Council Meeting

Notice of Meeting

Monday, 18 December 2017

Wednesday, 13 December 2017

 

An Ordinary Meeting of Council will be held at 7.00pm on Monday 18 December 2017 in the Dragon Room on Level 1, Georges River Civic Centre, corner Dora and MacMahon Streets, for the consideration of the business available on Council's website at http://www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au/Council/Council-Meetings.

 

Gail Connolly

General Manager

 

 

BUSINESS

·      National Anthem

·      Prayer

·      Acknowledgement of Country

·      Apologies

·      Disclosures of Interest

·      Public Addresses to the Meeting

·      Minutes of Previous Meetings

·      Mayoral Minutes

·      Matters of Privilege

o  Condolences

o  Other

·      Reports from Committees

·      Environment and Planning

·      Finance and Governance

·      Assets and Infrastructure

·      Community and Culture

·      Notices of Motion

·      Questions with Notice

·      Confidential Items

 


Ordinary Meeting

Summary of Items

Monday, 18 December 2017

 

Previous Minutes

MINUTES: Council Meeting - 27 November 2017

Mayoral Minute

Nil at time of printing

Committee Reports

CCL238-17       Report of the Finance and Governance Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017

(Report by Head of Executive Services).................................................................... 4

CCL239-17       Report of the Environment and Planning Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017

(Report by Head of Executive Services).................................................................. 18

CCL240-17       Report of the Assets and Infrastructure Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017

(Report by Head of Executive Services).................................................................. 24

CCL241-17       Report of the Community and Culture Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017

(Report by Head of Executive Services).................................................................. 29

Environment and Planning

CCL242-17       Adoption of Kogarah North Precinct Development Control Plan Amendment

(Report by Manager Strategic Planning)................................................................. 33

CCL243-17       Planning Proposal PP2017/0002 - 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights

(Report by Manager Strategic Planning)............................................................... 337

CCL244-17       Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

(Report by Senior Strategic Planner)..................................................................... 433

Finance and Governance

CCL245-17       Fraud and Corruption Control Policy and Plan

(Report by Manager Governance and Risk)......................................................... 664

CCL246-17       Quarterly Budget Review Statement to 30 September 2017

(Report by Coordinator Financial Management)................................................. 710

Assets and Infrastructure

Nil

Community and Culture

CCL247-17       Georges River Council Australia Day Awards 2018

(Report by Manager Communications, Customer Service and Events).......... 712

Precis of Correspondence

Nil

Notices of Motion

NM025-17          Notice of Motion 25: Preparation of a Night Time Economy Study for Georges River

(Report by Councillor Liu)........................................................................................ 730

NM026-17          Notice of Motion 26: Preparation of a New Foreshore Strategy for Georges River

(Report by Councillor Katris)................................................................................... 731

NM027-17          Notice of Motion 27: Energy Conservation and Sustainability Policy for Georges River

(Report by Councillor Katris)................................................................................... 732

NM028-17          Notice of Motion 28: Construction of a Regional Athletics Facility in Georges River

(Report by Councillor Hindi).................................................................................... 733

NM029-17          Notice of Motion 29: Revitalisation of Mortdale Town Centre - Upgrade of Public Domain

(Report by Councillor Hindi).................................................................................... 734

NM030-17          Notice of Motion 30: Georges River Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) - Operational Procedures

(Report by Councillor Landsberry)......................................................................... 735

NM031-17          Notice of Motion 31: NSW Container Deposit Scheme (Return and Earn)

(Report by Councillor Tegg)..................................................................................... 736

NM032-17          Notice of Motion 32: Support for Crisis Accommodation in the Georges River Local Government Area

(Report by Councillor Payor)................................................................................... 737

NM033-17          Notice of Motion 33: National Anthem at Council Meetings

(Report by Councillor Landsberry)......................................................................... 738

NM034-17          Notice of Motion 34: Georges River Code of Meeting Practice

(Report by Councillor Badalati)............................................................................... 739

NM035-17          Notice of Motion 35: Construction of a Cafe/Restaurant Facility in Oatley Park

(Report by Councillor Badalati)............................................................................... 740

Questions with Notice

Nil

 

Confidential (Closed Session)

CON027-17       General Manager - Contract of Employment

(Report by Head of Executive Services)  

 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 4

Committee Reports

Item:                   CCL238-17        Report of the Finance and Governance Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017 

Author:              Head of Executive Services

Directorate:      Office of the General Manager

Matter Type:     Committee Reports

 

 

 

Recommendation:

That the Committee recommendations for items FIN386-17 to FIN398-17 (inclusive) and CON025-17 to CON026-17 (inclusive), detailed below, be adopted by Council in accordance with the delegations set out in the Terms of Reference for the Finance and Governance Standing Committee:

 

FIN386-17         Tender for Construction of the Penshurst Park Indoor Cricket Centre

(Councillor Konjarski and Councillor Wu)

(a)     That, under Section 178 (1) (b) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, Council decline to accept any of the tenders for T17/025 Tender for Construction of the Penshurst Park Indoor Cricket Centre as outlined in the report.

(b)     That, under Section 178 (3) (e) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, Council enter into negotiations with the Lanskey Constructions Pty Ltd , Carfax Commercial Construction Pty Ltd and Cooper Commercial Constructions Pty Ltd. as outlined in the attached confidential report.

(c)     That, under Section 178 (4) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, Council notes that inviting fresh tenders is unlikely to resolve the issues of (1) non-conforming tenders, which do not agree to all conditions of contract and (2) significant variances from QS estimates; and, given the prices submitted, and likely competition, it is most advantageous to Council to conduct further negotiations with multiple tenderers, being Lanskey Constructions Pty Ltd, Carfax Commercial Construction Pty Ltd and Cooper Commercial Constructions Pty Ltd.

(d)     That delegation is granted to the General Manager to enter into contract with Lanskey Constructions Pty Ltd, Carfax Commercial Construction Pty Ltd or Cooper Commercial Constructions Pty Ltd. should negotiations result in a value-for-money outcome for Council.

(e)     That Council officers inform the unsuccessful Tenderers of the resolution to decline to accept those tenders.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 


 

 

FIN387-17         Tender for the Building Expansion and Modification Works at Beverly Hills Park Sports Amenities Building

(Councillor Wu and Councillor Tegg)

(a)     That, under Section 178 (1) (b) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, Council decline to accept any of the tenders for T17/028 Tender for Building Expansion and Modification Works at Beverly Hills Park Sports Amenities Building as outlined in the report.

(b)     That, under Section 178 (3) (b) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, Council invite, in accordance with clause 167, 168 or 169, fresh tenders based on the same or different details.

(c)     That Council inform the unsuccessful Tenderers of the resolution.

(d)     That Council Officers consult with Beverley Hills Park (Kingsgrove Colts Junior Rugby League Club) to establish a plan of management for the refurbishment/upgrade of the amenities building that can be achieved within the available cost envelope.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

FIN388-17         Tender for Cambridge Street, Penshurst - Construction of Stormwater                    Drainage Pipe

(Councillor Symington and Councillor Konjarski)

 (a)    That Council accepts the Tender from Citywide Civil Engineering (NSW) Pty Ltd, in the amount of $746,461.00, after having regard to all the circumstances, as the tender that appears to be the most advantageous and appoint Citywide Civil Engineering (NSW) Pty Ltd as the Principal Contractor under the Contract Number T17/046 Cambridge Street, Penshurst – Construction of a Stormwater Drainage Pipe.

(b)     That the General Manager be authorised to sign the Contracts with the preferred Contractor on behalf of Council.

(c)     That Council inform the unsuccessful Tenderers of the resolution to decline to accept those tenders.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

FIN389-17         Tender for Jubilee Oval Roof Rectification Works

(Councillor Tegg and Councillor Konjarski)

(a)     That Council accepts the Tender from Murphys Group Services Pty Ltd, in the amount of $298,016.40, after having regard to all the circumstances, as the tender that appears to be the most advantageous and appoint Murphys Group Services Pty Ltd as the Principal Contractor under the Contract Number T17/040 Jubilee Oval Roof Rectification Works.

(b)     That the General Manager be authorised to sign the Contracts with the preferred Contractor on behalf of Council.

(c)     That Council inform the unsuccessful Tenderers of the resolution to decline or accept those tenders.

(d)     That Council approve $112,000 from the Asset Management Reserve to be utilised for this project, with any unspent funds to go back into the reserve.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

FIN390-17         Property Matter - Lease for Air Bridge at South Street Kogarah

(Councillor Symington and Councillor Wu)

(a)     That Council grant a lease to AME Properties Pty Ltd (being a wholly owned subsidiary of Ramsay Healthcare Australia) for a proposed pedestrian air bridge over South Street, Kogarah for a period of 50 years with a further 5 year option.

(b)     That the General Manager be delegated authority to enter into a lease and to execute all documentation associated with the proposed lease, subject to development consent being granted for the proposed development.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

FIN391-17         Tender for the Construction of Traffic Management Devices

(Councillor Tegg and Councillor Konjarski)

(a)     That Council accepts the Tender from Ally Civil, in the amount of $101,250.00, after having regard to all the circumstances, as the tender that appears to be the most advantageous and appoint Ally Civil as the Principal Contractor under the Contract Number T17/047 Construction of roundabout and associate structures at the intersection of Francis Street and Colvin Street, Allawah.

(b)     That Council accepts the Tender from Ally Civil, in the amount of $34,375.00, after having regard to all the circumstances, as the tender that appears to be the most advantageous and appoint Ally Civil as the Principal Contractor under the Contract Number T17/047 Intersection upgrade works at the intersection of Connelly Street and Bridge Street, Penshurst.

(c)     That Council accepts the Tender from Ally Civil, in the amount of $41,620.00, after having regard to all the circumstances, as the tender that appears to be the most advantageous and appoint Ally Civil as the Principal Contractor under the Contract Number T17/047 Pedestrian facility upgrade works at the intersection of Pallamana Parade and Tallawalla Street, Beverly Hills.

(d)     That Council accepts the Tender from KK Civil Engineering, in the amount of $49,400.00, after having regard to all the circumstances, as the tender that appears to be the most advantageous and appoint KK Civil Engineering as the Principal Contractor under the Contract Number T17/047 Upgrade of pedestrian refuge in Lily Street at Roberts Lane, Allawah.

(e)     That Council accepts the Tender from Ally Civil, in the amount of $15,735.00, after having regard to all the circumstances, as the tender that appears to be the most advantageous and appoint Ally Civil as the Principal Contractor under the Contract Number T17/047 Construction of Pedestrian Refuge in Oatley Avenue, Oatley.

(f)      That Council accepts the Tender from Ally Civil, in the amount of $51,750.00, after having regard to all the circumstances, as the tender that appears to be the most advantageous and appoint Ally Civil as the Principal Contractor under the Contract Number T17/047 Construction of a raised pedestrian crossing (wombat crossing) on Gray Street, at Queens Avenue, Kogarah.

(g)     That Council accepts the Tender from Ally Civil, in the amount of $8,350.00, after having regard to all the circumstances, as the tender that appears to be the most advantageous and appoint Ally Civil as the Principal Contractor under the Contract Number T17/047 Construction of a pedestrian refuge on Gray Street, Kogarah outside St George Hospital.

(h)     That Council accepts the Tender from KK Civil Engineering, in the amount of $49,400.00, after having regard to all the circumstances, as the tender that appears to be the most advantageous and appoint KK Civil Engineering as the Principal Contractor under the Contract Number T17/047 Construction of a kerb blister on South Street, Kogarah near the St George Hospital.

(i)      That the General Manager be authorised to sign the Contracts with the preferred Contractors on behalf of Council.

(j)      That Council Officers inform the unsuccessful Tenderers of the resolution to decline to accept those tenders.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

FIN392-17         Georges River Council Quarterly Property Portfolio Report

(Councillor Wu and Councillor Symington)

That the quarterly Property Portfolio Report be received and noted.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

FIN393-17         Advice on Court Proceedings - November 2017

(Councillor Wu and Councillor Symington)

That the information be received and noted.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

FIN394-17         Property Matter - Illuminated Street Signs in the former Kogarah City     Council Area

(Councillor Konjarski and Councillor Wu)

That Council defer this item pending further information received.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

FIN395-17         Georges River Draft Communications and Media Management Policy

(Councillor Wu and Councillor Konjarski)

That Council adopt the attached draft George River Communications and Media Management

Policy.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

 

FIN396-17         Waste Services Request for Tender

(Councillor Tegg and Councillor Symington)

(a)     That Council invite tenders for the following:

i.        General Waste Processing (former Hurstville City Council LGA)

ii.       Green Waste Processing for the Georges River Council LGA as an optional component of the General Waste Processing tender

iii.      Clean up Processing for the Georges River Council LGA (in conjunction with SSROC)

iv.      Mattress collection and processing for the Georges River Council LGA (in conjunction with SSROC).

v.       Park and Litter bin collection and processing (former Kogarah City Council LGA)

(b)     That the General Manager be given delegated authority to accept the Tenders listed in a)

(c)     That the casual agreement with Suez Recycling and Recovery (NSW) Pty Ltd for garbage processing (former Hurstville City Council LGA) and green waste processing (Georges River Council LGA) be extended until 30 June2018.

(d)     That a report on the review of options for harmonising the Clean-up service including a cost benefit analysis be presented to Council in March 2018.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

FIN397-17         Investment Report as at 31 October 2017

(Councillor Wu and Councillor Konjarski)

That the Investment Report as at 31 October 2017 be received and noted.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

Councillor Liu entered the meeting at 6.16pm

 

FIN398-17         Fraud and Corruption Control Policy and Plan

(Councillor Tegg and Councillor Liu)

(a)     That the Fraud and Corruption Control Policy as attached to the report be adopted.

(b)     That the Fraud and Corruption Control Plan as attached to the report be received and noted.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

Consideration of Recommendations from Closed Session

CON025-17       Request for Tender No: F17/387 - Provision of Animal Management       Services

(Councillor Symington and Councillor Tegg)

 (a)    That Council resolves to decline to accept the tender submission received from St George Animal Rescue Pty Ltd in response to Request for Tender F17/387 in accordance with Regulation 178 (3) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

(b)     That Council resolves to decline to invite fresh tenders for the following reasons:

i.        St George Animal Rescue Pty Ltd was the only entity who tendered a submission in response to Request for Tender F17/387.

ii.       The single tender submitted in response to Request for Tender F17/387 demonstrates a lack of competition in the market for the provision of Animal Management Services. If Council were to invite fresh tenders it is likely that St George Animal Rescue will be the only entity to respond to the invitation.

(c)     That Council resolves to enter into negotiations with St George Animal Rescue Pty Ltd in accordance with Regulation 178 (3) (e) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, to achieve a better value for money outcome.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

CON026-17       Property Matter - Sans Souci Bathers Pavilion

(Report by Head of Strategic Property)

Recommendation: Councillor Tegg and Councillor Liu

(a)     That Council rescind the resolution of former Kogarah City Council Item H2.3 dated 24 February 2014 for the conditional offer of lease to Blakehurst Marina Pty Ltd.

(b)     That Council undertake an open tender process for the restoration of the Sans Souci Bathers Pavilion structure generally in accordance with approved development consent No. 233/12.

(c)     That a further report be submitted to Council following the completion of the tender, for Council to undertake the restoration works.

(d)     That the restoration works be funded from Council’s Commercial Property Reserve.

(e)     That Council offer the site to market by way of a 21 year lease (inclusive of options) via a competitive Expression of Interest/public tender process, subject to the Minister’s prior consent.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

File Reference

D17/228218

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Minutes of Finance and Governance Committee 11 December 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL238-17             Report of the Finance and Governance Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017

[Appendix 1]          Minutes of Finance and Governance Committee 11 December 2017

 

 

Page 10

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 18

Item:                   CCL239-17        Report of the Environment and Planning Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017 

Author:              Head of Executive Services

Directorate:      Office of the General Manager

Matter Type:     Committee Reports

 Recommendation

That the Committee recommendations for items ENV010-17 to ENV015-17 (inclusive), detailed below, be adopted by Council in accordance with the delegations set out in the Terms of Reference for the Environment and Planning Standing Committee:

 

 

ENV010-17       Report on Submissions - Exhibition of Notification and Advertising Development Control Plans

(Councillor Hindi and Councillor Kastanias)

That Council move to address this draft in a future Councillor workshop.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion:  Unanimous

 

ENV011-17       Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

(Councillor Hindi and Councillor Landsberry)

That Council defer this matter to the Council Meeting scheduled on18 December 2017.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion:  Unanimous

 

ENV012-17        Bankstown-Hurstville Bushfire Management Committee - Appointment of                        Councillor delegate

(Councillor Hindi and Councillor Kastanias)

That Councillor Nick Katris be appointed as Councillor delegate representing Georges River Local Government Area on the Bankstown-Hurstville Bushfire Management Committee.

(Councillor Badalati and Councillor Kastanias)

That Councillor Con Hindi be elected as the alternate Councillor delegate representing Georges River Local Government area on the Bankstown-Hurstville Bushfire Management Committee.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion:  Unanimous

 

ENV013-17       Amendment No.2 Generic Plan of Management - General Community Use Areas

(Councillor Hindi and Councillor Badalati)

That Council endorse Amendment No.2 Generic Plan of Management - General Community Use Areas (applicable to the former Hurstville local government area) to include 4 & 6 Dora Street, Hurstville and 25 Cook Street, Mortdale for public exhibition in accordance with Clause 38 of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

Record of Voting:
For the Motion:  Unanimous

 

ENV014-17       Economic Development Strategy and Place Making Program

(Councillor Badalati and Councillor Kastanias)

 

a)    That Council notes the progress made in commencing an evidence based Place Making Program and outline of the draft Economic Development Strategy.

b)    That Council notes the key results of the Place Score Town Centre Values survey and the Business survey.

c)    That Council endorses the draft Works Program of Place Making and Economic Development initiatives.

d)    That Council endorses the draft objectives and principles of the Economic Development Strategy for the purpose of further stakeholder input including referral to the Economic Development Advisory Committee in March 2018 and the inclusion of the review of places of play in town centres.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

ENV015-17       Recruitment of Community Representatives for the new Local Planning Panel (LPP), formerly known as Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP)

(Councillor Hindi and Councillor Badalati)

(a)     That Council endorse the process for the recruitment of the Community Representatives for the new Local Planning Panel

(b)     That delegation be given to the General Manager to call for expressions of interest for Community Representatives for the Local Planning Panel,

(c)     That the General Manager report to Council in February 2018 on the outcomes of the Expression of Interest Process, with a recommendation for the appointment of the 5 x Community Panel members.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion:  Unanimous

 

File Reference

D17/228221

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Minutes of Environment and Planning Committee 11 December 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL239-17             Report of the Environment and Planning Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017

[Appendix 1]          Minutes of Environment and Planning Committee 11 December 2017

 

 

Page 20

 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 24

Item:                   CCL240-17        Report of the Assets and Infrastructure Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017 

Author:              Head of Executive Services

Directorate:      Office of the General Manager

Matter Type:     Committee Reports

 Recommendation

That the Committee recommendations for all items ASS001-17 to ASS002-17 (inclusive), detailed below, be adopted by Council in accordance with the delegations set out in the Terms of Reference for the Assets and Infrastructure Standing Committee:

 

ASS001-17        Sydney Water - Waterway Health Improvement Program - Harold Fraser Reserve, Parkside Drive Reserve and Kogarah Bay Creek

(Councillor Katris and Councillor Elmir)

a)      That Council provide in principle support for the Sydney Water Waterway Health Improvement Program at Harold Fraser Reserve, Parkside Drive Reserve and Kogarah Bay Creek.

b)      That Sydney Water  is to provide written detailed  descriptions of the Harold Fraser Schematic Layouts Options A to F inclusive, outlining details of the naturalisation works of the existing stormwater canal.

          Details of the Planted Stormwater Treatment System (P10) and new water treatment           areas,  details of the new   park facilities (i.e.  the demolition and reconstruction of the           existing Amenities block  being proposed) and details of the landscaping works.

c)      That Sydney Water is to also indicate why Options C, E, and F are proposing almost double the amount of water treatment areas and retention systems as opposed to Options A,B, and D. Which option is the most pertinent option with regard to water treatment and what do they believe are the advantages and disadvantages of each individual option .

d)      That what, if any, funds are expected to be obtained from Council.

e)      That what is the timeline that is expected for the commencement  and completion of the works and how are the works intended to be staged.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion:  Unanimous

 

ASS002-17        Georges River Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting - 5 December 2017

(Councillor Elmir and Councillor Katris)

That the recommendations contained within the Minutes of the Georges River Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting held on 5 December 2017 be adopted by Council, with the exception of Items TAC149-17 and TAC156-17 which were dealt with separately.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion:  Unanimous

Note:     Councillor Katris left the meeting having previously declared a Pecuniary Interest in ASS002-17 - Item TAC149-17 James Street, Blakehurst – Proposed “Work Zone” adjacent to 623 Princes Highway

 

 

TAC149-17       James Street, Blakehurst – Proposed Work Zone adjacent to 623 Princes Highway

 

(Councillor Symington and Councillor Elmir)

 

That the recommendation contained within the Minutes of the Georges River Traffic Advisory Committee meeting of 5 December 2017 be adopted by Council.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion:  Councillor Grekas (Chair) and Councillors Elmir, Konjarski, Payor, Symington and Tegg.

 

Against the Motion: Nil

 

TAC156-17        282-290 Forest Road, Hurstville – Construction Traffic Management Plan

(Councillor Symington and Councillor Elmir)

That the matter be deferred for further consultation with businesses, including Westfield and in particular any impact that the work might have on pedestrian crossings in Humphreys Lane and Forest Road.

Record of Voting:

For the Motion:  Unanimous

 

File Reference

D17/228224

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Minutes of Assets and Infrastructure Committee 11 December 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL240-17             Report of the Assets and Infrastructure Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017

[Appendix 1]          Minutes of Assets and Infrastructure Committee 11 December 2017

 

 

Page 26

 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 29

Item:                   CCL241-17        Report of the Community and Culture Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017 

Author:              Head of Executive Services

Directorate:      Office of the General Manager

Matter Type:     Committee Reports

 Recommendation

That the Committee recommendations for all items COM040-17 to COM042-17 (inclusive), detailed below, be adopted by Council in accordance with the delegations set out in the Terms of Reference for the Community and Culture Standing Committee:

 

COM040-17       Draft Georges River Council Events Strategy

 

(Councillor Hindi and Councillor Liu)

(a)     That Council adopt the attached draft Georges River Council Events Strategy as amended and as detailed in this report.

(b)     That Council’s Sponsorship and Donations Policy be updated to obtain consistency with the adopted Events Strategy and as further detailed within this report.

 

Record of Voting

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

COM041-17       Annual and Fundraising Dinner Invitations

(Councillor Hindi and Councillor Liu)

(a)     That Council receive and note the contents of this report.

(b)     That Council approve the attendance, retrospectively, of Councillors who attended the following two events: Lantern Club Shines Pink! Fundraising Dinner held on Tuesday 31 October 2017 and the St George District Cricket Club (Inc.) Annual Dinner held on 15 November 2017.

(c)     That Council delegate to the General Manager the authority to accept these types of invitations on behalf of Council when due notice is not provided; seek advice from Councillors and Council Officers (when appropriate) on attendance and report back to Council as soon as is practical via the Councillor portal, on the cost of attendance at the event/donation made and attendance.

(d)     That Council include on its donations register on the website, a list of donations that are granted for the purpose of Councillors and/or Council officers to attend such events.

 

Record of Voting

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

COM042-17       Re-establishment of Kogarah CBD Alcohol Free Zone

(Councillor Hindi and Councillor Liu.)

That Council adopt to re-establish the existing Kogarah CBD Alcohol Free Zone until 28 August 2018 in accordance with sections 644, 644A and 644B of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

Record of Voting

For the Motion: Unanimous

 

File Reference

D17/228229

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Minutes of Community and Culture Committee meeting of 11 December 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL241-17             Report of the Community and Culture Committee - Meeting held on 11 December 2017

[Appendix 1]          Minutes of Community and Culture Committee meeting of 11 December 2017

 

 

Page 31

 


 

 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 33

Environment and Planning

Item:                   CCL242-17        Adoption of Kogarah North Precinct Development Control Plan Amendment 

Author:              Manager Strategic Planning

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Environment and Planning

 

Recommendation

(a)     That Council adopt amended criteria to guide the variations to the height of buildings in the Kogarah North Precinct that allows for a variation to the maximum building height up to 25% (40.5m – excluding the lift overrun) in the Kogarah North Precinct subject to:

a.   Design excellence outcomes which are outlined in Part E4 – Kogarah North Precinct of the Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 amended 2017;

b.   The development providing a public benefit that contributes to the provision of infrastructure, facilities and services to support future development and function of the Precinct.

c.   The public benefit being secured via a voluntary planning agreement.

(b)     That Council pursuant to Clause 21(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations adopt the development control plan – being the “Kogarah Development Control Plan 2012 (Kogarah North Amendment)” (Attachments 4, 5, 6, & 7).

(c)     That Council pursuant to Clause 21(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 give public notice of its decision to approve the Kogarah Development Control Plan 2012 (Kogarah North Amendment) in a local newspaper within 28 days after the decision is made.

(d)     That Council endorse a detailed review be undertaken (at the applicant/owners costs) with respect to consideration of the heritage listing of Nos 14-16 Victoria Street, Kogarah, and should it be identified that the properties do not have heritage value that a Planning Proposal be prepared (at the applicant’s cost) to Kogarah LEP 2012 to remove the heritage listing from the properties.

(e)     That the General Manager prepare a report to Council in early 2018 that explores a range of incentives to encourage design excellence of development/built form throughout the Local Government Area, including:

(i)         an initial priority focus on areas subject to high levels of development activity such as the Hurstville and Kogarah CBDs, Rocky Point Road and the Princes Highway; and

(ii)        incentive provisions that may be incorporated into Council’s Voluntary Planning Agreements Policy to encourage urban design excellence.

(f)      That the General Manager prepare a report for Council consideration on the options available for encouraging a higher percentage of family friendly apartments (containing two and three bedrooms) within the Kogarah North Precinct, including any cost implications of reduction or waiving of Section 94 Contributions.

(g)     That the General Manager be delegated to undertake minor amendments to the draft Development Control Plan – Kogarah North Precinct in order to assist with the interpretation of the provisions of the Plan and provide clarification of the controls.

 

Executive Summary

1.      Council at its Meeting held 27 November 2017 considered a report on the Draft Kogarah North Precinct Urban Design Strategy and the Draft Kogarah DCP – Kogarah North Precinct Amendment and resolved to endorse the Strategy but defer the draft development control plan for a further briefing with Councillors, which was held on 12 December 2017.

 

2.      Since the 27 November 2017 Council meeting the draft Kogarah North Precinct DCP Amendment has been further amended as a result of discussions with the Council’s Legal Team for one of the development applications within the Kogarah North Precinct. This is discussed in Paragraphs 92 and 93 of this report.

 

3.      This report deals with the Kogarah DCP – Draft Kogarah North Precinct Amendment and the amendment to the height variation policy.

 

Introduction

4.      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.

 

5.      In order to provide additional housing opportunities close to the Kogarah Town Centre, the area known as Kogarah North has been rezoned from R2 – Low Density Residential to R4 – High Density Residential with the following development standards – FSR of 4:1 and building height of 33m.

 

6.      City Plan Strategy Pty Ltd was appointed in August 2016 by Georges River Council to prepare an Urban Design Strategy and develop principles for the Precinct.

 

7.      Council, at its meeting on 1 May 2017, considered a report on the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy and Implementation and resolved the following (CCL064-17 - Minute No. 91):

(a) That the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy be publicly exhibited for a minimum period of 28 days.

 

(b) That Option 3 and the urban design principles contained within the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy be adopted by Council as an interim set of planning controls from the date of the gazettal of Amendment No.2 to Kogarah Local Environmental Plan.

 

(c)  That Council advise applicants and landowners that any application within the Kogarah North Precinct will be assessed against Option 3 and the urban design principles contained within the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy.

 

(d) That Council prepare an amendment to Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 by including as a specific chapter Option 3 and the urban design principles contained within the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy.

 

(e) That the amended Kogarah Development Control Plan be placed on public exhibition in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and its Regulation 2000 at the same time as the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy.

 

(f)   That a further report be presented to Council following the public exhibition of the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy and amended Kogarah Development Control Plan.

 

8.      As a result of the work undertaken by City Plan in the development of the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy, it was acknowledged that the FSR at 4:1 and maximum height of 33m do not result in a good design outcome and results in a bulky building with little or no articulation.

 

9.      In response to this, an additional report was presented to Council at its meeting on 7 August 2017 which sought Council’s consideration to endorse as a policy direction a maximum variation to the height of buildings within the Kogarah North Precinct up to 20% (up to a maximum height of 39m).

 

10.    This variation assisted in allowing a built form outcome that addressed the principles of the Draft Strategy. The Variation Policy is an interim measure. The heights within the North Kogarah Precinct would be varied as part of a future planning proposal.

 

11.    Council at its 7 August 2017  resolved the following (CCL144-17):

 

(a)     That Council adopt the criteria that guide the variations to the height of buildings in

the Kogarah North Precinct.

 

(b)     That advice be sought from Sydney Airport Corporation Limited (SACL) prior to the

exhibition of the draft Development Control Plan (DCP) with respect to the proposed

consideration of the variation to the maximum building height above 33m up to a

maximum 40m with respect to the Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) in the Kogarah

North Precinct.

 

(c)     If SACL raises no objection to the maximum building height up to a maximum 40m

across the Kogarah North Precinct, then the criteria to guide a variation in building

height above the 33m and associated objectives and controls as outlined in the body

of the report be incorporated into the draft Development Control Plan (DCP) and

placed on exhibition.

 

(d)     That if no submissions are received on the draft Development Control Plan that the

Plan is submitted to the General Manager for adoption.

 

12.    In accordance with the resolution advice was sought from SACL prior to the exhibition of the draft DCP. Council was advised that SACL could not provide advice in relation to the proposed variation to the height prior to the exhibition of the DCP and it was requested that advice be sought once the DCP had been placed on exhibition.


 

 

13.    A further request was made to SACL once the draft DCP was placed on exhibition. Comments were received advising that

Sydney Airport received a notice …. seeking advice on the proposed consideration of the variation to the maximum building height up to a maximum of 40m above existing ground height (63.0 metres Australian Height Datum (AHD)) with respect to the Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) in the Kogarah North Precinct.

The height of the OLS over the area is 51m AHD. Any proposed structures taller than 51m AHD would need to be submitted as an application for approval pursuant to s.183 Airports Act - Notification of decision under Reg 15A(2) of the Airports (Protection of Airspace) Reg's 1996.

This location lies within an area defined in schedules of the Civil Aviation (Buildings Control) Regulations which limit the height of structures to 15.24 metres above existing ground height (AEGH) without prior approval of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

 

14.    Accordingly, the draft DCP and Urban Design Strategy for the Kogarah North Precinct was formally placed on exhibition from Wednesday 6 September to Friday 6 October 2017.

 

15.    Council at its Meeting held 27 November 2017 endorsed the Kogarah North Precinct Urban Design Strategy but deferred the draft Development Control plan amended for a further briefing which was held on 12 December 2017.

 

16.    The draft development control plan amendment is now presented to council for adoption. Submissions received during the exhibition of the draft DCP and Urban Design Strategy have been considered, and it is recommended that the DCP be adopted by Council, subject to the amendments, as outlined in the body of the report.

 

Background to the Gazettal of the Kogarah LEP 2012 (New City Plan)

 

17.      The former Kogarah Council, at an Extraordinary Meeting on 4 April 2016 considered a report on the draft New City Plan. At that meeting Council endorsed, for submission to the Minister, the proposed changes to zoning, height and floor space ratio (FSR) for the area known as the Kogarah North Precinct.

 

18.      In order to provide additional housing opportunities close to the Kogarah Town Centre, the area known as Kogarah North has been rezoned from R2 – Low Density Residential to R4 – High Density Residential with the following development standards – FSR of 4:1 and building height of 33m.

 

19.      It is considered that the Precinct will see significant change in the form and scale of development over the life of the Plan to 2031 and it is important that detailed design controls are in place to ensure a high level of amenity for future residents.

 

20.      There has been significant interest in potential redevelopment in this Precinct and due to the significant uplift of proposed development in the New City Plan it is anticipated that redevelopment will proceed in a relatively short time frame. Critical to the success of the redevelopment of the area is the establishment of appropriate planning and urban design outcomes to ensure that development is sustainable, well designed and provides a high level of amenity for future residents.

 

21.      The former Kogarah Council Planning & Environmental Working Party considered a report on 18 April 2016 to seek endorsement to appoint a consultant to undertake an Urban Design Study and Section 94 Contributions Plan for the Kogarah North Precinct.

 

22.      In conjunction with the development of the key urban design principles, the project brief endorsed by Council also included the preparation of a new/amended Section 94 Contributions Plan for the Precinct.

 

23.      The former Kogarah Council, at its meeting on 26 April 2016, resolved the following: (Adopted Minute No. 57/2016)

 

a)   That the Project Brief titled Kogarah North – Urban Design Study and Section 94 Contributions Plan Brief and dated April 2016 for the preparation of an Urban Design Study for the Kogarah North Precinct be endorsed for the purpose of seeking Expressions of Interest (EOI) from suitably qualified consultants.

 

b)   That Expressions of Interest (EOI) be sought from suitably qualified consultants to undertake the tasks outlined in the Project Brief.

 

c)   That a further report be presented to a future Planning & Environmental Services Working Party on any Expressions of Interest (EOI) received to undertake the project, including fee proposals provided by the consultants.

 

24.      As a result, City Plan Services Pty Ltd were appointed in August 2016 by Georges River Council to undertake the work outlined in the Project Brief, including the preparation of an Urban Design Strategy and development principles for the Precinct; and the identification of a list of works that could be levied for under the provisions of Section 94.

 

Preparation of the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy

24.    A detailed report was presented to Council on 1 May 2017 on the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy, including a review of three (3) massing options and an overview of the Design Principles for the Precinct.

 

25.    Council, in this regard resolved the following:

 

(a) That the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy be publicly exhibited for a minimum period of 28 days.

 

(b) That Option 3 and the urban design principles contained within the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy be adopted by Council as an interim set of planning controls from the date of the gazettal of Amendment No.2 to Kogarah Local Environmental Plan.

 

(c)  That Council advise applicants and landowners that any application within the Kogarah North Precinct will be assessed against Option 3 and the urban design principles contained within the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy.

 

(d) That Council prepare an amendment to Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 by including as a specific chapter Option 3 and the urban design principles contained within the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy.

 

(e) That the amended Kogarah Development Control Plan be placed on public exhibition in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and its Regulation 2000 at the same time as the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy.

 

(f)   That a further report be presented to Council following the public exhibition of the draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy and amended Kogarah Development Control Plan.

 

26.    A copy of the report to Council dated 1 May 2017 is included at Attachment 1.

 

27.    As outlined in this report, the Precinct's existing lot configuration suggests that many sites will struggle to achieve the permitted height (33m) and FSR (4:1) under the Kogarah LEP 2012, as well as the design considerations mandated by the Apartment Design Guide (ADG).

 

28.    The analysis undertaken by the consultants suggests developers would only be able to maximise yields (e.g. achieve an FSR of 4:1) by consolidating lots to achieve a width of between 40-60 metres and even then, in some cases this may only be maximised by encroaching on the height limit of 33m.

 

29.    Design Option 3, which was recommended by the consultants and endorsed by Council in principle at its meeting held 1 May 2017, places an emphasis on creating a built form that complies with the ADG and defines a four storey street wall character.

 

30.    This option also places further emphasis on transitioning between the scale of the heritage items and the new built form with reduced heights and increased setbacks adjacent to the heritage items. This option also takes into account the height of buildings so as to minimise their overshadowing impact to existing and future open space areas. This option provides a maximum FSR of approximately 2.52:1.

 

31.    The draft DCP that has been exhibited for the Kogarah North Precinct was based on the Draft Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy.

 

32.    Council at its Meeting held 27 November 2017 endorsed the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy.

 

Section 94 Contributions

33.    The following development contributions plans currently apply to development in the Kogarah North Precinct:

-     Section 94 Contribution Plan No.8 – Kogarah North Town Centre

-     Section 94 Contributions Plan No.9 – Kogarah Libraries

-     Georges River Council Section 94A Contributions Plan 2017

 

34.    The Section 94 Contribution Plan No 8 – Kogarah Town Centre was adopted by the former Kogarah Council in 1999 and amended in 2006 and provides for all the upgrade works within the Kogarah Town Centre and to the area north of the Kogarah Town Centre (now known as the Kogarah North Precinct).

 

35.    Table 1 below outlines the types of development contributions levied under each of the plans, the community facilities and services for which the contributions are levied and the contributions rates.

 

36.    It is noted that there is a Ministerial Direction that sets a cap on the monetary contributions for residential dwellings of $20,000 per residential dwelling.

 

Table 1: Development Contributions Levied – Kogarah North Precinct

 

Development Contributions Plan

 

Types of development

levied contributions

Facilities and Services

Summary of Contribution Rates

Section 94 Contribution Plan No.8 – Kogarah North Town Centre

This Plan applies to the Kogarah Town centre which includes the Kogarah North Precinct. Applies to commercial, retail, medical and any residential flat building development and mixed use development.

Residential developments - all medium and high density

 

Non-residential developments -commercial, retail and medical

-       Streetscape works

-       Open space and public domain facilities

-       Community facilities and services

-       Storm water filtration, flood control and gross pollution traps

-       Traffic facilities

-       Carparking

 

Residential Dwellings:

1 bedroom - $10,566

2 bedroom - $16,746

3 bedroom - $19,409 (total rate is capped)

 

Retail: $99/m2

 

Commercial: $135/m2

 

Medical: $145/m2

 

Carparking rate: $30,207.50 per space

 

Stormwater rates: vary per sqm of impervious site area

 

Section 94 Contributions Plan No.9 – Kogarah Libraries

 

This Plan applies to the Kogarah Town centre which includes the Kogarah North Precinct.

 

Residential developments - all medium and high density

 

-       Library facilities – provision of facilities and services

-       Purchase of new books

 

Residential Dwellings:

1 bedroom - $286

2 bedroom - $458

3 bedroom - $591

 

Georges River Council Section 94A Contributions Plan 2017

Applies development that does not fall under the Plan No.8 – Kogarah North Town Centre.

All development (residential, retail, commercial, industrial) that is not subject to a section 94 contribution and the proposed cost of the development is greater than $100,001

 

-       Open space embellishment works

-       Streetscape works

-       Traffic modelling

-       Traffic management facilities

-       Carparks

Levy Rate (% of development cost):

 

$100,000 or less – NIL

 

$100,001 & $200,000 – 0.5%

 

$200,001 or more – 1%

 

 

 

37.    Council has engaged consultants to review and prepare a new/amended Section 94 Plan for the Kogarah North Precinct. Until a new plan is prepared and adopted by Council the above Section 94 development contributions plans apply.

 

38.    The current Section 94 Contributions Plans applying to the Precinct contains infrastructure to support the development of the Kogarah North Precinct in the interim such as: embellishment of open space and streetscapes; traffic management; bus shelters; and street tree planting.

 

Processing Variations to Height in the Kogarah North Precinct

39.    The Kogarah Town Centre has undergone significant changes over the past 15 years to become a vibrant, liveable and working community. More people are living and working in the Centre than ever before. The Kogarah Town Centre has been identified as a Health and Education Precinct and a Strategic Centre in the recently released draft Greater Sydney Region Plan  - Our Greater Sydney 2056 – A Metropolis of Three Cities which was released on 22 October 2017

 

40.    In order to respond to the key priorities in A Plan for Growing Sydney, the Planning Proposal for the Kogarah City Plan Amendment introduced a high density zone to this Precinct. The R4 – High Density Residential zone aims to revitalise areas to allow for high density apartments, close to public transport, hospitals, shopping and jobs. Building heights of 33m and FSR of 4:1 were proposed.

 

41.    The reasons for the 33m height limit in the Kogarah North Precinct can be summarised as follows:

a.   Provides an appropriate transition from the heights within the Kogarah Town Centre, which is a maximum of 39m; and

b.   Is within the Obstacle Limitation Surfaces (OLS) for Sydney Airport.  The Obstacle Limitation Surfaces (OLS) are a series of surfaces that set the height limits of objects around an airport. Objects, such as buildings that project through the OLS become obstacles. The OLS within the Kogarah North Precinct is 51AHD (approximately 31-33m); and

c.   Generally consistent with the height of existing development in areas adjacent to the Kogarah North Precinct (along the Princes Highway).

 

42.    Given the uplift in the Precinct there has been a significant development interest with an unprecedented number of enquiries and requests for pre-DAs and discussions for proposals within the Kogarah North Precinct.

 

43.    Since the gazettal of the LEP, there have been eight (8) development applications and four (4) pre-development applications lodged for development within the Precinct. The majority of the applications exceed the 33m by between 4m – 5.3m. These have all been referred for an independent assessment against the principles in the draft Urban Design Strategy and four (4) are currently in the Land & Environment Court.

 

44.    As part of the preparation of the DCP and in the assessment of the development applications lodged, a number of issues were identified including a transparent process for the consideration of clause 4.6 applications for a variation to the maximum building height.

 

45.    As outlined above, there have been eight (8) development applications and four (4) pre-development applications lodged for development within the Precinct. The majority of the applications exceed the 33m by between 4m – 5.3m. It is acknowledged that the FSR at 4:1 and maximum height of 33m do not result in a good design outcome and results in a bulky building with little or no articulation.

 

46.    Council sought to ensure that it provides a consistent application of Clause 4.6 in the consideration of the variation of height of buildings in the Precinct until such time that Council is able to prepare a Planning Proposal to review the height of buildings in the Precinct.

 

47.    In developing the DCP amendment for exhibition, it was considered that there will circumstances where a variation to the 33m maximum building height may be considered appropriate. Such circumstances include:

§ Allowing greater height to achieve a greater setback to heritage items;

§ Reconfiguring the height on a block, and rationalising heights to reduce impacts of overshadowing, particularly to public open space;

§ Creation of public open space and/or through site links that are consistent with the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy; and

§ Where a building achieves:

o Compliance with the ADG,

o is of superior design excellence, and

o does not result in an adverse impact to adjoining development.

 

48.    In order to provide transparency and consistency for both applicants and assessing officers in the consideration of variations to building height within the Kogarah North Precinct a policy position was considered and endorsed by Council.

 

49.    A report was presented to Council, at its meeting on 7 August 2017 which outlined the methodology and a proposed DCP provision which could be incorporated to ensure transparency and consistency in the consideration of clause 4.6 applications for a variation to the maximum building height up to 20% in the Kogarah North Precinct. Considerations of such variations would result in increases in the height from 33m to 39m.

 

50.    Council resolved in this regard the following:

(a)     That Council adopt the criteria that guide the variations to the height of buildings in

the Kogarah North Precinct.

 

(b)     That advice be sought from Sydney Airport Corporation Limited (SACL) prior to the

exhibition of the draft Development Control Plan (DCP) with respect to the proposed

consideration of the variation to the maximum building height above 33m up to a

maximum 40m with respect to the Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) in the Kogarah

North Precinct.

 

(c)     If SACL raises no objection to the maximum building height up to a maximum 40m

across the Kogarah North Precinct, then the criteria to guide a variation in building

height above the 33m and associated objectives and controls as outlined in the body

of the report be incorporated into the draft Development Control Plan (DCP) and

placed on exhibition.

 

(d)     That if no submissions are received on the draft Development Control Plan that the

Plan is submitted to the General Manager for adoption.

 

51.    A copy of this report is included at Attachment 2.

 

52.    The criteria endorsed by Council was inserted into the draft DCP amendment prior to its exhibition.

 

53.    The exhibited draft DCP contains a control that indicates that Council may consider a variation to the maximum height of buildings (Clause 4.3 of the KLEP) by a maximum of 20% where Council is satisfied that the additional height is complies with the principles of SEPP No. 65 and the Apartment Design Guide and does not have an adverse impact with respect to overshadowing, interface/transition with adjoining properties and any heritage item.

 

54.    The draft exhibited DCP also states that where a development is proposing to take up the 20% variation in height, the additional height will trigger the Council’s VPA Policy in relation to the provision of a public benefit.

 

Voluntary Planning Agreements

55.    The Georges River Council Policy on Planning Agreements 2016 provides guidelines for both the Council and developers to effectively negotiate and prepare planning agreements and provides an enhanced and more flexible development contributions system for Council.

 

56.    The Policy provides a clear and transparent framework governing the negotiation, assessment and use of planning agreements and ensures that the framework is consistent, efficient, fair and accountable.

 

57.    The Council may consider entering into a planning agreement when a developer proposes to make a change to the Local Environmental Plan through a planning proposal or where a development application exceeds development standards and controls.

 

58.    As stated above the exhibited draft DCP contains a control that indicates that Council may consider a variation to the maximum height of buildings (Clause 4.3 of the KLEP) by a maximum of 20% where Council is satisfied to a number of criteria.  The variation is linked to where the development is proposing to provide a public benefit. The public benefit is to be secured via a voluntary planning agreement.

 

59.    As stated previously in this report there are four (4) Development Applications currently in the Land and Environment Court.

 

60.    The Urban Design consultant appointed by Council to assist in defending the appeals has carried out built form testing which indicates that a greater height of 40.5m (excluding the lift overrun) will allow a better design outcome that complies with the 4 storey street wall height and the setbacks of the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy and the Apartment Design Guide. This is an increase in height from 33m to 40.5m – i.e. an increase in the variation from 20% (39m) to 25% (40.5m).

 

61.    The increase in height of 25% over that in the LEP Height Map for height variations in the Precinct would be subject to:

 

a.   Design excellence outcomes which are outlined in the DCP amendment, which include:

i. Create a productive, sustainable and liveable Precinct for people through leadership and integration of design excellence;

ii.        The built environment is to reflect its location, be connected to a landscape setting and be integral with local people and culture;

iii.       Development is distinctive, visually interesting and appealing.

b.   The lift core being centrally located on each building so it cannot be seen from a public place; and

c.   The development providing a public benefit (infrastructure, facilities and services) that contributes to the future function/liveability of the Precinct.

 

62.    The value of the public benefit is to be guided by the land value provisions in the Council’s Voluntary Planning Agreement Policy. As this Policy does not indicate a residual land value per square metre rate of floor space for the Kogarah North Precinct, it is proposed that an interim rate of $2750.00 sqm is applied as a guide. The rate per sqm will be finalised as part of the preparation of the Section 94 Contributions Plan for the Precinct.

 

63.    The value of public benefit linked to the additional 7.5m in height – that is it would be based on $2,750 sqm of floor space of the additional storeys resulting from the additional 7.5m in height – usually two storeys.

 

64.    This figure ($2,750 sqm) is to be used as a guide only. Given the complexities of capturing the value uplift resulting from an increase in height it is considered that the RLV and the suggested monetary contribution is investigated and discussed based on the figures linked to a site and costs that are incurred with the development on that site.

 

65.    The revised RLV and other associated costs is to be supported by sufficient detail and prepared by a certified practitioner.

 

66.    The public benefits to be provided within the Precinct is to be based on the infrastructure provisions in the DCP; including laneway dedication, open space acquisition and embellishment; pathways; streetscape improvement and traffic facilities to guide the negotiations. A Public Benefits Information Sheet for the Precinct which includes a range of traffic, community and other public benefits has also been prepared.

 

67.    This interim approach will be in place until an amendment to the VPA Policy/procedure occurs to include the Kogarah North Precinct or an alternative approach is identified.

 

Advice from Sydney Airport Corporation Limited prior to public exhibition of the draft DCP Amendment

68.    In accordance with the Council resolution on 7 August 2017 advice was sought from Sydney Airport Corporation Limited (SACL) prior to the exhibition of the draft Development Control Plan (DCP) with respect to the proposed consideration of the variation to the maximum building height above 33m up to a maximum 39m with respect to the Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) in the Kogarah North Precinct.

 

69.    Council was advised verbally that SACL could not provide advice in relation to the proposed variation to the height prior to the exhibition of the DCP and Council was requested that advice be sought once the DCP had been placed on exhibition.

 

Exhibition of the draft Development Control Plan (DCP) and Urban Design Strategy for Kogarah North

70.    In accordance with Council’s resolution of 1 May 2017, an amendment to the Kogarah DCP 2013 was prepared to insert provisions for the Kogarah North Precinct.

 

71.    The draft DCP amends the Kogarah DCP 2013 and was prepared with reference to the key urban design principles in the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy as well as the height variation criteria for the Precinct.

 

72.    Accordingly, the draft DCP and Urban Design Strategy for the Kogarah North Precinct was placed on exhibition from Wednesday 6 September – Friday 6 October 2017 (30 days).

 

73.    Letters were sent to all affected property owners within the Precinct and an advertisement appeared in the St George Leader on Wednesday 6 September 2017.


 

 

74.    In addition, the following was also undertaken:

a.   Copies of the draft DCP and Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy were available for viewing in Council’s Customer Service Centres at Hurstville and Kogarah, including copies in Kogarah Library;

b.   The documentation was available on Council’s website for the duration of the exhibition period; and

c.   Council’s Coordinator – Strategic Planner was available for one-on-one appointments and answering enquiries related to the draft Urban Design Strategy and draft DCP.

 

75.    During the exhibition, advice was also sought from SACL in accordance with Council’s resolution with respect to the proposed variation to the height.

 

76.    During the exhibition twenty-one (21) submissions were received. A detailed overview of the issues identified in the submissions along with the Council Officers response and recommendation is included at Attachment 3

 

77.    Comments on the draft DCP Amendment were also sought from GMU Consultants who are assisting Council with respect to the Appeals for the Development Applications in the Kogarah North Precinct and is providing Urban Design advice in this regard please refer to Paragraphs 81 to 85 for further discussion.

 

78.    Council is to note that the draft DCP amendment was advertised as an extension to that part of the DCP applying to the Kogarah Town Centre – Part E1. Given the importance of the Kogarah North Precinct it will now be in its own part – Part E4. This explains why the submissions received and comments provided by GMU Consultant mentioned different clause numbers to that now contained in the final draft copy of the DCP.

 

79.    Table 2 below provides a summary of the key issues raised in the submissions and Council Officer’s response and recommendations:

 

Table 2: Summary of Submissions received during the Exhibition of the draft DCP

Key Issues Raised in Submissions

Council Officer’s Comments and Recommendation

Objects to Option 3 in the draft Urban Design Strategy which identifies a 2.5:1 FSR vs FSR in Kogarah LEP 2012 (4:1)

The Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy identifies that due to the Precinct's existing lot configuration many sites will struggle to achieve the permitted height (33m) and FSR (4:1), while complying with the design considerations mandated by the Apartment Design Guide (ADG).

The analysis undertaken by the consultants suggests developers would only be able to maximise yields (e.g. achieve an FSR of 4:1) by consolidating lots to achieve a width of between 40-60 metres and even then, in some cases this may only be maximised by encroaching on the height limit of 33m.

Design Option 3, which was recommended by the consultants and endorsed by Council in principle, places an emphasis on creating a built form that complies with the ADG and defines a four storey street wall character.

This option places further emphasis on transitioning between the scale of the heritage items and the new built form with reduced heights and increased setbacks adjacent to the heritage items. This option also takes into account the height of buildings so as to minimise their overshadowing impact to existing and future open space areas.

 

With respect to the height and FSR, these have been retained at a maximum of 33m and 4:1, respectively. As outlined in the draft DCP, the FSR, as expressed in Kogarah LEP 2012 is a maximum. Due to certain factors, not all development is appropriate at the maximum allowable FSR.

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

No change to the FSR of 4:1 in Kogarah LEP 2012 for the Kogarah North Precinct and retention of the discussion relating to Option 3 in both the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy and DCP. Option 3 assists in guiding the principles to achieve a good design outcome.

 

Objects to the proposed pedestrian link between Stanley Street and Victoria Street as it will have adverse impacts on adjoining properties (noise, privacy, encourage loitering)

Figure 31 – Street Character Urban Design Diagram in the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy identifies the creation of a new/improved pedestrian link between Stanley Street and Victoria Street. The diagram or words do not indicate the exact location of the new pedestrian link – all it indicates is the creation of a link that continues from Regent Street connecting through to Victoria Street.

 

Section 5.8.14 of the draft DCP provides for the creation of a through site pedestrian link between Stanley Lane and Victoria Street. The preferred location for the through site pedestrian link is through No 22 Victoria Street. Where a development site includes or is adjacent to No 22 Victoria Street, Council will require the identification of any through site link as part of any future development application.

 

The exact location of the through site link can be negotiated through the preparation of any development application and issues related to noise and privacy can be dealt with as part of the assessment of any development application.

 

The DCP to be amended so that an additional control is inserted which states:

The location of the through site links/pocket parks may be amended through negotiations with Council Officers but must meet the desired future urban design principles for the Precinct and the objectives of this section.

 

Heritage status of Nos 14-16 Victoria Street, Kogarah is resulting in the sterilisation of redevelopment of properties in Victoria Street.

With respect to the heritage listed properties, preliminary advice has been sought from Council’s Heritage Adviser with respect to the properties at Nos 14 & 16 Victoria Street. In this regard, the following conclusions have been made:

 

While 14-16 Victoria Street can still be considered to be relatively rare within the Georges River Council area, there are at least two other comparable examples which are listed in Schedule 5 of Kogarah LEP. Based on the above, 14-16 Victoria Street could potentially be removed from Schedule 5 if it can be demonstrated that future planning policies would probably diminish the setting of the place.

 

Based on this preliminary review, it is recommended that a more detailed review be undertaken with respect to consideration of the heritage listing of Nos 14-16 Victoria Street, Kogarah.

 

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

That a more detailed review be undertaken by Council at the applicant’s costs with respect to consideration of the heritage listing of Nos 14-16 Victoria Street, Kogarah. Should it be identified that the properties do not have heritage value that a Planning Proposal be prepared at the applicant’s cost to Kogarah LEP 2012 to remove the heritage listing from the properties.

 

Siting and Consolidation of Development Sites: Given the building depths set out in the ADG, the larger site area arising from a frontage of 60m does not necessarily result in an optimal balance between height, FSR and ADG considerations.

 

 

The site isolation feasibility requirements should be consistent with the LEC planning principle Karavellas v Sutherland Shire Council [2004] NSWLEC 251, which requires that an offer to purchase the isolated site is based on at least one recent independent valuation

 

It is accepted that given the building depths set out in the ADG, the larger site area arising from a frontage of 60m may not necessarily result in an optimal balance between height, FSR and ADG considerations. The objectives of the DCP with respect to the siting and consolidation of development sites aims to encourage amalgamation of sites to promote the efficient use of land and to provide improved design outcomes and public domain interface and to avoid the creation of isolated sites.

 

The Land and Environment Court planning principle requires that the following questions be answered when dealing with amalgamation of sites or when a site is to be isolated through redevelopment:
     -     Firstly, is amalgamation of the sites feasible?

-     Secondly, can orderly and economic use and development of the separate sites be achieved if amalgamation is not feasible?

 

The principles to be applied in determining the answer to the first question are set out by Brown C in Melissa Grech v Auburn Council [2004] NSWLEC 40. The Commissioner said:

 

Firstly, where a property will be isolated by a proposed development and that property cannot satisfy the minimum lot requirements then negotiations between the owners of the properties should commence at an early stage and prior to the lodgement of the development application.

Secondly, and where no satisfactory result is achieved from the negotiations, the development application should include details of the negotiations between the owners of the properties. These details should include offers to the owner of the isolated property. A reasonable offer, for the purposes of determining the development application and addressing the planning implications of an isolated lot, is to be based on at least one recent independent valuation and may include other reasonable expenses likely to be incurred by the owner of the isolated property in the sale of the property.

 

Thirdly, the level of negotiation and any offers made for the isolated site are matters that can be given weight in the consideration of the development application. The amount of weight will depend on the level of negotiation, whether any offers are deemed reasonable or unreasonable, any relevant planning requirements and the provisions of s 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

A review of the site isolation feasibility requirements in the draft DCP has been undertaken against the planning principle outlined above. It is considered that the process outlined in the draft DCP is generally consistent with the exception of the draft DCP requiring two independent valuations, whereas the planning principle requires one. It is recommended that this be retained, as exhibited.

 

An amendment has also been made to the provision to clarify that the valuation of the land must also take into account the value of the land as a development site. In this regard, a note has been added

 

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

No change to the draft DCP, which is generally consistent with the Land & Environment Court Planning Principle.

Inclusion of a note in the relevant section to clarify that Council will ask that the valuation of the land must also take into account the value of the land as a development site if Council has any questions regarding the valuation.

 

Building heights: Any applicant is entitled to use clause 4.6 in order to increase the height and FSR. It is not subject to any maximum 20% increase.

 

It is also most certainly not subject to payment of money or public benefits package via a VPA or otherwise.

It is noted that any applicant is entitled to use clause 4.6 in order to increase the height and FSR. Council is seeking to ensure that it provides a consistent application of Clause 4.6 in the consideration of the variation of height of buildings in the Precinct until such time that Council is able to prepare a Planning Proposal to review the height of buildings in the Precinct.

In this regard, a report was presented to Council in August 2017 outlining a Policy Position on the consideration of the variation of height in the Kogarah North Precinct.

Any variation, including a variation of 20% would trigger Council’s Voluntary Planning Agreements (VPA) Policy. Refer to Paragraphs 55 to 67 of this report for the discussion on the matter.

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

The wording has been slightly amended to increase to variation to 25% but still reinforces Council’s policy decision dated 7 August 2017.

 

Street frontage heights and setbacks: Clause 5.8.10 – this control should be altered to reflect the guidance outlined in the ADG, which recognises that additional steps can be provided if a ziggurat form does not result.

 

Noted - draft DCP will be amended to include the design guidance as per the ADG, which states the following:

Generally one step in the built form as the height increases due to building separations is desirable. Additional steps should be careful not to cause a 'ziggurat' appearance

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

That the control be amended and replaced with:

One step in the built form as the height increases due to building separations is required. Additional steps should be careful not to cause a 'ziggurat' appearance.

 

Street frontage heights and setbacks: 2m front setback desired on the ground floor seeks to form an extension to the public domain and provide an increased footpath width. There may be liability issues where the footpath is situated on private land and it is requested that Council provide clarification how this may be managed.

 

The 2m setback at the ground floor seeks to create an extension to the public domain. A key objective of this increased setback is to preserve and enhance the street settings…and create opportunities for the planting of additional canopy trees and landscaping.

It is noted that the wording in the draft DCP identifies that the 2m setback is to form an extension to the public domain to provide for an increased footpath and deep soil landscaping. A review of the wording has been undertaken to clarify the objective of this provision.

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

That the following wording:

Minimum 2 m setback from the property boundary. This 2m setback is to form an extension to the public domain to provide for an increased footpath and deep soil landscaping.

Be deleted and replaced with:

Minimum 2 m setback from the property boundary. This 2m setback, although private, is to preserve and enhance the street and public domain setting. This setback is to provide opportunities for the planting of additional mature canopy trees and landscaping. The fencing height is to be no greater than 1m and the style is to be open in format.

 

Dedication of land to council for road/lane widening and splays: Clause 5.8.13 - Land dedications should be reflected in the LEP land reservation acquisition map and/or the s94 plan so they have statutory force.

 

The requirement for the dedication of land for the widening of the laneway will be required as a condition of consent as part of any development application to ensure the efficient operation of the laneway.

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

That the section of the DCP be retained, as exhibited, and the land dedications remain in the DCP.  However further detail is to be provided on the amount of land required for road widening purposes.

 

Vehicular access and car parking: Clause 5.8.19 – it should not be required to provide showers and lockers for bicycles for residential development.

This provision is consistent with the requirements currently contained in Kogarah DCP 2013 – Section E – Kogarah Town Centre (Clause 3.9.2). However the provision in the draft DCP needs to be clarified so that it applies to non-residential development and components of non-residential in mixed use developments. Residential units will have storage and showers within their units.

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

That the section amended in the Kogarah North DCP Amendment so that it applies only to non-residential development.

 

Ground floor apartments: Clause 5.8.24 – requested that Council provide clarity on how terraces should relate to required front setbacks at ground level when the terrace faces the street.

 

The objective of the provisions relating to ground floor apartments is to design ground floor apartments to balance dwelling privacy with surveillance to the street and to create opportunities at the street level for planting and landscaping.

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

That the provision be retained in the DCP, as exhibited. The DCP has been amended to include clearer diagrams.

 

Active street frontages: Clause 5.8.23 – inconsistency between the LEP and the DCP is the desire to provide commercial uses at ground floor of developments fronting Railway Parade North and Princes Highway

Suggestion that if Council desires an active frontage that an incentive provision is provided in the LEP, which permits food and drink premises, which would assist in achieving the desired outcomes

 

The comments raised are noted.

The zoning and land use provisions for the R4 – High Density zone conflict with achieving active frontages. The LEP permits only one type of use within the R4 zone which is a neighbourhood shop, which is limited to 80m2.

The DCP also suggests that home businesses be used to activate the street however this use is also highly restrictive.

The suggestion of a provision in the LEP to include additional land uses, particularly for developments with frontages to Railway Parade and Princes Highway would assist in achieving the desired objective of activating streetscapes, particularly along main roads where residential at ground level is not desirable.

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

That the provision be deleted from the DCP and that consideration be given to reviewing the inclusion of additional land uses for developments fronting the Princes Highway and Railway Parade, as part of any future amendment to the Kogarah LEP 2012.

 

Minimum frontage: Clause 5.8.7 (Siting and Consolidation of Development Sites)

 

60m is not the optimal frontage and there is no evidence supporting the 60m. The ADG setback requirements and maximum building depth derive the maximum yield therefore a frontage could be 42m. The frontage requirement of 60m is too onerous and would be difficult to achieve due to site cost constraints

 

The provision of the draft DCP states the following:

 

Sites must be of a sufficient width to accommodate development. The Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy identifies that to optimise yield and public domain amenity development sites should have a minimum street frontage of 60m. Where sites do not have a minimum street frontage of 60m they may not achieve the maximum yield.

The 60m frontage is a result of the testing undertaken by the consultant in achieving the maximum FSR of 4:1. Depending on the orientation of the site (corner site or mid-block) and depth of blocks, it may be possible to achieve the maximum 4:1 FSR without the need for a 60m frontage.

Where it is difficult to achieve the 60m frontage, Council may consider a variation however this would need to be justified taking into account the objectives of the Clause.

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

That the provision be amended to read as follows:

Sites must be of a sufficient width to accommodate development. The Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy identifies that to optimise yield and public domain amenity development sites should have a minimum street frontage of 60m. Where sites do not have a minimum street frontage of 60m the development would need to ensure the design outcomes/built form meets the Vision and the Desired Future Urban Design Principles for the Precinct.

In considering the development Council will take into account the proportions of the building – the podium width compared to the width of the tower and the appearance from the public domain.

 

Amalgamation Requirements: The table requires the amalgamation of certain sites – the amalgamation requirements are overly prescriptive allowing no creativity or flexibility in the development of the precinct

Identifying specific amalgamation requirements are likely to inflate the price of land

 

The intent of the amalgamation requirements is to ensure that for the efficient use of land and to provide for improved design outcomes and to avoid the creation of isolated lots.

Clause 5.8.7(vi) – (ix) proposes a process, which is consistent with the amalgamation requirements already contained within Kogarah DCP 2013. This process requires the applicant to provide to Council appropriate documentary evidence to demonstrate that a genuine and reasonable attempt has been made to purchase an isolated site based on a fair market value.

 

Where amalgamation of the isolated site is not feasible, applicants will be required to demonstrate that an orderly and economic use and development of the separate sites can be achieved. In this regard, applicants will be required to submit with the DA a DA Concept Plan that provides the following:

 

-       Details an envelope for the isolated site, indicating height, setbacks, resultant site coverage (building and basement), sufficient to understand the relationship between the application and the isolated site.

-       The likely impacts the developments will have on each other, such as solar access, visual and acoustic privacy and the impact of development of the isolated site on the streetscape must also be addressed.

-       An assessment against the ADG with respect to the impact of the proposed development on the isolated site. Any proposed development of a neighbouring isolated site should be compliant with ADG provisions

 

Council Officer’s Recommendation:

That the provision be retained in the DCP, as exhibited as it contains sufficient direction on where the amalgamation requirements can be met.

 

 

 

80.    It should be noted that none of the submissions objected to the variation proposed by Council for the increase in height in the precinct from 33m to 39m.

 

Comments from GMU – Urban Design Consultant

81.    Council currently has four (4) appeals before the Land & Environment Court for the subject sites within the Kogarah North Precinct:

§ No 11 Stanley Street and 28-36 Victoria Street, Kogarah (DA110/2017)

§ No 70-78 Regent Street, Kogarah (DA111/2017)

§ No 2-10 Palmerston Street, Kogarah (DA112/2017)

§ No. 41-47 Princes Highway (DA183/2016)

 

82.    GMU Consultant is representing Council with respect to the Appeals for the Development Applications in the Kogarah North Precinct and is providing Urban Design advice in this regard.

 

83.    As part of this process detailed built form testing was undertaken to establish appropriate design built form/solutions that encompasses the principles of design excellence.

 

84.    The built form testing has indicated that a greater height of 40.5m (excluding the lift overrun) will allow a better design outcome that complies with the 4 storey street wall height and the setbacks of the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy and the Apartment Design Guide. This is an increase in height from 33m to 40.5m – i.e. an increase in the variation from 20% (39m) to a 25% (40.5m).

 

85.    In addition, GMU has provided comments on the draft DCP. These are summarised in Table 3 below:

 

Table 3: Summary of Comments from GMU and

Council Officer’s Comments and Recommendations

GMU Comments

Council Officer’s Comments and Recommendations to the Kogarah North DCP Amendment

 

The draft DCP places significant reference on the Urban Design Strategy.

Council, in developing the draft DCP controls has tried to create a link between the principles in the Urban Design Strategy and the draft DCP controls. However it is noted that the DCP will be the statutory document. Therefore the Kogarah North DCP Amendment has been altered to list the Strategy as a reference document only, with a link to the Council’s website.

 

The Strategy has multiple options – the vision should be related to Option 3 which Council has endorsed.

 

That the DCP has been amended to reflect the vision in Option 3 only as that vision was adopted by Council at its meeting held 1 May 2017.

Vision needs more in it around the scale of buildings, human scale of the street, generous public domain with strong landscape character and about the different character of streets and built form to corners

 

The vision in both the strategy and the DCP has been amended to address the issues raised.

Page 4 of the draft DCP talks about compliance with the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy – it is recommended that this should be deleted.

 

The comments from GMU are noted – the urban design objectives and strategies in the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy have been included in the draft DCP so it is recommended that this reference be deleted.

 

There are a significant number of principles for different topics but they should be arranged with the controls so there is a clear link between them rather than in different sections.

 

The DCP has been amended to address this issue. The Precinct will now be in a separate part of the DCP under E – Town Centres as E4 – Kogarah North Precinct.

The maps are quite dislocated from the principles and some of the controls.

 

Maps are now located near the controls/objectives and are clearer.

Submission requirements (Section 5.8.5) should be upfront and not interrupt the principles and controls

 

The DCP has bene amended to address this issue.

Siting and consolidation -should simply say you have to have a 60m frontage and not refer back to the Urban Design Strategy

 

The provision  has been amended to read as follows:

Sites must be of a sufficient width to accommodate development. The Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy identifies that to optimise yield and public domain amenity development sites should have a minimum street frontage of 60m. Where sites do not have a minimum street frontage of 60m the development would need to ensure the design outcomes/built form meets the Vision and the Desired Future Urban Design Principles for the Precinct.

In considering the development Council will take into account the proportions of the building – the podium width compared to the width of the tower and the appearance from the public domain.

 

Images in the draft DCP are difficult to read

 

The images/maps have been replaced with higher resolution/clearer images.

 

Section on Heritage talks about building heights not being inconsistent with the desired future character – Objective B in 5.8.9 – this is a motherhood statement and is not clear

 

This objective has been deleted.

Objective D and Control (v) – linking heights to public benefit – needs to be clarified to ensure that increased height is only permitted in appropriate locations within the Precinct.

 

The Building heights section of the DCP has been rewritten to address the issues raised.

The consideration of a variation to the height of 33m is not a given and any application would need to result in full compliance with the requirements of SEPP and the ADG.

Link the public benefits and increased height to specific sites

 

Council has not identified specific sites where the provisions for increased height may occur as it would be difficult to identify specific sites within the Precinct.

A Public Domain Plan and Section 94 Contributions Plan will be prepared for the Precinct and this will identify the key works that will need to be undertaken.

 

The front setback table does not clearly indicate what the 2m setback from the property boundary 

 

The intention of Council in requiring a 2m setback is to create an extension to the front setback and allow for additional landscaping and the planting of mature trees.

In this regard, the Objectives of the street setback provisions seek to:

§ Preserve and enhance street settings or to retain existing street trees and create opportunities for the planting of additional canopy trees and landscaping; and

§ Ensure new development is compatible or contributes to the desired future streetscape character.

 

Watch the requirement that no balcony is to encroach into the setbacks – you need to combine this with a control for strong articulation in facades behind the setback or you will get dead flat facades.

 

Generally, balconies can encroach into the front building setbacks (Levels 2, 3, 4) up to 1m into the 3m setback and these controls are included in the setback requirements.

In addition, Clause 5.8.21 – Façade Composition includes Objectives and Controls which relate to the articulation of facades. Specifically, the Objectives state:

 

A.   Ensure facades reinforce the character and continuity of existing or proposed streetscapes.

 

B.   Create harmonious, well-balanced facades containing much articulation and architectural detail.

 

Activation for corners seems to expect retail on all corners shown – retail won’t work in so many locations – too close together

 

This comment is agreed with. The activation of corners has been limited to ground floor for frontages along the Princes Highway and Railway Parade North.

Side and rear setbacks (page 23) – seems to be saying that its ok to have no setbacks on every block up to level 4 – that form only works for centres and would not be a good outcome for all residential streets with residential at ground floor as you will lose a lot of the landscape character

 

This has been clarified in the DCP as only relating to those sites along fronting the Princes Highway to maximise yield. Council may consider the reduction of the side boundary setbacks on other sites within the Precinct, where the proposed development complies with the principles of solar access and cross ventilation in SEPP 65 and where it can be demonstrated that there would be no additional impacts on adjoining properties and trees are retained.

 

Additional Feedback from Ward Councillors

86.    Kogarah Bay Ward Councillors have discussed the draft DCP with the Director.

 

87.    A summary of the discussions and how matters raised have been addressed in the draft DCP are outlined below (Table 4):

 

Table 4 – Summary of Discussions with Ward Councillors

Comment made by Councillors

Changes to DCP/Comments

Section 94 and how the infrastructure will be funded.

Comment: As stated above the Kogarah s94 Plan No. 8 still applies in the Precinct which captures about $17,000/unit. Refer to paragraphs 33 to 38 of this report.

Need to make sure that the court principles are followed with the consideration of isolated sites. Need to clarify what we ask for in the land valuation.

Included in Section 7.

Amenity of the Precinct needs to be improved through controls that ensure building setbacks are landscaped and the street is not dominated by fencing.

Included in Sections 10, 11 and 15.

Setbacks are importance to give a space of space and pedestrian amenity.

Addressed in Sections 10, 11 and 15.

Power lines are to be undergrounded as per the town centre, to improve the amenity of the area by reducing visual clutter.

Addressed in a new section 25 – Site facilities

Needs to be a pedestrian friendly suburb.

Addressed in Sections 10, 11, 13 and 15.

Fencing requirements within the Precinct needs to be included in the DCP.

Addressed in Section 10.

There needs to be a plan of management on how to maintain setbacks, presentation of buildings, incorporate into strata bylaws.

Addressed in Section 26 – Maintenance.

Building design and facades are interesting and of superior quality.

Addressed in Section 19 – Architectural Articulation

Built form is softened with planting of mature/substantial trees both on private land and in the public domain/streets.

Addressed in Section 11 – Trees and Landscape

 

Advice from Sydney Airports Corporation Limited (SACL) during exhibition of the draft DCP

 

88.    In accordance with the Council’s resolution of 7 August 2017 advice was sought from SACL prior to the exhibition of the draft DCP. Council was advised verbally that at SACL could not provide advice in relation to the proposed variation to the height prior to the exhibition of the DCP and it was requested that advice be sought once the DCP had been placed on exhibition.

 

89.    A further request was made to SACL for comment once the draft DCP was placed on exhibition. In this regard, SACL has advised by letter dated 19 October 2017 as follows:

 

Sydney Airport received a notice … seeking advice on the proposed consideration of the variation to the maximum building height up to a maximum of 40m above existing ground height (63.0 metres Australian Height Datum (AHD)) with respect to the Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) in the Kogarah North Precinct.

 

The height of the OLS over the area is 51m AHD. Any proposed structures taller than 51m AHD would need to be submitted as an application for approval pursuant to s.183 Airports Act - Notification of decision under Reg 15A(2) of the Airports (Protection of Airspace) Reg's 1996.

 

This location lies within an area defined in schedules of the Civil Aviation (Buildings Control) Regulations which limit the height of structures to 15.24 metres above existing ground height (AEGH) without prior approval of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

Construction cranes may be required to operate at a height significantly higher than that of the proposed development and consequently, may not be approved under the Airports (Protection of Airspace) Regulations.

 

90.    Since early 2014 CASA are have become more critical of applications that exceed the OLS height limit and appear to be imposing more restrictive heights and conditions. There has however been a precedence established with buildings exceeding the OLS in the Kogarah Town Centre and these have been supported by CASA on the basis that the development should not increase the risk to aviation safety, regularity or efficiency.

 

91.    The heights within the Precinct and the OLS will be dealt by CASA on an individual basis – i.e. DA by DA.

 

Further changes since 27 November 2017

92.    Council’s Legal Team for one of the DA appeals in the Kogarah North Precinct has suggested the following matters be addressed (Table 5) prior to the draft amendment being adopted by Council:

 

 

Table 5 – Changes since 27 November 2017

 

Issue raised by legal team

Change to DCP

The draft DCP provides for:

·    a minimum street frontage of 60m in the Kogarah North area (cl.7(iii);

·    an objective (also in cl. 7(iii)) for sites that do not have a minimum street frontage of 60m, that the development “would need to ensure the design outcomes / built form which meets the Vision and Desired Future Urban Design Principles for the Precinct as well as the built form objectives outlined in [the] DCP”;

·    cl.7(vi) states: “proposal would result in an isolated site with a minimum site frontage of less than 40m”.

The reference to 40m in clause 7(vi) of the draft DCP is a typo and is now changed to 60m in Attachment 7.

The Note in Section in Control (iii): As a general rule, infrastructure to support site specific requirements resulting from the redevelopment of the site, including road/laneway widening is not considered a public benefit.

 

A DCP is not the legal mechanism for requiring land dedication. Council’s Legal Team has referenced the case of Australian International Academy of Education Inc v The Hills Shire Council [2013].

 

From paragraph 48, Craig J states:

48. It is now well settled that s 94, coupled with the requirement for a contributions plan made in accordance with s 94AE, provides the sole source of statutory power to impose a condition of development consent either requiring the payment of a monetary contribution or requiring the dedication of land. That statement of principle was first articulated by a judge of this Court in Fitch v Shoalhaven City Council [1987] 67 LGRA 165. It was further articulated in the judgments of the Court of Appeal in Fairfield City Council v N & S Olivieri Pty Ltd [2003] NSWCA 41. In that case Spigelman CJ said at [22]:

 

"22. The qualifications and restrictions found in s 94, notably the 'reasonableness' restriction in s 94(2) and the public requirements for the promulgation of a contributions plan, do lead to the conclusion that s 94 is the exclusive power for conditions of the character specifically identified in s 94 i.e. dedication of land or monetary contributions. To go beyond these express conditions and extend the exclusive nature of the power to conditions which may, in some way, be the commercial equivalent of a dedication of land, or the payment of a contribution, in my opinion goes too far."

49 In Maitland City Council v Anambah Homes Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCA 455; 64 NSWLR 695, Spigelman CJ provided a rationale for the decision expressed in Olivieri. At [15] he said:

 

"15. The conclusion that s 94 constitutes an exclusive power for the imposition of a condition requiring the dedication of land, as I pointed out in Fairfield City Council v N & S Olivieri Pty Ltd [citation omitted], is based on the application of a principle of statutory interpretation, expressed by Dixon J in one formulation in Anthony Horden & Sons Ltd v Amalgamated Clothing & Allied Trades Union of Australia (1932) 47 CLR 1 at [7], subsequently frequently applied, in the following way:

' ... When the Legislature explicitly gives a power by a particular provision which prescribes the mode in which it shall be exercised and the conditions and restrictions which must be observed, it excludes the operation and general expressions in the same instrument which might otherwise have been relied upon for the same power."

Delete from Note Section in Control (iii): As a general rule, infrastructure to support site specific requirements resulting from the redevelopment of the site, including road/laneway widening is not considered a public benefit.

 

 

93.    Attachment 7 (which is the final copy of Part E4 – Kogarah North Precinct) contains the changes required by Council’s Legal Team.

 

Administrative Changes Required

94.    The draft DCP amendment was advertised as an extension to that part of the DCP applying to the Kogarah Town Centre – Part E1. Given the importance of the Kogarah North Precinct it will now be in its own part – Part E4. This explains why the submissions received and provided by GMU mentioned different clause numbers to that now contained in the final draft copy of the DCP.

 

95.    Due to insertion of the Kogarah North Precinct section to the DCP the following changes are also proposed to the Kogarah DCP 2013 (Table 6):

 

Table 6 – Administrative Changes to the DCP

 

Part

subpart

Amendment

A – Introduction

(Refer to Attachment 4)

Part 1.2 – Name of this DCP

Include an amendments table of changes – this will be Amendment no. 2.

 

Part 1.7 – Structure of this DCP

Include new Part E4 – Kogarah North Precinct into the list under Part E – Town Centres.

E – Town Centres

(Refer to Attachment 5)

Contents list

Insert E4 – Kogarah North Precinct & its list Table of Contents list

E1 – Kogarah Town Centre

(Refer to Attachment 6)

 

1. Background

Amend This Part applies to land that is within the boundaries of the Kogarah North Precinct Centre as shown on Figure 1 below.

To

This Part applies to land that is within the boundaries of the Kogarah North Precinct Centre as shown on Figure 1 below except for that land that is within the Kogarah north precinct – refer to part E4 – Kogarah North Precinct.

E4 – Kogarah North Precinct

(Refer to Attachment 7)

New part

New part

 

Final copy of Kogarah DCP 2013 – Kogarah North Amendment 2017

96.    A final copy of the draft development control plan is attached (Refer to Attachment 4 to 7). Please note that Attachment 7 contains the controls applying to the Kogarah North Precinct.

 

97.    The DCP has been amended to address:

 

a.   Numbering requirements as the Kogarah North Precinct now has its own part;

b.   Public Submissions;

c.   Council’s Design Review Panel’s comments;

d.   Comments from Gabrielle Morrish from GMU who is representing Council with respect to the Appeals for the Development Applications in the Kogarah North Precinct and is providing Urban Design advice in this regard;

e.   Increase in the height variation from 20% to 25%;

f.    Councillor’s discussions;

g.   Updated Tables 2 and 3 (relating to setbacks) so that they align with Figures 4, 5 and 6;

h.   Advice from Council’s Legal Team.

 

98.    Part E4 – Kogarah North Precinct contains the following sections – refer to Table 7:

 

Table 7 – Outline of Part E4 – Kogarah North Precinct

Section No.

Content

1.

Existing Character:

Describes the Precinct as it is now.

2.

Land to which this part applies:

States that Part E4 applies to the Kogarah North Precinct and provides a map of the precinct. Also states that:

·      Development needs to comply with all other applicable Parts of the DCP. If there is a discrepancy between Part E4 and other Parts of the DCP the controls in Part E4 will always prevail. 

·      The Part is to be read in conjunction with the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012.

·      SEPP No. 65 and the ADG prevail over Council’s DCP. 

3.

Section 94 Development Contributions and Voluntary Planning Agreements:

This section states that Council seeks the following development contributions:

·      Section 94 Contributions;

·      Section 94A levies; and

·      Voluntary Planning Agreements.

4.

The Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy:

Provides a background on the strategy and its relationship to the DCP.

5.

Vision for the Kogarah North Precinct:

This describes the future Precinct – vision and the urban design principles.

6.

Submission Requirements for Development Applications:

Every Development Application for residential flat buildings and mixed use developments under SEPP 65 or developments with an assessed value exceeding $1 million in the Kogarah North Precinct must be accompanied by:

·      A 3D dimensional Google Sketch-up model of the proposed development (external configuration) on an accurate topographical and cadastral boundary base, including the existing built form of the immediately adjoining and neighbouring context of proposal; and

·      An indicative design concept for adjoining sites where the development will potentially isolated sites.

7.

Siting and Consolidation of Development Sites:

In summary requires:

·      The siting of a building is to respond to the requirements of the Apartment Design Guide.

·      The maximum floor space ratio (FSR) is set by clause 4.4 of Kogarah LEP 2012 and the FSR Map.

·      Sites must be of a sufficient width to accommodate development. The Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy identifies that to optimise yield and public domain amenity development sites should have a minimum street frontage of 60m. Where sites do not have a minimum street frontage of 60m the development would need to ensure the design outcomes/built form which meets the Vision and the Desired Future Urban Design Principles for the Precinct as well as the built form objectives outlined in this Part of the DCP. In considering the development Council will take into account the proportions of the building – the podium width compared to the width of the tower and the appearance from the public domain.

·      Development is not to result in the creation of an isolated site that could not be developed in compliance with the relevant planning controls, including the Kogarah LEP 2012, SEPP 65 and the ADG.

8.

Heritage:

Requires a Heritage Assessment to be lodged with a development application in accordance with Clause 5.10(5) of the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012.

There are also controls on site isolation of heritage sites, and transition and curtilage from heritage items.

9.

Building Heights:

This section contains the controls on the 25% variation.

Given the heights in the Precinct a Wind Analysis Report is required to be submitted with a Development Application. Also states that all applications will be referred to SACL and CASA.

10.

Street Frontage Height, and Front, Rear and Side Setbacks:

This section contains the setback controls for each street as well as requiring the four storey street wall height to provide human scale and set back taller elements above the four storey street wall height.

11.

Trees and Landscape:

This section promotes the retention of street trees and the planting of additional trees. Also has controls relating to landscaping within a site. Communal open space on roof tops is encouraged.

12.

Dedication of Land to Council for Road/Lane Widening and Splays:

Has controls for the widening of Stanley Lane between Regent Street and Regent Lane.

13.

Creation of Through Site Pedestrian Links and Additional Open Space:

Three public through site pedestrian links and one additional open space are highlighted within the Precinct. The location of the through site links/pocket parks may be amended through negotiations with Council Officers but must meet the desired future urban design principles for the Precinct.

14.

Housing Choice:

Apartment mix is encouraged within the Precinct. As well flexible apartment configurations are also encouraged to support diverse household types and stages of life including single person households, families, multi-generational families and group households.

15.

Addressing the street and public domain:

Controls ensure that development addresses the street and provides for a great public domain.

16.

Impact of Development on the Road/Pedestrian Network:

Requires a Transport Impact Study.

17.

Development with frontage to the Princes Highway and Adjacent to the Railway Line:

Controls to require that road and rail noise is taken into account within the Precinct.

18.

Vehicular access and car parking:

Requires that residential parking is provided in accordance with ASDG and SEPP 65. Controls the parking rates for non-residential development.

19.

Architectural Articulation – façade, roof and wall design and private open space:

The controls require buildings to be interesting and distinctive and visually appealing. Contains for facades, roofs, and private open space.

20.

Awnings:

Controls on under awning lighting and awnings for entrances to buildings.

21.

Active Street Frontages along Princes Highway and Railway Parade North:

Controls require activation of the ground floor for frontages with neighbourhood shops and home offices along the Princes Highway and Railway Parade North and that ground floor apartments are not permitted along the Princes Highway and along Railway Parade.

22.

Solar Access:

Controls ensure that solar access is provided to adjoining land. Also references the NSW Land and Environment Court Planning Principle for sunlight (NSW LEC 1082).

23.

Safety and Security:

Requires that the design of development is to incorporate Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTD) principles.

24.

Waste Minimisation:

Contains controls for waste management and collection.

25.

Site Facilities:

The controls seek to

·      Ensure that adequate provision is made for site facilities, such as clotheslines and storage areas, in the design of the development.

·      To ensure that site facilities are thoughtfully integrated into development and are unobtrusive.

26.

Maintenance

Contains controls for the maintenance of buildings and requires that such maintenance be written into the by-laws.

 

Legislation Requirements

99.    Clause 21 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 states that Council may after considering any submissions about the draft development control plan that have been duly made, may approve the plan with such alterations as the Council thinks fit. Council is also required under Clause 21 to give public notice of its decision in a local newspaper within 28 days after the decision is made.

 

100.  Clause 21 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 also requires that the council must not approve a draft development control plan (including an amending plan) containing provisions that apply to residential apartment development unless the council:

a.   has referred the provisions of the draft development control plan that relate to design quality to the design review panel (if any) constituted for the council’s local government area (or for 2 or more local government areas that include the council’s area), and

b.   has taken into consideration:

i. any comments made by the design review panel concerning those provisions, and

ii.        The matters specified in Parts 1 and 2 of the Apartment Design Guide.

 

101.  In this case, the Council’s DRP whilst not a mandatory DRP did consider the Kogarah North Urban Design Study on 23 June 2017. The DRP’s comments were addressed in the report to the Council Meeting held 27 November 2017 and have been included in the DCP amendment.

 

Options for Progressing the DCP

102.  The following 4 options are presented to Council:

a.   Option 1

That Council not adopt the Draft DCP amendment and rely on SEPP No. 65, the ADG and the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy. This would require that the Council resolution of 7 August 2017 which resulted in a policy of a height variation of 20% (39m) in the Precinct be rescinded.

 

Proposed recommendation if Council prefers Option 1:

i.    That the DCP amendment not be adopted and that Council rely on SEPP No. 65, the ADG and the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy in defending the appeals lodged.

ii.   That Council rescind the Council resolution of 7 August 2017 which resulted in a policy of a height variation of 20% (39m) in the Precinct.

 

b.   Option 2

That the Council adopts the DCP Amendment but retain a maximum height of 33m – which is the current maximum height in the Kogarah LEP 2012 for the Precinct. This would require that Section 9 – Building heights of the DCP is amended to reflect the maximum building height of 33m – deletion of Controls (ii) and (iii) and the accompanying note. . This would also require that the Council resolution of 7 August 2017 which resulted in a policy of a height variation of 20% (39m) in the Precinct be rescinded.

 

Proposed recommendation if Council prefers Option 2:

i.    That the DCP amendment be adopted but Section 9 be amended to reflect a maximum building height of 33m (as per the Kogarah LEP 2012).

ii.   That Council rescind the Council resolution of 7 August 2017 which resulted in a policy of a height variation of 20% (39m) in the Precinct.

 

c.   Option 3

That the Council adopts the DCP Amendment with the variation of 25% to the building height (40.5m).

 

If this option is preferred, then Council should adopt the recommendation of this report.

 

d.   Option 4

That Council defer consideration of the draft DCP amendment until an outcome of the Court proceedings is made in respect of the four Kogarah North Precinct DAs currently before the Land and Environment Court which will be in April/May 2018.

 

Proposed recommendation if Council prefers Option 4:

i.    That Council defer the consideration of the Draft DCP amendment until an outcome of the Court proceedings is made in respect of the four Kogarah North Precinct DAs currently before the Land and Environment Court

 

Voluntary Planning Agreements & the Kogarah North Precinct

103.  The following is an opinion provided by Council’s General Counsel on the implementation of the VPA policy in the Kogarah North Precinct:

 

a.   In accordance with Section 93F of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, planning agreements are a voluntary agreement between a planning authority (such as Georges River Council) and a developer. Accordingly, Council cannot legally compel a developer to enter into a planning agreement with Council.

 

b.   The Georges River Council Policy on Planning Agreements came into effect on 10 August 2016. The Policy establishes Council's policy on the use of planning agreements, including the negotiation and assessment, and ensures that the framework is consistent, efficient, fair and accountable. Since it came into effect, Council has consistently applied the Policy for planning proposals and development applications that seek to vary a development standard in the local environmental plans.

 

c.   As part of the assessment process through the Council or the Court, particularly where there is a new precinct, the applicant may wish to offer a material public benefit (either a monetary contribution or works in kind) if the circumstances involve a breach of the development standard in the local environmental plans.

 

d.   The urban design and planning consultants appointed by Council to assist in defending the appeals have advised that the designs lodged with the four development applications are not of a high architectural quality and that there would be significant benefits to the area as a whole with design changes – such as a 4 storey street wall height and a tower behind, and incorporating the setbacks of the Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy and the Apartment Design Guide. This does result in an increase in height from 33m to 40.5m – i.e. an increase in the variation from 20% (39m) to 25% (40.5m).  Design changes contemplated will, in the opinions of the experts, eventually ensure better amenity for local residents and improvements in the overall public domain.  If contributions can also be obtained through the VPA process, this could see additional benefits delivered to the community such as pocket parks, pedestrian links, traffic calming and other facilities.

 

Delivering Design Excellence

104.  At the Councillor Workshop held on 20 November 2017 discussions centred on the delivery of design excellence for developments across the City – being buildings within our centres and higher density residential zones.

 

105.  Design excellence would incorporate elements in a  development that seeks to:

a.   Create harmonious, well balanced facades that are articulated and contains architectural detail;

b.   Create interesting and harmonious roof scapes and skylines;

c.   Responds to the orientation and context of the site; and

d.   Promotes a sense of place through creating a built form that maintains a human scale at street level and encourages a comfortable pedestrian environment.

 

106.  It is proposed that further research is undertaken on developing a range of incentives for delivering design excellence. Areas to be investigated could include height incentives and varying the procedures for calculating the monetary contributions under the Council’s VPA Policy.

 

107.  The outcomes of this work will be presented to Council for consideration early in 2018.

 

Next Steps

108.  A final copy of the draft development control plan is attached (Refer to Attachment 4 to 7).

 

109.  Subject to Council’s approval, it is anticipated that a notice will be placed in the St George Leader in December 2017 to become effective.

 

Financial Implications

110.  Within budget allocation.

 

Community Engagement

111.  Community engagement was conducted including:

a.   Letters were sent to all affected property owners within the Precinct and an advertisement appeared in the St George Leader on Wednesday 6 September 2017.

b.   In addition, the following was also undertaken:

i. Copies of the draft DCP and Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy were available for viewing in Council’s Customer Service Centres at Hurstville and Kogarah, including copies in Kogarah Library;

ii.        The documentation was available on Council’s website for the duration of the exhibition period; and

iii.       Council’s Coordinator – Strategic Planner was available for one-on-one appointments and answering enquiries related to the draft Urban Design Strategy and draft DCP.

 

File Reference

TRIM FILE: 17/2278 & 16/1801

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Report to Council Meeting held 1 May 2017

Attachment View2

Report to Council Meeting held 7 August 2017

Attachment View3

Overview of issues in the submissions received

Attachment View4

Part A - Introduction for Kogarah DCO - Draft Kogarah North Amendment

Attachment View5

Part E - Table of Contents for Town Centres - Draft Kogarah North Precinct Amendment

Attachment View6

Part E1 - Kogarah Town centre Precinct - draft Kogarah North Precinct Amendment

Attachment View7

Part E4 - Kogarah North Precinct DCP Amendment

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL242-17             Adoption of Kogarah North Precinct Development Control Plan Amendment

[Appendix 1]          Report to Council Meeting held 1 May 2017

 

 

Page 65

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL242-17             Adoption of Kogarah North Precinct Development Control Plan Amendment

[Appendix 2]          Report to Council Meeting held 7 August 2017

 

 

Page 87

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL242-17             Adoption of Kogarah North Precinct Development Control Plan Amendment

[Appendix 3]          Overview of issues in the submissions received

 

 

Page 94

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL242-17             Adoption of Kogarah North Precinct Development Control Plan Amendment

[Appendix 4]          Part A - Introduction for Kogarah DCO - Draft Kogarah North Amendment

 

 

Page 131

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL242-17             Adoption of Kogarah North Precinct Development Control Plan Amendment

[Appendix 5]          Part E - Table of Contents for Town Centres - Draft Kogarah North Precinct Amendment

 

 

Page 145

 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL242-17             Adoption of Kogarah North Precinct Development Control Plan Amendment

[Appendix 6]          Part E1 - Kogarah Town centre Precinct - draft Kogarah North Precinct Amendment

 

 

Page 149

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL242-17             Adoption of Kogarah North Precinct Development Control Plan Amendment

[Appendix 7]          Part E4 - Kogarah North Precinct DCP Amendment

 

 

Page 289

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 337

Item:                   CCL243-17        Planning Proposal PP2017/0002 - 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights 

Author:              Manager Strategic Planning

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Environment and Planning

 

 

 

Recommendation

(a)     That Council forward the Planning Proposal to amend Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (HLEP 2012) as follows, to the delegate of the Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination under Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

a.   To change the land use zoning from SP2 Church and Community Purpose to R2 Low Density Residential;

b.   To include a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) control of 1:1;

c.   To include a maximum building height of 9m; and

d.   To amend Schedule 1 to include the following additional uses for the site: office premises; restaurant or café.

 

 

Executive Summary

1.      The Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) at its meeting on 5 December 2017 considered a report on the Planning Proposal for 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights as identified in Figure 1 on the next page.

 

2.      The Georges River IHAP recommends the following to Council:

a.   That the Georges River IHAP recommends to Council that the Planning Proposal to amend Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (HLEP 2012) as follows, 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.    To change the land use zoning from SP2 Church and Community Purpose to R2 Low Density Residential;

II.   To include a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) control of 1:1;

III.  To include a maximum building height of 9m.

IV. To amend Schedule 1 to include the following additional uses for the site: office premises; restaurant or café.

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

 

Figure 1: Aerial view of 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights

 

3.      Refer to Attachment 1 for a copy of the report to the IHAP and the associated annexures. The IHAP report is comprehensive in its assessment and should be read in conjunction with this report.

 

4.      This report recommends that Council supports the IHAP recommendation and endorse the Planning Proposal.

 

Background

5.      The request to prepare a Planning Proposal (PP2017/0002) for two (2) lots at the Leaning Links site (No. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights) was submitted by Capital Syndications Pty Ltd on behalf of the owner on 8 June 2017.

 

6.      The two lots are known as Lot 58 DP 206906 and Lot 59 of DP 206906 and have a primary street frontage to Pindari Road and a secondary frontage to Pindari Road Reserve.

 

7.      The Planning Proposal lodged on 8 June 2017 sought:

a.   To change the land use zoning from SP2 Church and Community Purpose to B1 Neighbourhood Centre;

b.   To include a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) control of 1.5:1; and

c.   To include a maximum building height of 9m.

 

8.      The IHAP considered the Planning Proposal for the site at its meeting on 26 October 2017. The IHAP resolved to defer the Planning Proposal at the request of the proponent and recommended that the proponent address the following:

a.   Consistency of the existing zoning pattern;

b.   The required land uses for the continued operation of Learning Links and to ensure the future long term economic viability of the site; and

c.   Built form controls that minimise the adverse impact on the adjoining low scale R2 Low Density Residential development.  It is advisable that a built form analysis of the proposed controls is undertaken.

 

9.      In making the decision to defer the planning proposal, the Georges River IHAP discussed with the proponent the following recommended changes to the current planning controls:

a.   A change to the land use zoning from SP2 Church and Community Purpose to R2 Low Density Residential;

b.   Changing the maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) control to 1:1;

c.   Changing the maximum building height to 9m; and

d.   Amending Schedule 1 to include Educational establishments as an additional land use for the subject property.

 

10.    The Panel provided the following reasons for its decision:

The Panel did not consider the proposed change of the zoning to B1 to be an appropriate planning outcome in relation to the existing and likely future zoning and built form The Panel did not consider the proposed change of the zoning to B1 Neighbourhood Centre to be an appropriate planning outcome in relation to the existing and likely future zoning and built form outcome.

 

11.    As a result of the IHAP consideration of the Planning Proposal at its meeting on 26 October 2017, the Planning Proposal has been amended by letter dated 6 November 2017 from Innova Capital and now requests the following:

a.   To change the land use zoning from SP2 Church and Community Purpose to R2 Low Density Residential zone;

b.   To include a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) control of 1:1;

c.   To include a maximum building height of 9m; and

d.   To amend Schedule 1 to include the following additional uses for the site: office premises; restaurant or café.

 

12.    The Planning Proposal as amended also proposes to include maximum FSR and building height controls for the site that are consistent with adjoining R2 Zoning. The maximum FSR proposed is 1.1 and the maximum building height proposed is 9m.

 

The Site and Locality

13.    The subject site includes two (2) lots within a combined area of 1,170m2 which are known as No. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights and comprise:

 

a.   Lot 58 in DP 206906 (No. 12 Pindari Road) is generally rectangular in shape which measures approximately 580m2 and has a frontage of approximately 15.85m to Pindari Road.

b.   Lot 59 in DP 206906 (No. 14 Pindari Road) is irregular in shape which measures approximately 590m2 and has a frontage of approximately 18.97m to Pindari Road and 38.105m to Pindari Road Reserve.

 

14.    The subject site is owned and occupied by Learning Links which from a legal entity perspective is a company. Learning Links provide a range of services that help support children with learning difficulties and disabilities such as speech pathology and occupational therapy.

15.    The subject site consists of the following building and open space elements as shown in Figures 2, 3 to 4 below:

a.   An elevated building facing Pindari Road with basement area (former church building) that is partitioned as used as an administrative office, tuition rooms and storage space.

b.   A single storey building to the rear of the site accessed from Pindari Road Reserve that is connected to the main building. This is used as a child care centre (pre-school).

c.   An outdoor play and recreation area that is partly covered and adjoins the neighbouring dwelling at No. 10 Pindari Road. A high security gate to the outdoor play area runs along the Pindari Road front boundary.

 

Figure 2: Site as viewed from Pindari Road frontage

 

Figure 3: Site viewed from Pindari Road Reserve

 

Figure 4: Outdoor play/recreation area as viewed from Pindari Road

 

16.    A summary of the surrounding land is provided below and shown in Figures 5 and 6 below:

 

·    North: To the north of the site are low density residential dwelling houses. No.10 Pindari Road which immediately adjoins the site is a single storey brick dwelling house with pitched roof form and side carport. No. 8 Pindari Road is a two storey dwelling house with pitched roof form.

 

·    East: To the east of the site, on the opposite side of Pindari Road, is Peakhurst South Public School.

 

·    South: Immediately to the south of the site is a public open space area that is known as Pindari Road Reserve. The child care component of the subject site is accessed from this reserve. Further south of the reserve is the Peakhurst Heights Pindari Road Neighbourhood Centre.

 

·    West: To the west of the site are low density dwelling houses that front Karwarra Place, which is a cul-de-sac.  The rear boundaries of Nos. 4 and 5 Karwarra Place border the rear boundary of the subject site.

 

17.    It should be noted that there are no heritage items on or within the vicinity of the site.

 

Figure 5: Adjoining low density residential uses along Pindari Road

 

Figure 6: Adjacent shop top housing development in the

Peakhurst Height Pindari Road Neighbourhood Centre

 

EXISTING PLANNING CONTROLS

 

18.    The Hurstville LEP 2012 applies to the site and the following provisions are relevant to the Planning Proposal:

 

Zoning

19.    The site is zoned SP2 Infrastructure (Church and Community Purpose). The Learning Links component of the site is defined as a community facility under the HLEP 2012 and is therefore a permissible use in the SP2 zone. However, the centre-based child care facility, although previously approved, is prohibited under the current SP2 zone of the HLEP 2012. The child care centre was approved by the former Municipality of Hurstville in 1968

 

20.    The current SP2 zone under the HLEP 2012 restricts redevelopment of sites for alternative uses by prohibiting all development types except for “roads” and “for the purposes shown on the Land Zoning Map”.

 

21.    The SP2 Infrastructure zone under the HLEP 2012 is considered overly restrictive to allow the range of uses that are existing on the site and is out of date as the site has not been used as a public of public worship for over 25 years.

 

22.    The adjoining land to the south is zoned RE1 Public Recreation and B1 Neighbourhood Centre. Peakhurst South Public School on the opposite side of Pindari Road is zoned SP2 Infrastructure (Educational Establishment).

 

23.    An assessment was undertaken as to the most appropriate future zoning of the site, consistent with the surrounding zoning. The intention of Learning Links is to formalise the existing uses on the site and to allow future expansion of the community facility to permit offices ancillary to the existing uses, health consulting rooms.

 

24.    With respect to the adjoining R2 – Low Density Residential Zone, the objective of the zone is to provide for the housing needs of the community as well as to encourage development of sites for a range of housing types. Community facilities, health consulting rooms and centre based child care facilities would be permissible in the R2 – Low Density Residential zone. The additional land uses sought by the proponent - office premises; restaurant or café – would need to be included in Schedule 1 to the Hurstville LEP 2012.

 

25.    This approach would allow the primary use of the site as a community facility being maintained. The proposed zoning – now R2 and maximum FSR (1:1) and height limits (9m) are considered appropriate in the context of the adjoining low density residential development. It should be noted that the adjoining low density residential zone and the adjoining B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone both set height limits of 9m.

 

Development Standards

26.    Height of Buildings: the site has no nominated maximum building height. The adjoining and surrounding land has a maximum building height of 9m.

 

27.    Floor Space Ratio: the site has no nominated maximum Floor Space Ratio.

 

28.    The surrounding and adjoining low density residential housing has a maximum FSR of 0.6:1. Land to the south in the B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone has a maximum FSR of 1.5:1.

 

THE PLANNING PROPOSAL

29.    The Planning Proposal requests the following amendments to the HLEP 2012 in relation to the site:

a.   Amend Land Zoning Map – Sheet LZN_002 to rezone site from SP2 Infrastructure (Church and Community Purpose) to R2 Low Density Residential.

b.   Amend the Height of Buildings Map - Sheet HOB_002 to include a maximum height limit of 9m.

c.   Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map – Sheet FSR_002 to include a maximum FSR of 1:1.

d.   Amend Schedule 1 – Additional permitted Uses to include the following:

Use of certain land at 12 and 14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst

(1)  This clause applies to land at 12 and 14 Pindari Road Peakhurst being Lot 58 and Lot 59 DP.206906.

(2)  Development for the purpose of an office premises; restaurant or café is permitted with development consent.

 

30.    The proposed changes to the LEP maps are outlined below (Figures 7 to 9):

Figure 7: Proposed R2 Low Density Residential Zone

 

Figure 8: Proposed Building Height Map to 9m

 

Figure 9: Proposed FSR Map of 1:1

 

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

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

 

32.    Section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 outlines that a planning proposal must explain the intended effect and the justification for making the proposed instrument and must include the following components:

a.   A statement of the objectives and intended outcomes of the proposed instrument (Part 1).

b.   An explanation of the provisions that are to be included in the proposed instrument (Part 2).

c.   The justification for those objectives, outcomes and the process for their implementation (Part 3).

d.   Maps, where relevant, to identify the intent of the planning proposal and the area to which it applies (Part 4).

e.   Details of the community consultation that is to be undertaken on the planning proposal (Part 5).

 

33.    The information below addresses the requirements for Planning Proposals.

 

Objectives and Intended Outcomes

34.    The objective of the Planning Proposal is to amend the Hurstville LEP 2012 by:

a.   Changing the land use zoning from SP2 Infrastructure (Church and Community Purpose) to R2 Low Density Residential.

b.   Providing a height of building control of 9m (currently there is no maximum height).

c.   Providing a Floor Space Ratio control of 1:1 (currently there is no maximum FSR).

d.   Amending Schedule 1 – Additional Permitted Uses to include office premises; restaurant or café.

 

35.    The intended outcomes of the Planning Proposal are to:

a.   Ensure the existing and approved use of the land is a permissible form of development in the zone.

b.   Ensure principal building envelope controls (height and FSR) are legislated to allow for any future redevelopment of the site.

c.   Provide certainty in the community in relation to any future redevelopment of the site.

 

Explanation of Provisions

36.    The proposed intended outcomes will be achieved by amending the Hurstville LEP 2012 as follows:

a.   Amend the Land Zoning Map to rezone site from SP2 Infrastructure (Church and Community Purpose) to R2 Low Density Residential.

b.   Amend the Height of Buildings Map to include a maximum height limit of 9m.

c.   Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map to include a maximum FSR of 1:1.

d.   Amend Schedule 1 – Additional Permitted Uses to include office premises; restaurant or café as being permitted with consent on the site

 

37.    It is noted that currently under the HLEP 2012 there are no maximum height or FSR controls for the site due to its SP2 Infrastructure zoning.

 

38.    The Planning Proposal seeks to adopt the standard controls that apply to the development of R2 Low Density Residential zoned land from the perspective of permissible uses and maximum building heights. This is considered appropriate given the surrounding context and the existing usage of the site as a community facility and centre-based child care facility.

 

39.    The maximum FSR surrounding the site is 0.6:1. The Planning Proposal seeks an FSR of 1:1.

 

40.    The Planning Proposal impacts the relevant zoning map, height of buildings map and FSR map. The Planning Proposal also impacts Schedule 1 to the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012.

 

Strategic Planning Context

41.    The revised draft South District Plan (October 2017) and draft Greater Sydney Region Plan A Metropolis of Three Cities are on public exhibition until mid-December 2017 and apply to the Georges River Council area.

 

42.    Consideration of the Planning Proposal request in relation to the current plans and strategies (A Plan for Growing Sydney (Metropolitan Strategy), draft plans, draft Greater Sydney Region Plan A Metropolis of Three Cities, draft revised South District Plan, Hurstville Community Strategic Plan 2025 and Draft Employment Lands Study is provided below.

 

A Plan for Growing Sydney (Metropolitan Strategy)

43.    The Planning Proposal is consistent with the aims of A Plan for Growing Sydney which was adopted in December 2014. It achieves the following relevant Goals and Directions:

a.   Goal 1: A competitive economy with world-class services and transport

Direction 1.10: Plan for education and health services to meet Sydney’s growing needs.

The Planning Proposal will contribute towards achieving this Direction by retaining employment land that is currently used as a child care centre and community facility that helps support children with learning difficulties and disabilities. The location of the site, opposite Peakhurst South Public School, benefits the community and future residents.

 

b.   Goal 3:           Sydney’s great places to live

Direction 3.1: Revitalise existing suburbs

The Planning Proposal will contribute towards achieving this Direction by allowing permissible uses that revitalise the local community and contribute to an attractive suburb. The proposal ensures the site be used for employment land providing business activity for the area and meeting the needs of a growing population.

 

Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan – A metropolis of three cities

44.    The draft Greater Sydney Region Plan has ten directions:

·    A city supported by infrastructure

·    A collaborative city

·    A city for people

·    Housing the city

·    A city of great places

·    A well connected city

·    Jobs and skills for the city

·    A city in its landscape

·    An efficient city

·    A resilient city

 

45.    The Planning Proposal is not inconsistent with the ten provisions of the draft Plan.

 

Draft South District Plan

46.    In relation to the revised draft South District Plan (October 2017) which proposes a 20 year vision for the South District, the Planning Proposal is consistent with the following planning priorities:

·    Planning Priority S1 Planning for a city supported by infrastructure

·    Planning Priority S2 Working through collaboration

·    Planning Priority S3 Providing services and social infrastructure to meet people’s changing needs

·    Planning Priority S4 Fostering healthy, creative, culturally rich and socially connected communities

·    Planning Priority S5 Providing housing supply, choice and affordability, with access to jobs and services

·    Planning Priority S6 Creating and renewing great places and local centres, and respecting the District’s heritage

·    Planning Priority S7 Growing and investing in the ANSTO research and innovation precinct

·    Planning Priority S8 Growing and investing in health and education precincts, and Bankstown Airport trade gateway as economic catalysts for the District

·    Planning Priority S9 Growing investment, business opportunities and jobs in strategic centres

·    Planning Priority S10 Protecting and managing industrial and urban services land

·    Planning Priority S11 Supporting growth of targeted industry sectors

·    Planning Priority S12 Delivering integrated land use and transport planning and a 30-minute city

·    Planning Priority S13 Protecting and improving the health and enjoyment of the District’s waterways

·    Planning Priority S14 Protecting and enhancing bushland, biodiversity and scenic and cultural landscapes and better managing rural areas

·    Planning Priority S15 Increasing urban tree canopy cover and delivering Green Grid connections

·    Planning Priority S16 Delivering high quality open space

·    Planning Priority S17 Reducing carbon emissions and managing energy, water and waste efficiently

·    Planning Priority S18 Adapting to the impacts of urban and natural hazards and climate change

 

47.    The Planning Proposal to rezone the site to R2 Low Density Residential addresses a number of planning priorities in the Plan but specifically in relation to: S3 Providing services and social infrastructure to meet people’s changing needs; S4 Fostering healthy, creative, culturally rich and socially connected communities; S6 Creating and renewing great places and local centres, and respecting the District’s heritage; and S8 Growing and investing in health and education precincts, and Bankstown Airport trade gateway as economic catalysts for the District.

 

48.    The proposal protects the employment land of the Learning Links site and the provision of existing children’s educational support services in the local community.

 

49.    The proposed rezoning provides opportunities for new ancillary uses to cluster around existing health and education facilities. The site’s immediate adjacency and accessibility to Peakhurst South Public School addresses priorities of the Plan in relation to planning for connected and stronger economic and employment centres where proximity of health and educations assets creates significant opportunity to drive economic activity and a sustainable and liveable city.

 

Hurstville Community Strategic Plan 2025

50.    The former Hurstville City Council endorsed the Hurstville Community Strategic Plan 2025 on 3 June 2015. It is the overarching strategy for Council’s objectives and operations. The Planning Proposal is not inconsistent with the principles of the Plan.

 

Draft Employment Lands Study

51.    A report on the draft Georges River Employment Lands Study was considered by Council at its meeting on 3 April 2017 where Council resolved to place the draft Study on public exhibition.

 

52.    The area to the south of the subject site is zoned B1 – Neighbourhood Centre zone and is known as the Peakhurst Heights – Pindari Road Precinct.

 

53.    The draft Study considers Peakhurst Heights – Pindari Road Precinct as a centre that has opportunity to accommodate growth. The Precinct is zoned B1 Neighbourhood Centre. Key land uses in the zone are neighbourhood shops and shop top housing such as hairdressing, yoga studio, and podiatry.

 

54.    Surrounding land uses are predominantly low density residential. The Learning Links site and Peakhurst South Public School are located on Pindari Road and adjoin the Precinct.

 

55.    The current development standards within the Precinct are a maximum FSR of 1.5:1 and building height limit of 9m. The draft Study makes the following recommendations in respect to the Peakhurst Heights – Pindari Road Precinct:

a.   Retain the existing B1 – Neighbourhood Centre Zone.

b.   Increase the maximum permitted height of buildings from 9m to 12m so as to allow realisation of the maximum FSR of 1.5:1.

c.   Review land uses in the B1 – Neighbourhood Centre zone to allow additional land uses.

 

56.    The draft Study identifies the opportunity across all B1 Neighbourhood Centres as an increase of permitted maximum height of building. The current height limits the potential for the permitted FSR of 1.5:1 to be realised.

 

57.    The subject site is not included in the Peakhurst Heights – Pindari Road Precinct as it is not currently zoned B1 Neighbourhood Centre.

 

58.    The Learning Links facility is one of the largest employers in the Peakhurst Heights – Pindari Road Precinct. The site generates a significant amount of employment for the local area and wider community.

 

59.    It comprises approximately 22 full time staff, 47 part time staff, 122 causal staff and 1 volunteer. Submissions on behalf of the subject site were made during the public exhibition of the draft Employments Lands Study requesting consideration of inclusion into the Peakhurst Heights – Pindari Road Precinct.

 

60.    The site, despite currently being zoned SP2 Infrastructure plays a vital role in providing employment for the precinct. The Planning Proposal supports the viability of the Peakhurst Heights – Pindari Road Precinct. 

 

State and Regional Statutory Framework

61.    State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) deal with matters of State or regional environmental planning significance. A review of the prevailing list of SEPPs was conducted by the applicant at the time of lodgement (dated 8 June 2017) and no applicable SEPP was identified.

 

62.    On 1 September 2017, the State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017 was gazetted.

 

63.    The SEPP aims to facilitate the effective delivery of educational establishments and early education and care facilities across the State by:

(a)          improving regulatory certainty and efficiency through a consistent planning regime for educational establishments and early education and care facilities, and

(b)         simplifying and standardising planning approval pathways for educational establishments and early education and care facilities (including identifying certain development of minimal environmental impact as exempt development), and

(c)          establishing consistent State-wide assessment requirements and design considerations for educational establishments and early education and care facilities to improve the quality of infrastructure delivered and to minimise impacts on surrounding areas, and

(d)         allowing for the efficient development, redevelopment or use of surplus government-owned land (including providing for consultation with communities regarding educational establishments in their local area), and

(e)         providing for consultation with relevant public authorities about certain development during the assessment process or prior to development commencing, and

(f)           aligning the NSW planning framework with the National Quality Framework that regulates early education and care services, and

(g)         ensuring that proponents of new developments or modified premises meet the applicable requirements of the National Quality Framework for early education and care services, and of the corresponding regime for State regulated education and care services, as part of the planning approval and development process, and

(h)         encouraging proponents of new developments or modified premises and consent authorities to facilitate the joint and shared use of the facilities of educational establishments with the community through appropriate design.

 

64.    The SEPP also introduces a common assessment framework made up of the Child Care Planning Guideline and non-discretionary development standards. The Guideline contains key national requirements and planning and design guidance for child care facilities and will generally prevail over local development control plans.

 

65.    The Planning Proposal is considered to be consistent with the aims of the SEPP by legitimising the existing centre-based child care facility land use on the subject site and henceforth allowing future upgrades and/or expansion of the early education facility on site. This will ensure the essential services currently provided on the site are protected whilst promoting the employment growth and viability of the Peakhurst Heights Neighbourhood Centre.

 

S117 MINISTERIAL DIRECTIONS

66.    Ministerial Directions under Section 117 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 set out a range of matters to be considered when preparing an amendment to a Local Environmental Plan.

 

67.    The Planning Proposal is consistent with all relevant ministerial directions as assessed by the applicant in Table 1 below:

 

S117 Direction

Assessment

3.1 Residential Zones

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of this direction. The Planning proposal seeks to rezone the land from SP2 to R2. The R2 zone will allow a range of residential uses as well as uses that support the local community.

6.3 Site Specific Provisions

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of this direction. The site is proposed to be rezoned to an existing zone already applying in the environmental planning instrument that allows that land use without imposing any development standards or requirements in addition to those already contained in that zone.

 

The proposal also seeks to amend Schedule 1 to include the following additional uses for the site: office premises; restaurant or café.

7.1 Implementation of A Plan for Growing Sydney

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of A Plan For Growing Sydney, as assessed in report above.

 

 

EXISTING USE RIGHTS

68.    Under Division 10 Existing uses of Part 4 Development assessment of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, existing use is defined as the use of a building, work or land for which development consent was granted before the commencement of a provision of an environmental planning instrument having the effect of prohibiting the use.

 

69.    In accordance with the above definition, the existing development on the site is deemed to possess existing use rights in that the use of a ‘centre-based child care facility’ was approved prior to the commencement of the HLEP 2012. The use was approved as a ‘pre-school kindergarten’ under BA-758 in 1968 by the former Municipality of Hurstville. The former Hurstville City Council also approved ‘office space and after school accommodation’ in 1990 under development application DA 479/90.

 

70.    The Planning Proposal request to rezone the site from SP2 Infrastructure (Church and Community Purpose) to R2 Low Density Residential Zone will ensure the ‘centre-based child care centre facility’ is a permissible form of development in the zone. The existing child care centre benefits the community which is the intent of the existing special use zone ‘Church and Community Purpose’.

 

VOLUNTARY PLANNING AGREEMENT

71.    The Voluntary Planning Agreement (“VPA”) Policy was adopted on 1 August 2016 and sets out Council’s objectives in relation to the use of planning agreements. The Policy has been consistently applied to planning proposals and development applications alike since its adoption.

 

72.    Clause 5.3 of the Policy states that where either a Planning Proposal is proposed, or development consent is sought, which will result in an exceedance of development standards, resulting in an inherent increase in value of the land or development, the concept of land value capture may be used to assess the appropriate contribution.

 

73.    Although the proposal seeks a rezoning from SP2 to R2, which will result in a broader range of land uses being permitted on the site, the proposal does not seek development uplift given that there are currently no FSR or height controls under the SP2 Infrastructure zone and the proposal is requesting height and FSR controls that are consistent with the adjoining R2/B1 zones.

 

74.    The formula in Council’s VPA Policy for calculating land value capture, applies to existing residual value under the LEP and the proposed residual land value under the PP or DA. In this regard, it would be difficult to assess the uplift as there may not be any uplift due to the existing use rights on the land.

 

75.    As outlined above, the existing development is community facility registered as a not for profit organisation. The site is owned by Learning Links and operates as a community facility that services children with learning difficulties and disabilities such as speech pathology and occupational therapy. The site also consists of a community based pre-school that is owned and run by Learning Links.

 

76.    The Planning Proposal is seeking to validate the existing employment based land uses on the site and allowing for a broadening of land uses that would be consistent with the existing uses on the site by rezoning from SP2 to R2. The proposed height and FSR are consistent with the adjoining R2/B1 zones, being 9m and 1:1

 

77.    The proposal also provides a significant public benefit to the community by providing services for children with learning difficulties.

 

78.    For these reasons, Council has not applied the VPA Policy to the Planning Proposal.

 

Community Consultation

79.    Should the Planning Proposal be supported it will be forwarded to the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) requesting a Gateway Determination.

 

80.    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.

 

81.    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.

 

82.    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 (if required),

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

 

Conclusion

83.    The Planning Proposal request to rezone the site from SP2 Infrastructure (Church and Community Purpose) to R2 Low Density Residential Zone allows for the continuation of existing and approved community facility and centre-based child care facility uses.

 

84.    The proposed R2 zoning is considered an appropriate zone for the site. It allows for the continuation of the existing uses on site within a permissible zone and provides greater flexibility for redevelopment of the site for future upgrades and expansions. The primary use of the site as a community facility is being maintained. The proposed new zone ensures that future uses are compatible with existing surrounding uses.

 

85.    The proposed zoning and maximum FSR and height limits are considered appropriate.

 

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

 

Task

Anticipated Timeframe

Lodgement of Planning Proposal request

8 June 2017

Report to Georges River IHAP on Planning Proposal

December 2017 (

Report to Council on Planning Proposal

December 2017 this report)

Anticipated commencement date (date of Gateway determination)

March 2018

Anticipated timeframe for completion of any further technical information

April 2018

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

May 2018

Commencement and completion dates for community consultation period

June 2018

Dates for public hearing (if required)

N/A

Timeframe for consideration of submissions

July 2018

Reporting to Georges River IHAP on community consultation

August 2018

Reporting to Council on community consultation and finalisation

August 2018

Submission to the Department to finalise the LEP

September 2018

Anticipated date for notification.

September 2018

 

87.    It is noted that the project timeline will be assessed by the DPE and may be amended by the Gateway Determination.

 

NEXT STEPS

88.    If the Planning Proposal is endorsed by Council it will be forwarded to the delegate of the Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway determination in accordance with Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

89.    If Council resolves not to support the Planning Proposal, the Applicant has the opportunity to request a pre-Gateway Review by the Planning Panels under the delegation of the Greater Sydney Commission. An applicant has 40 days from the date of notification of Council’s decision to request a review.

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Report to IHAP held on 5 December 2017

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL243-17             Planning Proposal PP2017/0002 - 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights

[Appendix 1]          Report to IHAP held on 5 December 2017

 

 

Page 358

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL243-17             Planning Proposal PP2017/0002 - 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights

[Appendix 1]          Report to IHAP held on 5 December 2017

 

 

Page 425

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL243-17             Planning Proposal PP2017/0002 - 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights

[Appendix 1]          Report to IHAP held on 5 December 2017

 

 

Page 426

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 433

Item:                   CCL244-17        Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site) 

Author:              Senior Strategic Planner

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Environment and Planning

 Recommendation

(a)     That Council endorse the proposed amendments to DCP No. 2 – Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the “Bing Lee” site) for public exhibition.

(b)     That Council publicly exhibit the amendments to DCP No. 2 – Hurstville City Centre for the Bing Lee site in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

(c)     That Council endorse that the General Manager may make minor modifications to any numerical, typographical, interpretation and formatting errors, if required, in preparation for the public exhibition of the amendments to DCP No. 2.

(d)     That Council advise the NSW Department of Planning and Environment of its decision.

(e)     That a further report be submitted to Council following the public exhibition period.

 

Executive Summary

1.      This report was deferred at the Environment and Planning Committee Meeting on 11 December 2017 for Council consideration on 18 December 2017.

 

2.      On 4 December 2014, the former Hurstville City Council received a Planning Proposal (PP2014/0004) for Nos. 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road, Hurstville to amend the zone, height and floor space ratio of the subject properties. The Planning Proposal has subsequently been amended a number of times and Nos. 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville have been included within the subject site.

 

3.      At its meeting on 13 December 2016 (CCL127-16), Council endorsed that the Planning Proposal be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Environment for a Gateway Determination to amend the Hurstville LEP 2012 to rezone part of the site from B2 Local Centre and R3 Medium Density Residential to B4 Mixed Use, amend the height from 9m, 12m and 23m to 34.5m and 46.5m and amend the Floor Space Ratio for part of the site from 1:1 and 1.5:1 to 4:1. At this meeting Council also supported the preparation of an amendment to Hurstville Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2012 and Development Control Plan No. 2 – Hurstville City Centre to include part of the site within the boundaries of the Hurstville City Centre and include site specific provisions.

 

4.   This report outlines the amendments to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the “Bing Lee” site, see Figure 1) and recommends that Council endorse it for public exhibition. Following the public exhibition, the DCP amendments will be reported to the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (the “IHAP”) and Council.


 

 

Background of the Planning Proposal (PP2014/0004)

5.      In December 2014, the applicant, Tony Polvere, submitted a Planning Proposal for Nos. 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road, Hurstville to:

·    Rezone part of the site from B2 Local Centre to B4 Mixed Use;

·    Increase the height from 9m and 23m to 42m and 60m; and

·    Increase the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) from 1.5:1 and 4:1 to 6.6:1.

 

6.      Since the lodgement of the Planning Proposal in December 2014, a total of five (5) revised Planning Proposals have been received and reported to Council with variations to the requested height, FSR, quantum of retail/commercial and number of residential apartments.

 

7.      The applicant’s latest revised Planning Proposal (Revision No. 6) was lodged on 11 March 2016 and included Nos. 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville. Revision No. 6 of the Planning Proposal requested to amend the Hurstville LEP 2012 (HLEP 2012) to:

a.   Rezone parts of the site from B2 Local Centre and R3 Medium Density Residential to B4 Mixed Use (part of the site is already zoned B4 Mixed Use);

b.   Increase the maximum height of the buildings for the site to a range between 34.5m and 46.5m (currently 9m, 12m and 23m); and

c.   Increase the maximum the floor space ratio control for the site to 4:1 (currently 1:1, 1.5:1 and 4:1).

 

Figure1:  Land Zoning Map Extract (Source: HLEP 2012)


 

 

8.      At its meeting on 13 December 2016 (CCL127-16), Council considered the Planning Proposal and resolved:

 

(a) That Council endorse the forwarding of the Planning Proposal to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment to request a Gateway Approval for an amendment to the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 in relation to Nos. 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and Nos 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville to:

§ Amend the Land Zoning Map (LZM ) to rezone Nos 108 and 112 Forest Road Hurstville from B2 - Local Centre Zone to B4 – Mixed Use Zone;

 

§ Amend the Land Zoning Map (LZM) to rezone Nos 1 - 3 Wright Street, Hurstville from R3 - Medium Density Residential Zone to B4 - Mixed Use Zone;

 

§ Amend the Height of Buildings map (HOB) to increase the height of buildings for Nos. 108 and 112 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville to 34.5m;

 

§ Amend the Height of Buildings map (HOB) to increase the height of buildings for No. 124 Forest Road, Hurstville to 46.5m;

 

§ Amend the Floor Space Ratio map (FSR) to increase the maximum floor space ratio for Nos. 108 and 112 Forest Road and Nos. 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville to 4:1;

 

§ Amend the Lot Size Map (Sheet LSZ_008) to remove Nos. 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville from its application, consistent with the B4 - Mixed Use zone; and

 

§ Amend Clause 4.4A of HLEP 2012 to include a provision relating to the subject site stating that development consent must not be granted for development unless the non –residential floor space is at least 0.5:1.

 

(b) That Council also note the IHAP resolution to support the following:

(i)         The preparation of an amendment to the Hurstville Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2012 to include 108 Forest Road, 112 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street in the boundaries of the Hurstville City Centre to reflect the proposed B4 Mixed Use zoning of the land; and

(ii)        The preparation of an amendment to the Hurstville Development Control Plan No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre (Amendment No. 6) to include the subject site within the boundary of the Hurstville City Centre and site specific provisions including (but not limited to), setbacks to the adjoining residential development, street activation provisions and vehicular access points, building massing and form as well as provisions to upgrades to public domain, provide deep soil landscaped areas and through site connections and linkages.

 

9.      In accordance with Council’s resolution, the Planning Proposal was forwarded to the Department of Planning and Environment on 16 December 2016 and Council received a Gateway Determination to exhibit the Planning Proposal on 24 February 2017.

 

10.    The Planning Proposal was exhibited from 17 May to 16 June 2017 and a total of 13 submissions were received. The submissions included two petitions signed by 60 and 30 signatories respectively and mainly raised issues in relation to amenity (including privacy, overshadowing and view loss), traffic and parking, and noise. The Planning Proposal will be reported to the IHAP and Council in early 2018.

 

Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 – Hurstville City Centre

11.    In accordance with Council’s resolution of 13 December 2016 (CCL127-16), Amendment No. 8 to DCP No.2 – Hurstville City Centre has been prepared for the Bing Lee site (attached in Appendix A). This amendment comprises a new section; Section 8 – Controls for Specific Sites and Localities that includes site specific controls for the Bing Lee site in accordance with the Planning Proposal.

 

12.    As a result of extending the Hurstville City Centre to include the Bing Lee site, a number of consequential changes have been made to various sections of DCP No. 2; as outlined below:

 

Section

Proposed Amendments

1 Introduction

Minor changes to wording and formatting

2 Application Process

Minor changes to wording and formatting

3 Strategic Context

Formatting changes only

4 City Centre Precincts

 

Map updates in various precincts and formatting

5 Controls for Residential, Commercial and Mixed Use Development

Map updates and formatting

 

6 Site Planning Considerations

Minor changes to wording and formatting

7 Controls for Other Development Types

Minor changes to wording and formatting

 

8 Controls for Specific Sites and Localities

·    Section 8.1 - 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the “Bing Lee” site)

New section inserted that will include all future site specific DCPs

Appendix 1

 

Update to the amendments table, maps and formatting

Appendix 2

Minor changes to wording and formatting

 

 

13.    The key elements addressed in Section 8.1 of the DCP for the Bing Lee site include:

·    Design Excellence - Promote design excellence through the creation of a sustainable and liveable environment for people through use of expert panels and active engagement between Council and applicants; that aligns with the vision for the Hurstville City Centre.

 

·    Land Dedication – Include details of the land to be dedicated to Council for road widening to address the traffic impacts of the future development of the site.

 

·    Built Form and Setbacks – Provide a vibrant mixed use development that takes advantage of the site’s location

 

·    Façade Treatment and Street Corners – Articulate the building facades and emphasise street corners

 

·    Open Space and Landscaping - Ensure that development contributes to the amenity and quality of streets and the public domain.

 

·    Pedestrian Experience – Promote a built form that provides a comfortable pedestrian environment.

 

·    Transition / Interface - Provide adequate transition between the new development and the adjoining residential development on Wright and Hudson Streets.

 

·    Active Street Frontages – Ground floor frontages along Hudson Street, Forest Road and Wright Street to be active and pedestrian oriented (see Note below).

 

Notes:

1.   The Planning Proposal will be amended to extend the Active Street Frontage along Nos. 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville; consistent with the provision of commercial uses on the ground floor.

2.   The DCP amendments will ensure that the development on the subject site meet the requirements of the State Environmental Planning Policy No.65 Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development (SEPP 65) and the Apartment Design Guide.

 

Draft Hurstville City Centre Urban Design Strategy

14.    In December 2016, Council engaged SJB Architects to prepare a draft Hurstville City Centre Urban Design Strategy (the “draft HCCUDS”) to review and update the existing urban design principles for the Hurstville City Centre, review the existing development standards (including maximum building height and maximum FSR) and prepare block by block urban design controls.

 

15.    Council publicly exhibited the draft HCCUDS from 27 September to 10 November 2017 and the draft HCCUDS will be reported to Council for its endorsement and finalisation.

 

Draft Voluntary Planning Agreement

16.    In relation to the Planning Proposal, Council was provided with an Offer to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) to:

1.   Dedicate land to Council for the purpose of widening Forest Road to facilitate traffic movement (within 3 months of the issue of the first construction certificate for the first DA or within 5 years of the gazettal of the LEP amendment); and

 

2.   Provide a monetary contribution to Council of $3,775,750 for the purpose of public facilities including public infrastructure, amenities and services within the Hurstville City Centre (within 28 days of gazettal of the LEP amendment).

 

The VPA was reported to Council at its meeting on 13 December 2016 (CCL128-16 and CON029-16). Council accepted the terms of the Offer and drafted a VPA in accordance with the VPA Offer and signed Heads of Agreement.

 

17.    The draft VPA is currently on public exhibition from 15 November to 15 December 2017.

 

18.    The contributions and dedications are in addition to the Section 94 contributions levied on the future development. An amendment to the Hurstville Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2012 to include 108 Forest Road, 112 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street within the boundaries of the Hurstville City Centre to reflect the proposed B4 Mixed Use zoning of the land was prepared. This amendment was adopted by Council on 1 May and became effective on 19 July 2017.

 

19.    It is anticipated that following public notification, should no submissions be received objecting to the VPA, the VPA will be entered into on behalf of Council by signature of the General Manager. Once entered into, the VPA will be registered on the title of the land to which it relates.

 

Next Steps

20.    The next steps in finalising Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 are tabulated below:

 

Council endorses Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 for public exhibition (this report)

18 December 2017

Exhibit Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 (extended exhibition due to holiday period)

Mid-January to end February 2018

Seek an extension to the Gateway Determination - date for finalising the LEP is 3 March 2018

February 2018

IHAP Report on submissions received on the Planning Proposal

Post February 2018

Council Report on submissions received on the Planning Proposal and Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 seeking endorsement for their adoption

Post February 2018

Planning Proposal sent to the Department for finalisation

Post Council consideration

DCP No. 2 – Hurstville City Centre (Amendment No. 8) comes into effect

When the Planning Proposal gets gazetted and a notice is published in the newspaper.

 

 

Financial Implications

21.    No budget impact for this report.

 

Community Engagement

22.    Community engagement will be conducted with regard to Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 – Hurstville City Centre for the Bing Lee site in January-February 2018 as detailed in this report.


 

 

File Reference

 

17/2532

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Table of Contents

Attachment View2

Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 1 Introduction

Attachment View3

Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 2 Application Process

Attachment View4

Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 3 Strategic Context

Attachment View5

Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 4 City Centre Precincts

Attachment View6

Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 5 Controls for Residential, Commercial and Mixed Use

Attachment View7

Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 6 Site Planning Considerations

Attachment View8

Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 7 Controls for Other Development Types

Attachment View9

Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 8.1 Bing Lee Site

Attachment View10

Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Appendix 1

Attachment View11

Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Appendix 2 Council Codes and Policies

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 1]          Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Table of Contents

 

 

Page 440

 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 2]          Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 1 Introduction

 

 

Page 442

 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 3]          Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 2 Application Process

 

 

Page 446

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 4]          Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 3 Strategic Context

 

 

Page 474

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 5]          Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 4 City Centre Precincts

 

 

Page 482

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 6]          Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 5 Controls for Residential, Commercial and Mixed Use

 

 

Page 504

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 7]          Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 6 Site Planning Considerations

 

 

Page 575

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 8]          Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 7 Controls for Other Development Types

 

 

Page 606

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 9]          Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Section 8.1 Bing Lee Site

 

 

Page 620

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 10]        Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Appendix 1

 

 

Page 634

 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 10]        Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Appendix 1

 

 

Page 639

 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 10]        Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Appendix 1

 

 

Page 644

 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL244-17             Amendment No. 8 to DCP No. 2 - Hurstville City Centre for 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street, Hurstville (the "Bing Lee" site)

[Appendix 11]        Draft DCP No. 2 - Amendment No. 8 - Appendix 2 Council Codes and Policies

 

 

Page 648

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 665

8.      Finance and Governance

Item:                   CCL245-17        Fraud and Corruption Control Policy and Plan 

Author:              Manager Governance and Risk

Directorate:      Office of the Chief Operating Officer

Matter Type:     Finance and Governance

 Recommendation

(a)     That the Fraud and Corruption Control Policy as attached to the report be adopted.

(b)     That the Fraud and Corruption Control Plan as attached to the report be received and         noted.

 

Executive Summary

1.      The Fraud and Corruption Prevention Policy, which was previously adopted by Council in July 2017 requires renaming to ensure consistency with the newly developed Fraud and Corruption Control Plan.

2.      The Fraud and Corruption Control Plan is a key document supporting Council’s Fraud and Corruption Control Policy, and sits within the Code of Conduct Framework. The Plan draws together all prevention, detection and response initiatives adopted by Council to document the strategies and controls to mitigate the risk of fraud and corruption.

 

Background

3.   At the Council meeting of 3 July 2017 Council resolved to:

(a)    Adopt the Georges River Council Fraud and Corruption Prevention Policy.

(b)    Note that a draft Fraud and Corruption Prevention Plan will be developed and submitted    to the Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee in October 2017, and subsequently submitted to a future Council meeting for adoption.     

Fraud and Corruption Control Plan

4.   The Fraud and Corruption Control Plan represents the commitment of Council Officials to the control of fraud and corruption.  Contractors, consultants, volunteers, members of the public and external parties engaged in doing business with Council, are encouraged to support Council’s commitment to preventing and addressing fraudulent or corrupt behaviour by reporting to the appropriate authority.

5.   In developing the Fraud and Corruption Control Plan close reference was made to the NSW Auditor-General’s Better Practice Guide Fraud Control Improvement Kit – February 2015 and Standards Australia AS 8001 – 2008 Fraud and Corruption Control.

6.   The draft Plan was circulated to the Audit Risk and Improvement Committee at the October meeting for feedback and in principle endorsement. It was resolved at this meeting:

“That the ARIC endorses the attached, draft Fraud and Corruption Control Plan and will respond by Friday, 10 November by email to the Internal Auditor, with any feedback and the Committee’s in-principle endorsement of the Enterprise Risk Management Strategy progress report, to be circulated on the Portal.”

Feedback was incorporated in relation to the Definitions.

 

7.   The draft Plan was submitted to ICAC for comment and minor changes were suggested and made to the draft Plan.

 

Fraud and Corruption Control Policy

8.   The Fraud and Corruption Prevention Policy was adopted by Council in July 2017. It is now suggested that the following minor changes be made to the Policy.

a)   the title of the policy be changed to reflect ‘Control’ not ‘Prevention’.  It is therefore suggested that the title of the existing policy be changed from the Fraud and Corruption Prevention Policy, to the Fraud and Corruption Control Policy

b)   the definition of ‘Council Official’ be expanded to include Mayor, Councillors, members of Council Committees, delegates of Council, and members of staff. Consistent with Council’s Code of Conduct.

 

Financial Implications

9.      N/A

 

File Reference

D17/220425, D17/91596

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Draft Fraud and Corruption Control Plan

Attachment View2

Pol-012.02 - Draft Fraud and Corruption Control Policy

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL245-17             Fraud and Corruption Control Policy and Plan

[Appendix 1]          Draft Fraud and Corruption Control Plan

 

 

Page 667

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL245-17             Fraud and Corruption Control Policy and Plan

[Appendix 1]          Draft Fraud and Corruption Control Plan

 

 

Page 683

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL245-17             Fraud and Corruption Control Policy and Plan

[Appendix 1]          Draft Fraud and Corruption Control Plan

 

 

Page 699

 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL245-17             Fraud and Corruption Control Policy and Plan

[Appendix 2]          Pol-012.02 - Draft Fraud and Corruption Control Policy

 

 

Page 705

 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 711

Item:                   CCL246-17        Quarterly Budget Review Statement to 30 September 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 September 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 2017-18 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 to this report (to be circulated under separate cover prior to meeting) provide a comprehensive high level review of Council’s financial position at 30 September 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 30 September 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 30 September 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 30 September 2017.

 

9.      The publication of the Quarterly Budget Review is completed in December due to the primary focus being shifted to the Annual Financial Reporting & Audit process in order to ensure that Council meet the deadlines provided by the Office of Local Government. Council was able to achieve an unqualified audit report despite all the challenges posed by the recent NSW amalgamations.

 

Financial Implications

10.    If the proposed budget is adopted, Council has an increase in Operating Income of $35,199 and also an increase in Operating Expenditure of $1,401,136.

 

 

Attachment 1:    Quarterly Budget Review Statements to be circulated under separate cover                              prior to meeting.

 

 

   


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 713

Assets and Infrastructure

Nil

Community and Culture

Item:                   CCL247-17        Georges River Council Australia Day Awards 2018 

Author:              Manager Communications, Customer Service and Events

Directorate:      Community and Culture

Matter Type:     Community and Culture

 Recommendation

(a)     That Council adopts the recommendations made by the judging panel for the 2018 Georges River Council Australia Day Awards which will be provided confidentially under separate cover.

(b)     That all nominees and their families are invited to the Australia Day Awards civic reception on Monday 22 January 2018 at Georges River Council Civic Centre where the announcement of the winners will take place.

(c)     That the 2018 Citizen of the Year, Young Citizen of the Year and Volunteer of the Year are invited as special guests and publicly announced during the official proceedings at the Georges River Council Australia Day Festival on 26 January 2018 at Carss Bush Park.

(d)     That Council expands the Australia Day Awards in 2019 to include a fourth award category of “Sportsperson of the Year”, in recognition of the sporting history of the Georges River area and provide the opportunity for the community to recognise contributors in this field.

 

Executive Summary

1.      Each year Georges River Council launches the Australia Day Awards to recognise and honour individuals who have contributed extensively to the Georges River community, have made a significant positive contribution to our community and inspired others through their endeavours or achievements.

2.      Council received 10 nominations from the community.

3.      A judging panel consisting of the Mayor, General Manager and outgoing Georges River Council Citizen of the Year 2017, Ms Natalia Esdaile-Watts, met to assess the applications and recommend winners across the three categories.

4.      The judging panel’s recommendations for the 2018 Georges River Council Australia Day Awards for the following three categories will be provided confidentially under separate cover:

a.   2018 Citizen of the Year,

b.   2018 Young Citizen of the Year, and

c.   2018 Volunteer of the Year.

 

Background

5.      Nominations for the 2018 Georges River Council Australia Day Awards were called from the community via Council’s hard copy and electronic communication channels between 18 October and 24 November 2017.

6.      Council received 10 nominations across the three categories. Details of each nomination are provided in Attachment 1 – Australia Day Awards 2018 Judging Panel Information Pack.

7.      The Australia Day Awards judging panel met on 12 December 2017 to assess each nomination and recommend the winner of each category. The panel’s recommendations for the 2018 Georges River Council Australia Day Awards are to be provided to the Council confidentially under separate cover.

8.      The Australia Day Awards 2018 winners will be announced at a civic reception on Monday 22 January 2018 and all nominees and their families will be invited to attend. The winners will also be invited to attend the Australia Day Festival at Carss Bush Park on 26 January 2018 as part of the official proceedings of the event.

9.      This report also recommends that Council expands the Australia Day Awards in 2019 to include a fourth award category of “Sportsperson of the Year”, in recognition of the sporting history of the Georges River area and provide the opportunity for the community to recognise contributors in this field.

Financial Implications

10.    Within budget allocation.

Community Engagement

11.     Community engagement was conducted including Media Releases, Council’s website, Council’s Social Media, emails to community groups and St George Leader advertisement to calls for nominations between 18 October and 24 November 2017.

 

File Reference

D17/220654

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment View1

Georges River Council's Australia Day Awards 2018 Judging Information Pack FINAL version

Attachment View2

Mayoral recommendation - Australia Day Awards  (Confidential)

 


Georges River Council - Ordinary Meeting - Monday, 18 December 2017

CCL247-17             Georges River Council Australia Day Awards 2018

[Appendix 1]          Georges River Council's Australia Day Awards 2018 Judging Information Pack FINAL version

 

 

Page 715

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 731

Precis of Correspondence

Nil

Notices of Motion

Item:          NM025-17          Preparation of a Night Time Economy Study for Georges River

Councillor:       Councillor Liu 

 

MOTION:

 

(a) That Council commence the preparation of a Night Time Economy Study for the Georges River local government area in 2018 to help inform Council’s long term vision for the city.

(b) That the Study identify and measure the night time activities of the City’s night time economy and identify potential economic or other actions for new plans, policy directions or investments by Council.

(c)  That the General Manager prepare a report detailing the proposed program for preparation of the Study including the timeframe, research, consultation program, and costs for preparation of the Study.

(d) That funding for the commencement of the preparation of the Night Time Economy Study be considered as part of the 2018/2019 budget process.

 

 

File Reference

D17/205217

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 732

Item:          NM026-17          Preparation of a New Foreshore Strategy for Georges River

Councillor:       Councillor Katris 

 

MOTION:

 

(a) That Council commence the preparation of a new Foreshore Strategy for the Georges River local government area in 2018.

 

(b) That the Foreshore Strategy address, amongst other things:

 

(i)         the identification of strategic links to regional open space and foreshore lands in adjoining local government areas;

(ii)        opportunities to improve public access to all foreshore areas in the City, including private and publicly owned lands;

(iii)       potential incentives (such as development, financial, property or otherwise) that could be introduced to encourage private properties to allow public access across their foreshore frontages;

(iv)       opportunities to connect strategically important missing links between foreshore destinations in the City such as parks, swimming pools and baths and marinas.

 

(c)  That the General Manager prepare a report detailing the proposed program for preparation of the Foreshore Strategy including the timeframe, background research, community consultation program, options to pursue grant funding and costs for preparation of the Strategy.

 

(d) That funding for the commencement of the preparation of the Foreshore Strategy be considered as part of the 2018/2019 budget process.

 

 

 

File Reference

D17/228126

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 733

Item:          NM027-17          Energy Conservation and Sustainability Policy for Georges River

Councillor:       Councillor Katris 

 

MOTION:

 

(a)  That the General Manager prepare a report to Council on the development of an Energy Conservation and Sustainability Policy within the Local Government Area in early 2018.

 

(b)  That the report include options for promoting the creation of environmentally resilient buildings, options for energy efficient upgrades to new and existing multi-storey buildings and sustainable design provisions that could be included within future Development Control Plans for the City.

 

(c)   That the report identify potential sources of funding and timeframes for the development and implementation of the Policy during 2018.

 

 

 

File Reference

D17/228128

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 734

Item:          NM028-17 Construction of a Regional Athletics Facility in Georges River

Councillor:       Councillor Hindi 

 

MOTION:

(a) That Council re-commence the process initiated by the former Hurstville Council to locate a suitable site within the Georges River local government area for the construction of a regional athletics facility.

 

(b) That Council write to the State Member for Oatley, Mr Mark Coure, the State Member for Rockdale, Mr Steve Kamper MP and the State Member for Kogarah, Mr Chris Minns MP requesting their support and a funding contribution towards the construction of a regional athletics facility in the Georges River local government area.

 

(c)  That Council write to the Federal Member for Banks, Mr David Coleman MP thanking him for obtaining $500,000 grant funding towards the construction of a regional athletics facility in Georges River and advise that Council is continuing to investigate options for a suitable site in the LGA.

 

(d) That the site investigation and selection process have regard to current Council strategic initiatives that are under development including the Sport and Recreation Strategy, the Aquatic Facilities Strategy and the Synthetic Surfaces Action Plan.

 

 

File Reference

D17/219670

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 735

Item:          NM029-17          Revitalisation of Mortdale Town Centre - Upgrade of Public Domain

Councillor:       Councillor Hindi 

 

MOTION:

(a) That Council commence the planning and design work for the upgrade of the Mortdale Town Centre public domain with a view to commencing works in the 2018/19 financial year.

(b) That Council commence consultation with local business owners to ascertain their views on priorities for upgrades, including timing and staging of works, design elements and pedestrian safety and accessibility.

(c)  That the St George Chamber of Commerce, the Local Traffic Committee and the NSW Police Local Area Command be consulted during the preparation of designs to determine their requirements for any upgrade.

(d) That appropriate funding for the upgrade of the Mortdale Town Centre public domain be allocated during the preparation of the 2018/19 budget.

 

 

File Reference

D17/219673

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 736

Item:          NM030-17          Georges River Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) -              Operational Procedures

Councillor:       Councillor Landsberry 

 

MOTION:

 

a)      That the Mayor write to the Minister for Planning, the Hon Anthony Roberts MP and the Secretary of the NSW Department of Planning and Environment, Ms Carolyn McNally to request that any Guidelines issued for the operation of IHAPs in NSW provide for the following:

(i)      The commencement time for IHAP meetings to be no earlier than 6pm to enable residents and other community members to attend outside of usual business hours;

(ii)     That Panel deliberations occur in open session;

(iii)    That decisions of the Panel be published on the same day as the meeting;

(iv)    That IHAP meetings are scheduled on a regular basis to avoid any unnecessary delays to application determination times;

(b)     That the appointment of the Georges River IHAP Chairperson be undertaken as soon as possible to enable Council to establish the final operational procedures for the Panel in collaboration with the Chairperson, prior to the commencement of the new Panel in March 2018.

 

 

Background

<Enter text>

 

File Reference

< Enter Records Reference Number Here >

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 737

Item:          NM031-17          NSW Container Deposit Scheme (Return and Earn)

Councillor:       Councillor Tegg 

 

MOTION:

(a)  That the General Manager provide a report to Council in early 2018 which identifies ways in which Council can assist the community to participate in the NSW government’s ‘Return and Earn’ Container Deposit Scheme.

 

(b)  The report should include a review of existing and proposed suitable locations for the placement of return kiosks within the City to ensure adequate coverage and also include an appropriate community engagement and education campaign.

 

 

 

File Reference

D17/228160

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 738

Item:          NM032-17          Support for Crisis Accommodation in the Georges River Local Government Area

Councillor:       Councillor Payor 

 

MOTION:

a)    That the Mayor write to the Minister for Family and Community Services, the Minister for Social Housing and the Minister for Prevention of Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, the Hon Pru Goward MP requesting greater support for the provision of adequate crisis accommodation in the local government area for women and children who are at risk of, or are experiencing homelessness as a result of domestic violence; and

b)    That a report be prepared for Council in early 2018 to identify options available for Council to work with the NSW government and its agencies to facilitate the increased provision of crisis accommodation in the local government area.

 

 

File Reference

< Enter Records Reference Number Here >

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 739

Item:          NM033-17 National Anthem at Council Meetings

Councillor:       Councillor Landsberry 

 

MOTION:

That the Mayor invite local schools within the Georges River Council local government area to submit recordings of student choirs or bands performing the Australian National Anthem, for presentation at the opening of Council Meetings.

 

 

File Reference

D17/228161

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 740

Item:          NM034-17 Georges River Code of Meeting Practice

Councillor:       Councillor Badalati 

 

MOTION:

That during the upcoming review of the Georges River Code of Meeting Practice in early 2018, Council consider the inclusion of appropriate amendments that provide for:

(i)      Rescission motions to be lodged with the General Manager up to 3 business days following the passing of a resolution by Council; and

(ii)     The inclusion of a prayer in the General Order of Business for Ordinary Meetings.

 

 

 

 

File Reference

D17/228165

 

 

 

  


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 741

Item:          NM035-17          Construction of a Cafe/Restaurant Facility in Oatley Park

Councillor:       Councillor Badalati 

 

MOTION:

 

(a)  That the General Manager prepare a report to Council in early 2018 investigating the feasibility of constructing a café/restaurant facility within Oatley Park to serve the needs of the local community and other visitors to the Park.

 

(b)  That the report include options for location of the proposed café/restaurant having regard to the objectives of the Oatley Park Plan of Management, indicative designs and construction costs, any land use planning requirements and options available to Council for undertaking a public expression of interest or tender process for the future operation of the facility.

 

(c)   That the report identify potential sources of funding for construction of the facility and possible timeframes for the delivery of the facility.

 

 

 

File Reference

D17/228164

 

 

 

   


Georges River Council – Ordinary Meeting -  Monday, 18 December 2017                                                                      Page 742

Confidential items (Closed Council Meeting)

Council's Code of Meeting Practice allows members of the public present to indicate whether they wish to make representations to the meeting, before it is closed to the public, as to whether that part of the meeting dealing with any or all of the matters listed should or should not be considered in closed session.

 

Recommendation

That in accordance with the provisions of Part 1 of Chapter 4 of the Local Government Act 1993, the following matters be considered in closed Council Meeting at which the press and public are excluded.

 

CON027-17       General Manager - Contract of Employment

(The Mayor, Councillor Greene)

THAT in accordance with the provisions of Part 1 of Chapter 4 of the Local Government Act 1993, the matters dealt with in this report be considered in closed Council Meeting at which the press and public are excluded. In accordance with Section 10A(2) (a) it is considered the matter deals with personnel matters concerning particular individuals (other than Councillors).

THAT in accordance with Section 10D it is considered that if the matter were discussed in an open Council Meeting, it would on balance, be contrary to the public interest as it deals with personnel matters concerning particular individuals (other than Councillors).

 

That in accordance with the provisions of Section 11(2) of the Act, the reports and correspondence relating to these matters be withheld from the press and public.