Environment and Planning Committee

Notice of Meeting

Monday, 08 October 2018

 

 

A meeting of the Environment and Planning Committee will be held at 7.00pm on Monday,8 October 2018 in the Dragon Room, Level 1, Georges River Civic Centre, corner Dora and MacMahon Streets, Hurstville, for the consideration of the business available on Council’s website at

http://www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au/Council/Council-Meetings

 

 

 

 

BUSINESS

1.      Apologies

2.      Disclosures of Interest

3.      Minutes of previous meetings

4.      Committee Reports

 


Environment and Planning Committee Meeting

Summary of Items

Monday, 08 October 2018

 

Previous Minutes

MINUTES: Environment and Planning - 10 September 2018

Committee Reports

ENV036-18       Amendment No.10 to Hurstville DCP No.2 for Landmark Square (53-75 Forest Road, 108-126 Durham Street and 9 Roberts Lane, Hurstville)

(Report by Strategic Planner)....................................................................................... 2

ENV037-18       Planning Proposal for Nos. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights

(Report by Senior Strategic Planner)....................................................................... 17

ENV038-18       Georges River Local Environmental Plan Review Report

(Report by Senior Strategic Planner)....................................................................... 41   

 


Georges River Council – Environment and Planning Committee Meeting -  Monday, 8 October 2018                       Page 2

Committee Reports

Item:                   ENV036-18        Amendment No.10 to Hurstville DCP No.2 for Landmark Square (53-75 Forest Road, 108-126 Durham Street and 9 Roberts Lane, Hurstville) 

Author:              Strategic Planner

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Committee Reports

 

 

 

Recommendation

(a)     That Council endorse the proposed amendments (Amendment No.10) to Hurstville Development Control Plan No.2 – Hurstville City Centre for 53-75 Forest Road, 108-126 Durham Street and 9 Roberts Lane, Hurstville (the “Landmark Square Precinct”) for public exhibition.

(b)     That Council publicly exhibit the amendments (Amendment No.10) to Hurstville Development Control Plan No.2 – Hurstville City Centre for the Landmark Square Precinct concurrently with the associated Planning Proposal 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 correct any numerical, typographical, interpretation and formatting errors, if required, in preparation for the public exhibition of the amendments (Amendment No.10) to Hurstville Development Control Plan No.2 – Hurstville City Centre.

(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.      The original request to prepare a Planning Proposal (PP2015/0001) for the site bounded by Forest Road, Durham Street and Roberts Lane, Hurstville (known as the Landmark Square Precinct), was originally submitted by Dickson Rothschild on behalf of One Capital Pty Ltd / Prime Hurstville Pty Ltd (“the applicant”) on 16 June 2015.

2.      The Planning Proposal was subsequently amended a number of times and a Gateway Determination (approval) was issued by the Department of Planning and Environment (“DPE”) on 19 October 2017.

3.      On 17 May 2018, the applicant submitted a revised Planning Proposal request which seeks to amend the original Planning Proposal with an alternative concept scheme. The revised concept scheme does not seek to alter the proposed density on the site or the intent of the existing Planning Proposal. The amendments are solely informed by the Urban Design Report which proposes reconfigurations of the maximum building envelope.

4.      At its meeting on 23 July 2018, Council resolved to forward the revised Planning Proposal to the DPE for an Alteration to the Gateway Determination.  In summary, the revised Planning Proposal seeks to amend the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (“HLEP 2012”) to:

·    rezone the site from IN2 Light Industrial and part R2 Low Density Residential to B4 Mixed Use;

·    amend the floor space ratio (“FSR”) from 0.6:1 (R2) and 1:1 (IN2) to 2:1 along Roberts Lane and up to 3.5:1 for the remainder of the site (including a minimum non-residential FSR of 0.5:1);

·    amend the height from 9m (R2) and 10m (IN2) to a range of heights being 12m, 15m, 21m, 28m, 30m, 40m and 65m;

·    apply active street frontages along the Forest Road and Durham Street frontages of the Precinct; and

·    apply a bonus FSR incentive of 0.5:1 based on the total Precinct site area for the purpose of hotel accommodation only at the corner of Forest Road and Durham Street.

5.      The revised Planning Proposal was approved by the DPE and an Alteration to the Gateway Determination was issued on 24 September 2018. Refer to Attachment 1.

6.      At the 23 July 2018 meeting, Council also supported the preparation of an amendment to the Hurstville Development Control Plan No.2 – Hurstville City Centre (“HDCP No.2”) to reflect detailed urban design considerations for any future development of the site including the provision of public access, built form, boundary setbacks, deep soil areas, site amalgamation, vehicular access and any other relevant issues.

7.      This report outlines the amendments (Amendment No.10) to the HDCP No.2 for the Landmark Square Precinct and recommends that Council endorse the draft DCP (refer Attachment 2) for public exhibition. The public exhibition of the draft DCP will occur concurrently with the associated revised Planning Proposal once approval is received from the DPE.

 

Background of the Planning Proposal (PP2015/0001)

8.      The original request to prepare a Planning Proposal (PP2015/0001) for the site bounded by Forest Road, Durham Street and Roberts Lane, Hurstville (refer Figure 1 below), was submitted by Dickson Rothschild on behalf of One Capital Pty Ltd / Prime Hurstville Pty Ltd (“the applicant”) on 16 June 2015.

 


 

Figure 1 – Subject site (shown in red outline)

 

9.      The Planning Proposal was subsequently amended a number of times with variations to the requested height, FSR, quantum of retail / commercial and number of residential apartments. The detailed chronology of events was previously reported to the Georges River Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (“IHAP”) on 20 July 2017, and subsequently to Council at its meeting dated 7 August 2017.

10.    The original Planning Proposal was endorsed by Council at its meeting dated 7 August 2017 (CCL146-17), to be forwarded to the delegate of the Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination (approval), subject to the preparation of a revised urban design analysis prior to community consultation if a Gateway Determination was received.

11.    A Gateway Determination was received by Council on 19 October 2017, for the original Planning Proposal (PP2015/0001) which sought to amend the HLEP 2012, in relation to the Landmark Square Precinct as follows:

a)      Rezone the land from IN2 Light Industrial and part R2 Low Density Residential to B4 Mixed Use;

b)      Increase the FSR from 0.6 (R2) and 1:1 (IN2) to 2:1 along Roberts Lane and up to 3.5:1 for the remainder of the site (including a minimum commercial FSR of 0.5:1);

c)      Increase the maximum building height from 9m (R2) and 10m (IN2) to a range of heights being 12m, 21m, 28m, 30m, 40m and 65m;

d)      Apply an active street frontage along Forest Road and Durham Street frontages of the site; and

e)      Provide a FSR incentive of 0.5:1 for hotel accommodation land uses for a portion of the site on the corner of Forest Road and Durham Street (refer to location in Figure 3 below).

 

12.    Following receipt of the Gateway Determination on 19 October 2017, a revised Planning Proposal was prepared by the applicant to address the Council resolution dated 7 August 2017, as below:

 

(i) The proponent shall prepare a revised urban design analysis that assesses the inter-relationship between the proposed height and floor space ratio, and considering provision of ground level communal open space, street setbacks, road widening and compliance with all aspects of the Apartment Design Guide.

13.    In response to the above resolution, the applicant submitted a revised Planning Proposal request to Council on 17 May 2018 which seeks to amend the HLEP 2012, in relation to the Landmark Square Precinct as follows:

a)      To amend the land zoning from IN2 Light Industrial and part R2 Low Density Residential to B4 Mixed Use (refer Figure 2 below);

b)      To increase the FSR from 0.6 (R2) and 1:1 (IN2) to 2:1 along Roberts Lane and up to 3.5:1 for the remainder of the site (including a minimum non-residential FSR of 0.5:1, refer Figure 3 below);

c)      To increase the maximum building height applying to the site from 9m (R2) and 10m (IN2) to a range of heights being 12m, 15m, 21m, 28m, 30m, 40m and 65m (refer Figure 4 below);

d)      To apply active street frontages along the Forest Road and Durham Street frontages of the Precinct (refer Figure 5 below); and

e)      To apply a bonus FSR incentive of 0.5:1 based on the total Precinct site area for the purpose of hotel accommodation at the corner of Forest Road and Durham Street (refer Area 1 marked in Figure 3 below).

 


 

Figure 2 – Proposed Land Zoning Map (HLEP 2012)

 

 


 

Figure 3 – Proposed Floor Space Ratio Map (HLEP 2012)


 

Figure 4 – Proposed Height of Buildings Map (HLEP 2012)


 

Figure 5 – Proposed Active Street Frontage Map (HLEP 2012)

14.    The Georges River Local Planning Panel (“LPP”) at its meeting dated 21 June 2018, considered a report on the revised Planning Proposal. It should be noted that the LPP recommended the removal of the 15m height from the proposed Height of Buildings Map.

15.    At its meeting dated 23 July 2018, Council considered the revised Planning Proposal, including the LPP recommendation as noted above. Council resolved to proceed with the revised Planning Proposal as submitted by the applicant which features the transitional 15m building height. Council’s resolution (CCL036-18) is detailed below:

(a) That Council endorse the revised Planning Proposal to amend the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012, as follows, in relation to the Landmark Square Precinct at 53-75 Forest Road, 108-126 Durham Street and 9 Roberts Lane, Hurstville:

a)      To amend the land zoning from IN2 Light Industrial and part R2 Low Density Residential to B4 Mixed Use;

b)      To amend the Floor Space Ratio Map to increase the FSR from 0.6 (R2) and 1:1 (IN2) to 2:1 along Roberts Lane and up to 3.5:1 for the remainder of the site (including a minimum non-residential FSR of 0.5:1);

c)      To amend the Height of Buildings Map to increase the maximum building height applying to the site from 9m (R2) and 10m (IN2) to a range of heights being 12m, 15m, 21m, 28m, 30m, 40m and 65m;

d)      To amend the Active Street Frontages Map to apply active street frontages along the Forest Road and Durham Street frontages of the Precinct; and

e)      To apply a bonus FSR incentive of 0.5:1 based on the total Precinct site area for the purpose of hotel accommodation only at the corner of Forest Road and Durham Street.

(b) That Council endorse the revised Planning Proposal to be forwarded to the delegate of the Greater Sydney Commission for an Alteration to the Gateway Determination under Section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

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

 

(d) That the Development Application for the development of the hotel on the site (being the bonus floor area) is to be accompanied by a surveyor’s certificate that indicates the hotel floor area and the gross floor area for the purpose of calculating FSR.  The requirement for a surveyor’s certificate is to be included in the DCP for the site.

 

(e) That Council endorse the preparation of an amendment to the Hurstville Development Control Plan No.2 – Hurstville City Centre (“HDCP No.2”) to run concurrently with an amendment to the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (if Alteration to the Gateway is given by the Department of Planning and Environment), to reflect detailed urban design considerations for any future development of the site including the provision of public access, built form, boundary setbacks, deep soil areas, site amalgamation, vehicular access and any other relevant issues. The DCP is to be prepared at the proponent’s cost.

16.    In accordance with Council’s resolution as detailed above, the revised Planning Proposal was forwarded to the DPE for an Alteration to the Gateway Determination on 28 August 2018.

17.    The revised Planning Proposal was approved by the DPE and an Alteration to the Gateway Determination was issued on 24 September 2018. Refer to Attachment 1.

18.    In addition to the applicant’s revised Planning Proposal for the Landmark Square Precinct, Council also resolved to support a separate road widening Planning Proposal at its meeting dated 27 August 2018 to enable two-way vehicle access, access for service vehicles such as delivery and waste collection trucks, and the provision of a continuous pedestrian footpath with street planting on Roberts Lane.

19.    The road widening Planning Proposal seeks to amend the HLEP 2012 Land Reservation Acquisition Map to include a 3m wide local road widening at 53 Forest Road, 108 Durham Street and 9 Roberts Lane along the Roberts Lane boundary.

20.    It should be noted that the remaining allotment in the Precinct which has a frontage to Roberts Lane is located at 61-65 Forest Road. This allotment is one of the eight allotments affected by the Voluntary Planning Agreement (“VPA”) Offer associated with the Landmark Square Planning Proposal (PP2015/0001) which identifies a 3m wide strip of land adjoining Roberts Lane is to be dedicated at no cost to Council. The locations of the two road widening mechanisms are illustrated in Figure 6 below.

 

Figure 6 – Roberts Lane Road Widening

 

 

21.    In accordance with Council’s resolution dated 27 August 2018, the road widening Planning Proposal was forwarded to the DPE for a Gateway Determination on 12 September 2018. Assessment of the road widening Planning Proposal is currently being undertaken by the DPE.

22.    The public exhibition of the subject amendment to the HDCP No.2 will occur concurrently with the associated Landmark Square Planning Proposal which received Alteration to Gateway on 24 September 2018. The road widening Planning Proposal will also be exhibited once Council receives the Gateway Determination from the DPE.

 

Inclusion in the Hurstville City Centre

23.    The subject site is located inside the boundary of the Hurstville City Centre in the Eastern Bookend Precinct (refer Figure 7 below). Council at its meeting held on 3 July 2017, adopted a report and approved the Hurstville Section 94 Development Contributions Plan (Amendment No. 2) to include Kempt Field, the subject site (bounded by Forest Road, Durham Street and Roberts Lane) and the Bing Lee site (being 108, 112 and 124 Forest Road and 1 and 3 Wright Street) into the Hurstville City Centre land application map.

 


 

Figure 7 – Extent of Hurstville City Centre

 

Amendment No. 10 to HDCP No.2 – Hurstville City Centre

24.    In accordance with Council’s resolution dated 23 July 2018 above, a site specific DCP has been prepared to reflect detailed urban design considerations for the future development of the Landmark Square Precinct to accompany the Planning Proposal.

25.    This DCP has been prepared as Amendment No.10 of the HDCP No.2 and will be inserted into Section 8 – Controls for Specific Sites and Localities as Section 8.2 Landmark Square (refer Attachment 2). The purpose of this DCP is to produce a detailed guide for the future development of the Precinct. The remainder sections of the HDCP No.2 will be published in a separate document to this report.

26.    The DCP has been prepared based on the following urban design principles:

·    Development of a sustainable, diverse, attractive and inviting precinct for people to live, work and recreate through leadership and integration of design excellence.

·    Development is distinctive, visually interesting and appealing.

·    Development is designed to address the context of the area through responsive built forms and appropriate transitions to adjoining residential development.

·    Provision of good residential amenity by complying with the State Environmental Planning Policy No.65 Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development and the Apartment Design Guide.

·    The street edge is activated and clearly defined by building podiums featuring fine grain retail and active uses.

·    The building facades are distinctively articulated to enhance the streetscape character.

·    A human scale is maintained at the street level with particular emphasis on the human experience in the built environment.

·    A highly permeable precinct with distinguished pedestrian connections between streets and communal spaces.

·    A sense of place is created, particularly between buildings and in public spaces.

·    Provision of adequate basement car parking and a safe and efficient access network for pedestrians and vehicles.

 

27.    The key elements addressed in this DCP include:

·    Design Excellence – to promote good design and development outcomes that deliver sustainable and liveable environments and align with the desired future character of the Hurstville City Centre and its surrounding locality.

 

·    Indicative Concept Master Plan – to provide general guidance on the overall form of development within the Precinct.

 

·    Surveyor’s Certificate – to require a surveyor’s certificate that indicates the break-up of the residential and non-residential floor areas for the purpose of calculating the gross floor area. This has been inserted in accordance with Council’s resolution (CCL036-18 point d) dated 23 July 2018 as detailed above.

 

·    Amalgamation and Site Isolation – to avoid the creation of isolated sites in the Precinct and to ensure any isolated sites are not unreasonably restricted in their development potential.

 

·    Roberts Lane Widening – to ensure that a consistent local road widening occurs on Roberts Lane in accordance with Figure 6 above.

 

·    Built Form and Setbacks – to provide adequate transition in scale and building separation for visual and residential amenity and to establish the desired spatial proportions of the street with respect to the human scale.

 

·    Façade Treatment and Street Corners – to ensure building façades are clearly articulated and employ high quality materials and finishes that enhance and complement the streetscape character.

 

·    Pedestrian Access and the Public Domain – to provide high quality public through-site links and a central plaza for public use, including community events.

 

·    Open Space and Landscaping – to ensure the development provides amenity for its residents and a quality public domain.

 

·    Active Street Frontages – to ensure ground floor frontages along Forest Road and Durham Street are active and pedestrian focused.

 

·    Heritage Item (Scout Hall) – to protect the cultural and heritage significance of the Scout Hall and to integrate the heritage item into the future development.

 

·    On-Site Parking – to provide adequate car parking for the future development and to ensure all parking is accommodated underground.

 

·    Vehicle Access – to integrate adequate car parking and servicing access without compromising street character, landscape or pedestrian amenity and safety.

 

28.    As a result of preparing the new Section 8.2, a number of formatting and administrative changes have been proposed to various sections of the HDCP No.2 as outlined in Table 1 below.


 

Table 1 – Proposed Amendments (Amendment No.10) to HDCP No.2

Section

Proposed Amendments

1 Introduction

Minor formatting changes.

2 Application Process

Minor formatting changes.

3 Strategic Context

Minor formatting changes.

4 City Centre Precincts

Minor formatting changes.

Adjustment of the Hurstville City Centre boundary in accordance with the new boundary illustrated in Figure 6 of this report.

5 Controls for Residential, Commercial and Mixed Use Development

Minor formatting changes.

Adjustment of the Hurstville City Centre boundary in accordance with the new boundary illustrated in Figure 6 of this report.

6 Site Planning Considerations

Minor formatting changes.

7 Controls for Other Development Types

Minor formatting changes.

8 Controls for Specific Sites and Localities

Insertion of new section:

Section 8.2 Landmark Square

Key elements of the site specific controls in Section 8.2 have been outlined above.

Appendix 1

Minor formatting changes.

Adjustment of the Hurstville City Centre boundary in accordance with the new boundary illustrated in Figure 6 of this report.

Appendix 2

Minor formatting changes.

 

29.    The draft Section 8.2 of the HDCP No.2 (Amendment No.10) is provided in Attachment 2.

 

Next Steps

30.    The next steps in finalising Amendment No.10 to the HDCP No.2 and the anticipated timeframes are tabulated below:

 

                              Task

Anticipated Timeframe

Report to the Environment and Planning Committee on Amendment No.10 to HDCP No.2 for public exhibition

8 October 2018

(this report)

Report to Council on Amendment No.10 to HDCP No.2 for public exhibition

22 October 2018

Public exhibition of Amendment No.10 to HDCP No.2 concurrently with the Landmark Square revised Planning Proposal (and where practicable, also in conjunction with the road widening Planning Proposal if the Gateway Determination is received prior to November)

November – December 2018

Report to Council on submissions received on the Planning Proposal and Amendment No.10 to HDCP No.2, and seeking endorsement for their adoption

February 2019

Planning Proposal to the DPE for finalisation

March 2019

Notice is published in the local newspaper to adopt Amendment No.10 to HDCP No.2

April 2019

(subject to the gazettal of the Planning Proposal)

 

Financial Implications

31.    No budget impact for this report.

 

Risk Implications

32.    No risks identified.

 

Community Engagement

33.    The proposed amendments to the HDCP No.2 for the Landmark Square Precinct (Amendment No.10) will be publicly exhibited in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and its Regulations 2000 for public comment and community engagement.

34.    A further report will be submitted to Council following the public exhibition period.

 

 

File Reference

D18/205294

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Letter from DPE - Alteration to Gateway Approval

Attachment 2

Draft DCP - Section 8.2 Landmark Square - HDCP No.2

 


Georges River Council – Environment and Planning Committee Meeting -  Monday, 8 October 2018                       Page 17

Item:                   ENV037-18        Planning Proposal for Nos. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights 

Author:              Senior Strategic Planner

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Committee Reports

 

 

 

Recommendation

(a) That Council adopt the amendment to the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 as exhibited in relation to Nos. 12-14 Pindari Street, Peakhurst Heights to:

a.   Amend the Land Zoning Map – Sheet LZN_002 to rezone the site from SP2 Infrastructure (Church) 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 the Lot Size Map – Sheet LSZ_002 to include a minimum lot size of 450m2.

e.   Amend Schedule 1 – Additional Permitted Uses to include the following:

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

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

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

(b) That Council request the Parliamentary Counsel’s Office for an Opinion to finalise the Local Environmental Plan under Section 3.36 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and in accordance with Council’s delegation for the finalisation of the Planning Proposal.

(c)  That the Department of Planning and Environment and the Department of Education be advised of Council’s decision.

 

 

Executive Summary

1.      On 8 June 2017, the Planning Proposal (PP2017/0002) for Nos. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights, was submitted by Capital Syndications Pty Ltd (trading as ‘Innova Capital’) on behalf of the owner (Learning Links).

 

2.      The proposal (as amended) seeks to amend Hurstville Local Environmental Plan (HLEP) 2012 to change the land use zoning from SP2 Infrastructure (Church) to R2 Low Density Residential and include a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) control of 1:1, building height of 9m and minimum lot size of 450m2. The proposal also seeks to amend Schedule 1 to include office premises, and a restaurant or café as additional permitted uses.

 

3.      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)     Ensure minimum lot size is legislated to provide a useable area for building and landscaping.

(d)     Provide certainty in the community in relation to any future redevelopment of the site.

 

4.      The Planning Proposal seeks to validate the existing employment based land uses on the site and allow for a broader range 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 compatible with neighbouring sites.

 

5.      Council at its meeting on 23 July 2018, considered the Planning Proposal for Nos. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights, and resolved (CCL036-18):

(a) That Council publicly exhibit the Planning Proposal PP2017/0002 for No. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights, in accordance with the conditions of the Gateway Determination issued by the Department of Planning and Environment.

 

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

 

6.      The Planning Proposal was placed on public exhibition from 15 August to 14 September 2018. No submissions were received during the exhibition period.

 

7.      This report recommends that Council support the proposed changes as exhibited to the HLEP 2012 for Nos. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights as follows:

a.   Amend the Land Zoning Map – Sheet LZN_002 to rezone the site from SP2 Infrastructure (Church) 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 the Lot Size Map – Sheet LSZ_002 to include a minimum lot size of 450m2.

e.   Amend Schedule 1 – Additional Permitted Uses to include the following:

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

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

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

8.      The Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) advised Council that the Planning Proposal is not required to be referred to the Local Planning Panel under the Local Planning Panels Direction – Planning Proposal because the Planning Proposal has already received a Gateway Determination. The DP&E interprets the Direction to be focussed on receiving the Local Planning Panel’s advice prior to Gateway. However, the Planning Proposal was referred to the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) on 26 October 2017 and 5 December 2017.

 

Background

9.      On 8 June 2017, the Planning Proposal (PP2017/0002) for Nos. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights (the ‘subject site’), was submitted by Capital Syndications Pty Ltd (trading as ‘Innova Capital’) on behalf of the owner (Learning Links).

 

10.    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 FSR control of 1.5:1; and

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

 

11.    The Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (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 R2 Low Density Residential development.  It was advised that a built form analysis of the proposed controls be undertaken.

 

12.    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.      Amend the land use zoning from SP2 Infrastructure (Church) to R2 Low Density Residential;

b.      Amend the maximum FSR control to 1:1;

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

d.      Amend Schedule 1 to include ‘educational establishment’ as an additional land use for the subject property.

 

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

“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.”

 

14.    The applicant (Innova Capital) advised Council that amending Schedule 1 to include ‘educational establishment’ as an additional land use (as recommended by IHAP) was not appropriate for the subject site because Learning Links is not considered to be an ‘educational establishment’ defined by the Standard Instrument.

 

15.    As a result of IHAP’s recommendation, the applicant amended the Planning Proposal by letter dated 6 November 2017, requesting the following:

a.      To change the land use zoning from SP2 Infrastructure (Church) to R2 Low Density Residential;

b.      To include a maximum 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, and restaurant or cafe.

 

16.    The IHAP at its meeting on 5 December 2017, considered the amended Planning Proposal to amend HLEP 2012 and recommended Council forward the Planning Proposal to the delegate of the Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination under Section 3.34 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (previously Section 56).

 

17.    Council at its meeting on 18 December 2017, resolved to support the recommendations of the IHAP and forward the Planning Proposal to the Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination.

 

18.    A Gateway Determination was issued by the DP&E on 16 March 2018, subject to conditions, including the following:

“1. Prior to community consultation the planning proposal is to be updated to:

a.    include the proposed minimum lot size control within the explanation of provisions;

b.    include maps indicating the current and proposed minimum lot size controls;

c.    include a concept or block diagram to demonstrate the proposed built form controls; and

d.    discuss in more detail why Council considers the proposed amendment to the zoning, built form controls and Schedule 1 of the LEP is suitable and the best means of achieving the proposal’s intended outcomes.

The revised planning proposal is to be provided to the Department for review and approval for public exhibition.”

 

19.    In response to the conditions of the Gateway Determination, Council submitted an amended Planning Proposal to the DP&E which included the following information:

·        A minimum lot size control of 450m2 (currently there is no minimum lot size);

·        A proposed Lot Size Map (Sheet LSZ_002);

·        A concept diagram of an indicative building footprint and scale based on the proposed built form controls (building height of 9m and FSR of 1:1); and

·        Justification for the proposed amendments to the zoning, built form controls and Schedule 1 of the LEP.

 

20.    The Planning Proposal seeks to validate the existing employment based land uses on the site and allow for a broader range 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 compatible with neighbouring sites.

 

21.    The DP&E reviewed the amended Planning Proposal and notified Council on 1 June 2018, that they are satisfied that the Planning Proposal is consistent with the conditions of the Gateway Determination and can be publicly exhibited.  

22.    Council at its meeting on 23 July 2018 resolved to publicly exhibit the Planning Proposal PP2017/0002 for Nos. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights (Attachment 1) in accordance with the conditions of the Gateway Determination and report any submissions received to a further report to Council.

 

23.    The existing development is a community facility registered as a not for profit organisation that provides services such as speech pathology and occupational therapy to children with learning difficulties and disabilities. The proposal provides a significant public benefit to the community by providing services for children with learning difficulties. Accordingly, Council has not applied the Voluntary Planning Agreement Policy to the Planning Proposal.

 

Subject Site

24.    The subject site includes two (2) lots with a combined area of 1,170m2 which are known as No. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights as shown in the aerial image below (Figure 1) and comprise:

·    Lot 58 in DP 206906 (No. 12 Pindari Road) is generally rectangular in shape with an area of approximately 580m2 and frontage of approximately 15.85m to Pindari Road.

 

·    Lot 59 in DP 206906 (No. 14 Pindari Road) is irregular in shape with an area of approximately 590m2 and frontages of approximately 18.97m to Pindari Road and 38.105m to Pindari Road Reserve.

 

25.    The subject site is owned and occupied by Learning Links. Learning Links is a not for profit organisation established by a group of parents who were concerned about the lack of appropriate education and support services to meet the needs of their children. Learning Links focuses on preventing learning difficulties from causing contemporary and future disadvantage. Learning Links provide a range of services that help support children with learning difficulties and disabilities such as speech pathology and occupational therapy.

 

Figure 1: Aerial image with site outlined in red

 

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

 

a.      An elevated building facing Pindari Road with a basement area (former church building) that is partitioned and used as an administrative office, tuition rooms and storage space (Figure 2).

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) (Figure 3).

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 4).

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

a.      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 a pitched roof form and side carport. No. 8 Pindari Road is a two storey dwelling house with a pitched roof form.

 

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

 

c.       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.

 

d.      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.

 

28.    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 Heights Pindari Road Neighbourhood Centre

 

Existing Planning Controls

29.    The HLEP 2012 applies to the site and the following provisions are relevant to the Planning Proposal (Refer Figures 7 to 10):

 

Zoning

30.    The site is zoned SP2 Infrastructure (Church) as shown on the extract of the Land Zoning Map – Sheet LZN_002 below (Figure 7).

31.    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).

Figure 7: Extract of Hurstville LEP 2012 – Land Zoning Map

 

Height of Buildings:

32.    The site has no nominated maximum building height as shown on the extract of the Height of Buildings Map – Sheet HOB_002 below (Figure 8). The adjoining and surrounding land has a maximum building height of 9m.

Figure 8: Extract of Hurstville LEP 2012 – Height of Buildings Map

 

Floor Space Ratio:

33.    The site has no nominated maximum Floor Space Ratio as shown on the extract of the Floor Space Ratio Map – Sheet FSR_002 below (Figure 9).

 

34.    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.

 

Figure 9: Extract of Hurstville LEP 2012 – Floor Space Ratio

 

Lot Size:

35.    The site has no nominated minimum lot size as shown on the extract of the Lot Size Map – Sheet LSZ_002 below (Figure 10).

 

36.    The adjoining low density residential housing has a minimum lot size of 450m2. Land to the south in the B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone has no minimum lot size.

 

Figure 10: Extract of Hurstville LEP 2012 – Lot Size

 

Proposed Planning Controls

37.    The Planning Proposal requests the following amendments to the HLEP 2012, in relation to the subject site:

 

Mapping amendments:

a.      Amend the Land Zoning Map – Sheet LZN_002 to rezone the site from SP2 Infrastructure (Church) to R2 Low Density Residential (as shown in Figure 11).

b.      Amend the Height of Buildings Map - Sheet HOB_002 to include a maximum height limit of 9m (as shown in Figure 12).

c.       Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map – Sheet FSR_002 to include a maximum FSR of 1:1 (as shown in Figure 13).

d.      Amend the Lot Size Map – Sheet LSZ_002 to include a minimum lot size of 450m2 (as shown in Figure 14).

 

Schedule 1 amendment

 Amend Schedule 1 – Additional Permitted Uses to include the following:

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

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

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

 

Figure 11: Planning Proposal Land Zoning Map (Source: Council GIS section)

 

Figure 12: Planning Proposal Height of Buildings Map (Source: Council GIS section)

 

Figure 13: Planning Proposal Floor Space Ratio Map (Source: Council GIS section)

 

 

Figure 14: Planning Proposal Lot Size Map (Source: Council GIS section)

 

Justification for the Planning Proposal

38.    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 place of public worship for over 25 years. An assessment was undertaken to determine the most appropriate zone for the site 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, including a centre-based child care facility. The most appropriate use for the subject site is R2 Low Density Residential; which is consistent with the surrounding zoning.

 

39.    The objective of the R2 Low Density Residential 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 and centre-based child care facilities are permissible in the R2 Low Density Residential zone.

 

40.    The additional land uses sought by the proponent for office premises, and restaurant or café are not permissible in the R2 Low Density Residential zone and therefore, are proposed to be included in Schedule 1 (Additional Permitted Uses) of the HLEP 2012.

 

41.    This approach would allow the primary use of the site as a community facility to be maintained and formalised as a permissible land use on the site, preventing any potential misinterpretation under existing use rights. These additional land uses are considered appropriate in the context of the site which includes residential, commercial and educational uses.

 

42.    The Planning Proposal seeks to adopt the standard controls that apply to the R2 Low Density Residential zone in regards to maximum building height and minimum lot size.

 

43.    In accordance with the conditions of the Gateway Determination, a block diagram was submitted by the applicant to demonstrate the proposed built form controls. Figure 15 below illustrates an indicative building footprint and scale based on the maximum proposed built form controls (i.e. building height of 9m and FSR of 1:1). The proposed height and FSR controls are considered appropriate in the context of the adjoining R2 and B1 zones as:

·    The 9m height limit represents a building that does not appear excessive in terms of bulk and scale. It is consistent with the surrounding two storey dwelling houses and adjacent shop top housing.

·    The 1.1 FSR would ensure a future development is of a built form that provides an appropriate transition between the R2 (FSR 0.6:1) and B1 (FSR 1:1) zones.

·    The site adjoins the Pindari Road Reserve and the rear of properties fronting Karwarra Place, providing a building separation to adjoining dwelling houses and minimising adverse amenity impacts. A future development utilising the proposed maximum built form controls would also have minimal impact, such as overshadowing, on the adjoining residential properties to the north given the site’s location to the south.

 

Figure 15: Extract of applicant’s Planning Proposal illustrating indicative building footprint

 

44.    The Planning Proposal is consistent with State and local policies as illustrated in Table 1 below:

 

Greater Sydney Region Plan – A Metropolis of Three Cities

Direction

Objective relevant to the Planning Proposal

A city for people

Objective 6: Services and infrastructure meet communities’ changing needs

The proposal allows for the continuation of the existing uses on site within a permissible zone. The primary use of the site as a community facility that provides vital services to the growing community is proposed to be maintained.

Jobs and skills for the city

Objective 22: Investment and business activity in centres

The proposal will allow the site be used for employment, providing business activity in the Peakhurst Heights local centre. The existing employment uses, such as the Learning Links facility which is the largest employer in the precinct, is proposed to be maintained on the site, retaining jobs in the precinct.

South District Plan

Direction

Planning Priorities achieved by the Planning Proposal

A city for people

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

A city for people

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

A city of great places

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

Jobs and skills for the city

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

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment

·    The subject site is wholly located within the Georges River Catchment. This Planning Proposal does not affect the way the Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment applies to the site.

Community Strategic Plan 2028

Pillar 4: A diverse and productive economy

 

Goal 4.1: Local businesses are supported to help protect jobs and create employment opportunities.

The proposal will protect existing and create local employment opportunities. The site generates a significant amount of employment for the local area and wider community.

Pillar 5: A harmonious and proud community with strong social services and infrastructure

Goal 5.3: The community is socially and culturally connected.

Goal 5.4: Diverse, vibrant community facilities and spaces are connected, well maintained and accessible.

The proposal will allow for the retention of a centre-based child care facility and community facility within close proximity to the local centre. This is essential to meet the community’s growing needs for child care centres and children services and in doing so will assist in satisfying the objective of this strategic plan in permitting the provision of more community facilities.

Employment Lands Study

 

The area to the south of the subject site is zoned B1 Neighbourhood Centre and is known as the Peakhurst Heights – Pindari Road Precinct. The Study considers Peakhurst Heights as a centre that has opportunity to accommodate growth.

 

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.

 

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

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

State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Child care Facilities) 2017

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

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.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 19 (Bushland in Urban Areas)

SEPP 19 aims to protect and preserve bushland within urban areas.

The SEPP applies to land that adjoins land zoned or reserved for public open space. The site adjoins Pindari Road Reserve which is zoned RE1 Public Recreation. The proposal does not affect the public open space land by way of erosion of soils, siltation of streams and waterways, or the spread of weeds and exotic plants.

Section 9.1 Directions

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 development types as well as uses that support the local community.

6.3 Site Specific Provisions

 

The proposal is consistent with the objective of this direction in that it discourages unnecessarily restrictive site specific planning controls. The range of uses permissible under the R2 zone and the additional permitted uses to be included under Schedule 1 of the LEP allows flexibility for redevelopment of the site.

7.1 Implementation of A Plan for Growing Sydney

A Plan For Growing Sydney has been replaced by the Greater Sydney Commission’s Greater Sydney Region Plan – A Metropolis of Three Cities. The Planning Proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Greater Sydney Region Plan, as assessed above.

Table 1: Consistency with State and local policies

 

Public Exhibition

45.    The Planning Proposal was placed on public exhibition from 15 August to 14 September 2018. The Planning Proposal was made available during the exhibition period on Council’s website and hard copies were available at:

·    Georges River Council Hurstville Service Centre;

·    Georges River Council Kogarah Service Centre and Library; and

·    Hurstville Library, during library opening hours.

 

46.    Notification of the public exhibition was provided through:

·    Newspaper advertisement in The St George and Sutherland Shire Leader on 15 August 2018;

·    Exhibition notice on Council’s website;

·    Notices in Council offices (Hurstville and Kogarah Service Centres) and libraries;

·    Letter to NSW Department of Education as specified in the Gateway Determination; and

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

 

47.    During the public exhibition period, no submissions were received from the community and the NSW Department of Education.

 

48.    No changes to the Planning Proposal are recommended as no issues were raised during the public consultation.

 

Finalisation of the Planning Proposal

49.    This report recommends that Council support the following proposed changes to the HLEP 2012 for the subject site (Nos. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights) as exhibited:

a.   Amend the Land Zoning Map – Sheet LZN_002 to rezone the site from SP2 Infrastructure (Church) 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 the Lot Size Map – Sheet LSZ_002 to include a minimum lot size of 450m2.

e.   Amend Schedule 1 – Additional Permitted Uses to include the following:

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

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

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

 

50.    The Gateway Determination (16 March 2018) granted Council delegation for the Planning Proposal. Council may consult directly with the Parliamentary Counsel’s Office (PCO) in relation to seeking an Opinion with respect to the LEP amendment under Section 3.36 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Next Steps

51.    The DP&E and the Department of Education will be advised of Council’s decision and the finalisation of the Planning Proposal.

 

52.    Subject to Council endorsement of the Planning Proposal for forwarding to the PCO for an Opinion, the anticipated next steps are included in Table 2 below:

 

Task

Anticipated Timeframe

Report to Environment and Planning Committee on public exhibition and finalisation of the Planning Proposal for Nos. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights (this Report)

8 October 2018

Report to Council on public exhibition and finalisation of the Planning Proposal for Nos. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights

22 October 2018

Date Council resolved to adopt the LEP

22 October 2018

Date sent to the PCO seeking an Opinion

November 2018

Date Opinion received

November/December 2018

Date LEP made by GM (or other) under delegation

December 2018

Date sent to DP&E requesting notification

December 2018

Table 2: Project timeline

 

Financial Implications

53.    Within budget allocation.

 

Risk Implications

54.    No risks identified.

 

Community Engagement

55.    Community engagement was conducted from 15 August to 14 September 2018 and no submissions were received.

 

File Reference

PP2017/0002

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Planning Proposal for Nos. 12-14 Pindari Road, Peakhurst Heights

 


Georges River Council – Environment and Planning Committee Meeting -  Monday, 8 October 2018                       Page 41

Item:                   ENV038-18        Georges River Local Environmental Plan Review Report 

Author:              Senior Strategic Planner and Senior Strategic Planner

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Committee Reports

 

 

 

Recommendation

(a)     That Council endorse the attached Georges River Local Environmental Plan Review Report, as contained in Attachment 1 of this Report.

(b)     That Council endorse that the General Manager may make minor modifications to correct any numerical, typographical, interpretation and formatting errors, if required, to improve clarity and readability.

(c)     That Council forward the Georges River Local Environmental Plan Review Report to the Greater Sydney Commission by 31 October 2018.

 

 

Executive Summary

1.      On 12 May 2016, the Minister for Local Government announced the newly formed Georges River Council (Council), which was formed out of the amalgamation of the former Kogarah Council and the former Hurstville Council. The amalgamation resulted in Council being governed by three Local Environmental Plans (LEPs) and four Development Control Plans (DCPs).

 

2.      An LEP review has been prepared to satisfy the legislative requirement under Section 3.8(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 which requires all councils in the Greater Sydney Region to undertake a review of their LEP(s), following the making of the District Plans in March 2018.

 

3.      The LEP Review includes an LEP Health Check, to identify how closely aligned Council’s LEPs are to the Actions in the South District Plan. The LEP Health Check is the first step in drafting a principal Georges River LEP.

 

4.      The Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) provided each District with a spreadsheet for Sustainability and Monitoring, Housing and Liveability, Productivity, and Infrastructure and Collaboration themes under the relevant District Plan, with each Action listed, along with prompting questions for discussion. The spreadsheets were used to complete the LEP Health Check.

 

5.      The LEP Health Check reviews Council’s LEPs against all 82 South District Plan Actions.

 

6.      Additionally, Council has compared four LEPs in the South District - Kogarah 2012, Hurstville 2012, Bankstown 2015 & Sutherland 2015 LEPs, to identify the similarities and differences between each LEP clause.

 

7.      The LEP Health Check and South District LEP Review demonstrates that KLEP 2012 and HLEP 2012 do not satisfactorily meet all 82 Actions in the South District Plan and provides a snapshot of what we are doing well and what we need to improve upon.

 

8.      The LEP review contains recommended changes to our planning controls in response to questions posed by the Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) and GSC. The recommendations are contained within the LEP Health Check spreadsheet for each of the four themes and also the body of the LEP Review.

 

9.      This Report recommends that Council endorse the LEP Review (Attachment 1) including the methodology; the LEP Health Check; timeframes; and investigations required for the Georges River Local Environmental Plan, to enable it to be forwarded to the GSC by their 31 October 2018 deadline.

 

10.    The next steps include the preparation and consultation of a draft Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) in March/April 2019, preparation of relevant strategies to inform the draft LSPS; including a Local Housing Strategy, an Inclusive Housing Strategy and a Commercial Centres Strategy for Georges River local Government area (LGA) over 2018/2019, exhibition of a planning proposal for the Georges River LEP in early 2020 and making of the LEP in June 2020.

 

Background

11.    The GSC (supported by the NSW DP&E) is committed to requiring all NSW Councils to align their LEPs with the actions in the Greater Sydney Region Plan and the District Plans, following the finalisation of the District Plans in March 2018.

 

12.    Tabulated below is the background to the drafting of the Georges River LEP:

 

Date

Details

12 May 2016

Former Hurstville and Kogarah Councils amalgamated into Georges River Council

 

October 2017

The NSW Government released the draft Greater Sydney Region Plan and the draft South District Plan. These plans outlined the need for councils to update their LEPs once both of the State Government Plans were finalised.

The draft South District Plan also set out a requirement for councils to prepare a Local Housing Strategy for the LGA.

The Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) and Environmental Planning & Assessment Bill 2017 were under review. The Bill set out a requirement that councils must draft a Community Participation Plan and a LSPS for the LGA.

 

27 November 2017

Council Meeting (NM015-17) Preparation of a New (City –Wide) Local Environmental Plan for Georges River

Summary of Council resolution

(a) That Council commence the preparation of a new Local Environmental Plan (LEP) for the Georges River local government area in early 2018.

(b) That the General Manager prepare a report detailing the proposed program for preparation of the LEP, including the necessary strategic studies, community consultation framework, timeframes and costs for preparation of the LEP.

(c)  That the General Manager investigate the scheduling of additional Councillor Workshop sessions during 2018 for the purposes of formulating the draft LEP.

 

26 February 2018

Council meeting (CCL001-18)

Summary of Council resolution

(a) The report on the Georges River Principal Local Environmental Plan be received and noted.

(b) Council endorse the preparation of a Housing Strategy, Community Participation Plan and Local Strategic Planning Statement for the Georges River local government area.

(c)  Council endorse the preparation of a principal Local Environmental Plan for the Georges River local government area.

 

March 2018

Amendments to the EP&A Act came into force and the Greater Sydney Region Plan and the South District Plan were finalised.

 

May 2018

Council prepared the South District LEP review in response to CCL001-18, the South District Plan and the Greater Sydney Region Plan. This includes the review of KLEP 2012 and HLEP 2012 against Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 (SLEP 2015) and Bankstown Local Environmental Plan 2015 (BLEP 2015).

The GSC released the LEP Roadmap Guidelines for updating Local Environmental Plans to give effect to the District Plans in the Greater Sydney Region (LEP Roadmap Guidelines).

 

June to September 2018

The GSC and the DP&E hosted a Technical Working Group (TWG) Program to assist in the preparation of the LEP Review and to give effect to the District Plans. The TWGs were separated into the following themes:

·    TWG 1: District Roadmap

·    TWG 2: Local Strategic Planning Statements

·    TWG 3: Sustainability and Monitoring

·    TWG 4: Housing and Liveability

·    TWG 5: Productivity

·    TWG 6: Infrastructure and Collaboration

 

The GSC provided each District with a spreadsheet for each of the four themes under the relevant District Plan, with each Action listed, along with prompting questions for discussion. The spreadsheets were used to complete an ‘LEP Health Check’ of Council’s LEPs against the 82 South District Plan Actions – (Refer to Attachments 5 – 8).

Council has completed the spreadsheets by comparing the two current LEPs using the GSC’s compliance ranking within the respective spreadsheets.

The LEP Roadmap Guidelines released in May 2018 provide guidelines to all NSW Councils for updating their LEPs to give effect to the five District Plans in the Greater Sydney Region. The LEP Review process as per the LEP Roadmap Guidelines provides the legislative context and includes six stages in the LEP review process. The LEP Roadmap Guidelines also includes the LEP Review template and the LEP timeline.

 

Table 1 – Background to the update of Georges River LEP

 

13.    Council was invited to apply for funding, made available to councils, to update their LEPs within two years. Georges River Council received the $2.5 million funding to prepare an LEP by June 2020.

 

LEP PROCESS

14.    This Report deliberates on the LEP Process that Council needs to undergo in accordance with the GSC’s LEP Roadmap Guidelines. The key steps in the LEP Process include:

 

·    Legislative context (See Figure 1)

·    Phase 1: Local environmental plan health check/review 

·    Phase 2: Draft local strategic planning statement

·    Phase 3: Final local strategic planning statement

·    Phase 4: Gateway determination

·    Phase 5: Exhibition of planning proposal

·    Phase 6: Plan making

 

Figure 1: Inter-relationship of metropolitan, district and local planning

 

Legislative Context:

15.    The release of the Greater Sydney Region Plan - A Metropolis of Three Cities and the five supporting District Plans in March 2018 provide a unique opportunity for all levels of Government to coordinate implementation to align infrastructure with growth.

 

16.    This is reinforced by recent amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act) and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000  which embed a statutory requirement for councils to review and amend their Local Environmental Plans (LEP) as soon as practicable after a District Plan is made.

 

17.    Together with the introduction of local strategic planning statements (LSPS), these initiatives put into practice the NSW Government’s policy shift towards upfront strategic planning.

 

18.    Local planning will also be informed by councils’ community strategic plans. The community strategic plan provide the strategic framework for the planning and delivery of services over a 10-year period for each local government area and are part of the broader Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework under the Local Government Act 1993.

 

19.    At present, Georges River Council (Council) is governed by three Local Environmental Plans (LEPs) and four Development Control Plans (DCPs). They include the following:

·    Three LEPs:

1.   Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP 2012);

2.   Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (HLEP 2012); and

3.   Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994 (HLEP 1994).

·    Four DCPs:

1.   Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013;

2.   Hurstville Development Control Plan 1 (Applies to land within the Peakhurst, Mortdale and Hurstville Wards);

3.   Hurstville Development Control Plan No. 2 – Hurstville City Centre (Amendment Number 5) (Applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre identified as Deferred Land) (HDCP2 – Amd. 5); and

4.   Hurstville Development Control Plan No. 2 – Hurstville City Centre (Amendment Number 7) (Applies to land identified as Hurstville City Centre, excluding the Deferred Land) (HDCP2 – Amd. 7).

 

20.    Provided below is the process for the preparation of a Georges River LEP, as per the GSC’s LEP Roadmap Guidelines.

 

Phase 1: Local environmental plan review/Health Check

 

Purpose

21.   The purpose of the LEP review, or “health check” (Attachment 1) is to undertake:

·    an assessment of the local environmental plan against the South District Plan planning priorities and actions

·    local context analysis

·    an overview and program for the local strategic planning required to inform the preparation of a local strategic planning statement that will inform updates to the local environmental plan

 

Technical Working Group Program

22.    To assist in the preparation of the LEP Review and to give effect to the District Plans, the GSC and the Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) hosted a Technical Working Group (TWG) Program from June to September 2018. The TWGs are separated into the four themes, as set out below:

·    Housing and Liveability

·    Productivity

·    Sustainability and Monitoring

·    Infrastructure and Collaboration

 

23.    The draft LEP and LSPS build upon the strategic planning work being undertaken by Council over the last 18 months; including the Local Housing Strategy, the Foreshore Review, the Industrial Lands Review, the Commercial Centres Strategy and the Economic Development Strategy (refer to Attachment 1 for more detail).

 

24.    Council will engage with the community to draft a LSPS and complete any strategic background studies that will be identified in the LSPS. These will include the studies referred in point 23 and others identified in Section 4.1 of the LEP Health Check Report (Attachment 1). These background studies will inform the preparation of the Georges River LEP. Some of these background studies have been identified under the following four themes.

 

25.    The LEP review contains recommended changes to our planning controls in response to questions posed by Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) and Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) in the four spreadsheets.

 

26.    The LEP Review includes a project plan for the finalisation of the LEP by June 2020 and identifies evidence that will be required to inform the LEP update in form of various studies and strategies. The LEP review will be reported to the October 2018 Council meeting in order to forward it to the GSC by the 31 October 2018 deadline.

 

Liveability

27.    Based on the known housing approvals and construction activity within Georges River LGA, Council is anticipating that the 0-5 year housing supply target of 4,800 will be achieved.

 

28.    Council is in the process of preparing a Local Housing Strategy and an Inclusive Housing Strategy that will deliver the 20-year strategic housing target and investigate and recognise opportunities for long-term housing supply associated with city-shaping transport corridors as identified in the Future Transport 2056.

 

29.    According to the City Futures Research Centre’s Sydney Housing Affordability Index, across most property sales in the North, Central and South districts, less than 20% of sales were affordable to a household earning $100,000. Council’s Inclusive Housing Strategy will aim to address this affordability challenge and provide a diverse housing typology for people from very low to low income households, seniors, people with a disability, students and key workers.

 

30.    The Local Housing Strategy and the Inclusive Housing Strategy may result in a number of LEP actions, including but not limited to:

·    Possible rezoning of R2 Low Density Residential land to R3 Medium Density Residential land

·    Possible rezoning of R3 Medium Density Residential land to R4 High Density Residential land

·    Changes to development standards to appropriately allow for medium density housing

 

Productivity

31.    Council has prepared a draft Economic Development Strategy (EDS), which has analysed the numbers, reviewed our centres and developed key performance indicators. The LGA as a whole is tracking well in terms of productivity, with the following key statistics:

·    50,000 local jobs

·    GRP growing at a rate comparable to Greater Sydney and greater than the rate of population growth

·    Low unemployment rate of 3.4% (Greater Sydney 4.5%)

·    Reasonable employment self-containment (37%) and capacity for LGA to be a 20 minute city (that is our Strategic Centres can be accessed from anywhere within the LGA in <20 minutes.)

·    EDS takes a place based approach on the basis that being competitive in a modern economy is about creating places or centres that are attractive to live, work or invest in.

 

32.    Council is also in the process of preparing a Commercial Centres Strategy. This strategy will create a hierarchy of all local and strategic centres in the LGA and will review the planning controls for the business zones.

 

33.    Council has commissioned SGS Planning to undertake a detailed review of the industrial precincts within the LGA (Industrial Lands Review). This includes a supply and demand analysis by land use, to better understand the suitability of different precincts for local and strategic land uses.

 

34.    The Commercial Centres Strategy, Industrial Lands Review and EDS may result in a number of LEP actions, including but not limited to:

·    Expansion of business zones

·    Diversification of the IN2 Light Industrial zone – in line with Actions 39 and 40 of the South District Plan:

o Action 39 - Retain and manage industrial and urban services land, in line with the Principles for managing industrial and urban services land, in the South District by safeguarding all industrial zoned land from conversion to residential development, including conversion to mixed-use zones. In updating local environmental plans, councils are to conduct a strategic review of industrial lands.

o Action 40 - Consider office development in industrial zones where it does not compromise industrial or urban services activities.

·    Local provisions to activate all local and strategic centres and improve urban design outcomes

·    Possible amendments to development standards for the business zones (with the exception of the Beverly Hills local centre, which is the subject of the Beverly Hills Masterplan)

 

Sustainability

35.    The Standard Instrument – Principal LEP does not contain clauses relevant to the Actions within the Sustainability LEP Health Check and therefore our LEPs do not address these Actions. In reviewing our South District LEP Review, it is clear that other councils are using local provisions to address sustainability issues. Council will explore the use of local provisions in the Georges River LEP to address these Actions.

 

36.    Council is currently completing a Foreshore Access and Improvement Plan and Foreshore Review of Councils LEP and DCP Controls. Such strategic planning work will inform the Georges River LEP.

 

37.    The Foreshore Access and Improvement Plan and Foreshore Review of Councils LEP and DCP Controls may result in a number of LEP actions, including but not limited to:

·    Changes to land zonings in the foreshore area

·    Changes to development standards in the foreshore area

·    An amended Foreshore Building Line

·    Introduction of new local provisions to address the sustainability and biodiversity Actions within the South District Plan


Infrastructure & Collaboration

38.    Council does not have the funds available or the opportunities to source the funding for the infrastructure projects that are required to serve the existing population. Further growth is only appropriate if the infrastructure is in place and ready to serve the current and future population.

 

39.    Council is willing to initiate discussions with the State Government on the Kogarah Health and Education Precinct to promote and enhance the role of this centre in order to serve Southern Sydney.

 

40.    In reviewing our South District LEP Review, it is clear that other councils are using local provisions to address public benefit deficits. Council will explore amendments to the local provisions within the LEP to allow for development standards to be amended (in accordance with the clause), in exchange for public benefits.

 

41.    Council will complete a comprehensive review of our plans and policies relating to Section 7.4 Planning agreements, Section 7.11 Contribution towards provision or improvement of amenities or services and Section 7.12 Fixed development consent levies under the EP& A Act.

 

42.    Council will also explore a regional approach to funding infrastructure projects that will benefit the South District.

 

Phases 2 and 3: Draft and final local strategic planning statement

Local Strategic Planning Statement

43.    Section 3.9 of the EP&A Act requires Council to draft an LSPS. The LSPS presents an opportunity for Council to create a 20 year vision for our LGA that respects and strengthens the character of our suburbs and the social, environmental and economic values of our community. It will build upon the 10 year vision of the Community Strategic Plan and must emphasise strategic land use, transport and environmental planning, whilst clearly demonstrating how the LGA will change to meet the community’s needs in 20 years’ time.

 

Figure 2: Local Strategic Planning Statement – Strategic-led planning

 

44.    Many of the 82 Actions within the South District Plan do not fit within an LEP, but they can be incorporated into an LSPS. This is clearly illustrated in the LEP Health Check where future studies or strategies are required to be identified in an LSPS in order to address an Action, prior to any LEP amendment being considered appropriate.

 

45.    The LSPS will be the primary resource to express the desired future for the LGA and will guide and indicate what significant changes are planned for the LEP and DCPs, to deliver the vision.

 

46.    To assist in explaining the context for implementation of the final LSPS, councils may develop supporting material to explain the priorities identified in the draft, options considered and reasons for final choices as well as supporting plans and initiatives such as development control plans and public domain strategies.

 

47.   Council will review submissions received during the public exhibition of the draft LSPS and make modifications to planning priorities and actions for the LGA as appropriate. Any incomplete strategic work or ongoing planning issues can be identified in the final LSPS as further work to be undertaken in the LSPS action plan, which would need to be resolved prior to finalisation of the Georges River LEP.

 

48.   The LSPS may result in a number of LEP actions, including but not limited to:

·    New local provisions to address the 82 Actions within the South District Plan

·    New local provisions and amendments to development standards, to guide the desired future character of our suburbs

 

South District LEP review

49.    In addition to completing the LEP Health Check, Council staff also compared four of the LEPs in the South District, being KLEP 2012, HLEP 2012, BLEP 2015 and SLEP 2015 (South District LEP Review). The South District LEP Review identifies the similarities and differences between each LEP clause in a table format and has been used to inform the LEP Review.

 

50.    The LEP Health Check and South District LEP Review demonstrates that KLEP 2012 and HLEP 2012 do not satisfactorily meet all 82 Actions in the South District Plan and provide a snapshot of what we are doing well and what we need to improve upon.

 

Phase 4: Gateway determination

 

Planning Proposal

51.   Once the direction to be followed in the LSPS is established, councils can commence preparation of a planning proposal in accordance with the DP&E’s ‘A guide to preparing planning proposals’.

 

52.   The purpose of the planning proposal is to achieve the spatial or policy-based recommendations outlined in the LSPS in a new principal Georges River LEP.

 

53.   The planning proposal is to be endorsed by Council and forwarded to the relevant Regional team of the DP&E for a Gateway Determination. At this time, it is also appropriate to be considering and preparing supporting documentation such as development control plans and contribution plans.

 

Phase 5: Exhibition of planning proposal

54.   The planning proposal is to be placed on public exhibition and referred to State agencies in accordance with the conditions of the Gateway Determination. The planning proposal will be exhibited for a minimum of 28 days, and amend the planning proposal in response to the submissions. In this circumstance, the DP&E will work with Council to determine whether re-exhibition of the planning proposal is required.

 

Phase 6: Plan making

55.   Once council has resolved to adopt the draft LEP, Council will forward all relevant information to the DP&E for the drafting of the instrument. Once a draft of the instrument has been prepared, the Secretary, or delegate will consult with Council on the content of the LEP.

 

TIMELINE

56.    The timeline/next steps for the preparation of the Georges River LEP by June 2020 is provided in Table 2 below:

Date

Details

8 October 2018

Environment and Planning Committee Report on the Georges River Phase 1 LEP Review (this Report)

22 October 2018

Council Report on the Georges River Phase 1 LEP Review.

31 October 2018

Forward the Phase 1 LEP Review to GSC

October 2018 to June 2019

Phase 2 - Draft LSPS

·    Undertake studies (Evidence base) including a Local Housing Strategy, an Inclusive Housing Strategy and a Commercial Centres Strategy.

·    Prepare draft LSPS

March/April 2019

Preliminary consultation on Phase 2 - Draft LSPS

October/November 2019

Draft LSPS exhibition

November/December2019

Phase 3 - Finalise LSPS

·    Review submissions and implementation options (March to July 2019)

·    Finalise LSPS (May to November 2019)

April-July 2019

Phase 4 – Gateway

·    Prepare planning proposal (April to August 2019)

·    Gateway Determination (July to November 2019)

August 2019

Submit Planning Proposal for Gateway

January to May 2020

Phase 5 – Draft LEP on Exhibition

·    Prepare consultation material (November 2019 to January 2020)

·    Exhibit planning proposal (February March 2020)

·    Finalise planning proposal (March to May 2020)

June 2020

Phase 6 – Plan making

Submit final Planning Proposal to DP&E for notification

Table 2 – Timeline for the preparation of the Georges River LEP by June 2020

 

Financial Implications

57.    The GSC has allocated $2.5 million from the Priority Council LEP grant funding to Council, to draft a principal Georges River LEP within the two year time frame.

 

Risk Implications

58.    No risks identified.

 

Community Engagement

59.    Community engagement on the LSPS will be conducted in early 2019. Community engagement on the Planning Proposal for the Georges River Local Environmental Plan will be carried out in early 2020 (Refer to the timeline above).

 

File Reference

17/2561

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Georges River LEP Review

Attachment 2

South District LEP Review - Part 1

Attachment 3

South District LEP Review - Part 2

Attachment 4

South District LEP Review - Part 3

Attachment 5

Liveability Actions - LEP Health Check

Attachment 6

Infrastructure Actions - LEP Health Check

Attachment 7

Productivity Actions - LEP Health Check

Attachment 8

Sustainability Actions - LEP Health Check