Council Meeting

Notice of Meeting

 

Monday, 5 June 2017

30 May 2017

 

Mr John Rayner

 

An Ordinary Meeting of Council will be held at 6.00pm at Club Rivers, 32-34 Littleton Street Riverwood, on Monday, 5 June 2017 for consideration of the business available on Council's website at http://www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au/Council/Council-Meetings.

 

 

 

 

 

Gail Connolly

General Manager

 

 

BUSINESS

1.      Acknowledgement of Country

2.      Apologies

3.      Disclosures of Interest

4.      Administrator Minute

5.      Minutes of previous meetings

6.      Environment and Planning

7.      Finance and Governance

8.      Assets and Infrastructure

9.      Community and Culture

 

 


Ordinary Meeting

Summary of Items

Monday, 5 June 2017

 

Previous Minutes

MINUTES: Council Meeting - 1 May 2017

MINUTES: Extraordinary Council Meeting - 25 May 2017

Environment and Planning

CCL084-17       Economic Development Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes - 24 April 2017

(Report by Economic Development Officer).............................................................. 2

CCL085-17       Planning Proposal - 37-41 Treacy Street Hurstville

(Report by Manager Strategic Planning)................................................................... 7

CCL086-17       Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

(Report by Manager Strategic Planning)............................................................... 242

CCL087-17       Summary of Development Applications lodged and determined

(Report by Manager Development and Building)................................................ 520

CCL088-17       Draft Kempt Field Plan of Management

(Report by Independent Assessment)................................................................... 524

CCL089-17       Gazettal of Kogarah LEP 2012 (Amendment No 2 - New City Plan)

(Report by Coordinator Strategic Planning).......................................................... 599

Finance and Governance

CCL090-17       Investment Report as at 30 April 2017

(Report by Team Leader Financial Reporting)..................................................... 630

CCL091-17       Quarterly Budget Review Statement to 31 March 2017

(Report by Coordinator Financial Management)................................................. 644

CCL092-17       Advice on Court Proceedings - May 2017

(Report by General Counsel).................................................................................. 662

CCL093-17       Georges River Council Policy for Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities for the Mayor and Councillors

(Report by Internal Auditor)...................................................................................... 670

CCL094-17       Code of Conduct and Associated Administrative Procedures

(Report by Internal Auditor)...................................................................................... 690

CCL095-17       Georges River Council Code of Meeting Practice

(Report by Internal Auditor)...................................................................................... 763

 

CCL096-17       Draft Drug and Alcohol Policy

(Report by Chief Operating Officer)........................................................................ 810

CCL097-17       Draft Community Engagement Documents: Community Engagement Policy, Community Engagement Strategy and Community Strategic Plan Engagement Strategy

(Report by Senior Corporate Planner)................................................................... 820

CCL098-17       Disclosure Of Interest Returns of newly Designated Persons

(Report by Manager Governance and Risk)......................................................... 854

Assets and Infrastructure

CCL099-17       Strategic Property - Property Asset Strategy - Business Plan Community Leasing Policy - Property Acquisition and Disposal Policy

(Report by Manager Strategic Property)................................................................. 856

CCL100-17       Georges River Council Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - 16 May 2017

(Report by Traffic Engineer).................................................................................... 893

CCL101-17       Beverley Golf Course - Request for Assistance

(Report by Property Portfolio Manager)................................................................. 897

Community and Culture

CCL102-17       Stronger Communities Fund Program

(Report by Director Community and Culture)....................................................... 899

CCL103-17       Draft Georges River Libraries Collection Development Policy

(Report by Manager Library Services).................................................................... 903

CCL104-17       Draft Georges River Library Use and Membership Policy

(Report by Manager Library Services).................................................................... 913

CCL105-17       Communications Activities Report September 2016 - Februrary 2017

(Report by Coordinator Communications)............................................................ 921

CCL106-17       Georges River Council Disability Inclusion Action Plan 2017 - 2021

(Report by Coordinator Community Development)............................................. 933

CCL107-17       Draft Library Strategy 2017-2020

(Report by Manager Library Services).................................................................... 959

CCL108-17       Aboriginal Advisory Committee meeting 1 May 2017

(Report by Manager Community and Cultural Development)........................... 981

CCL109-17       Draft Georges River Council Customer Service Strategy

(Report by Project Leader)........................................................................................ 983

CCL110-17       Service NSW Easy to do Business Program - Service Partnership Agreement

(Report by Project Manager).................................................................................... 994

 

CCL111-17       Notification from the Audit Office of New South Wales of the Local Government Performance Audit Programme

(Report by Executive Manager)............................................................................ 1045

 

 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 1

 

AGENDA

1.      Acknowledgement of Traditional Custodians

Council acknowledges the traditional custodians of the land on which this meeting is being held as the Biddegal people of the Eora Nation.

2.      Apologies 

3.      Disclosure of Interest

4.      Administrator Minutes

5.      Minutes of previous meetings

MINUTES: Council Meeting - 1 May 2017

MINUTES: Extraordinary Council Meeting - 25 May 2017


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 2

6.      Environment and Planning

 

Item:                   CCL084-17        Economic Development Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes - 24 April 2017 

Author:              Economic Development Officer

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Environment and Planning

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the Committee recommendations contained within the Minutes of the Economic Development Advisory Committee Meeting held on Monday, 24 April 2017 be adopted.

 

Executive Summary

1.      The third meeting of the Georges River Economic Development Advisory Committee was held on Monday, 24 April 2017.  Minutes of the meeting are attached for Council consideration and adoption.

 

Financial Implications

2.      No budget impact for this report.

 

File Reference

16/1330, S/F16/708

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Minutes of Economic Development Advisory Committee Meeting held - 24 April 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL084-17          Economic Development Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes - 24 April 2017

[Appendix 1]         Minutes of Economic Development Advisory Committee Meeting held - 24 April 2017

 

 

Page 3

 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 7

Item:                   CCL085-17        Planning Proposal - 37-41 Treacy Street Hurstville 

Author:              Manager Strategic Planning

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Environment and Planning

 

Recommendation

(a)     That Planning Proposal PP2015/0006 to amend Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 as follows, in respect of the land known as 37-41 Treacy Street, Hurstville (Treacy Street Car Park Site), be forwarded to the delegate of the Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination under Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

i.    Amend the Land Application Map to remove the “deferred matter” status from the Site.

ii.   Amend the Land Zoning Map to remove the “deferred matter” from the Site and zone the Site B4 Mixed Use.

iii.  Amend the Height of Building Map (HOB) to specify a maximum building height of 55m.

iv.  Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map (FSR) to specify a maximum floor space ratio of 7:1.

v.   Amend the Active Street Frontages Map (ASF) to identify an active street frontage along the Treacy Street boundary of the Site.

vi.  Amend Clause 4.4A of Hurstville LEP 2012 to include a provision requiring a minimum ‘non-residential’ floor space ratio of 1:1 on the Site.

vii. Amend to include a site specific clause that requires the consent authority to be satisfied that any future development will provide for road and traffic upgrades in the local road network and contribute to measures that encourage the use of public transport.

 

(b)     That if it is determined by the Greater Sydney Commission or its delegate under Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 that the Planning Proposal referred to in Recommendation (a) should proceed, that an amendment to the Hurstville Development Control Plan No 2 – Hurstville City Centre (Amendment No 6),  in respect of the land known as 37-41 Treacy Street Hurstville (Treacy Street Car Park Site), be prepared and publicly exhibited at the same time that the Planning Proposal is publicly exhibited.

 

(c)     That the proponent be requested to prepare a draft amendment to the Hurstville Development Control Plan No 2 – Hurstville City Centre (Amendment No 6) include the following:

i.    To include the site in the land to which the development control plan applies;

ii.   To include site specific provisions including (but not limited to):

·        vehicle access points,

·        site and boundary landscaping,

·        active street frontages and building rear setbacks,

·        building breaks,

·        minimising overshadowing of the public domain.

 

(d)     If it is determined by the Greater Sydney Commission or its delegate under Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 that the Planning Proposal referred to in Recommendation 1 should proceed, that the proponent prepare the following:

i.    A revised urban design analysis is to be undertaken and to be exhibited with the Planning Proposal that assesses the inter-relationship between the proposed height and floor space ratio as well as compliance with the Apartment Design Guide and avoids units with sole orientation to the railway line.

 

(e)     That the Planning Proposal be placed on formal public exhibition in accordance with the conditions of any Gateway Determination issued by the Department of Planning and Environment.

 

(f)      That

i.    Council prepare a local housing strategy in accordance with Action L1 of the draft South District Plan,

ii.   Steps 1, 2 and 3 of the local housing as generally outlined in this report, and

iii.  Step 4 be prepared in association with the preparation of the comprehensive LEP for the Georges River LGA.

 

(g)     That:

i.    The Car Parking Strategy (which is under preparation by Council) identify the location, implementation mechanisms and time frame for the provision of not less than 90 car parking spaces (lost from the site) within the Hurstville City Centre; and

ii.   If no alternate suitable location for the public car parking can be found within the Centre, then a minimum of 90 spaces are to be provided on the Treacy Street site; with such requirement being linked to the sale/development of the site.

 

 

Executive Summary

1.         The Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP), at its meeting on 18 May 2017 considered a report on a Planning Proposal request submitted by Hurstville City Council (now Georges River Council) on 16 October 2015 and revised in November 2016 for the following changes to the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan (“LEP”) 2012 for the Council owned Treacy Street Car Park Site (37-41 Treacy Street, Hurstville – refer to Figure 1):

·          Zone B4 Mixed Use to permit business and residential land uses (shop top housing) and parking,

·          Amend the Height of Building Map (HOB) to specify a maximum building height of 53m (16 storeys),

·          Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map (FSR) to specify a maximum floor space ratio of 7:1 (increased in the revised Planning Proposal request to 7.2:1),

·          Include the Treacy Street frontage of the Site as “active street frontage” (included in the revised Planning Proposal request).

 

2.         A copy of the report (and its attachments) considered by IHAP is contained in Attachment 1. The report is comprehensive in its assessment and should be read in conjunction with this report.

 

Figure 1 – Site (bounded in red)

 

3.      As a result of the meeting, the IHAP resolved:

 

(a)     The Georges River IHAP recommends to the Council that the Planning Proposal PP2015/0006 to amend Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 as follows, in respect of the land known as 37-41 Treacy Street, Hurstville (Treacy Street Car Park Site), be forwarded to the delegate of the Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination under Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

i)     Amend the Land Application Map to remove the “deferred matter” status from the Site.

ii)   Amend the Land Zoning Map to remove the “deferred matter” from the Site and zone the Site B4 Mixed Use.

iii)  Amend the Height of Building Map (HOB) to specify a maximum building height of 55m.

iv)  Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map (FSR) to specify a maximum floor space ratio of 7:1.

v)   Amend the Active Street Frontages Map (ASF) to identify an active street frontage along the Treacy Street boundary of the Site.

vi)  Amend Clause 4.4A of Hurstville LEP 2012 to include a provision requiring a minimum ‘non-residential’ floor space ratio of 1:1 on the Site.

vii) Amend to include provision for affordable housing to be incorporated in any development on the site equivalent to not less than 5% of the gross floor area of the development.

viii)    Amend to include provision for public car parking to be provided in any development on the site equivalent to not less than 90 car spaces.

 

(b)     If it is determined by the Greater Sydney Commission or its delegate under Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 that the Planning Proposal referred to in Recommendation 1 should proceed, the Georges River IHAP recommends to the Council that an amendment to the Hurstville Development Control Plan No 2 – Hurstville City Centre (Amendment No 6),  in respect of the land known as 37-41 Treacy Street Hurstville (Treacy Street Car Park Site), be prepared and publicly exhibited at the same time that the Planning Proposal is publicly exhibited:

i)     To include the site in the land to which the development control plan applies;

ii)   To include site specific provisions including (but not limited to):

·        vehicle access points,

·        site and boundary landscaping,

·        active street frontages and building rear setbacks,

·        building breaks,

·        minimising overshadowing of the public domain.

 

3.      If it is determined by the Greater Sydney Commission or its delegate under Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 that the Planning Proposal referred to in Recommendation 1 should proceed, the Georges River IHAP recommends to the Council:

a.    That a revised urban design analysis is to be undertaken and to be exhibited with the Planning Proposal that assesses the inter-relationship between the proposed height and floor space ratio as well as compliance with the Apartment Design Guide and avoids units with sole orientation to the railway line.

b.    Consideration be given to the traffic impacts generated by the development of the site in accordance with the Planning Proposal and the contributions that can be made to offset that impact.

 

4.      The IHAP does not have delegation to resolve to proceed with the rezoning of the land. In this regard, this component of the report is also being reported to Council for consideration and endorsement.

 

Background

5.         The Planning Proposal relates to a 2,497m2 site within the Hurstville City Centre which is bounded by Treacy Street to the north and the railway corridor to the south.  The Site is known as 37-41 Treacy Street and currently accommodates a public car park (approx. 90 spaces).

 

6.         This Council report has been prepared based on an assessment undertaken by an independent planning consultant (DFP Planning Pty Limited), independent urban design advice (SJB Architects) and consideration by the St George Design Review Panel and the Georges River Council IHAP.

 

7.         The Site is currently a “deferred matter” in the Hurstville LEP 2012 and the provisions of the Hurstville LEP 1994 apply including zoning of 3(b) City Centre Business Zone. The development standards (including maximum building height of 15m and FSR of 3:1) in the Hurstville DCP No.2 (Amendment No.5) also currently apply. The “deferred matters” of the Hurstville LEP 2012 are to be finalised by September 2017.

 

8.         The anticipated development from the Planning Proposal request (November 2016) is a 16 storey mixed use development including:

·          180 residential apartments (mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom),

·          780m2 ground level retail floor space,

·          1,800m2 commercial (office) floor space (Level 2),

·          375 basement parking spaces including 90 public spaces (replacing existing), 237 residential and 48 commercial/retail spaces.

 

9.         The Planning Proposal request has been considered by the St George Design Review Panel (“DRP”) at its meeting of 7 April 2016 and the revised Planning Proposal (November 2016) was supported at its meeting of 6 April 2017.

 

10.       A maximum FSR of 7:1 is being recommended by Council Officers based on consideration of the proposed range of 7:1 – 7.2:1 in the Indicative Concept Plans and the design issues raised by the St George Design Review Panel and the Independent Urban Design Advice which would impact on the achievable maximum FSR.  In addition, the Concept Plan approval on the adjacent site (21-35 Treacy Street), and to which this Planning Proposal request makes reference to, has an FSR of approx. 6.78:1.

 

11.       The report now before Council recommends that the Council support an amendment to the Hurstville LEP 2012 which:

·          Includes the Site in the Land Application Map and removes its “deferred matter” status (thereby removing the Site from the provisions of the Hurstville LEP 1994),

·          Amend the Land Zoning Map to remove the “deferred matter” from the Site and zone the Site B4 Mixed Use (currently 3(b) City Centre Business Zone under Hurstville LEP 1994),

·          Increasing the maximum building height from 15m (under Hurstville DCP No.2) to 55m,

·          Increasing the maximum FSR from 3:1 (under Hurstville DCP No.2) to 7:1 and including a minimum “non-residential” FSR of 1:1 (which will provide for ground level retail and one commercial level), and

·          Identifying the Treacy Street frontage of the Site as “active street frontage”.

 

12.       The preparation of an amendment to the Hurstville Development Control Plan No 2 – Hurstville City Centre (Amendment No 6), if Gateway Approval is granted, is also recommended to include the Site in the land to which the DCP applies and introduce site specific provisions including (but not limited to) vehicle access points, site and boundary landscaping, active street frontages and building rear setbacks.

 

13.       The other recommendations made by IHAP regarding affordable housing and the provision of 90 public car parking spaces in any redevelopment of the site are discussed in this report under the heading - Discussion on IHAP Recommendation and Public Benefits.

 

14.       An independent planning consultant (Don Fox Planning) was contracted to review the Planning Proposal request and commence the assessment which has informed this report. Urban design advice has been provided by the St George Design Review Panel and Independent Urban Design Advice. The report has been finalised by an Independent Assessment Consultant Planner contracted by Georges River Council.

 

The Planning Proposal

15.       The Planning Proposal has been assessed under the relevant sections of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulation 2000 and against the following advisory documents prepared by the Department of Planning and Environment:

·     “A guide to preparing planning proposals” (August 2016)

·     “A guide to preparing local environmental plans” (August 2016).

 

16.       The assessment report in accordance with the Department of Planning and Environment “Guides” is included in Attachment 1.

 

17.       The objective of the Planning Proposal is to enable the future development of the site to accommodate a mixed use development that will include ground floor commercial/ retail, first floor commercial and upper level residential land uses.

 

18.       The intended outcomes of the Planning Proposal as amended by IHAP are to amend the Hurstville LEP 2012 provisions in relation to the Site as follows:

·          Amend the Land Application Map 001 to remove the “deferred matter” reference from the Site,

·          Amend the Land Use Zoning Map 008A to zone the site to B4 Mixed Use (currently identified as a “deferred matter”),

·          Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map 008A to set a maximum FSR of 7.0:1, where no maximum FSR limit is currently in effect within Hurstville LEP 2012,

·          Amend the Height of Buildings Map 008A to set a maximum height of 55 metres, where no maximum height limit is currently in effect within Hurstville LEP 2012,

·          Amend the Active Street Frontages Map 008A to identify the Site’s Treacy Street frontage as an active street frontage’, where no active street frontage is currently in effect within Hurstville LEP 2012,

·          Amend Clause 4.4A (Exceptions to floor space ratios for buildings on land in certain zones) to require a minimum “non-residential” FSR on the site of 1:1 and amend the Floor Space Ratio Map to identify the clause amendment to the Site,

·          Include provision for affordable housing to be incorporated in any development on the site equivalent to not less than 5% of the gross floor area of the development, and

·          Amend to include provision for public car parking to be provided in any development on the site equivalent to not less than 90 car spaces.

 

19.       IHAP also recommended that a revised urban design analysis is to be undertaken and to be exhibited with the Planning Proposal that assesses the inter-relationship between the proposed height and floor space ratio as well as compliance with the Apartment Design Guide and avoids units with sole orientation to the railway line.

 

Public Benefits - Voluntary Planning Agreement

20.       It should also be noted that Council’s Property Section/Division provided a Letter of Offer to enter into a Planning Agreement dated 27 April 2017 in relation to the Planning Proposal. The letter of offer proposed to provide the following public benefits in relation to Planning Proposal on the site:

a.   Public car parking to be dedicated to Council (GRC) in stratum with the redevelopment of the site up to or greater than current number of spaces on the site; and or

b.   Monetary contributions to be used by Council (GRC) towards public purposes as described under Section 93F(2) of the EPA Act from sale of land resulting from uplift via the LEP amendment – as per VPA policy equation.

 

21.       Council has received advice from Henry Davis York (Law Firm) that as Council is the owner of the site, a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) under Section 93F of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is not required to enable Council to ‘lock in’ the public benefits proposed to the land.

 

22.       Nevertheless, IHAP at its Meeting of 18 May 2017 recommended inter-alai in relation to the public benefits offered that:

a.   Amend to include provision for affordable housing to be incorporated in any development on the site equivalent to not than 5% of the gross floor area of the development.

b.   Amend to include provision for public car parking to be provided in any development on the site equivalent to not than 90 car spaces.”

 

23.       Whilst the letter of offer did not include affordable housing as one of the public benefits offered, affordable housing is mentioned as a potential public benefit that can be provided by VPAs.

 

24.       Thus a VPA is not required to ‘lock-in’ the public benefits on the site, as special provisions can be inserted in the Hurstville LEP, as part of the Planning Proposal process, to ensure their delivery.

 

Discussion on IHAP recommendation & Public Benefits

 

Height:

25.       The Planning Proposal as amended by the applicant seeks a maximum building height of 53m (16 storeys) over the site.

 

26.       IHAP has recommended a maximum building height of 55m as the Urban Design Strategy for the Hurstville Centre which will be considered by Council in July is recommending a height of 55 metres for the block this site is contained within. The height of 55m is also consistent with the height approved at 21-35 Treacy Street by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (on 1 July 2011).

 

27.       Therefore the recommendation of this report to Council is that the Height of Building Map be amended to specify a maximum height of 55m for the site.

 

Local provision on car parking

28.       As stated above, Council’s Property Section/Division provided a Letter of Offer to enter into a Planning Agreement dated 27 April 2017 in relation to the Planning Proposal. The letter of offer proposed to provide the public benefit of public car parking to be dedicated to Council (GRC) in stratum with the redevelopment of the site up to or greater than current number of spaces on the site.

 

29.       Council received advice from Henry Davis York (Law Firm) that as Council is the owner of the site, a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) under Section 93F of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is not required to enable Council to ‘lock in’ the public benefits proposed to the land.

 

30.       IHAP at its Meeting of 18 May 2017 recommended that a provision for public car parking to be provided in any development on the site equivalent to not than 90 car spaces to replace the car parking currently provided on the site.

 

31.       Council officers have commenced the preparation of a car parking strategy for the Georges River LGA. The strategy will consider the outcomes of the Hurstville City Centre Urban Design Strategy and the review of the Hurstville TMAP. The Car Parking Strategy will recommend the provisions for car parking within the Hurstville City Centre including the quantity and location of public parking and paid parking. Given that the future provision of public car parking within the Hurstville City Centre is under review, it is considered that at this point in time Council takes a flexible approach in “locking in” the future provision of car parking on this site.

 

32.       In light of the strategies underway and the review of the Hurstville TMAP, it is suggested that a local provision requiring carparking to be provided on this site not be included in the planning proposal and that the following approach is followed:

a.   The Car Parking Strategy identifies the location, implementation mechanisms and time frame for the provision of not less than 90 car parking spaces (lost from the site) within the Hurstville City Centre.

b.   If no alternate suitable location and delivery for the parking can be found within the Centre, then a minimum of 90 spaces are to be provided on the Treacy Street site. The requirement for the parking would be linked to the sale/development of the site.

 

Provision for a traffic study

33.       IHAP at its Meeting of 18 May 2017 recommended that a traffic study be prepared that considers the traffic impacts generated by the development of the site in accordance with the Planning Proposal and the contributions that can be made to offset that impact

 

34.       Council has already set a precedent for requiring local provisions to address traffic issues related to assessment of planning proposal. At its Meeting held 1 May 2017 Council resolved to request that the Department insert into the Hurstville LEP 2012 for 29-31 MacMahon Street Hurstville a site specific clause that requires the consent authority to be satisfied that any future development will provide for road and traffic upgrades in the local road network and contribute to measures that encourage the use of public transport.

 

35.       The suggested approach to implementing the IHAP recommendation in respect of the Treacy Street Planning Proposal is to require a local provision requiring that the consent authority to be satisfied that any future development will provide for road and traffic upgrades in the local road network and contribute to measures that encourage the use of public transport.

 

Design Analysis

36.       IHAP at its Meeting of 18 May 2017 recommended that a revised urban design analysis is to be undertaken and to be exhibited with the Planning Proposal that assesses the inter-relationship between the proposed height and floor space ratio as well as compliance with the Apartment Design Guide and avoids units with sole orientation to the railway line.

 

37.       The IHAP’s recommendation is supported and is consistent with Gateway Determination conditions that have been issued by the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC). In the Gateway Determination dated 24 February 2017 for the Bing Lee Site at 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road Hurstville the GSC required that a revised Urban Design report illustrating the proposed built form taking into consideration the requirement of a minimum non-residential floorspace of 0.5:1. The Report is to be placed on public exhibition with the planning proposal that is updated to reflect the revised Urban Design report.

 

Affordable Housing 5% requirement – alternative approach

38.       IHAP at its Meeting of 18 May 2017 recommended that a provision for affordable housing be incorporated in any development on the site equivalent to not than 5% of the gross floor area of the development.

39.       The 5% affordable housing requirement is based on the Affordable Rental Housing Target of 5% to 10% in the draft South District Plan for new urban renewal areas.

40.       Council has not prepared a local housing strategy in accordance with Action L1 of the draft South District Plan.  Action L1 states that Councils will prepare local housing strategies and need to consider:

·    the planning principles and directions in A Plan for Growing Sydney

·    capacity to support the five year housing target

·    capacity to support the strategic housing need of the local government area for the next 20 years

·    local demographic and socioeconomic characteristics

·    the local housing market including the feasibility of development for different housing types

·    development staging and market take-up rates and how this aligns with demand

·    challenges and opportunities relating to infrastructure provision urban form and place making

·    accessibility of housing to employment opportunities

·    opportunities to improve housing affordability

·    ways to address housing diversity that are relevant to the needs of the existing and future local housing market including opportunities for, and blockages to, housing diversity and adaptability

·    the prospective displacement of affordable housing

·    opportunities for additional capacity around strategic and district centres and other areas with good transport connectivity and service provision

·    specific local market complexities including addressing ways to incentivise for the provision of larger group homes, smaller homes for singles and couples only, intergenerational homes and medium density housing required by the local community

·    ways to provide adaptable housing in accordance with guidelines from Liveable Housing Australia.

 

41.       No analysis of the need for housing – affordable, key workers etc, has been undertaken to date. To have a provision requiring 5% of the units designated as affordable housing is an ad hoc approach and has no justification. In this case 180 apartments are provided – and therefore 9 would be allocated for affordable housing.

 

42.       There are two options for the Council to consider in dealing with the IHAP’s recommendation of a provision for affordable housing be incorporated in any development on the site equivalent to not than 5% of the gross floor area of the development. These are:

a.   Require the provision of 5% affordable housing – i.e. 9 apartments; or

b.   Alternatively prepare a local housing strategy.

 

43.       The approach recommended by officers is to prepare a local housing strategy. A local housing strategy will enable Council to:

a.   Investigate the capacity for housing within the LGA – both the 5 year target and the strategic housing needs of the LGA for the next 20 years,

b.   Investigate the local housing market including local demographics and socio economic characteristics, the feasibility of development for different housing types, and

c.   Investigate housing affordability, key worker housing and social housing.

 

44.       A local housing strategy provides a holist approach to housing supply and demand for the LGA and will allow Council to have a defined policy that can be argued in discussions with applicants and proponents for applications and planning proposals within the LGA.

 

Local Housing Strategy

45.       Action L1 of the draft South District Plan requires Councils to prepare local housing strategies. Affordability of housing is a key component of a local housing strategy.

 

46.       The key steps in preparing a local housing strategy according to the Centre for Affordable Housing are as follows:

 

Step 1: Getting started

·    What is a housing market?

·    Defining the local housing market Identifying participants

·    Analysing the strategic context

·    Establishing study objectives

 

 

Step 2: Understanding the housing market

·    Analysing and estimating trends

·    Demographic trends

·    Economic context

·    Housing supply issues

·    Council policies

 

Step 3: Assessing trends

·    House prices

·    Rents

·    Housing affordability

·    Housing stress

·    Vacancy rates

 

Step 4: Interpretation

·    Is a large new stock of housing likely to be required? ·

·    Is this need for new stock related to employment trends? ·

·    Is existing housing stock a good match for the demographic profile of the area? ·

·    Is there a particular group who are missing out? ·

·    Has there been a marked loss of low-priced stock in recent times? ·

·    Are there large concentrations of low-income households in the area? ·

·    Is affordability a major concern?

·    This step also identifies the local opportunities.

 

Step 5: Monitoring

 

47.       Preparing a Local Housing Strategy is a major project and it is envisaged that Steps 1, 2 and 3 could be carried out now with Step 4 being carried out as part of the comprehensive LEP preparation for the LGA.

 

Community Consultation

 

48.       Should the Planning Proposal be supported it will be forwarded to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment requesting a Gateway Determination.

 

49.       If a Gateway Determination (Approval) is issued, and subject to its conditions, it is anticipated that the Planning Proposal will be exhibited for a period of 28 days in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and Regulation, 2000 and any requirements of the Gateway Determination.

 

50.       Exhibition material, including explanatory information, land to which the Planning Proposal applies, description of the objectives and intended outcomes, copy of the Planning Proposal and relevant maps will be available for viewing during the exhibition period on Council’s website and hard copies available at Council offices and libraries.

 

51.       Notification of the public exhibition will be through:

 

·          Newspaper advertisement in The St George and Sutherland Shire Leader,

·          Exhibition notice on Council’s website,

·          Notices in Council offices and libraries,

·          Letters to State and Commonwealth Government agencies identified in the Gateway Determination,

·          Letters to adjoining landowners (in accordance with Council’s Notification Procedures).

 

52.       The anticipated project timeline for completion of the Planning Proposal is shown below:

 

Task

Anticipated Timeframe

Lodgement of Planning Proposal request

October 2015

Consideration by St George Design Review Panel

7 April 2016

Lodgement of Revised Planning Proposal request

November 2016

Consideration by St George Design Review Panel

6 April 2017

Reporting to Georges River IHAP on Planning Proposal

18 May 2017 (this report)

Reporting to Council on Planning Proposal

5 June 2017

Anticipated commencement date (date of Gateway determination)

August/September 2017

Anticipated timeframe for the completion of technical information (if required)

August 2017

Timeframe for government agency consultation (pre and post exhibition as required by Gateway determination)

September 2017

Commencement and completion dates for community consultation period

October/November 2017

Dates for public hearing (if required)

 

Timeframe for consideration of submissions

November 2017

Reporting to Georges River IHAP on community consultation

November 2017

Reporting to Council on community consultation and finalisation

December 2017

Submission to the Department to finalise the LEP

December 2017

Anticipated date for notification.

December 2017

 

53.       It is noted that the project timeline will be assessed by the Department of Planning and Environment and may be amended by the Gateway Determination.

 

SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT / CONCLUSION

 

54.       In summary, the Planning Proposal request for the Council owned Treacy Street Car Park Site (37-41 Treacy Street, Hurstville) is:

·          Supported in relation to the zoning of the site to B4 Mixed Use,

·          Supported in relation to the increase in maximum building height from 15m to 55m,

·          Supported in relation to the increase in maximum FSR from 3:1 to 7:1, and

·          Supported in relation to the identification of the Treacy Street frontage of the Site as “active street frontage”.

 

55.       The Planning Proposal will be amended to include a local provision that requires the consent authority to be satisfied that any future development will provide for road and traffic upgrades in the local road network and contribute to measures that encourage the use of public transport.

 

56.       In addition, to ensure the provision of employment within the Hurstville City Centre, and to reflect commercial and retail floor space identified the Indicative Concept Plans, a minimum “non-residential” FSR of 1:1 will be required on the site (through an amendment to clause 4.4A of the Hurstville LEP 2012).

 

57.       The key reasons for support include that the proposed B4 Mixed Use zone, increases to the development standards (maximum height and FSR), minimum “non-residential” FSR of 1:1 and identification of ‘active street frontage’ will facilitate future development of the highly accessible site within the Hurstville City Centre, including:

·          Residential accommodation within close proximity to the retail and other facilities within the Hurstville City Centre and excellent public transport options,

·          Non-residential floor space of approximately 2,580sqm which will provide for employment opportunities within the Hurstville City Centre, and equating to approximately 80-120 jobs,

·          Urban design analysis and requirements through an amendment to the Hurstville (City Centre) DCP No.2 which will address a range of issues identified by the St George DRP and in the independent urban design advice in relation to future development’s consistency with SEPP 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development.

 

NEXT STEPS

 

58.       If the Planning Proposal is endorsed by Council it will be submitted to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment for a Gateway determination in accordance with section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

 

59.       The proponent will be requested to prepare a draft amendment to the Hurstville Development Control Plan No 2 – Hurstville City Centre (Amendment No 6) include the following:

a.   To include the site in the land to which the development control plan applies;

b.   To include site specific provisions including (but not limited to):

c.   vehicle access points,

d.   site and boundary landscaping,

e.   active street frontages and building rear setbacks,

f.    building breaks, and

g.   minimising overshadowing.

 

60.       Council officers will prepare a brief for a local housing strategy and commence Steps 1, 2 and 3.

 

61.       If Council resolves not to support the Planning Proposal, the Applicant has the opportunity to request a pre-Gateway Review by the Department of Planning and Environment. An applicant has 40 days from the date of notification of Council’s decision to request a review.

 

Financial Implications

62.       Within budget allocation.

 

File Reference

63.       Trim File: PP2015/0006

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Attachment 1 - Report to IHAP 18 May 2017 - Treacy Street Car park

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL085-17          Planning Proposal - 37-41 Treacy Street Hurstville

[Appendix 1]         Attachment 1 - Report to IHAP 18 May 2017 - Treacy Street Car park

 

 

Page 19

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL085-17          Planning Proposal - 37-41 Treacy Street Hurstville

[Appendix 1]         Attachment 1 - Report to IHAP 18 May 2017 - Treacy Street Car park

 

 

Page 143

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL085-17          Planning Proposal - 37-41 Treacy Street Hurstville

[Appendix 1]         Attachment 1 - Report to IHAP 18 May 2017 - Treacy Street Car park

 

 

Page 154

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 241

Item:                   CCL086-17        Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004 

Author:              Manager Strategic Planning

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Environment and Planning

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the Planning Proposal to reclassify the northern half of the former Oatley Bowling Club Land (Lots 14 to 20 Section 3 DP 7124, Part of Lots 3 to 7 Section 4 DP 7124 and Lot 1 DP 1159269) indicatively shown in Figure 3 of the report to Georges River Council IHAP Meeting of Thursday 18 May 2017 from “community” to “operational” land be supported.

 

(b)     That prior to the Planning Proposal (for the rezoning of the site from RE1 Public Recreation to SP2 Infrastructure) being forwarded to the delegate of The Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination under section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, that it be updated as follows:

i.    Reduce the area proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure to that indicatively shown in Figure 3 of the report to Georges River Council IHAP Meeting of Thursday 18 May 2017 and update any reports to accompany the Planning Proposal as is necessary to reflect the reduced area;

ii.      Include the separate information provided on the planning proposal’s compliance with the draft South District Plan;

iii.     Include an updated Traffic and Access Assessment to reflect the indicative concept proposal and to specifically address emergency access requirements arising from the bushfire hazard;

iv.     Include an updated detailed Site Investigation to specifically address the suitability of the part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure in terms of contamination risk.

 

(c)     That the Planning Proposal (as amended) to amend Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (“Hurstville LEP 2012”) be forwarded to the delegate of The Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination under section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

i.       Amend the Land Zoning Map to rezone that part of the land indicatively shown in Figure 3 of the report to Georges River Council IHAP Meeting of Thursday 18 May 2017 relating to application No. PP2016/0004 from RE1 – Public Recreation to SP2 Infrastructure, with the designated use of ‘seniors housing’;

ii.      Amend the Height of Buildings Map to introduce a maximum building height of 18.5m on that part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure;

iii.     Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map to introduce a maximum Floor Space Ratio sufficient to allow 6,020sqm of gross floor area on the part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure (approximately 1.2:1); and

iv.     Amend Schedule 4 (Part 1) to reclassify the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure from “community” to “operational” land.

 

(d)     The Planning Proposal (as amended) is placed on formal public exhibition in accordance with the conditions of any Gateway Determination issued by the Department of Planning and Environment and a public hearing be arranged as required under the Local Government Act 1993.

 

(e)     That a Public Hearing is held into the reclassification of that part of the land indicatively shown in Figure 3 of the report to Georges River Council IHAP Meeting of Thursday 18 May 2017 from community to operational as required under Section 29 of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

(f)      That Council prepare an amendment to the Hurstville DCP to address interface issues with adjoining sites which may include, but may not be limited to height, interface and transition, setbacks and any other relevant issues.

 

 

Executive Summary

1.      The Independent hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP), at its meeting held 18 May 2017 considered a report on a Planning Proposal to reclassify and enable the development of part of the former Oatley Bowling Club (Lots 14 to 20 Section 3 DP 7124, Part of Lots 3 to 7 Section 4 DP 7124 and Lot 1 DP 1159269) for seniors housing.

2.      The site has an area of approximately 1.1 hectares. It contains two disused bowling greens which are terraced with a height difference of approximately 4 metres.  All other building structures associated with the former Bowling Club have been demolished, apart from a small metal shed in the north-eastern corner of the site. Figure 1 indicates the locality of the site. The Planning Proposal relates to the northern half of the former Oatley Bowling Club Land.

 

 

3.      The Planning Proposal was considered by the Georges River Council IHAP on 18 May 2017. A copy of the report (and its attachments) is contained in Attachment 1. The report is comprehensive in its assessment and should be read in conjunction with this report.

4.      As a result of the meeting, the IHAP recommended the following:

 

1.      Subject to paragraphs 2 and 3 below, the Georges River IHAP recommends to the Council that the Planning Proposal to amend Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (“Hurstville LEP 2012”) as follows, in respect of the northern half of the former Oatley Bowling Club Land (Lots 14 to 20 Section 3 DP 7124, Part of Lots 3 to 7 Section 4 DP 7124 and Lot 1 DP 1159269), be forwarded to the delegate of The Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination under section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

 

a.      Amend the Land Zoning Map to rezone that part of the land indicatively shown in Figure 3 of the report to Georges River Council IHAP Meeting of Thursday 18 May 2017 relating to application No. PP2016/0004 from RE1 – Public Recreation to SP2 Infrastructure, with the designated use of ‘seniors housing’;

 

b.      Amend the Height of Buildings Map to introduce a maximum building height of 18.5m on that part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure; and

 

c.       Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map to introduce a maximum Floor Space Ratio sufficient to allow 6,020m2 of gross floor area on the part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure (approximately 1.2:1).

 

2.      The Georges River IHAP recommends to the Council that the Planning Proposal referred to in paragraph 1 above be updated as follows prior to being forwarded to the delegate of The Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination under section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

 

a.      Reduce the area proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure to reflect the Council decision of 7 November 2016 and update any reports to accompany the Planning Proposal as is necessary to reflect the reduced area;

 

b.      Include the separate information provided on the planning proposal’s compliance with the draft South District Plan;

 

c.       Include an updated Traffic and Access Assessment to reflect the indicative concept proposal and to specifically address emergency access requirements arising from the bushfire hazard;

 

d.      Include an updated detailed Site Investigation to specifically address the suitability of the part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure in terms of contamination risk.

 

3.      The Georges River IHAP makes no recommendation to the Council in relation to that part of the Planning Proposal to amend Hurstville LEP 2012 (application No. PP2016/0004) by reclassifying the northern half of the former Oatley Bowling Club Land (Lots 14 to 20 Section 3 DP 7124, Part of Lots 3 to 7 Section 4 DP 7124 and Lot 1 DP 1159269) from community to operational because it is not within the functions or charter of the IHAP to make recommendations on such matters.

 

4.      That Council prepare an amendment to the Hurstville DCP to address interface issues with adjoining sites which may include, but may not be limited to height, interface and transition, setbacks, minimising overshadowing of the public domain and any other relevant issues.

 

5.      The IHAP does not have delegation to resolve to proceed with the rezoning of the land for a Gateway Determination. Also, as indicated in Recommendation 3 above, the Georges River IHAP has made no recommendation to the Council in relation to that part of the Planning Proposal to amend Hurstville LEP 2012 (application No. PP2016/0004) by reclassifying the northern half of the former Oatley Bowling Club Land (Lots 14 to 20 Section 3 DP 7124, Part of Lots 3 to 7 Section 4 DP 7124 and Lot 1 DP 1159269) from community to operational because it is not within the functions or charter of the IHAP to make recommendations on such matters.

6.      In this regard, this report covers the reclassification of the subject land from community to operational as well as the forwarding of the Planning Proposal to the delegate of The Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination under section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Background

7.      The site is currently zoned RE1 Public Recreation under Hurstville LEP 2012 (refer to Figure 2 below). The site is surrounded by a mix of land uses including the R2 - Low Density Residential to the north of the site. To the east of the site, on the opposite side of the Oatley train station is a mix zones including land zoned R3 - Medium Density Residential and B2 - Local Centre (Kogarah LEP 2012).

Figure 2 – Land Use Zoning map

 

8.      The former Oatley Bowling Club ceased operations in 2006 and in 2011 the disused club house was demolished. The Planning Proposal has been prepared by the Georges River Council after considerable investigation and deliberation by the former Hurstville City Council regarding the most appropriate future use of the disused Bowling Club.

9.      Georges River Council’s (Council) undertook preliminary public exhibition of the Planning Proposal prepared on Council’s behalf by TPG. Council sought feedback from the community on the Planning Proposal from November 2016 to February 2017.

10.    As part of this process, Council also conducted Community Information and Feedback sessions held on Wednesday 23 November 2016 (one session) and Saturday 26 November 2016 (two sessions), facilitated by Elton Consulting.

11.    A separate report was presented to Council on 1 May 2017 on the preliminary public exhibition phase. Attachment 1 contains a copy of that report.

12.    The community consultation has also resulted in a reduction in the area to be rezoned and a more thorough assessment of ecological and potential bushfire constraints. The land to be reclassified and rezoned is approximately 55% of the original area.

13.    IHAP at its meeting held 18 May 2017 assessed the rezoning of the subject land from RE1 to SP2 Infrastructure (seniors housing) but not the reclassification of the northern half of the former Oatley Bowling Club Land (Lots 14 to 20 Section 3 DP 7124, Part of Lots 3 to 7 Section 4 DP 7124 and Lot 1 DP 1159269) from community to operational because it is not within the functions or charter of the IHAP to make recommendations on such matters.

 

The Planning Proposal

14.    The Planning Proposal seeks to amend Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (“Hurstville LEP 2012”) as follows, in respect of the northern half of the former Oatley Bowling Club Land (Lots 14 to 20 Section 3 DP 7124, Part of Lots 3 to 7 Section 4 DP 7124 and Lot 1 DP 1159269):

a.   Amend the Land Zoning Map to rezone that part of the land indicatively shown in Figure 3 (below) relating to application No. PP2016/0004 from RE1 – Public Recreation to SP2 Infrastructure, with the designated use of ‘seniors housing’;

b.   Amend the Height of Buildings Map to introduce a maximum building height of 18.5m on that part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure;

c.   Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map to introduce a maximum Floor Space Ratio sufficient to allow 6,020m2 of gross floor area on the part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure (approximately 1.2:1); and

d.   Reclassify the northern half of the former Oatley Bowling Club Land (Lots 14 to 20 Section 3 DP 7124, Part of Lots 3 to 7 Section 4 DP 7124 and Lot 1 DP 1159269) as shown in Figure 3 below from community to operational.

 

Figure 3 – Indicative Site Plan

 

15.    The intended outcome of the Planning Proposal (as amended by Council’s resolution of 7 November 2016) is to facilitate the development of seniors housing in the north-western corner of the site to meet a community need identified in the Georges River Council’s Community Strategic Plan 2025; and to retain the balance of the site for public recreation and community purposes.

16.    The proposal to rezone part of the former Oatley Bowling Club site to facilitate the development of an aged care facility is consistent with the vision and priorities of the NSW Government’s draft South District Plan and the local strategies of the former Hurstville City Council. 

17.    The Planning Proposal has been assessed in accordance with the Department of Planning & environment’s guides and that assessment is also contained in Attachment 1 to this report. The Planning Proposal has sufficient merit overall to proceed to formal public exhibition.

18.    The recommendation from IHAP has identified that a number of the outstanding issues be addressed prior to the Planning Proposal being forwarded to the delegate of The Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination under section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979to the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, including:

a.   Reduce the area proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure to reflect the Council decision of 7 November 2016 and update any reports to accompany the Planning Proposal as is necessary to reflect the reduced area;

b.   Include the separate information provided on the planning proposal’s compliance with the draft South District Plan;

c.   Include an updated Traffic and Access Assessment to reflect the indicative concept proposal and to specifically address emergency access requirements arising from the bushfire hazard;

d.   Include an updated detailed Site Investigation to specifically address the suitability of the part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure in terms of contamination risk.

19.    It is also recommended that controls be prepared to address the impact of any proposed future development on the site in the context of the adjoining residential development. These new controls will require an amendment to the Hurstville DCP. The controls will include, but not limited to height, transition between zones and setbacks.

 

Reclassification of the subject land from “community” to “operational” land

20.    In order to facilitate any future development for seniors housing and community uses, the site will need to be reclassified as it is currently classified as ‘community land’ under the Local Government Act 1993.

21.    The Department of Planning & Environment has issued a practice note (PN 16-001) which provides guidance on classifying and reclassifying public land through a local environmental plan (LEP).

22.    A planning proposal to classify or reclassify public land will need to be prepared in accordance with the practice note and the additional matters specified in Attachment 1 to this practice note.

23.    An assessment against the practice note and its attachment is as follows:

 

Matters for Consideration

Comment

The current and proposed classification of the

Land.

The subject land is classified as community land.

Whether the land is a ‘public reserve’ (defined

in the LG Act).

The former Oatley Bowling Club is not a ‘public reserve’ as defined in the LG Act. 

The strategic and site specific merits of the reclassification and evidence to support this.

The Planning Proposal is consistent with the vision and priorities of the draft District Plan. The draft District Plan notes that the Georges River Local Government Area will see significant increase in people aged over 65. The intended outcome of the Planning Proposal is to facilitate the development of seniors housing in the north-western corner of the site to meet a community need identified in the Georges River Council’s Community Strategic Plan 2025; and to retain the balance of the site for public recreation and community purposes.

The site is also within easy walking distance of the Oatley Railway Station and therefore meets Action L3 of the draft South District Plan – investigate further opportunities for additional strategic needs and diversity in and around local centres and close to transport and other areas of high accessibility.

Whether the planning proposal is the result of a strategic study or report.

The Hurstville Positive Ageing Strategy and the Hurstville Community Strategic Plan 2025 both recognise the demographic changes which are increasing the demand for seniors housing.  The Hurstville Positive Ageing Strategy also identifies that the preference of the majority of older residents is to find appropriate housing in their own neighbourhoods.  Both strategies include commitments to increase the provision of aged care facilities. 

Whether the planning proposal is consistent with council’s community plan or other local strategic plan.

The Delivery Program and Operational Plan associated with the Community Strategic Plan include commitments to provide seniors housing on the former Oatley Bowling Club site.

A summary of council’s interests in the land, including:

·    how and when the land was first acquired (e.g. was it dedicated, donated, provided as part of a subdivision for public open space or other purpose, or a developer contribution)

·    if council does not own the land, the land owner’s consent;

·    the nature of any trusts, dedications etc.

The former Oatley Bowling Club site is located at land known as 35 and 40 River Road, Oatley (also known as 34 Mimosa Street, Oatley) and Part River Road.

The former Oatley Bowling Club site was located on several parcels of land which were purchased by Hurstville City Council in 1945, and adjacent lots which were resumed by Council in 1960 to ‘improve and embellish the area’ and the Oatley bowling Club was constructed on the site shortly thereafter. 

The club closed in 2006 and was demolished in 2011.

Council intends to redevelop the site for seniors housing which was originally initiated in 2015.

Whether an interest in land is proposed to be discharged, and if so, an explanation of the reasons why.

Legal advice contained in Appendix J of the Planning Proposal confirms that there are no trusts, interests or restrictions in relation to the site. 

The effect of the reclassification (including, the loss of public open space, the land ceases to be a public reserve or particular interests will be discharged).

The Myles Dunphy Reserve and Open Space Requirements Strategy excludes the former Oatley Bowling Club Site from the Myles Dunphy Reserve and does not recommend the expansion of the Reserve to include the Club site.

The Oatley Bowling Club site was not a general use public open space area – its recreation use was limited to a bowling club since 2006-2011. In 2011 the club house was demolished and the land has been left vacant.

Evidence of public reserve status or relevant interests, or lack thereof applying to the land (e.g. electronic title searches, notice in a Government Gazette, trust documents).

Not applicable

Current use(s) of the land, and whether uses are authorised or unauthorised.

Vacant land,

Current or proposed lease or agreements applying to the land, together with their duration, terms and controls.

There are no lease or agreements applying to the land.

Current or proposed business dealings (e.g. agreement for the sale or lease of the land, the basic details of any such agreement and if relevant, when council intends to realise its asset, either immediately after rezoning/reclassification or at a later time).

On 22 September 2010 Council resolved to rezone and reclassify the site for seniors housing enabling Council to lease the site for such purposes.  No agreements have been made and no further decisions (or timeframes) have been made in relation to the site.

Any rezoning associated with the reclassification (if yes, need to demonstrate consistency with an endorsed Plan of Management or strategy).

There is a rezoning associated with the reclassification of the land. The rezoning component seeks to:

·    Amend the Land Zoning Map to rezone that part of the land indicatively shown in Figure 3 of the report to Georges River Council IHAP Meeting of Thursday 18 May 2017 relating to application No. PP2016/0004 from RE1 – Public Recreation to SP2 Infrastructure, with the designated use of ‘seniors housing’;

·    Amend the Height of Buildings Map to introduce a maximum building height of 18.5m on that part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure; and

·    Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map to introduce a maximum Floor Space Ratio sufficient to allow 6,020m2 of gross floor area on the part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure (approximately 1.2:1).

How council may or will benefit financially, and how these funds will be used.

Any funds from the disposal of the land (either lease or sale) will be subject to a separate Council report outlining where the funds will be allocated as funds may be required for the remediation of the adjoining site proposed to be used for community recreation purposes including community gardens.  Previously Council on 22 September 2010 Council resolved that funds from the lease be directed towards the upgrading of Jubilee Park, Mortdale including the construction of a Community Centre (now complete). 

How council will ensure funds remain available to fund proposed open space sites or improvements referred to in justifying the reclassification, if relevant to the proposal.

At the time of disposal (sale or lease) of the land a separate report will be presented to council outlining where the funds will be allocated to. However funds will be spent on embellishing the adjoining site.

A Land Reclassification (part lots) Map, in accordance with any standard technical requirements for spatial datasets and maps, if land to be reclassified does not apply to the whole lot.

If this report is adopted the proponent is required to reduce the area proposed to be zoned SP2. It is only the SP2 land to be reclassified. The land to be rezoned and reclassified is approximately 55% of the original area the subject of the planning proposal.

A preliminary comments by a relevant government agency, including an agency that dedicated the land to council, if applicable.

No comments lodged with Council to date.

Comments will be sought during the formal exhibition of the planning proposal from relevant government agencies.

 

 

24.    Councils must hold a public hearing when reclassifying public land from community to operational (EP&A Act s.57 & LG Act s.29). This gives the community an opportunity to expand on written submissions and discuss issues with an independent person in a public forum. After the exhibition period has ended, at least 21 days public notice is to be given before the hearing. This allows the person chairing the hearing sufficient time to consider written submissions and all issues raised. There are specific requirements for the independence of the person chairing the hearing, their preparation of a public hearing report and council making the report publicly available.

25.    The Governor’s approval is required when a reclassification proposal seeks to remove any public reserve status and/or discharge any interests affecting public land (s.30).

 

Next Steps

26.    Should the Planning Proposal be supported, the proponent will be requested to amend the Planning Proposal to include the following matters:

a.   Reduce the area proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure to reflect that part of the land indicatively shown in Figure 3 of the report to Georges River Council IHAP Meeting of Thursday 18 May 2017 and update any reports to accompany the Planning Proposal as is necessary to reflect the reduced area;

b.   Include the separate information provided on the planning proposal’s compliance with the draft South District Plan;

c.   Include an updated Traffic and Access Assessment to reflect the indicative concept proposal and to specifically address emergency access requirements arising from the bushfire hazard;

d.   Include an updated detailed Site Investigation to specifically address the suitability of the part of the land proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure in terms of contamination risk.

27.    Once the Planning Proposal has been updated, it will be forwarded to the delegate of The Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination under section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

28.    The proponent will also be requested to prepare an amendment to the Hurstville DCP to address interface issues with adjoining sites which may include, but may not be limited to height, interface and transition, setbacks, minimising overshadowing of the public domain and any other relevant issues. This will then be reviewed by council officers.

29.    A Public Hearing will be held pursuant to Section 29 of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

Community Consultation

30.    If a Gateway Determination (Approval) is issued, and subject to its conditions, it is anticipated that the Planning Proposal will be exhibited for a period of 28 days in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and Regulation, 2000 and any requirements of the Gateway Determination.

31.    Exhibition material, including explanatory information, land to which the Planning Proposal applies, description of the objectives and intended outcomes, copy of the Planning Proposal and relevant maps will be available for viewing during the exhibition period on Council’s website and hard copies available at Council offices and libraries.

32.    Notification of the public exhibition will be through:

a.   Newspaper advertisement in The St George and Sutherland Shire Leader,

b.   Exhibition notice on Council’s website,

c.   Notices in Council offices and libraries (including a display at the Oatley Library),

d.   Letters to State and Commonwealth Government agencies identified in the Gateway Determination,

e.   Letters to adjoining landowners (in accordance with Council’s Notification Procedures), and

f.    Drop in/information sessions at Oatley Library.

33.    A Public Hearing is required under Section 29 of the Local Government Act 1993. This will occur after the exhibition period as required under the Local Government Act 1993.

 

Financial Implications

34.    Within budget allocation.

 

File Reference

PP2016/0004

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 252

 

REPORT TO GEORGES RIVER COUNCIL

IHAP MEETING OF Thursday, 18 May 2017

 

IHAP Report No

3.1

Application No

 PP2016/0004

Site Address & Ward Locality

Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club

Peakhurst Ward

Proposal

Planning Proposal to amend Hurstville LEP 2012 to rezone and reclassify  Lots 14-20, Sec 3, DP7124; Lots 3-7, Sec 4, DP 4124 and Lot 1, DP 1159269 (known as the former Oatley Bowling Club) to enable future development for seniors housing and public open space.

Report Author/s

Independent Assessment, Consultant Planner and Manager Strategic Planning, Catherine McMahon

Owners

Georges River Council

Applicant

Georges River Council

Zoning

RE1 – Public Recreation

Date Of Lodgement

2/11/2016

Submissions

 N/A

Cost of Works

 N/A

Reason for Referral to IHAP

To seek endorsement to present the Planning Proposal report to Council


 

 


 

Recommendation

1.   That the Georges River IHAP acknowledges that the Planning Proposal to reclassify and enable the development of part of the former Oatley Bowling Club (Lots 14 to 20 Section 3 DP 7124, Part of Lots 3 to 7 Section 4 DP 7124 and Lot 1 DP 1159269) for seniors housing has sufficient merit to proceed to Gateway Review.

2.   That the Planning Proposal be referred to the Department of Planning and Environment for Gateway Review subject to the project timeline at Part 6 being updated to reflect the decision making timeframes in Council’s decision of 7 November 2016.

3.   Before public exhibition of the Planning Proposal:

a.   The Planning Proposal be amended as necessary to reflect the Council decision of 7 November 2016 (reduced site boundary) and to include the separate information provided on the planning proposal’s compliance with the draft South District Plan;

b.   The Traffic and Access Assessment be updated to reflect the indicative concept proposal and to specifically address emergency access requirements arising from the bushfire hazard;

c.   The Detailed Site Investigation be updated to specifically address the suitability of the proposed SP2 land (reduced site boundary) in terms of contamination risk; and

d.   Relevant reports are updated as necessary.

4.   The Planning Proposal is placed on formal public exhibition in accordance with the conditions of any Gateway Determination issued by the Department of Planning and Environment and a public hearing be arranged in the manner described in the Council decision of 7 November 2016.

 

5.   That Council prepare an amendment to the Hurstville DCP to address interface issues with adjoining sites which may include, but may not be limited to height, interface and transition, setbacks and any other relevant issues.

 

6.   That a report to Council be prepared to advise of the IHAP recommendations

 


 

Site Plan

 

Executive Summary

1.      This report has been prepared by City Plan Strategy and Development Pty Ltd (the consultant) on behalf of Georges River Council.

 

2.      The purpose of this report is to provide a high-level assessment of a Planning Proposal for part of the former Oatley Bowling Club to determine whether it has sufficient strategic merit to warrant a Gateway Review, and subsequent public exhibition.

 

3.      The Planning Proposal has been prepared by the Georges River Council after considerable investigation and deliberation by the former Hurstville City Council regarding the most appropriate future use of the disused Bowling Club.

 

4.      The effect of the current Planning Proposal would be to permit the development of a five storey residential aged care facility in the north eastern corner of the site.  The balance of the site, representing approximately half of the site area, would remain zoned for public recreation purposes and able to be developed for recreation and community purposes.

 

5.      The proposal to facilitate the provision of seniors housing is consistent with the draft South District Plan and the Georges River Council Community Strategic Plan 2025 and in this regard has strategic merit.

 

6.      At this stage of investigation there are no identified environmental constraints that render the land unsuitable for the proposed use.

 

7.      As such, the Planning Proposal has sufficient merit overall to proceed to formal public exhibition and in this regard it is recommended that the Planning Proposal be referred to the Department of Planning and Environment for Gateway Review.

 

Report in Full

 

Site Location and Context

8.      The Planning Proposal relates to the site of the former Oatley Bowling Club on River Road, Oatley (the site).  The current legal description of the site is Lots 14 to 20 Section 3 DP 7124, Part of Lots 3 to 7 Section 4 DP 7124 and Lot 1 DP 1159269 (being the unmade part of River Road).

 

9.      The site has an area of approximately 1.1 hectares. It contains two disused bowling greens which are terraced with a height difference of approximately 4 metres.  All other building structures associated with the former Bowling Club have been demolished, apart from a small metal shed in the north-eastern corner of the site.

 

10.    The site is nestled between the T4 Eastern Suburbs and Illawarra Rail Line on its eastern boundary, and the Myles Dunphy Bushland Reserve on its western and southern boundaries.  Two detached dwelling houses adjoin the northern boundary.  These houses are contained within a pocket of five dwelling houses that are also bound by the Illawarra Rail Line and Myles Dunphy Reserve, and the former Oatley Bowling Club and Mulga Road to the north.  Road access to the site is available from the partially constructed River Road.

 

11.    The site is located adjacent to the Oatley Train Station, which has recently been upgraded with the provision of lift access.  The surrounding area is characterised by a predominantly low density residential suburb on the western side of the railway line, with a strip of neighbourhood shops approximately 200m from the site on Mulga Road. 

 

12.    On the eastern side of the railway line, approximately 300m walking distance from the site, is the Oatley local centre containing a variety of shops and services and the Oatley RSL and Community Club.  The Oatley local centre is surrounded by a precinct of mostly older style 3 storey walk-up apartment buildings. (refer to Figure 1).

 

 

Existing Planning Controls

13.    The site is currently zoned RE1 Public Recreation under Hurstville LEP 2012 (refer to Figure 2 below). The site is surrounded by a mix of land uses including the R2 - Low Density Residential to the north of the site. To the east of the site, on the opposite side of the Oatley train station is a mix zones including land zoned R3 - Medium Density Residential and B2 - Local Centre (Kogarah LEP 2012).

 

Figure 2 – Land Use Zoning Map

 

Background to the Planning Proposal

14.    The former Oatley Bowling Club ceased operations in 2006 and in 2011 the disused club house was demolished.

 

15.    There have been extensive investigations by the former Hurstville City Council regarding the most appropriate future use of the site culminating in a decision by the now Georges River Council on 7 November 2016 to proceed with the current Planning Proposal subject to the following:

 

“(c)     That the Planning Proposal to reclassify the site from ‘community’ land to ‘operational’ and to rezone the site to SP2 Infrastructure with the designated land use of seniors housing (nursing home) and community facilities be amended to apply only to that part of the site which would accommodate the seniors housing (aged care component) and ancillary support requirements, i.e. approximately 50% of the site.

 

(d)      That extensive public consultation commence immediately and a report be submitted to Council in March 2017 detailing the outcomes of the public consultation (including any proposed amendments to the Planning Proposal arising from such consultation) prior to any Gateway submission to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment.

 

(e)      That an independent peer review of the community consultation results ((d) above) be undertaken.

 

(f)       That the Planning Proposal be assessed by an independent expert who will make recommendations to the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel for endorsement or otherwise prior to any Gateway determination.

 

(g)      That if the Planning Proposal proceeds, i.e. after independent assessment, approval by IHAP and Department of Planning and Environment, the reclassification Public Hearing be undertaken by a former Judge of the NSW Land and Environment Court or a person with equivalent standing and experience, and that a post Gateway exhibition report be prepared by an independent consultant for consideration by the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel and the newly elected Council panel prior to forwarding to the Department of Planning.”

 

16.    The Planning Proposal has not been amended at this stage to give effect to the above items.

 

17.    With regard to item (c), we are advised that a reduced site boundary is to be formalised via a land subdivision application.  When the new site boundary is known the proposed FSR will be adjusted to account for the reduced site area.  The proposal, as far as the scale and configuration of the indicative seniors housing development goes, remains unchanged.  The land subdivision application is currently being prepared.

 

18.    With regard to item (d), public consultation comprising three community information and feedback sessions, a community survey and a telephone survey was undertaken by an independent facilitator between November 2016 and February 2017.  A progress report was considered by Council on 6 March 2017 and a further report including a peer review of the community consultation results and a recommendation regarding any further amendments to the Planning Proposal was considered at the Council Meeting of 1 May 2017. 

 

19.    The peer review of the community consultation results was undertaken by Cred Consulting.  The review found that the consultation methodology was robust and did not recommend any further amendments to the planning proposal.  It should be noted that further public consultation will be undertaken once the planning proposal has been amended as required by (c), and the recommendations of this report, and issued with a gateway determination.  In our opinion, there are no outstanding matters arising from the preliminary community consultation that warrant further amendment of planning proposal prior to the gateway review.

20. As such, this assessment of the merits of the planning proposal has been undertaken as though the planning proposal had been amended in accordance with item (c).  No assumptions have been made regarding the outcome of item (d).

 

21.    As such, this assessment of the merits of the Planning Proposal has been undertaken as though the Planning Proposal had been amended in accordance with item (c). 

 

Preliminary Assessment of the Planning Proposal

22.    In addition to the above matters, on 15 March 2017, City Plan Strategy and Development Pty Ltd wrote to Council advising that a preliminary assessment of the Planning Proposal had been undertaken. This letter identified a number of outstanding issues which were required to be considered, and included the following:

 

§  Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) - The TIA provided was prepared prior to the development of the indicative concept plans.  It is recommended that the TIA be updated to provide a high-level traffic, parking and access analysis of the proposal, specifically in relation to the indicative concept plans.

 

§  Phase 2 Contamination Assessment - A Phase 1 Contamination Assessment has been provided and states that the site could be made suitable for the proposal subject to additional investigations being undertaken. A Phase 2 Contamination Report should therefore be prepared and provided to ensure consistency with the State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land.

 

§  Acoustic, Hydraulic and Geotechnical Reports which accompany the PP are out-of-date as they were prepared between 2006 and 2007. An updated Hydraulic report should be provided to ensure the site can be adequately serviced. Given this is a PP, updated acoustic and geotechnical reports are not currently required.

 

§  District Plans - It is acknowledged that the PP was submitted to Council prior to the release of the draft South District Plan. A statement should however be provided outlining whether the proposal is consistent with the relevant aims and priorities of the draft plan.

 

23.    On 6 April 2017, TPG Town Planning and Urban Design (TPG) provided a written response to Council in response to the issues raised in the letter from City Plan. A copy of the response from TPG is included at Attachment 1. In summary, the advice states:

 

“In addition to any changes that may be required as a result of this feedback, it is important to note that the following factors are likely to result in amendment to the PP prior to its consideration by a future elected Council, these being:

 

1.   Outcomes of the Phase 2 contamination assessment undertaken by Douglas Partners, which was not available prior to lodgement of the PP.

 

2.   The 7 November 2016 resolution by Council to amend the PP area to approximately 50% of the site.

 

3.   Outcomes of the public exhibition process and assessment of submissions.  It is considered the most appropriate time to amend the PP is at a point where the outcomes of all of the above matters are known and all matters can be addressed holistically and comprehensively.”

 

Preliminary Public Exhibition of the Planning Proposal

24.    Georges River Council’s (Council) undertook preliminary public exhibition of the Planning Proposal prepared on Council’s behalf by TPG. Council sought feedback from the community on the Planning Proposal from November 2016 to February 2017.

 

25.    As part of this process, Council also conducted Community Information and Feedback sessions held on Wednesday 23 November 2016 (one session) and Saturday 26 November 2016 (two sessions), facilitated by Elton Consulting.

 

26.    A separate report was presented to Council on 1 May 2017 on the preliminary public exhibition phase. Attachment 2 is a copy of that report. The Administrator adopted the recommendations of the report which were:

 

a.   That the results of the independent peer review, undertaken by Cred Consulting, of the community consultation process for the future uses of the former Oatley Bowling Club site are noted, particularly that the report “is considered to be a high-quality report based on a robust methodology and wide ranging activities”.

b.   That Council acknowledge the ongoing community support for aged care facilities as an important issue for Council as outlined in the Elton Consulting report.

c.   That the Elton Consulting report and the Cred Consulting report be provided to City Plan Services for consideration during the assessment and review of the Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club site.

d.   That the Georges River community be updated on the community consultation results via the Council website and usual communications and media channels.

e.   That the draft Georges River Council Community Engagement Policy be reviewed having regard to the feedback from the Elton Community Consultation report, prior to adoption by Council.

 

Intended Outcomes and Proposed Amendment

27.    In summary, the intended outcome of the Planning Proposal (as amended by Council’s resolution of 7 November 2016) is to facilitate the development of seniors housing in the north-western corner of the site to meet a community need identified in the Georges River Council’s Community Strategic Plan 2025; and to retain the balance of the site for public recreation and community purposes.

 

28.    The proposal is to be achieved by the following amendments to the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (HLEP):

 

§  An amendment to the Land Zoning Map to rezone approximately half of the site (indicatively shown in Figure 3 below) from RE1 – Public Recreation to SP2 Infrastructure, with the designated uses of ‘seniors housing’;

 

§  An amendment to the Height of Buildings Map to introduce a maximum building height of 18.5m on that part of the site proposed to be zoned SP2 Infrastructure; and

 

§  An amendment to the Floor Space Ratio Map (FSR) to introduce a maximum FSR sufficient to allow 6,020m2 of gross floor area on the proposed SP2 land (approximately 1.2:1); and

 

§  An amendment to Schedule 4 – ‘Classification and reclassification of public land’ to reclassify the land proposed to be zoned SP2 - Infrastructure from ‘community’ to ‘operational’ land.

 

Figure 3 – Indicative Site Plan

 

 

Strategic Merit

29.    Planning Circular PS16-004 (dated 30 August 2016) clearly articulates the considerations for determining whether or not a Planning Proposal should be submitted for a gateway determination (under section 56 of the EP&A Act). Although this circular is technically directed at a rezoning review undertaken by the relevant Planning Panel, the process outlined provides a useful frame of reference for Council to examine a Planning Proposal when first submitted. 

 

30.    A Planning Proposal will meet the strategic merit test if it is:

 

§  Consistent with the relevant draft district plan or corridor/precinct plan released for public comment; or

 

§  Consistent with a relevant local strategy that has been endorsed by the Department; or

 

§  Responding to a change in circumstances, such as the investment in new infrastructure or changing demographic trends that have not been recognised by existing planning controls.

 

31.    The circular notes that a proposal that seeks to amend controls that are less than 5 years old will only be considered where it clearly meets the Strategic Merit Test.

 

Consistency with Strategic Studies or Reports[1]

32.    The draft South District Plan was released by the Greater Sydney Commission on 21 November 2016.

 

33.    The draft South District Plan sets out the aspirations and proposals for Greater Sydney’s South District, which includes the local government area of Georges River. Whilst the draft South District Plan has only recently completed formal exhibition and will not be finalised until the end of 2017, it is an important document to consider as it sets out the vision, priorities and actions for future development of the South District.

 

34.    The Planning Proposal was lodged before the release of the draft South District Plan.  However, the following additional commentary has subsequently been provided by the authors of the Planning Proposal which demonstrates that the Planning Proposal is consistent with the vision and priorities of the draft District Plan:

 

Oatley is identified in the Greater Sydney Commission’s South District Plan 2036, which outlines a 20 year vision, priorities and actions for the South District.

 

The plan envisages:

 

§  By 2036, people living in the South District will have greater access to healthier rivers, bays, beaches and bushland. Increased tree cover will better integrate urban areas with these natural areas. People will have access to a greater number of parks and playing fields, particularly in northern communities, and safe walking and cycling links. This culturally diverse community … will thrive as new food and dining hubs and community events spread a new energy throughout the District…

 

§  …With planned investments, Sutherland Hospital and private hospitals in Hurstville will create employment in health care and allied services. Protecting land for existing employment and urban services will provide opportunities for start-up businesses and allow jobs to grow in the urban services that support the District.

 

§  The draft District Plan notes that the Georges River Local Government Area will see significant increase in people aged over 65. The Planning Proposal is consistent with following aspects of the draft District Plan:

 

-        4.2 Liveability priorities, which seeks to improve housing diversity and affordability by supporting planning for adaptable housing and aged care.

 

-        4.4.1 Plan for housing diversity, which notes that the South District’s projected growth in people aged 65 and over in the South District means that there must be more emphasis on planning for housing diversity particularly seniors housing and aged care options that allow people to age in place.

 

-        4.4.2 Support planning for adaptable housing and aged care, which notes the best way to provide seniors housing and aged care is to co-locate them in places that have a mix of different uses and services, with good quality footpaths and pedestrian connections that make it easy for people to meet their day to day needs, or visit health services and community and cultural facilities.

 

-        4.8 Respond to people’s need for services, which notes the full range of service needs must be realised including child care, schools, hospitals, health centres and aged care.

In delivering land for seniors housing, the Planning Proposal will assist Council and the NSW government to deliver key priorities relating to the ageing population.”

 

Relevant Local Strategy

35.    As discussed in the Planning Proposal, there are two local strategies which are relevant to the Planning Proposal.

 

36.    The Hurstville Positive Ageing Strategy and the Hurstville Community Strategic Plan 2025 both recognise the demographic changes which are increasing the demand for seniors housing.  The Hurstville Positive Ageing Strategy also identifies that the preference of the majority of older residents is to find appropriate housing in their own neighbourhoods.  Both strategies include commitments to increase the provision of aged care facilities.  The Delivery Program and Operational Plan associated with the Community Strategic Plan include commitments to provide seniors housing on the former Oatley Bowling Club site.

 

Changing Circumstances, Investment and/or Demographic Trends

37.    As noted already, the draft South District Plan observes that the projected growth in people aged 65 and over in the South District means that there must be more emphasis on planning for housing diversity particularly seniors housing and aged care options that allow people to age in place.  This demographic trend is the primary driver for the Planning Proposal.

 

38.    The Planning Proposal was precipitated by the demise of the former Oatley Bowling Club (which is part of a wider trend observed with reduced participation in lawn bowls) and the need to consider appropriate alternate uses of the land that will serve the interests of the wider Oatley and Georges River communities.

 

Site Specific Assessment

39.    Having met the strategic merit test, Planning Circular PS16-004 specifies that a Planning Proposal must then pass a site-specific merit test regarding:

 

§  The natural environment;

 

§  Existing uses, approved uses and likely future uses of land in the vicinity of the proposal; and

 

§  The services and infrastructure that are or will be available to meet the demands arising from the proposal and any proposed financial arrangements for infrastructure provision.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

Ecology

40.    The Planning Proposal is informed by an Ecological Constraints Assessment prepared by Molino Stewart and dated September 2016, and a further report by Molino Stewart titled Integrated Response to Rezoning Proposal dated April 2017.

 

41.    The assessment identified Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest (an endangered ecological community) in the Myles Dunphy Bushland Reserve to the west of River Road, as well as two species of threatened micro-bats to the south of the site.  It is possible that habitat for the micro-bats may be present in the retaining walls that support the bowling greens.

 

42.    The further report gives more detailed consideration to the likely impact to the widening of River Road (to 8m) and provision of equitable access.  The report finds that the widening would most likely require the removal of a small area of the Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest from the road reserve, although because of a number of factors that already impact on the viability of that particular vegetation, it could be offset by compensatory measures to improve the existing habitat within the Myles Dunphy Reserve.

 

43.    The further report also observes that the widening of River Road would require extending an existing culvert into a first order stream.  This would necessitate the provision of additional measures to compensate for the loss of a small area of the vegetation riparian zone associated with the creek.

 

44.    The Assessment makes a number of recommendations which are primarily relevant to any future development application for the site and concludes that the impact of redevelopment on the site can be mitigated through appropriate measures.

 

Bushfire

45.    Myles Dunphy Bushland Reserve is bushfire prone land and as such a Bushfire Constraints Assessment was undertaken for the Planning Proposal by Travers Bushfire and Ecology.

 

46.    Seniors housing is identified as a ‘special fire protection purpose’ by the Rural Fires Act 1997 and is therefore subject to more stringent bushfire planning requirements.

 

47.    The result is that only a relatively small part of the site (approximately 2,000m2) can be developed for the purpose of seniors housing, resulting in the compact indicative building form illustrated in the Planning Proposal.

 

48.    According to the Integrated Response to the Planning Proposal by Molino Stewart, the Asset Protection Zone that would be required for the senior housing facility would be entirely located within the boundaries of the land proposed to be rezoned SP2.

 

Contamination

49.    A detailed site investigation (Phase 2 Site Investigation) has been undertaken by Douglas Partners of the entire site.

 

50.    The investigation has raised concern with apparently uncontrolled fill in the south and south western parts of the site reaching an estimated depth of 9 metres. This fill, apart from lacking stability to support buildings and structures, has been found to be contaminated by asbestos fragments.

 

51.    The investigation recommends that a remedial action plan be prepared for this area.  Because of the volume of material present, it is likely that remediation would involve capping the contaminated fill with clean soil.

 

52.    The south and south western parts of the site are the areas which are now proposed to retain their existing RE1 - Public Recreation Zone and to be developed for open space purposes.  The findings of the Phase 2 Site Investigation are relevant to any future planning of this area including future development applications and/or Part 5 assessments.

 

53.    With regard to that part of the site now proposed to be rezoned SP2 - Infrastructure, the investigation found “The fill beneath the former bowling greens was assessed to be relatively free of anthropogenics and visual indicators of potential contamination”.

 

54.    It is recommended that the site investigation be updated before the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal to reflect the Council decision of 7 November 2016 and specifically to determine whether or not the proposed SP2 land is contaminated, and if it is, whether it is suitable in its contaminated state for the proposed use (with or without remediation).

 

Existing and Likely Future Use of Land in the Vicinity

 

55.    As described above, the site is tucked away between the Illawarra Rail Line and Myles Dunphy Reserve.  Because of bushfire constraints, any future seniors housing development must be located at least 50 metres from the Bushland Reserve, which would also serve to provide a visual buffer to the development.

 

56.    The adjacent pocket of five dwelling houses, two of which adjoin the northern boundary of the site, present challenges in terms of maintaining an appropriate scale relationship with the proposed 18.5 metre (five storey) aged care facility.  

 

57.    The indicative concept plans submitted with the Planning Proposal suggest that the interface between the aged care facility and the adjoining low density dwellings can be managed by arranging a three storey building form nearest to the boundary (approximately 3.5 metres) which then increases to five storeys approximately 10 metres from the boundary.  The proposal would have no overshadowing impact on these properties and provided the operations of the aged care facility were oriented away from the neighbours, no adverse noise impacts would be anticipated. 

 

58.    In this regard, the relationship of the proposal with the existing uses in the immediate locality is considered satisfactory. However, it is recommended that an amendment to the Hurstville DCP be prepared to address any potential future impacts from the development to the existing residential development on the adjoining sites.

 

Services and infrastructure

 

59.    The Planning Proposal observes that public transport and utility services infrastructure are available in the locality and adjacent to the site.  It is anticipated that there is adequate services and infrastructure capacity to service the proposal subject to minor augmentation (such as the provision of an electrical substation).  Consultation with infrastructure agencies is expected following Gateway which will confirm any additional infrastructure requirements.

 

Transport and Access

 

60.    A Transport and Access Assessment was prepared by GTA Consultants.  In relation to traffic the Assessment found that the relatively low trip generation associated with the residential care facility would have no adverse impact on the performance of the local road network.

 

61.    The Assessment also considered the particular requirements to ensure equitable access to the site for people with disabilities.  In this regard, the existing grade and cross fall of River Road does not comply with the requirements of the relevant Australian Standard. 

 

62.    The Assessment suggests that compliant access could be provided by constructing an elevated boardwalk on the western side of the River Road carriageway within the existing road reserve.  Alternatively, the Assessment proposes that a boardwalk could be considered within Myles Dunphy Bushland Reserve.

 

63.    The Ecological Constraints Assessment observes that although an elevated boardwalk on the western side of River Road has the potential to harm the Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest endangered ecological community; this can be avoided with thoughtful design.

 

64.    One aspect that the Transport and Access Assessment has not considered is whether redevelopment of the site for the purpose of aged care accommodation will require improved emergency access.  The Integrated Response to Rezoning Proposal report by Molino Stewart indicates that River Road would need to be widened to provide an 8m wide carriageway to satisfy the performance criteria in Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006.  We recommend that the Transport and Traffic Assessment be reviewed and revised as necessary to address this issue before public exhibition of the Planning Proposal.

 

Conclusion

 

65.    The proposal to rezone part of the former Oatley Bowling Club site to facilitate the development of an aged care facility is consistent with the vision and priorities of the NSW Government’s draft South District Plan and the local strategies of the former Hurstville City Council. 

 

66.    Based on the assessment so far, there are no site constraints that are unable to be managed through careful design of the proposed facility. 

 

67.    Community consultation has been undertaken on behalf of Georges River Council to inform the planning proposal, resulting in a reduction in the area to be rezoned and a more thorough assessment of ecological and potential bushfire constraints. 

 

68.    The recommendation has identified that a number of the outstanding issues be addressed prior to the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, including:

 

a.   Reference to the draft South District Plan;

b.   An update to the Traffic and Access Assessment to specifically address any emergency access requirements arising from the bushfire hazard;

c.   An updated Detailed Site Investigation to specifically address the suitability of the proposed SP2 land in terms of contamination risk; and

d.   The update of any other reports as considered necessary and which may arise as a recommendation from the report presented to Council on 1 May 2017 on the outcomes of the preliminary public exhibition.

 

69.    It is also recommended that controls be prepared to address the impact of any proposed future development on the site in the context of the adjoining residential development. These new controls will require an amendment to the Hurstville DCP. The controls will include, but not limited to height, transition between zones and setbacks.

 

70.    In this regard, the Planning Proposal (as amended) has sufficient merit, in the opinion of the consultant, to be referred to the Department of Planning and Environment for a Gateway Review, prior to formal public exhibition.

 

 


 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Response to Preliminary Assessment by Independent Planner

Attachment 2

Report to Council Meeting 1 may 2017 on outcomes of community consultation


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 266

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 296

 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 298

 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 302

 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 304

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 315

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 316

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 446

 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 449

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 450

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 451

 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 453

 

Item:                   CCL059-17        Community Consultation Results on the Future Uses of the Former Oatley Bowling Club 

Author:              Executive Manager

Directorate:      Office of the General Manager

Matter Type:     Environment and Planning


 


 

Recommendation

(a)     That the results of the independent peer review, undertaken by Cred Consulting, of the community consultation process for the future uses of the former Oatley Bowling Club site are noted, particularly that the report “is considered to be a high-quality report based on a robust methodology and wide ranging activities”.

(b)     That Council acknowledge the ongoing community support for aged care facilities as an important issue for Council as outlined in the Elton Consulting report.

(c)     That the Elton Consulting report and the Cred Consulting report be provided to City Plan Services for consideration during the assessment and review of the Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club site.

(d)     That the Georges River community be updated on the community consultation results via the Council website and usual communications and media channels.

(e)     That the draft Georges River Council Community Engagement Policy be reviewed having regard to the feedback from the Elton Community Consultation report, prior to adoption by Council.

 


Executive Summary

1.      The results of a detailed community consultation process from Elton Consulting and independent peer review by Cred Consulting are provided in this report. This follows a Council Meeting on 7 November 2016, where it was resolved that Georges River Council would undertake extensive community consultation on the Planning Proposal and future uses of the former Oatley Bowling Club site.

Background

2.      At a Meeting of Council on 7 November 2016 it was resolved:

a.   That Council not proceed with the 2014 resolution of the former Hurstville City Council to rezone the site to residential to facilitate a 7-9 storey, mixed use residential and seniors housing development.

b.   That it be noted that if the Planning Proposal proceeds to Gateway determination, any plan making (re-zoning and reclassification) is unlikely to occur before December 2017, and would require the prior approval of the Council elected in September 2017.

c.   That the Planning Proposal to reclassify the site from ‘community’ land to ‘operational’ and to rezone the site to SP2 Infrastructure with the designated land use of seniors housing (nursing home) and community facilities be amended to apply only to that part of the site which would accommodate the seniors housing (aged care component) and ancillary support requirements, i.e. approximately 50% of the site.

d.   That extensive public consultation commence immediately and a report be submitted to Council in March 2017 detailing the outcomes of the public consultation (including any proposed amendments to the Planning Proposal arising from such consultation) prior to any Gateway submission to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment.

e.   That an independent peer review of the community consultation results ((d) above) be undertaken.

f.    That the Planning Proposal be assessed by an independent expert who will make recommendations to the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel for endorsement or otherwise prior to any Gateway determination.

g.   That if the Planning Proposal proceeds, i.e. after independent assessment, approval by IHAP and Department of Planning and Environment, the reclassification Public Hearing be undertaken by a former Judge of the NSW Land and Environment Court or a person with equivalent standing and experience, and that a post Gateway exhibition report be prepared by an independent consultant for consideration by the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel and the newly elected Council panel prior to forwarding to the Department of Planning.

 

3.      At the Council Meeting on 6 March 2017, Council resolved:

a.   That the progress report on the community consultation process for the former Oatley Bowling Club site is received and noted.

b.   That respondents to the community survey are sent an update on the community consultation process contained in this report.

Consultation Process

4.      In accordance with point (d) above, Council undertook extensive community consultation on future uses of the former Oatley Bowling Club site.  The consultation process sought to understand the Georges River community’s support for the development of the former Oatley Bowling Club site, their attitude towards the need for seniors housing and preferences for community uses on the site. This consultation included:

c.   Three (3) community information sessions held on Wednesday 23 November 2016 and Saturday 26 November 2016

d.   A community survey available on the Council website and in hard copy at the community information sessions

e.   A telephone survey

5.      The consultation was additional to that which is legally required to be undertaken as part of the Planning Proposal gateway process.   Council is committed to ongoing community consultation on the Planning Proposal for this site. The community consultation was undertaken by an independent facilitator, Elton Consulting, between November 2016 and February 2017. Elton Consulting has extensive communications and community engagement experience.

 

6.      The independent facilitator designed the sessions to provide residents with an opportunity to find out more about the Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club site. The sessions were an opportunity for the community to talk to Council staff and experts in a range of areas. The independent facilitator captured feedback from members of the community.

7.      A community survey was available in hardcopy format at the information sessions and on Council’s website. The independent facilitator developed the survey to explore, amongst other things: 

a.   If the provision of aged care (seniors housing), as identified by the community and former Hurstville City Council since 2006, in the Hurstville Community Strategic Plan 2021 and the Hurstville Community Strategic Plan 2025, continued to be a priority for the Georges River community;

b.   Preferences for the types of seniors housing proposed at the former Oatley Bowling Club site;

c.   Options for community facilities proposed for the site; and

d.   Ideas for improving access to the adjacent Myles Dunphy Reserve.

8.      The independent facilitator also arranged a telephone survey to be conducted with randomly selected residents from the Georges River Local Government Area.  Participants were recruited and sent an information pack prior to a one-on-one interview.  The information pack contained copies of the information panels used in the community information sessions and a short introductory letter.

9.      Following the community consultation process, an independent peer review was undertaken by Cred Consulting. Cred Consulting has extensive experience in community engagement processes and social planning.

10.    In the interests of transparency, Council also publicly released the OBC Planning Proposal in order to obtain community feedback early in the rezoning process.  The submissions were analysed by Elton Consulting and a series of key themes were determined by the independent consultant.

Promotion and Participation Results

11.    The community information sessions were promoted on Council’s website and in the St George and Sutherland Shire Leader. An invitation to the sessions was delivered to 1,200 homes and businesses in streets located close to the former Oatley Bowling Club site. Information panels, on display at the sessions, explained the Planning Proposal and background to the former Oatley Bowling Club site. The survey was available in hardcopy format at the sessions and was also available for completion online, on Council’s website.

 

12.    Background information on the former Oatley Bowling Club site was available on the Council website and as hardcopy information panels at the Hurstville Service Centre. The Planning Proposal was also available in hardcopy format at local libraries and customer service centres.

 

13.    There was strong community participation in the consultation process with:

·        149 participants at the 3 community information sessions

·        146 community surveys completed at the community information sessions or online

·        501 residents participated in a phone survey, of which 30% were from Oatley

·        52 submissions were received in response to the Planning Proposal

 

14.    Participants of the telephone survey included 194 males and 307 females. 154 participants were from the suburb of Oatley, representing 30% of the overall telephone participants.

 

15.    Participants in the community survey indicated that their preferred methods of engagement include, in order of preference:

·        Community information sessions

·        Surveys

·        Open days

·        Newsletters

·        Presentations

 

Community Consultation Results

16.    Three reports are attached to this report:

·        Outcomes Report by Elton Consulting

·        Submissions Report by Elton Consulting

·        Peer Review by Cred Consulting

 

17.    These reports provide further detail on the results of the community consultation process, results and subsequent peer review.

18.    Elton Consulting found that “Generally, those people who participated in the phone survey, both within the suburb of Oatley and those in surrounding suburbs, were supportive of the proposal” (Outcomes Report, p.4). The telephone survey found that:

·        92% of surveyed respondents consider the provision of aged care facilities was an important issue for Council and 47% felt that they or a family member would be interested in aged care accommodation at the Oatley Bowling Club site.

·        Most respondents felt that self-contained dwellings would be most appropriate to the site.

·        58% of respondents felt that the proposed three-five storey aged care facility was appropriate for the site

·        71% felt that the proposed rezoning would result in an appropriate intensity of development for the site

 

19.    Those participants who expressed concerns about the proposal provided insights into their concerns which are summarised in the Outcomes Report as:

·        The scale of the development and setting a precedent for the area

·        Visual impact of the development

·        Preserving the character of Oatley’s built environment

·        Privatisation of public land

·        Desire for the site to be preserved for open space, passive recreation and environmental value

·        Road access to the site, including clearing to widen the road and turn off into the site

·        Risk of bushfire to residents, the Myles Dunphy Reserve and the proposed development site

·        Parking for the site

 

20.    Respondents of the telephone survey provided a range of preferred uses for the community facilities, including:

·        Community gardens (88%)

·        Walkways (86%)

·        Public toilets (75%)

·        Picnic shelters (75%)

 

21.    A review of the 52 submissions received in relation to the Planning Proposal were themed in the following key categories:

·        General comments: 13% of submissions expressed a view that the community survey was skewed towards supporting the planning proposal.

·        Site location: 6% suggested the site be located close to Oatley.

·        Scale and impact of development: 71% were opposed to commercial development of the site while 2 submissions supported the proposed reduction in heights of the planning proposal.

·        Environmental concerns: 37% objected to the rezoning and advocated that the site be reserved for native fauna and flora. Some submissions were concerned that the proposal would negatively impact the Myles Dunphy Reserve.

·        Traffic and parking: 19% of submissions were concerned about the impact on traffic and parking on the existing road networks. Several submissions called for a more detailed analysis of traffic and parking issues.

22.    The submissions provided a mix of suggestions for the community uses of the land, including:

·        Parkland (10%)

·        Bike/pedestrian paths, signs, public amenities and facilities (10%)

·        Native habitats are preserved (6%)

 

Independent Peer Review Results

23.    The independent peer review of the community consultation process for the future uses of the former Oatley Bowling Club site noted that the Outcomes Report “is considered to be a high-quality report based on a robust methodology and wide ranging activities”.

24.    As reported by Cred Consulting and confirmed by Georges River Council Officers, a typographical errors was made on page 9 of the Outcomes Report: 38% of respondents to the community survey believed there was enough aged care options in the LGA, not 48% as reported in the Outcomes Report.

 

Future Consultation and Engagement

25.    Participants in the community engagement process indicated that they would be interested in participating in future consultations and would welcome further information through newsletters, email updates, surveys, pop-ups and face-to-face events.

26.    Georges River Council is committed to ongoing, effective community engagement.  It is proposed to review the draft Community Engagement Policy and Strategy for Community engagement in light of the feedback from the Elton Community Consultation report.  The insights from the above community consultation process will inform the development and review of the Community Engagement Policy and Strategy.

Next Steps

27.    Following the Meeting of Council on 3 April 2017, it is proposed that the Elton Consulting report and the Cred Consulting report be provided to City Plan Services for consideration during the assessment and review of the Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club site.

 

Financial Implications

28.    Within budget allocation.

 

File Reference

16/1212

 

 


 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Outcomes Report Elton Consulting

Attachment 2

Outcomes Report - Appendix A

Attachment 3

Outcomes Report - Appendix B

Attachment 4

Outcomes Report - Appendix C

Attachment 5

Submissions Report Elton Consulting

Attachment 6

Independent Peer Review by Cred Consulting


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 459

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 477

 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 481

 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 487

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 502

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL086-17          Planning Proposal for the former Oatley Bowling Club - PP2016/0004

[Appendix 1]         Report to IHAP held 18 May 2017

 

 

Page 514

 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 520

Item:                   CCL087-17        Summary of Development Applications lodged and determined  

Author:              Manager Development and Building

Directorate:      Office of Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Environment and Planning

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the information on development applications lodged and determined for February 2017 - April 2017 be received and noted.

 

Executive Summary

1.      A snap-shot of Georges River Council’s development applications over the past 3 months is contained within this report. 

 

2.      The information includes details on numbers received and determined, a breakdown of application types, mean and median time-frames, the estimated value of applications determined and the number of applications that have been with Council and under determination for more than 40 days. This information will be prepared monthly and enable review of trends in assessment timeframes.

This report also provides information being undertaken by the Environment and Planning Directorate to reduce the number of outstanding applications.

 

Report

3.       Georges River Council was proclaimed on 12 May 2016, combining the former Hurstville and Kogarah City Councils. The development application determination numbers and time-frames for the past four (4) months are set out below.

 

Month

Applications Received

Applications Determined

Outstanding Applications

Apps – with Council over 40 days <= 100 days

Apps – with Council over 100 days

Jan

48

42

341

142

153

Feb

71

64

348

103

146

Mar

109

88

369

84

174

Apr

67

35

371

118

153

 

4.       The reporting for the applications has been refined and improved over the last month, resulting in a more accurate reflection of applications and time-frames.

5.      To note - Outstanding Applications relates to applications that:

·         have just been lodged with Council

·         are under neighbour notification

·         are under assessment 

·         are awaiting determination via the relevant planning pathway.  

 

 

6.      These figures are based on the gross turn-around times and include development applications, s96 modification applications, and s82A review of determinations (included in the DA figures). The gross determination figure has been used to ensure any anomalies in the data sets from the two previous Councils are assimilated.

 

7.      The Appendix, which has a detailed breakdown of each development type, the value of work for each type, the numbers received and determined and the mean determining times for each category.

 

8.      A summary of the key elements are:

 

·    During the period of Dec 2016 – April 2017 (inclusive) Georges River Council each month has received more applications than the same time-frame for the year before. This increase is occurring in each month. Generally, applications slow down in the beginning of the Calendar year however this has not occurred for Georges River Council.

·    This could be attributed to a number of factors including the general movement in the market and housing rates being consistent. It also shows that the development market is attracted to the Georges River area.

·    The former Kogarah New City Plan was gazetted on 26 May 2017 hence it is anticipated there will be a further influx of applications being lodged with Council.

·    The major category of developments determined for the last quarter were “Residential New” and “Residential new second occupancy”.

·    The average determination time for development applications is slowly decreasing as the older applications are determined and staff get used to new processes. The introduction of the clearance program is also contributing to this decrease in times.

 

9.      Council staff are focussing on improved ways to reduce the number of outstanding applications. 

·    The “Clearance Program” which focused on reducing the back-log of applications, not necessarily fast-track, determined 110 applications over the 4 month period.  The expanded program involving additional resources will continue until 31 August 2017.  The aim being to continue with clearing the volume of outstanding applications.

·    Over the month of April, all staff relocated back to Hurstville offices so moving forward will make it easier and quicker to deal with applications and departments within Council.

·    From 1 May 2017 – all DA related applications have been lodged in an electronic format, to make it easier to work with the applications, reduce administration tasks within Council and improve the overall time-frames for each aspect of the application.

·    Conditions and templates have been unified to make it consistent.

·    Looking at moving all applications onto one computer system so as to refine and improve processes.

·    Looking at implementing new procedure to review new DAs twice a week.

 

Financial Implications

10.    Within budget allocation.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Application statistics for Feb-Apr 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL087-17          Summary of Development Applications lodged and determined

[Appendix 1]         Application statistics for Feb-Apr 2017

 

 

Page 523

 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 524

Item:                   CCL088-17        Draft Kempt Field Plan of Management 

Author:              Independent Assessment, Consultant Planner and Manager Strategic Planning

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Environment and Planning

 

Recommendation

(a)     That Council consult with the landowner – being the NSW Department of Planning and Environment – in respect of the draft Kempt Field Plan of Management and accompanying Kempt Field Master Plan.

(b)     That Council delegate the Director, Environment and Planning to make modifications to the Kempt Field Plan of Management to address points raised during landowner consultation with the NSW Department of Planning and Environment prior to public exhibition.

(c)     That Council endorse the draft Kempt Field Plan of Management (as amended) and accompanying Kempt Field Master Plan for public exhibition.

 

Executive Summary

1.      A draft Plan of Management and Master Plan has been prepared for Kempt Field, Hurstville. This report summarises the provisions and actions included in the draft Kempt Field Plan of Management and the open space improvements identified in the Kempt Field Master Plan.

 

2.      Kempt Field is owned by the NSW Planning and Environment Commission (Office of Strategic Lands within the NSW Department of Planning and Environment). Georges River Council (former Hurstville City Council) has had the care, control and management of Kempt Field since 29 September 1978.

 

3.      The draft Plan of Management details how Kempt Field will be used, improved and managed in the future. It identifies Council’s goals and objectives for the land and establishes the overall direction for planning, resource management and maintenance of the land.  The Plan of Management is accompanied by the Kempt Field Master Plan which shows the proposed landscape improvements and allows Council to set priorities when preparing works programs and related budgets.

 

4.      This report recommends that, subject to the support of the Department of Planning and Environment (Office of Strategic Lands), Council place the draft Kempt Field Plan of Management (which includes the Master Plan) on public exhibition in order to receive feedback from the local community and user groups.

 

Background

5.      Kempt Field is a 3.173 hectare site on the eastern edge of the Hurstville City Centre, which fronts Durham Street and is bounded by Roberts Lane to the east, the Illawarra Rail Line to the south and the “East Quarter” site (known as Nos. 93-103 Forest Road, Hurstville) to the west. The site comprises Lot 1 in DP 596535 and is known as 75 Durham Street, Hurstville (refer Figure 1).

 

Figure 1: Kempt Field and Surrounds (Source: Six Maps NSW)

 

6.      Kempt Field is a public park, and a public reserve under the Local Government Act 1993, which is owned by the NSW Planning and Environment Commission (Office of Strategic Lands within the NSW Department of Planning and Environment) and which Georges River Council (former Hurstville City Council) has the care, control and management.

 

7.      On 16 June 1978, the Site was resumed under the Public Works Act, 1912, for the purposes of the State Planning Authority Act, 1963 for the “purpose of promoting and co-ordinating town and country planning and securing the orderly and economic development and use of the said land, and in particular for open space purposes and that the said land is vested in the New South Wales Planning and Environment Commission”.

 

8.      On 29 September 1978, it was notified that the land was placed under the care, control and management of the Council of the Municipality of Hurstville for use only as a public park, public reserve or public recreation area for active recreational purposes. At that time the land was described as follows:

“All that piece or parcel of land fronting Durham Street, Roberts Lane and the Illawarra Railway Line at Hurstville, in the Municipality of Hurstville, Parish of St George and County of Cumberland, being Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 596535, having an area of 3.173 hectares or thereabouts and being part of the land comprised in Certificate of Title, volume 13032, folio 250, excluding thereout that interest as regards part of the land abovementioned created by Covenant in Transfer No. B607224”.

 

9.      The primary reason for preparing the Plan of Management is to ensure that developments and improvements in Kempt Field are relevant to the community’s sports and recreational needs (both current and future).

 

10.    In 2016, Georges River Council commissioned independent landscape architects to prepare a Master Plan for Kempt Field; the landscape improvements within the draft Plan of Management reflect those in the Master Plan.

 

11.    Figure 2 (below) and Attachment 2 to this report contains is the concept masterplan for Kempt Field. The Master Plan is a graphic representation of the landscaping and building works being proposed for Kempt Field, which has informed the preparation of the Plan of Management including the Action Plan, Staging Plan and Costings.

 

Figure 2 – Concept Masterplan

 

12.    The Kempt Field Master Plan includes sporting and passive recreation improvements to Kempt Field and identifies three (3) distinct zones, “active zones”, “social zones”, “passive zones” and two (2) connection paths, “circuit path” and “linking spine”.

 

13.    Four (4) Active Zone areas are identified which include areas for:

a.   Play space

b.   Bike training circuit

c.   Multi-purpose ball court

d.   Fitness stations

e.   Dog off leash zone

The central playing field also provides for an Active Zone for sporting groups and school sports bookings and a shared Passive Zone.

 

14.    Six (6) Social Zone areas are identified which include areas for:

a.   Shelter and BBQs

b.   Picnic tables and seating

c.   Stage for events

d.   Upgraded toilet facility

 

15.    Four (4) Passive Zone areas are identified which include areas for:

a.   Seating

b.   Viewing areas

c.   Resting / stretching zones

d.   Open space for markets and events

As well as providing for a Passive Zone, the central playing field also provides for an Active Zone for shared sporting group and school sports bookings.

 

16.    A circuit path is identified which includes:

a.   Fitness track

b.   Connection to Allawah Rail Station

c.   Fitness stations along track

d.   Line marking and running lanes

Pedestrian connections will be provided to the East Quarter site adjacent to the west.

 

17.    A linking spine is identified which includes:

a.   Connection for the whole space

b.   Activity spine

c.   Wayfinding signage

 

Draft Kempt Field Plan of Management

18.    The Plan of Management has been prepared under the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 and provides the statutory requirements, clear guidelines and designation of areas, to enhance the use of Kempt Field by all the community and minimise any conflict between existing and future user groups.

 

19.    The key objective of the Plan of Management is to ensure that Kempt Field retains its use as an area of active open space while providing increased opportunities and improvements in passive recreation (eg walking paths, picnic and BBQ areas, children’s playground and dog off-leash area). The draft Kempt Field Plan of Management is structured in five (5) parts as follows:

 

20.    Part 1 Introduction: including a general explanation of the purpose of plans of management and master plans, the objectives of the Kempt Field Plan of Management and a brief description of the land to which it applies. The background to Georges River Council’s responsibility for the care, control and management of Kempt Field is also provided.

 

21.    Part 2 Strategic and Legislative Framework: considers the State Government legislation and environmental planning instruments (including Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012) which apply to the land and which identify permissible and prohibited land uses. The relationship of the Plan of Management with other Georges River Council plans, strategies and policies is summarised, including the Hurstville Community Strategic Plan 2025, Hurstville Open Space Recreation, Community & Library Facilities Strategy (June 2010), Hurstville Sportsgrounds Generic Plan of Management (2006), Hurstville Development Contributions Plan 2012 and Georges River Council Policy on Planning Agreements (August, 2016). Kempt Field is categorised as “community land” which is used for the multiple purposes of park, general community use and sportsground in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993.

 

22.    Part 3 Description of Kempt Field: provides a site and location description, brief site history, details on current land owner and management structure. 

 

23.    A range of permissible uses within Kempt Field, as identified in the Hurstville LEP 2012 RE1 Public Recreation Zone and other uses, are identified in the draft Plan of Management and are repeated in the following table:

 

Table 1 – Permitted Uses

Purpose/Use

Development

RE1 Public Recreation Zone (permitted development)

Without consent: Environmental facilities, environmental protection works, roads (without consent)

 

With consent: Building identification signs, business identification signs, child care centres, community facilities, information and educational facilities, kiosks, markets, recreation areas, recreation facilities (indoor), recreation facilities (outdoor), respite day care centres, restaurants or cafes.

 

Provides a location for, and supports, the gathering of groups for a range of general social, cultural or recreational purposes. Uses may include:

·           Community events and cultural celebrations

·           Casual or informal recreational use

·           Meetings (including for social, recreational, educational or cultural purposes)

·           Concerts (including all musical genres)

·           Performances (including film and stage)

·           Leisure or training classes

·           Child care (e.g. before or after school care)

·           Designated group use (e.g. scout of girl guide use).

 

Development for the purposes of social, community, cultural and recreational activities, including:

·           Landscaping and finishes, improving access, shade structures, lighting, hard and soft landscape areas to improve the amenity and the visual character of Kempt Field,

·           Provision of buildings or other amenity areas to facilitate use and enjoyment of the community.

Community use.

 

Community notice boards, events and gatherings.

 

Ancillary service areas related to the use of Kempt Field in accordance with the Plan of Management.

 

Loading areas (events/maintenance), car parking spaces and bicycle racks.

Lease, licence or the grant of another estate.

Any of the above as well as the provision of public utilities and associated works or short term casual purposes as prescribed by the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005. These may include uses such as outdoor dining or pedestrian access to adjacent buildings, commercial and retail premises.

 

24.    The description and condition of land is provided including landform, landscape and vegetation, visual assessment within the site and surrounds, access, circulation and parking and existing facilities and current use.

 

25.    In relation to geology, groundwater and contamination and given Kempt Field’s site history, including the excavation and importation of fill material, appropriate contamination and groundwater investigations, according to the State legislative requirements, will be undertaken.  The Plan of Management notes that Council will commission environmental consultants to review all documentation relating to previous environmental investigations of Kempt Field and undertake any supplementary investigations (as required). This will be undertaken as part of Stage 1 (immediate to short term) and will require the preparation of an environmental management strategy prior to any major development to ensure that all future works and development, and maintenance within Kempt Field, complies with State legislative requirements (including State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land), ensuring the ongoing safe use of the park. The final design and layout of Kempt Field and the Master Plan may be impacted by the findings and outcomes of the environmental investigations and the Plan of Management will be updated accordingly.

 

26.    Part 4 Preparing the Plan of Management: details the process for preparing the Plan of Management and its final implementation, including consultation and consent from the landowner (Office of Strategic Land, Department of Planning & Environment), public exhibition and consideration of submissions in the final Plan of Management. An extract of the Kempt Field Master Plan is provided which shows a graphic representation of the landscaping and building works being proposed, and has informed the preparation of the Plan of Management including the Action Plan, Staging Plan/Implementation and Indicative Costings. A full copy of Kempt Field Master Plan is included as an Attachment to the Plan of Management. Part 4 will also include details of the community consultation undertaken as part of the public exhibition of the Plan of Management and will identify any changes to the Plan which reflect community and user group comments.

 

27.    Part 5 Management of Kempt Field: includes a vision statement and eight (8) design principles which are based on the key principles and actions in the Master Plan, including:

·        Improve connections through to Allawah Station,

·        Utilise existing trees as natural shade over play space,

·        Utilise the opportunity to modify the existing circuit path as a fitness path,

·        Retain the central oval for informal ball sports and community events,

·        Utilise the existing slope as a natural amphitheatre,

·        Consider the placement of key facilities in line with environmental assessment,

·        Ensure provision of a range of activities for all ages to enjoy,

·        Retain existing car parking.

 

28.    The Kempt Field Master Plan includes sporting and passive recreation improvements and identifies three (3) distinct zones “active zones”, “social zones”, “passive zones” and two (2) connection paths, “circuit path” and “linking spine” which are shown in the Plan of Management. 

 

Funding

29.    The indicative cost estimate of $3.3M (based on the zones above) has been included in the Master Plan. This indicative cost estimate will be reviewed by a Quantity Surveyor once the layout and works programme (including any remediation works) has been finalised. This final cost estimate will be included in the Plan of Management and will include:

·        all landscaping and building works identified in the Master Plan including new and upgraded central sporting field, multi-purpose court, fitness zones, lighting, resurfacing and changes to the pedestrian/cycle track, new pedestrian pathways, dog off leash zone, fencing, extensive landscaping and improvements to passive recreation areas (including children’s playgrounds, circuit track, seating, BBQ and picnic areas) and replacement toilet block,

·        a component of the remediation of the site and subsequent reinstatement and improvements to landscaping. Note, the full costs of any remediation will be determined once detailed environmental investigations have been carried out.

 

30.    Funding for the landscape and building works identified in the Master Plan will include the use of funding from future Section 94 Development Contributions (LGA Wide works including park furniture and signage and shade structures), funds from planning agreements (existing and future), existing budget and contributions from Government Grants (where available). Landscaping works will commence in the short term and be staged based on funding availability; including through Council’s operational plans, section 94 contribution plans, planning agreements or grants become available.

 

31.    Future Planning Agreements for sites within (and outside) the Hurstville City Centre may consider contributions for improvements to Kempt Field in accordance with this Plan of Management and the Hurstville Open Space, Recreation, Community and Library Facilities Strategy (June 2010).

 

32.    Current Planning Agreements which identify works and monetary contributions for Kempt Field include the Voluntary Planning Agreement - East Quarter Hurstville Pty Limited and Hurstville City Council (December 2011) and updated by Voluntary Planning Agreement – Georges River Council and Hville FCP Pty Ltd and East Quarter Hurstville Pty Ltd, which identifies works to Kempt Field including:

a.   Removal of the redundant tennis courts and the provision of tree planting and planter beds and landscaping,

b.   Enhancement of the existing amenities block or the construction of a new amenities block including safety lighting,

c.   The provision of new footpaths, park furniture, regrading of existing park surfaces and tree planting at the northern end of the park to integrate with the works (above),

d.   The provision of a new footpath between East Quarter and Allawah Railway Station through Kempt Field to accommodate pedestrian traffic,

e.   Provision of several shelter for weather protection for pedestrians and additional lighting to facilitate pedestrian safety in conjunction with the footpath (refer above),

f.    The provision of connections between Kempt Field and East Quarter for pedestrian and bicycle traffic,

g.   Construction of a community facility at Kempt Field.

 

33.    The updated Voluntary Planning Agreement requires that Council will use its reasonable endeavours to commence construction of the Kempt Field Works prior to 31 December 2017.

 

Implementation

34.    The Action Plan provides the basis for the implementation of the Plan of Management (including the Master Plan). The Action Plan in the draft Plan of Management outlines the strategies and actions which will be adopted in order to achieve the objectives and an indication of the staging and timing.

 

35.    The Action Plan and the Master Plan summarise the purposes for which land, and any buildings or improvements, will be used and developed. The Action Plan provides the basis for the implementation of the Plan of Management (including the Master Plan) and outlines the strategies and actions which will be adopted in order to achieve the objectives under three (3) headings: social and cultural development, environmental sustainability and civic leadership.  A program for implementation is also provided and details the specific works within each of the Master Plan Zones.

 

36.    The design and upgrade proposals are indicative only and detailed design will be required for the proposals. This detailed design may require minor variations in the location of facilities and works such as cycleways and pathways. The Action Plan includes actions which are management based and those that involve landscape and building works.

37.    The anticipated timeframes for the commencement of individual stages are:

a.   Stage 1 (1-2 years) -       Immediate / Short Term

b.   Stage 2 (5 years) -          Short Term

c.   Stage 3 (10+ years) - Medium Term

 

Way Forward

38.    If Council resolves to support the public exhibition of the draft Kempt Field Plan of Management and accompanying Kempt Field Master Plan, the following steps are anticipated:

·        Landowner consultation will be undertaken with the Office of Strategic Land within the NSW Department of Planning and Environment on the draft Plan of Management and the required contamination investigations,

·        Contamination investigations will be undertaken in accordance with the provisions and requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Contaminated Land,

·        Once landowner approval is provided (and subject to any conditions) the draft Kempt Field Plan of Management will be placed on public exhibition for a period of no less than 28 days (or as required by the Office of Strategic Lands),

·        A revised draft Kempt Field Plan of Management (and Master Plan) will be prepared which addresses comments raised during the public exhibition and the outcomes of the contamination investigations. This revised draft will also include the review of the indicative cost estimates, and provide an updated costing by an independent quantity surveyor,

·        The revised draft Kempt Field Plan of Management will be reported to Council for finalisation, and if supported will be lodged with the Minister for Planning and Environment (as landowner) for adoption and finalisation.

 

Financial Implications

39.    Within budget allocation.

 

File Reference

17/394

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Draft Kempt Field Plan of Management

Attachment View2

Kempt Field Master Plan

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL088-17          Draft Kempt Field Plan of Management

[Appendix 1]         Draft Kempt Field Plan of Management

 

 

Page 533

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL088-17          Draft Kempt Field Plan of Management

[Appendix 2]         Kempt Field Master Plan

 

 

Page 586

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 599

Item:                   CCL089-17        Gazettal of Kogarah LEP 2012 (Amendment No 2 - New City Plan) 

Author:              Coordinator Strategic Planning  

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Environment and Planning

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the report on the gazettal of Kogarah Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2012 Amendment No.2 - New City Plan be received and noted.

 

Executive Summary

 

1.      On Friday, 26 May 2017, the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2012 – Amendment No 2 New City Plan was published in the Government Gazette and became effective on that date.

 

2.      The gazetted Plan generally reflects the New City Plan, as exhibited.

 

3.      Generally, the post exhibition changes made by Council on 4 April 2016 were not supported by the Greater Sydney Commission and have not been included in the amendment to the LEP due to lack of evidence and because they would require re-exhibition of the LEP.

Background

 

4.      The former Kogarah Council, at its meeting on 28 July 2014, considered a report on a Planning Proposal to make amendments to Kogarah Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2012. The proposed amendments included options for additional housing opportunities across the City of Kogarah to meet the future needs of the community.

 

5.      The Planning Proposal, referred to as the New City Plan, was prepared in accordance with Section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act) and was submitted to the Department of Planning and Environment in August 2014. It includes proposals to amend zonings and land use tables, introduce height and floor space ratio controls (principal development standards) and review and amend the associated maps.

 

6.      The Gateway Determination was issued by the Minister for Planning on 15 December 2014 and this allowed Council to proceed with the public exhibition of the New City Plan and undertake formal government agency consultation.

 

7.      Council, at its meeting on 23 February 2015, resolved to exhibit the New City Plan and associated documentation in accordance with the requirements of the Gateway Determination dated 15 December 2014 and the Engagement Strategy, as endorsed by Council.

 

 

8.      At its meeting of 27 July 2015, Council considered a report on the status of the Planning Proposal to make amendments to Kogarah Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2012, known as the New City Plan, and an overview of submissions. Council resolved that the report be received and noted. At that meeting it was also resolved that a Public Forum be held for community members to address Council regarding the New City Plan.

 

9.      In accordance with the resolution of 27 July 2015, an Extraordinary Council Meeting was held on 31 August 2015 which included the Public Forum for Council to receive further representations.

 

10.    A further report was presented to Council, at an Extraordinary Council meeting on 4 April 2016. This report responded to submissions received as a result of the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal for the New City Plan, including the Public Forum and consultation with public authorities.

 

11.    At that meeting Council resolved to endorse the draft LEP, subject to a number of changes. The amended Planning Proposal, with the changes as resolved by Council was submitted to the Department of Planning & Environment on 2 June 2016

 

Gazettal of Kogarah LEP 2012 (Amendment No 2 – New City Plan)

12.    Kogarah LEP 2012 (Amendment No 2 – New City Plan) was gazetted on Friday 26 May 2017 and became effective on that date.

 

13.    The Department of Planning & Environment has written to Council advising of the gazettal and explaining that a number of changes were made to the plan from the version adopted by Council in April 2016. In this regard, the Department has advised the following:

 

I note a number of amendments were made by Council to the plan following exhibition to address community concerns. It is important that the right balance between supplying additional housing and local amenity is achieved.

 

The Department has carefully considered the issues raised by the community, such as overshadowing and loss of privacy, in regard to the increased height and density around commercial centres. These concerns are best addressed at the individual development application stage through a merit assessment against the planning and design principles of Councils current Development Control Plan (DCP) and the Apartment Design Guide.

 

I understand that Council has developed a Draft Urban Design Strategy for the Kogarah North Precinct which includes a detailed set of urban design principles underpinned by the Apartment Design Guide (ADG). I am advised that the Strategy will be adopted as an interim measure to assess development applications following notification of the LEP until Council amends its DCP. I strongly encourage that Council prioritise amending its development control plan to implement the principles of the Strategy.

 

Those post exhibition changes made by Council have not been supported nor included in the LEP due to lack of evidence and because they would require re-exhibition of the LEP. These matters can be considered through a separate Planning Proposal process informed by community consultation.

 

14.    A copy of the letter is included at Attachment 1.

 

15.    In order to simplify the understanding of the gazetted changes to the LEP, a document has been prepared which provides a comparison of the gazetted LEP as compared to the plan as exhibited; and as resolved by Council on 4 April 2016 (Refer to Attachment 2). A copy of the document is available on Council’s website.

 

Consultation

 

16.    As the LEP has now been gazetted, the following has been undertaken to notify the general community of the changes to the Kogarah LEP 2012:

§ a link on Council’s website to the NSW Legislation website where people will be able to access the LEP instrument and all of the maps;

§ our internal mapping system and external mapping system (IntraMaps) reflects the gazetted mapping information;

§ Council’s property information system have been updated;

§ Council’s Section 149 Certificates for affected properties;

§ an email to the New City Plan contact list advising of the gazettal and how they can access the LEP and maps; and

§ an advertisement in the Leader advising of the gazettal.

 

Financial Implications

 

17.  Within budget allocation.

 

File Reference

17/398

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Letter from the Department of Planning advising of Gazettal

Attachment View2

New City Plan Gazettal 26 May 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL089-17          Gazettal of Kogarah LEP 2012 (Amendment No 2 - New City Plan)

[Appendix 1]         Letter from the Department of Planning advising of Gazettal

 

 

Page 602

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL089-17          Gazettal of Kogarah LEP 2012 (Amendment No 2 - New City Plan)

[Appendix 2]         New City Plan Gazettal 26 May 2017

 

 

Page 604

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 630

7.      Finance and Governance

 

Item:                   CCL090-17        Investment Report as at 30 April 2017 

Author:              Team Leader Financial Reporting

Directorate:      Office of the Chief Operating Officer

Matter Type:     Finance and Governance

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the Investment Report as at 30 April 2017 be received and noted.

 

Executive Summary

1.      This report details Council’s performance of its investment portfolio for April 2017 and compares it against key benchmarks.  The report includes the estimated market valuation of Council’s investment portfolio, loan liabilities, and an update on Council’s legal action against various parties.

2.      Council’s annualised rate of return is 3.23%, which is 1.43% above benchmark. Income from interest on investments and proceeds from sale of investments totals at $4.3 million is $17,264 above 2016/17 budget.

 

Background

3.      Council’s Responsible Accounting Officer, is required to report monthly on Council’s Investment Portfolio and certify that the Investments are held in accordance with Council’s Investment Policy and Section 625 of the Local Government Act.

Investment Performance Commentary

4.      Council’s performance against the benchmark for returns of its investment portfolio for April 2017, are as follows:

 

 

1 Month

3 Month

12 Month

Portfolio Performance

0.18%

0.89%

3.23%

Performance Index

0.15%

0.43%

1.80%

Excess

0.03%

0.46%

1.43%

                         

Notes                                                       

1       Portfolio performance is the rate of return of the portfolio over the specified period

2       The Performance Index is the rate of return of the market (comparable securities) over the specified period                               

3       Excess performance is the rate of return of the portfolio in excess of the Performance Index

 

 

 

 

5.      Council’s investment portfolio as at the end of April was as follows:

Security Type

Market Value $000's

% Total
Value

Cash at Bank

2,907

1.71%

11am Cash

4,885

2.87%

31 Day Notice Account

6,018

3.54%

ASX Listed Fixed Rate Security

2,023

1.19%

Covered Floating Bond

1,009

0.59%

Floating Rate Deposit

3,008

1.77%

Floating Rate Note

60,126

35.34%

Floating Rate TCD

3,541

2.08%

Term Deposit

78,840

46.34%

Managed Funds Trust

7,783

4.57%

Total Cash and Investments

170,140

100.00%

 

 

 

Investment Properties

15,100

 

Portfolio Total

185,240

 

 

 

6.      At the end of April 2017 Total Cash and Investments were $170,140 million and have decreased by $2.933 million from March 2017 as a result of normal monthly operational spend.  Fourth quarter rate instalments are not due until the end of May 2017.

 

7.      The investment property valuations listed above have been undertaken in accordance with the revaluation process to ‘fair value’ by an independent value, in compliance with the Australian Accounting Standards.

 

8.      Council continues to utilise the Federal Government’s current guarantee   ($250,000) investing in Term Deposits with a range of Authorised Deposit Taking Institutions (ADI’s) on short to medium term investments (generally 30 days to 180 days maturity) where more competitive rates are available.

9.      Council’s income from investments is above budget, due mainly to Council receiving more funds from Section 94 contributions, with investment income for General Revenue remaining steady.

 

Legal Issues

 

10.    Council was participating in the IMF class action regarding Lehman Brothers Australia Liquidation. The IMF class action matter is now finalised.

 

 

 

 

Loan Liability

 

11.    Council’s loan liability as at 30 April was $2.750 million which represents the balance of $5 million ten (10) year loan drawn down on 16 November 2012 for Jubilee Park upgrade in Mortdale. Next repayment of $125,000 is due 28th June 2017. The outstanding balance on this facility is at a variable interest of 194 basis points over 3 month BBSW. At the current 3 month BBSW rate, the interest rate payable is 3.69% pa.

12.    Council receives a 4.00% pa subsidy under the NSW Government’s Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme funding agreement for this Jubilee Park upgrade facility. It is intended to continue this financially-advantageous arrangement through to full term in 2022.

 

Policy Limits

 

13.    The following graph shows the limits, as a percentage of total cash investments, of the amount by periods, as allowed under Council’s policy, and comparing them to the amounts actually invested, as a percentage of the total cash investments.

 

14.    It shows that the funds invested are within the limits set in the Investment Policy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

Investment Income

 

15.    Income from interest on investments and proceeds from sales of investments totals $4.3 million is $17,264 above current budget projections

 

Certificate by Chief Financial Officer (Responsible Accounting Officer): Rob Owens

 

16.    Investments have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act, Minister’s Guidelines, Regulations and Council’s Investment Policy.

 

 

Analysis of Investments

 

Investment Duration

 

Investment Term

Market Value

% Total Value

Policy Limits %

0 to < Year

64,648

38.00%

100

1 to < 3 Years

52,223

30.69%

70

3 to < 5 Years

53,269

31.31%

50

> 5 Years

-

 

25

Portfolio Total

170,140

100.00%

 

 

 

17.    Council’s portfolio is very liquid, with 38% of assets maturing within 12 months. FRNs, funds and fixed bonds also provide additional liquidity in an emergency.

 

 

18.    The following graphs show analysis of the total cash investment by:

          Institution

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Type of Investments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

19.   Council’s investment portfolio is mainly directed to term deposits, which account for approximately 46% of total investments. Yields have steadily contracted, while tracking bond market volatility in the short term.

 

20.    Bank Floating Rate Notes (FRN) offer liquidity and a higher rate of income accrual, which is highly recommended by our Investment Advisors (CPG Research & Advisory) going forward.

 

21.    The following are the types of investments held by Council:

 

a)      At Call refers to funds held at a financial institution, and can be recalled by Council either           same day or on an overnight basis.

 

b)      A Floating Rate Note (FRN) is a debt security issued by a company with a variable interest rate. This can either be issued as Certificates of Deposit (CD) or as Medium Term Notes (MTN). The interest rate can be either fixed or floating, where the adjustments to the interest rate are usually made quarterly and are tied to a certain money market index such as the Bank Bill Swap Rate.

 

c)      A Fixed Rate Bond is a debt security issued by a company with a fixed interest rate over the term of the bond.

 

d)      A managed fund is a professionally managed investment portfolio that individual investors can buy into, purchasing 'units' rather than shares. Each managed fund has a specific investment objective. This is usually based around the different asset classes (cash, fixed interest, property and shares). The money you invest is used to buy assets in line with this investment objective. When you invest in a managed fund, you are allocated a number of 'units'. The value of your units is calculated on a daily basis and changes as the market value of the assets in the fund rises and falls.

         

* These managed funds have been grandfathered since the NSW State Government changed the list of Approved Investments as a result of the Cole enquiry (which was reflected in the Ministerial Order dated 31/7/2008).

 

Credit Rating

 

22.    Credit ratings are generally a statement as to an institution’s credit quality. Ratings ranging from A1+ to NR (Short Term) & AAA to BBB- (long term) are considered investment grade.

 

23.    A general guide as to the meaning of each credit rating that Council deals with is as follows:

 

Short-term

 

A1+: the best quality companies, reliable and stable. An obligor has extremely strong capacity to meet its financial commitments.

 

A1:    Adequate capacity to meet financial commitments, many positive investment attributes but also elements susceptible to adverse effects of changes in economic conditions.

 

A2:    Adequate capacity to meet financial commitments, but also speculative s or lack of protection against changes of economic conditions.

 

B1:    Moderate characteristic capacity to meet financial commitments, also in good economic conditions.

 

Unrated:   This category includes unrated Authorised Deposit-Taking Institutions (ADI’s) such as some Credit Unions and Building Societies to the extent not Commonwealth-guaranteed. No rating has been requested, or there is insufficient information on which to base a rating.         

 

Long-term

 

AAA:          the best quality companies, reliable and stable. An obligor has extremely strong capacity to meet its financial commitments.

         

AA:   quality companies, a bit higher risk than AAA. An obligor has very strong capacity to meet its financial commitments. It differs from the highest-rated obligors only to a small degree.

 

A:      economic situation can affect finance. An obligor has strong capacity to meet its financial commitments but is somewhat more susceptible to the adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than obligors in higher-rated categories.

 

BBB:          medium class companies, which are satisfactory at the moment. An obligor has adequate capacity to meet its financial commitments. However, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to lead to a weakened capacity of the obligor to meet its financial commitments.

 

Unrated:  This category includes unrated Authorised Deposit-Taking Institutions (ADI’s) such as some Credit Unions and Building Societies to the extent not Commonwealth-guaranteed. No rating has been requested, or there is insufficient information on which to base a rating.

 

24.    The credit quality of Council’s portfolio is relatively high with approximately 80% of assets rated ‘A’ or higher. The ‘AAA’ assets represent the deposit investments covered by the Federal Government’s Financial Claims Scheme (FCS).

 

25.    The remaining 20% rated ‘BBB’ or ‘unrated’ reflects the attractive deposit and Floating Rate Notes (FRN) investments with the regional and unrated ADIs.

 

 

Council’s Investment Powers

 

26.    Council’s investment powers are regulated by Section 625 of the Local Government Act, which states:

 

•        A council may invest money that is not, for the time being, required by the council for any other purpose.

•        Money may be invested only in a form of investment notified by order of the Minister published in the Gazette.

•        An order of the Minister notifying a form of investment for the purposes of this section must not be made without the approval of the Treasurer.

•        The acquisition, in accordance with section 358, of a controlling interest in a corporation or an entity within the meaning of that section is not an investment for the purposes of this section.

 

27.    Council’s investment policy and strategy requires that all investments are to be made in accordance with;

 

•        Local Government Act 1993 - Section 625

•        Local Government Act 1993 - Order (of the Minister) dated 12 January 2011

•        The Trustee Amendment (Discretionary Investments) Act 1997 – Sections 14A (2), 14C (1) & (2)

•        Local Government (Financial Management) Regulation 1993

•        Investment Guidelines issued by the Department of Local Government

 

 

File Reference

D17/70247

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Investment Portfolio as at 30 April 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL090-17          Investment Report as at 30 April 2017

[Appendix 1]         Investment Portfolio as at 30 April 2017

 

 

Page 639

 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL090-17          Investment Report as at 30 April 2017

[Appendix 1]         Investment Portfolio as at 30 April 2017

 

 

Page 642

 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 644

Item:                   CCL091-17        Quarterly Budget Review Statement to 31 March 2017 

Author:              Coordinator Financial Management

Directorate:      Office of the Chief Operating Officer

Matter Type:     Finance and Governance

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the report in relation to the March 2017 Quarterly Budget Review Statement be received and noted.

(b)     That the proposed budget variations as detailed in the report be approved.

 

Executive Summary

1.      This report is a review of the third quarter's financial performance against the 2016-17 current budgets and recommends approval of proposed budget variations in line with the revised projected year end result.

 

Background

2.      Clause 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires that a quarterly budget review be considered by Council that shows current estimates for income and expenditure for the year, indicates whether Council’s financial position is satisfactory and makes recommendations for remedial action where required.

 

3.      Quarterly Budget Review Statements attached to this report provide a comprehensive high level review of Council’s financial position at 31 March 2017, in accordance with requirements developed by the Office of Local Government that will assist Councils in meeting their obligations as set out in legislation.

 

4.      A review of Council’s budget up to 31 March 2017 has identified some proposed variations to existing budgets based on updated budget forecasts for the financial year. Details of the proposed budget variations and their effect on the projected year end result are attached to this report.  

 

5.      The Quarterly Budget Review Statements Include an Income and Expenses Review Statement, Capital Budget Review Statement, Cash and Investments Budget Review Statement, Key Performance Indicator Budget Review Statement, and a Contracts and Other Expenses Review Statement.

 

Financial Comment

6.      Council has been operating within budget for the quarter ending 31 March 2017.

 

7.      After reviewing the budget figures to date, Council’s yearly forecasts should be achieved.

 

8.      Council’s projected level of available working funds at year-end remain in a satisfactory position as at 31 March 2017.

 

Financial Implications

9.      If the proposed budget is adopted, Council’s unrestricted working funds will decrease by $961,000 and Council’s restricted working funds will increase by $4,708,000

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Quarterly Budget Review Statement 31 March 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL091-17          Quarterly Budget Review Statement to 31 March 2017

[Appendix 1]         Quarterly Budget Review Statement 31 March 2017

 

 

Page 646

 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL091-17          Quarterly Budget Review Statement to 31 March 2017

[Appendix 1]         Quarterly Budget Review Statement 31 March 2017

 

 

Page 649

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL091-17          Quarterly Budget Review Statement to 31 March 2017

[Appendix 1]         Quarterly Budget Review Statement 31 March 2017

 

 

Page 650

 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL091-17          Quarterly Budget Review Statement to 31 March 2017

[Appendix 1]         Quarterly Budget Review Statement 31 March 2017

 

 

Page 654

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL091-17          Quarterly Budget Review Statement to 31 March 2017

[Appendix 1]         Quarterly Budget Review Statement 31 March 2017

 

 

Page 655

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL091-17          Quarterly Budget Review Statement to 31 March 2017

[Appendix 1]         Quarterly Budget Review Statement 31 March 2017

 

 

Page 656

 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL091-17          Quarterly Budget Review Statement to 31 March 2017

[Appendix 1]         Quarterly Budget Review Statement 31 March 2017

 

 

Page 658

 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 662

Item:                   CCL092-17        Advice on Court Proceedings - May 2017 

Author:              General Counsel

Directorate:      Office of the General Manager

Matter Type:     Finance and Governance

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the information be received and noted.

 

Executive Summary

1.      Advice on Council’s Court Proceedings for the period 25 April 2017 to 26 May 2017 is contained within this report.

Background

2.      The current Court Proceedings for the reporting period are broken down as follows:

Land and Environment Court Appeals

·    9 x Class 1 (Merit/DA)

·    2 x Class 2 Appeal (Appeal against Order now S56A Appeal & Tree Dispute)

·    4 x Class 4 Proceedings

Local Court

·    13 x Prosecutions

Cost Recovery

·    5 x cost recovery matters

 

Total Costs

·        Total costs to date for the 2016/17 financial year are $559,058.00 [$397,978.00 (Hurstville) and $161,080.00 (Kogarah)]. 

·       Total legal costs recovered to date for the 2016/17 financial year are $75,322.00 [$57,140.00 (Hurstville) and $18,182.00 (Kogarah)]. Therefore net legal costs for Court proceedings for the 2016/17 financial year are $483,736.00.

 

Historical Costs

·        Total costs for 2015/16 financial year were $897,624.00 [$815,167.00 (Hurstville) and $82,457.00 (Kogarah)];

·        Total costs for 2014/15 financial year were $1,468,351.00 [$1,401,608.00 (Hurstville) and $66,743.00 (Kogarah)].

 

New Matters

3.      Two new matters were received during the reporting period: one Local Court matter (Altaranesi) and one Class 4 enforcement commenced (Lowe).

 

Finalised Matters

4.       One matter (Altaranesi) was resolved - Council awarded $500 fine plus $250 Prosecutor’s costs.

Current Table

5.      The Court Proceedings current for the reporting period for Council are set out below. The external costs include both external legal and consultants’ fees.

 

 

 

No.

Property Address / Applicant / Proceedings Number

Description of Matter

Status / Critical Dates

External Costs to Date Up to 2015/16 FY

External Costs to Date From 2016/17 FY

Land and Environment Court Proceedings – Class 1 Appeals

1

58 and 60 Blackshaw Avenue

MORTDALE

 

Applicant:

Marion McDowell and Associates

 

Proceedings No.

241879 of 2016

Class 1 Appeal against Council Order for demolition of existing unauthorised structure.

Matter set down for hearing on 5 June 2017. Negotiations continuing regarding stormwater management.

$0

$12,829.30

2

399-403 Princes Highway

CARLTON

 

Applicant :

Michael Murr

 

Proceedings No.

336689 of 2016

Class 1 Appeal against refusal of DA 75/2016 for 5 storey residential flat building containing 22 units and strata subdivision.

S34 conference

Proceedings fixed for contested hearing on 24 and 25 May 2017.  Judgment reserved.

$0

$21,381.23

3

8-10 Princes Highway

KOGARAH

 

Applicant:

Outdoor Systems P/L

 

Proceedings No. 344564 of 2016

 

Class 1 Appeal against deemed refusal of Section 96 application DA30/1997 to delete conditions relating to a digital advertising sign. 

Matter part heard and listed for a further hearing day on 24 April 2017.  RMS joined to proceedings.  Council filed submitting appearance as it has no objection to application.  Awaiting Court decision.

$0

$7,642.44

4

25 Old Forest Road, LUGARNO

 

Applicant: George Antoniou

 

Proceedings No. 2826 of 2017

 

Class 1 Appeal against deemed refusal of DA 2016/0314 for child care centre for 45 children.

S34 Conciliation terminated.  Matter listed for hearing on 23 August 2017.  External traffic and acoustic consultants briefed.

$0

$5,000.00

5

12 – 22 Woniora Road, Hurstville

 

Applicant: Combined Projects (Hurstville) Pty Limited

 

Proceedings No. 64848 of 2017

Class 1 Appeal against deemed refusal of DA 154/2016 for construction of an additional two storeys to Building D of mixed use development

Matter listed for S34 Conference on 21 June 2017.  External planner briefed.

$0

$0

6

365 – 377 Rocky Point Road, Sans Souci

 

Applicant: Primus DMS Pty Limited

 

Proceedings No. 71976 of 2017

Class 1 Appeal against deemed refusal of DA 283/16 for alterations and additions to mixed use development

Matter listed for S34 Conference 6 July 2017.

$0

$0

7

35 – 39 Ocean Street, Kogarah

 

Applicant: Mario Briglia, Enio Briglia & Maria Cerra

 

Proceedings No. 77304 of 2017

Class 1 Appeal against refusal of DA 26/16 for the demolition of existing dwellings and construction of multi-dwelling housing over basement car parking and strata subdivision

Matter listed for S34 Conference on 28 July 2017.

$0

$0

8

19 – 23 Bembridge Street, Carlton

 

Applicant:

William Karavelas

 

Proceedings No: 98274 of 2017

Class 1 Appeal against deemed refusal of DA 9/2016/78/2 for modification of DA 9/2016/78/1 to amend condition 4, relation to Section 94 contributions and delete conditions 13, 14 and 15 relating to design amendments

Matter listed for S34 Conference on 3 August 2017

$0

$0

9

977 Forest Road, Lugarno

 

Applicant: Congregational Christian Church Samoa Parish of Sydney

 

Proceedings No: 103967 of 2017

Class 1 Appeal against refusal of DA2015/0443 for a child care centre

Matter listed for hearing of Notice of Motion to dismiss proceedings on 19 June 2017.

$0

$0

 

Subtotal

 

 

$0.00

$46,852.97

Land and Environment Court Proceedings – Class 4 Proceedings

 

1

84D Roberts Avenue

MORTDALE

 

Parties:

 

Romanous Developments Pty Ltd

 

Proceedings No.

40883 of 2013

Court orders entered on 24 July 2015 for Class 4 proceedings requiring remediation works under supervision of independent site auditor.

DAs for wall and drainage approved.  Respondent to carry out works pursuant to approvals by 21 June 2017.

$283,921.51

$3,757.50

2

5 Maclaurin Street, PENSHURST

 

Parties: Emanuel Mifsud & Crystina Mifsud

 

Proceedings No. 377447 of 2016

Class 4 commenced in relation to clearing of articles and matter.

Contempt proceedings commenced against Mr Mifsud. Sentencing hearing listed on 26 July 2017.

$0.00

$22,138.25

3

105 Forest Road & 1A Hill Street, Hurstville

 

Parties: Australian Consulting Builders

Court orders entered on 5 August 2016 relating to cleaning up of property at 105 Forest Road.  Related adjoining property also in disrepair. 

Proceedings commenced. Consent orders agreed following clean-up of property.  Respondent to pay Council’s costs. Subject to continual monitoring.

$11,806.33

$10,295.76

4

117 Kyle Parade, Kyle Bay

 

Parties: Michael Stanley Lowe

Class 4 commenced in relation to removal of crane

Proceedings commenced and listed for first directions hearing on 26 May 2017.

$0

$0

 

Subtotal

 

 

$295,727.84

$36,191.51

Land and Environment Court Proceedings – Class 2 Appeals

 

1

1 Arnold Street

PEAKHURST

 

Parties:

Mofeed Louis Tanious

 

Proceedings No.

2017/32320

 

Class 2 commencing in relation to failing to comply with Council Notices/Orders concerning keeping of poultry at the premises.  Orders upheld by Court with extension of time to comply to 25 April 2017.

Further S56A lodged by applicant was  listed for hearing on 17 May 2017.  Council was successful in upholding the Order. 

$0

$18,914.00

2

7B Tottenham Place, BLAKEHURST

 

Applicant: Dr Eric Solo

 

Proceedings No. 359122 of 2016

Class 2 Appeal – Tree Dispute Application.

Council has advised applicant it has no objection to removal of trees.  Application dismissed by Court.

$0

$0

 

Subtotal

 

 

$0

$18,914.00

Local Court Proceedings

 

1

13-17 Peake Parade

PEAKHURST

 

Parties:

Oxford (NSW) Pty Ltd

Appeal against PIN for breaches of development consent. Defendant pleaded not guilty.

Matter part heard on 20 May and 26 October 2016. Magistrate requires further submissions. Stood over to 10 May 2017, which was subsequently adjourned to September 2017 due to illness of defendant’s lawyer.

$221.50

$10,924.10

2-6

13-17 Peake Parade

PEAKHURST

 

Parties:

Oxford (NSW) Pty Ltd

 

 

Appeals against five PINs for breaches of development consent and one water pollution offence under POEO Act.

Defendant pleaded guilty to 4 offences, 1 withdrawn.  Magistrate has ordered written submission evidence on sentencing.  Listed on 10 May 2017, which was subsequently adjourned to 25 September 2017 due to illness of defendant’s lawyer.

$190.00

$8,523.30

7-12

25 Koorabel, 25A Koorabel, 25B Koorabel Street

LUGARNO

 

Parties:

Daoud & Daoud Developments Pty Ltd

Appeals against six PINs issued for carrying out development not in accordance with development consent.

Matter adjourned for sentencing to 16 August 2017.

$0

$10,693.50

13

Parties: Tareq Altaranesi

PIN for illegal dumping

Defendant pleaded guilty.  Mr Altaranesi fined $250 and $500 Prosecutor’s costs.

$0

$0

 

Subtotal

 

 

$411.50

$30,140.90

Cost Recovery

 

1

The Baptist Church Union of NSW and The Baptist Churches of NSW Property Trust

 

No. 83357 of 2017

Church has taken proceedings to  prevent gazettal of the acquisition notice relating to 4 – 6 Dora Street, Hurstville

Council was successful in resisting the Church’s injunction.  Property acquired by Council on 31 March 2017.  Court orders to be enforced.  Council proceeding to recover costs awarded by Court.  Church has filed a Notice of Intention to Appeal, giving it 3 months in which to appeal.

$0

$39,149.00

2

66 Mulga Road OATLEY

 

Applicant:

Foxground Property Investments Pty Ltd

 

Proceedings No.

290679 of 2016

Class 1 Appeal against deemed refusal of DA2015/0035 for demolition of existing structures and construction of new two storey childcare centre for 51 children with basement car parking.

Matter resolved by S34 Agreement filed with the Court on 22 March   2017.  Awaiting payment of s97B costs.

$0

$41,821.11

3

37 Boronia Street

KYLE BAY

 

Parties:

Mrs Megan McOnie

 

Proceedings No.

40940 of 2015

 

Class 4 commenced in relation to failing to comply with Council Notices/Orders relating to a non-compliant swimming pool fence, overgrown vegetation and unhealthy swimming pool water.

Court Orders in support of Council’s Notices/Orders made. Application for substituted service on Respondent commenced.  Pool secured by Council December 2016.

$20,658.60

$1,560.50

4

832-836 King Georges Road & 51 Connells Point Road, SOUTH HURSTVILLE

 

Applicant:  Cash Warwick Pty Limited

 

Proceedings No. 380571 of 2016

Class 1 Appeal against deemed refusal of DA 99/2016 for demolition of existing dwellings and construction of 1 x 7 and 1 x 5 storey residential flat buildings.

S34 Agreement entered into.  Council proceeding to recover s97B costs.

$0

$5,154.11

5

6 Booyong Ave, Lugarno

 

Parties: Sasho Naumcevski

 

Costs payable pursuant to Court Orders in enforcement proceedings.  Mr Naumcevski has entered into an instalment arrangement in relation to the $49,881.24 payable.  The balance due is now $22,169.44.

$0

$0

 

Subtotal

 

 

$0

$87,684.72

 

6.      The cost savings to date by virtue of S34 delegations are as follows:

 

Month

Savings

July

$34,000.00

August

$24,000.00

September

$0

October

$16,000.00

November

$32,000.00

December

$0.00

January

$48,000.00

February

$0.00

March

$32,000.00

April

$16,000.00

May

$0.00

Total

$202,000.00

 

Financial Implications

7.      Within budget allocation.

 

File Reference

09/1077

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 669

Item:                   CCL093-17        Georges River Council Policy for Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities for the Mayor and Councillors 

Author:              Internal Auditor

Directorate:      Office of the General Manager

Matter Type:     Finance and Governance

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the attached, draft policy for payment of expenses and provision of facilities for the mayor and councillors, be adopted for exhibition as required by the Local Government Act S 253(1).

(b)     That following conclusion of the exhibition period, the draft policy together with any public submissions received, be reported back to Council for consideration and adoption of a policy.

 

Executive Summary

1.      At the first meeting of Georges River Council on 19 May 2016, Council was required to adopt an interim policy for the payment of expenses and provision of facilities for the mayor and councillors.  This report proposes Council’s new policy, updated to reflect current expectations and improved practices in the administration of this type of policy. The policy is detailed in the report attachment and is now recommended for public exhibition, to allow for submissions to Council on any aspect of the draft, prior to adoption of a policy.

 

Background

2.      The mayor and councillors will incur some reasonable expenses and require reasonable use of some facilities, in order to be effective in the conduct of their civic roles.

3.      Council is required under s 252 of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act), to follow a process in adopting a policy for the payment of any expenses and provision of any facilities for the mayor and councillors.

4.      A Council must not pay any expenses for, or provide any facilities to the mayor, the deputy mayor (if there is one) or a councillor, unless in accordance with a policy under S. 252 of the Act.

5.      The attached, draft policy is proposed to provide for the specified, reasonable expenses and facilities required by our elected mayor and councillors, in order to effectively exercise their functions on behalf of the community.

6.      The draft policy if adopted for exhibition at this meeting, is required to go on public exhibition for a minimum of 28 days, to allow any person to express a view about the policy.  The draft policy was referred to Council’s Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee at its meeting held on 13 February 2017, when the Committee noted the draft policy and offered to provide retrospective oversight of its administration, by considering future auditor’s reports on historical expenses. The Committee also requested that the audit of these expenses should be included in Council’s Audit Programme.

7.      Councils may have variations in their provisions under this policy. The Department of Premier and Cabinet recently provided a policy template, which has been considered in the preparation of this draft to suit Council’s requirements.

8.      Public submissions by mail, should be addressed to the General Manager, PO Box 205, Hurstville BC NSW 1481. Submissions being delivered, should be clearly identified as a “Submission on Council’s policy for the payment of expenses and provision of facilities for the Mayor and Councillors” and should be delivered to Council’s customer service counters, either at Kogarah library or Hurstville administration centre. Submissions by email should be clearly identified as a submission and emailed to mail@georgesriver.nsw.gov.au .

 

 

Financial Implications

9.      Within budget allocation.

 

File Reference

D17/76351

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Mayor and Councillors Expenses and Facilities Policy - V5

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL093-17          Georges River Council Policy for Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities for the Mayor and Councillors

[Appendix 1]         Mayor and Councillors Expenses and Facilities Policy - V5

 

 

Page 671

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL093-17          Georges River Council Policy for Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities for the Mayor and Councillors

[Appendix 1]         Mayor and Councillors Expenses and Facilities Policy - V5

 

 

Page 687

 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 688

Item:                   CCL094-17        Code of Conduct and Associated Administrative Procedures 

Author:              Internal Auditor

Directorate:      Office of the General Manager

Matter Type:     Finance and Governance

 

Recommendation

(a)     That Council adopt the Code of Conduct and Procedures for the Administration of the Code of Conduct, as attached to this report and based on the Office of Local Government’s current Model Code and Model Procedures.

(b)     Supplementing Section 3.13 and 3.14 – Lobbying of Councillors

(c)     Substituting a ‘minimal’ tolerance for Gifts and Benefits, in Sections 5.3 to 5.10.

 

 

Executive Summary

1.      The purpose of this report is to amend the current Code, to reflect the Model Code and Model Procedures for the Administration of the Code, with slight amendments to include this Council’s intentions for a minimum tolerance of the acceptance by staff, of gifts.

 

2.      Further revisions of this policy will be proposed as the OLG provides feedback or updates the Model Code and when Council has finalised its broader Governance policy framework, which will complement the code of Conduct. These revisions will be made as required by resolution of the Council and will not necessitate further public exhibition.

 

Background

3.      Section 440 of the Local Government Act requires every council to adopt a Code of Conduct that incorporates the provisions of the Model Code. The Model Code sets out the minimum requirements of conduct for council officials, in carrying out their functions. Council’s current Code of Conduct was prescribed on 12 May 2016 upon proclamation of Georges River Council.

 

4.      The Office of Local Government (OLG) requires Council to adopt a Code of Conduct by resolution, to reflect the current Model Code, as updated from time to time by OLG.

 

5.      A Council may vary the Model Code, but the varied Code will have no effect, to the extent that it is inconsistent with the Model Code. The Model Code is accompanied by Model Procedures for the administration of the Code. The variations now included in Council’s attached draft code, relate to the question of acceptance of gifts by officials. It is the view of this Council that the most appropriate treatment of any offer of a gift to a Council official, is for the official to decline the offer politely and graciously, with “thanks” is enough thanks”. There may be occasions where gifts cannot be declined, without causing embarrassment or distress to the person making the offering. In these rare circumstances it will be permissible for a gift to be accepted and reported to the General Manager, for determination of an appropriate outcome, for the gift to be retained, or raffled for a charitable cause, or other outcome. It is therefore proposed to substitute this ‘minimal’ tolerance of acceptance of gifts, for the Model Code’s Sections 5.3 to 5.7.

 

 

6.      The proposed Code of Conduct also includes a copy of the ICAC publication “Lobbying Local Government Councillors” brochure, to further expand on Section 3.13 and 3.14 of the Model Code in regard to appropriate lobbying behaviour. Permission has been granted on previous occasions by ICAC to use this publication.

 

7.      The use by Councils, of the OLG provided Model Code as amended and associated Model Procedures provides clarity and consistency for Conduct Reviewers and the OLG, when they are required to consider or determine any relevant matter.

 

Financial Implications

8.      No budget impact for this report.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Draft Code of Conduct

Attachment View2

Draft Procedures for Administration of Code of Conduct

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL094-17          Code of Conduct and Associated Administrative Procedures

[Appendix 1]         Draft Code of Conduct

 

 

Page 690

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL094-17          Code of Conduct and Associated Administrative Procedures

[Appendix 2]         Draft Procedures for Administration of Code of Conduct

 

 

Page 718

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 761

Item:                   CCL095-17        Georges River Council Code of Meeting Practice 

Author:              Internal Auditor

Directorate:      Office of the General Manager

Matter Type:     Finance and Governance

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the draft Georges River Council Code of Meeting Practice as amended and attached to this report be adopted by Council.

(b)     That should the Office of Local Government adopt a new model code of meeting practice that it be automatically included in Council’s Code of Meeting practice without any further public exhibition.

 

Executive Summary

1.      The current Code of Meeting Practice was prescribed for use at the proclamation of Georges River Council.  Council has since exhibited a revised draft Code, but adoption of that policy was deferred pending an anticipated issue by the Office of Local Government, of a revised Model Code. With the approach of the September Council election, it is now appropriate that outcomes from the earlier exhibition be considered and that Council proceed to adopt its new Code of Meeting Practice.

 

Background

 

2.       At the Council meeting held on 6 June 2016, it was resolved that the revised draft Code of Meeting Practice be placed on public exhibition, in accordance with S361 of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

3.       The formal public exhibition period closed on 27 July 2016. Since the commencement of that exhibition period, several submissions were received and have been considered in this revision of the draft policy.

 

4.       The amendments to the draft Code of Meeting Practice include:

i.    A provision for representations about confidentiality of meetings, as stated in Clause 33(6) of this draft Code of Meeting Practice.

ii.   Further clarification for the provision of a system for public addresses to the Council meeting, as described in Clause 52 of this draft Code of Meeting Practice. 

iii.  Schedule 3A of the General Regulation, being the Form of Special Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest, has been added.

 

 

Financial Implications

5.       No budget impact for this report.

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Draft - Code of Meeting Practice - 5 June 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 5 June 2017

CCL095-17          Georges River Council Code of Meeting Practice

[Appendix 1]         Draft - Code of Meeting Practice - 5 June 2017

 

 

Page 763

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 5 June 2017                                                                                  Page 808

Item:                   CCL096-17        Draft Drug and Alcohol Policy 

Author:              Chief Operating Officer

Directorate:      Office of the Chief Operating Officer

Matter Type:     Finance and Governance

 

Recommendation

(a)     That the Draft Drug and Alcohol Policy be adopted.

 

Executive Summary

1.      Georges River Council is committed to providing a safe and healthy work environment in which all workers are treated fairly. The use of drugs and alcohol may impact on an individual’s capacity to perform work safely and efficiently. This report outlines Council’s position on the use of alcohol and illegal drugs or being under the influence of such substances in the workplace to ensure the safety and well-being of all Council officers. This report seeks endorsement of the Drug and Alcohol Policy prior to public exhibition.

Background

2.      The NSW Work Health and Safety legislation requires a person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU) to ensure, so far as it is reasonably practicable to do so, the health and safety of its workers and other people such as volunteers and visitors. The obligations of the PCBU include:

a.   safe systems of work

b.   safe use of plant, structures and substances

c.   adequate facilities for the welfare of workers

d.   notification and recording of workplace incidents

e.   adequate information, training, instruction and supervision

f.    compliance with requirements under the Work Health and Safety Regulation

g.   effective systems for monitoring the health of workers and workplace conditions

h.   a safe work environment

3.      The Drug and Alcohol Policy was developed to reduce the risks associated with the use and effect of drugs and alcohol in the workplace. The policy applies to all Councillors and employees of Georges River Council and all persons performing work at the direction of, or on behalf of Council including contractors and volunteers.

4.      It is the goal of Council to:

a.   eliminate the risks associated with the misuse of alcohol and other drugs, thereby providing a safer working environment;

b.   to reduce the risks of alcohol and other drugs impairment in the workplace;

c.   to promote a supportive culture that encourages a co-operative approach between management and workers and builds on the shared interest in workplace health and safety; and

d.   to foster an attitude among employees that it is unacceptable to come to work under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

5.      A draft Drug and Alcohol Policy was developed for Georges River Council following the Proclamation and merger of the former Hurstville and Kogarah City Councils on the 12 May 2016.

6.      The draft Policy was tabled and reviewed at the Georges River Council Consultative Committee on 22 November 2016. The Minutes of the Consultative Committee noted that the “whole committee” endorsed the Drug and Alcohol Policy on this date.

7.      The Draft Policy was again presented to the Executive on 22 March 2017 and amendments were made to the formatting and structure of the document to meet the current policy template and guidelines.

8.      The Draft Policy was presented to the Implementation Advisory Committee on 12 April 2017 for information and feedback which has been incorporated into this draft

9.      The Draft Policy was placed on public exhibition from 4 April to 3 May 2017.

10.    One submission was received however amendments to the policy were not required. 

 

Financial Implications

11.    No budget impact for this report.

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS