Agenda


Environment and Planning Committee

 

Monday, 08 April 2019

7.00pm

 

Georges River Civic Centre

Hurstville

 

 

 

 


Georges River Council –          Environment and Planning -  Monday, 8 April 2019                                                        Page 2

 

          Environment and Planning

ORDER OF BUSINESS

 

1.      Acknowledgement of Country

2.      Apologies

3.      Disclosures of Interest

4.      Public Addresses to the Meeting

5.      Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting  

MINUTES: Environment and Planning - 11 March 2019

6.      Committee Reports

ENV008-19       Beverly Hills Masterplan - Phase 1

(Report by Senior Strategic Planner).......................................................................... 3

ENV009-19       Planning Proposal 2017/0001 - No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale

(Report by Coordinator Strategic Planning).......................................................... 153

ENV010-19       Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Draft Plan of Management and Masterplan

(Report by Strategic Planner).................................................................................. 227  

 

 


Georges River Council –          Environment and Planning -  Monday, 8 April 2019                                                        Page 4

Committee Reports

Item:                   ENV008-19        Beverly Hills Masterplan - Phase 1  

Author:              Senior Strategic Planner

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Committee Reports

 

Recommendation

(a)     That Council receives and notes the report, including the community vision report and technical studies undertaken in Phase 1 of the Beverly Hills Masterplan.

(b)     That Council endorses proceeding with Phase 2 to prepare a Masterplan of Beverly Hills Town Centre to develop a coordinated approach to the future development of the Centre.

 

Executive Summary

1.        In early 2017, Council was approached by a number of landowners of several key sites within the Beverly Hills Town Centre with requests to prepare planning proposals to amend the planning controls and facilitate redevelopment on their sites. Individual consideration of these requests may have resulted in a fragmented built form and scale within the Centre without the provision of key infrastructure and public domain improvements.

2.      Accordingly, Council decided to prepare a Masterplan for Beverly Hills to provide a clear vision and an urban design framework for the public and private domain, with a view to improve the amenity and quality of the built environment of the Centre. Importantly, the Masterplan will identify future infrastructure requirements for inclusion in an infrastructure contributions plan or any future planning agreement. Phase 1 costs were covered by the Stronger Communities Fund 2017/2018 budget. 

3.      The key aim of the proposed Beverly Hills Masterplan is to provide a coordinated approach for any future development of the Centre which will include an Implementation Plan.

4.      A Masterplan of Council’s vision for the Centre provides guidance to developers and greater transparency to the community. It is important to note that planning proposals for sites within the study area may be submitted at any time and preparing a Masterplan and Implementation Plan for the Centre would assist Council in determining whether a proposal has strategic merit and meets community expectation, including the delivery of public benefits.

5.      The study area includes the B2 Local Centre zoned area along King Georges Road and adjoining residential areas within approximately 400m radius of the Beverly Hills Station.

6.      The Masterplan is split into two phases. Phase 1 involves the development of a vision for the future of the Centre through community engagement and an analysis of the opportunities and constraints to development in the study area. Phase 2 will involve the preparation of a Masterplan that will recommend a future development strategy for the area to address development pressure, a deteriorating urban fabric, poor public domain and lack of activation in the Centre. The Masterplan will recommend changes to land use and built form controls in a future Comprehensive Georges River LEP.

7.      The outcomes of Stage 1 include an engagement summary report and the following technical reports: a planning review, an urban design analysis, an economic feasibility study and a transport and accessibility assessment. These reports investigate the opportunities and constraints to development within the study area and provide recommendations and further guidance for the preparation of the Masterplan in Phase 2.

8.      This Report will present the findings of Phase 1 of the Beverly Hills Masterplan, which was completed in March 2019, and will seek endorsement from Council to proceed with Phase 2 of the Masterplan.

 

Developing a Masterplan for Beverly Hills Town Centre

9.      The purpose of the Beverly Hills Masterplan is to revitalise the Beverly Hills commercial centre and improve the quality of life for residents, workers and visitors by creating attractive streets and a Centre that are great places to live, work and visit. The key aim of the Beverly Hills Masterplan will be to recommend a coordinated approach to future development of this Centre.

 

10.    The objectives of the Masterplan are to: 

·        Develop a vision for the Beverly Hills Town Centre that addresses and responds to the community’s ideas and aspirations for the future of the Centre;

·        Enhance the vibrancy of the Town Centre and make Beverly Hills a destination;

·        Strengthen the Centre’s economy by providing initiatives for sustainable business, including retail, commercial and entertainment activities;

·        Improve the visual and aesthetic qualities, amenity and liveability of the public domain;

·        Improve the connectivity and accessibility to, from and within the Beverly Hills Town Centre for pedestrians and vehicles;

·        Effectively capitalise on opportunities to grow as a destination and address any constraints to future development;

·        Achieve a high standard of design quality, sustainability and innovation in development;

·        Achieve housing diversity and affordability;

·        Engage the community effectively throughout the preparation and development of the Masterplan and achieve broad community and stakeholder support for the project; and

·        Identify infrastructure and public domain requirements in order to achieve the vision of the Town Centre.

 

11.    The Masterplan is split into two phases. Phase 1 involves the development of a vision for the future of the Centre through community engagement and an analysis of the opportunities and constraints to development in the study area. The outcomes of Stage 1 include an engagement summary report and the following technical reports: a planning review, an urban design analysis, an economic feasibility study and a transport and accessibility assessment. These reports investigate the opportunities and constraints to development within the study area and provide recommendations and further guidance for the preparation of the Masterplan in Phase 2.

12.    Phase 2 will involve the preparation of a Masterplan that will recommend a future development strategy for the area to address development pressure, a deteriorating urban fabric, poor public domain and lack of activation in the Centre. The Masterplan will recommend changes to land use and built form controls in the Hurstville LEP 2012 or a future Comprehensive Georges River LEP.

13.    A Masterplan of Council’s vision for the Centre provides guidance to developers and greater transparency to the community. It is important to note that planning proposals for sites within the study area may be submitted at any time and preparing a Masterplan and Implementation Plan for the Centre would assist Council in determining whether a proposal has strategic merit, and meets community expectation, including the delivery of public benefits.

 

Beverly Hills Town Centre Study Area

14.     The study area includes the commercial centre strip along King Georges Road and surrounding residential area. The study area is generally bounded by Broadarrow Road and Ponyara Road to the north, Pallamana Parade and Cahill Street to the east and Stoney Creek Road to the south, and Melvin Street to the west as shown in Figures 1 and 2.

 

Figure 1. Aerial Map of Beverly Hills (study area in red)

 

Figure 2. Hurstville LEP 2012 Land Use Zoning Map (Study area in red)

 

15.     The study area includes the B2 - Local Centre zoned area of Beverly Hills and the surrounding residential area. It includes land zoned R2 Low Density Residential, R3 Medium Density Residential and SP2 Infrastructure. It is noted that a small portion of the B2 Local Centre is outside the study area as it is part of the road. Beverly Hills Town Centre is located in proximity to two major transport arteries – the T8 railway line including Beverly Hills Station and King Georges Road and provides an opportunity for transit-oriented development with enhanced accessibility to services via sustainable modes like walking and cycling.

 

16.     The study area includes the Edgbaston Road car park and the Beverly Hills Girls High School. A large channel, owned by Sydney Water, crosses under King Georges Road approximately midway between the intersections with Frederick Avenue and Norfolk Avenue. The channel flows towards the north-west.

 

Community Engagement

17.     Community engagement is a crucial part of the development of a vision for the Beverly Hills Town Centre. The aim of the Phase 1 consultation was to inform local residents, landowners, business owners and other key stakeholders of the Masterplan process and provide them the opportunity to express their concerns, ideas, visions and aspirations for the future of the Centre. These views will be incorporated into the Masterplan to ensure future development reflects the needs and expectations of the community.

 

18.     The community engagement activities undertaken for Phase 1 are summarised below:

 

Activity/ Description

Target Audience

Date/Time

Number of participants

Online

Project information was provided on Council’s website, social media (Facebook page) and as a project on Council’s Your Say online panel.

§ Local residents

§ Businesses

§ Visitors

§ Workers

§ Landowners

August 2018 -ongoing

805 online visits to the project page

 

Letters

Addressed letters sent to landowners inviting them to register their interest to participate in community engagement activities for the vision for Beverly Hills Town Centre.

§ Landowners/residents

6 August 2018

800 properties (within the study area)

Community Magazine

Article in Council’s magazine about Masterplan project asking for ideas on Council’s Your Say online panel.

§ Local residents

§ Businesses

§ Visitors

§ Workers

§ Landowners

Spring Edition 2018

Distributed to all local residents in the LGA

Newspapers

Article in local newspaper about Masterplan project asking for ideas on Council’s Your Say online panel.

Advertisement in local newspaper inviting community feedback at the drop-in session and Your Say project page.

§ Local residents

§ Businesses

§ Visitors

§ Workers

§ Landowners

22 August 2018

 

 

 

31 October 2018

St George and Sutherland Shire Leader newspaper distribution

Letter box

Postcard letterbox drop of invitation to participate, distributed to residents and businesses within an 800 metre radius of Beverly Hills station.

§ Residents

§ Businesses

Completed by

26 October 2018

Approximately 2,000 postcards

Survey

The survey included questions on the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and constraints of the Centre. It included image responses and demographic questions. The survey was available on Council’s Your Say webpage.

Roaming surveys were conducted in the Centre over a two hour period.

§ Local residents

§ Businesses

§ Visitors

§ Workers

§ Landowners

 

26 October– December 2018

 

 

 

1 November 2018,

4.00pm-6.00pm

 

27 responses in total

Landowner Interviews

Landowner interviews were conducted to have an open discussion with both Council and Council’s consulting team to talk about their vision for the Beverly Hills Town Centre. Stakeholders’ responses were prompted by a number of questions that discussed opportunities, current uses and future direction for the Beverly Hills area.

§ Landowners

§ Business owners

 

27 September –

4 October 2018

5 interviews were conducted with landowners and business owners

Drop-in session

Participants were invited to ask questions or provide their feedback directly to a Council representative or a KJA (Council’s engagement consultant) staff member. Participants had the opportunity to share their thoughts by completing a survey or providing feedback using the posters set up around the marquee.

§ Local residents

§ Businesses

§ Visitors

§ Workers

§ Passers-by

Saturday 3 November 2018,

10.00am-2.00pm

40 (approx.)

Community Walk

Participants navigated the study area via a guided walk through the precincts. Participants were given a map of the walking route and had the opportunity to provide feedback through a questionnaire. The walking route was designed to prompt participants to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and constraints of each precinct. Throughout the walk participants were facilitated by the Guide to respond to a questionnaire and engage in discussions with Council staff and the members of the project team. 

§ Local residents

§ Businesses

§ Workers

Community Walk 1: Thursday 1 November 2018, 6.00pm-7.30pm

 

Community Walk 2: Saturday 3 November 2018, 10.30am-12.00pm

Community Walk 1: 14

 

 

Community Walk 2: 3

Focus Groups

Focus group sessions were held to gather feedback on the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and constraints of the town centre.

Participants were presented with maps of each precinct around the room and encouraged to place post-it notes with their written feedback.

Participants were then asked to respond to the following question, ‘What would you like Beverly Hills Town Centre to look and feel like in 2030?’.

§ Local residents

§ Businesses

§ Workers

 

Focus Group 1: Thursday 8 November 2018, 6.00pm-7.00pm

 

Focus Group 2: Saturday 10 November 2018, 9.00am – 10.00am

Focus Group 1: 15

 

Focus Group 2: 10 

 

19.     Engagement activities were designed around the following questions to better understand the community’s current issues and priorities, and future needs and aspirations:

·    What’s working and how can we leverage this?

·    What’s not working?

·    What could be improved?

·    What are the future needs and aspirations for the town centre?

 

20.     The feedback from the community consultation revealed the following:

·     Limited public open space and poor streetscape appearance/ comfort /safety;

·     Unfeasible development controls a barrier to investment;

·     Limited housing diversity, mixed use development and no supermarket;

·     Limited accessibility, permeability and safety for pedestrians and cyclists;

·     Limited car parking availability; and

·     King Georges Road - low vacancy rate and strong night time economy/ poor daytime economy.

 

21.    The feedback from our consultations with key landowners revealed the following:

·    Good night time economy centered around the Cinema;

·    Lack of retail offering (e.g. full line supermarket, homewares, medical services, commercial office space), parking and site consolidation;

·    Limited development occurring in the  R3 Medium Density Residential zone (no townhouse developments);

·    Keen interest from developers in the B2 Local Centre zone for shop top housing;

·    Lack of floor space incentives for redevelopment; and

·    Suggested Floor Space Ratios of 3:1 to 4:1, with FSRs as high as 6.4:1.

 

Vision for Beverly Hills

 

22.    Based on feedback from the community and key landowners, an overarching vision statement and 5 underlying vision themes have been developed to reflect the community’s priorities and aspirations for the future, and to guide the preparation of the draft Masterplan for the Beverly Hills Town Centre.

 

23.    The following vision statement is proposed:

The Beverly Hills Town Centre celebrates its existing character while successfully integrating a new, modern feel. It provides a safe, inviting environment for all, is accessible and well-connected, and has green streets and open spaces to enjoy.

 

24.    The five themes for the Vision for Beverly Hills are listed below, along with their aim and principles.

 

1.      Community Life

Vision Aim: An inclusive place that reflects local identity and supports the diverse needs of the community.

 

Principles:

·       Reflects and celebrates existing culture and lifestyle

·       Lively, inclusive, interactive and attractive

·       Community facilities and services meet community needs

·       Housing diversity and inclusive housing

·       Places to gather, celebrate and interact

·       Buildings, streets and places reflect local character and identity

 

2.      Urban Design and Architecture

Vision Aim: Beverly Hills Town Centre is attractive, distinctive, inviting and vibrant.

 

Principles:

·       High quality and well-designed buildings and landscapes

·       People friendly, comfortable and attractive

·       Human scale with heights that transition

·       Harmoniously mixing old and new

·       Areas of distinctive character are retained and enhanced

3.      Transport and Connection

Vision Aim: Safe, accessible, enjoyable and well connected

 

Principles:

·       Safer and fairer balance between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles

·       Encourages multi modal trips and public transport use 

·       Enhances mobility, permeability and accessibility for people of all abilities 

·       Improved accessibility of public transport (e.g. new links and lift)

·       Improved connectivity across King Georges Road and railway

·       Car parking is available and accessible

 

4.      Public Domain and Landscape

Vision Aim: People focused streets and places that are green, comfortable and interactive

 

Principles:

·    Greener and more attractive with street furnishings, landscaping and trees

·    A new Civic Plaza for gathering, events and quiet enjoyment

·    Wider King Georges Road footpaths for pedestrian safety and alfresco

·    Respects the “Garden City” character of the Warrawee Place Precinct and key views to landmark elements as a key part of local character and identity

·    A network of public open spaces is connected with green routes

·    School grounds are accessible for public recreation purposes (Subject to Department of Education)

 

5.   Land use:

Vision Aim: Diverse land uses that provide for a wide range of community needs and public benefits

 

Principles:

·    Mixed use buildings on King Georges Road to promote activity and vibrancy both day and night

·    A “one-stop” shopping destination with supermarket, retail, bars, cafes, cinema

·    Connected places for people to meet in streets, parks and plazas

·    New active building frontages in areas of higher amenity and lower traffic noise

·    Increased density in appropriate locations where public benefit outcomes can be achieved (e.g. setbacks, land dedication, open spaces, public cross links)

·    Leverage the existing convenience of the area to attract new people and families

·    Renewed ground level retail that provides an active street frontage

 

25.     The engagement summary report is attached to this Report (Attachment 1).

 

Research and Analysis

26.     The following technical studies were undertaken to inform the preparation of the Masterplan – Phase 1:

·    Planning Review

·    Urban Design Analysis

·    Transport and Accessibility Assessment

·    Development Feasibility Study

 

Planning Review

 

27.     The planning review outlines the existing planning framework and identifies a range of key opportunities to consider during the preparation of the Masterplan. A copy is attached to this Report (Attachment 2).

 

28.     The following plans and strategies were reviewed:

·    Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012

·    Hurstville Development Control Plan No. 1 (Amendment 7)

·    Past development applications

·    Greater Sydney Region Plan - A Metropolis of Three Cities (Greater Sydney Commission, 2018)

·    South District Plan (Greater Sydney Commission, 2018)

·    Georges River Community Strategic Plan 2018-2028

·    Georges River Employment Lands Study (2017)

·    Draft Open Space, Recreation and Community Facilities Strategy 2018-2036

·    Section 9.1 Ministerial Direction – Development Near Licensed Aerodromes

 

29.     Specific opportunities identified through a review of the planning framework to be considered in Phase 2 of the Masterplan are outlined as follows:

·      Identify new open space opportunities to provide places to gather noting the lack of RE1 Public Recreation zoned land in the study area.

·      Consider potential incentives to encourage amalgamation of fragmented land parcels potentially through minimum lot size and floor space ratio controls to deliver public benefits such as new links and public open spaces.

·      Consider transition of building height across the precinct to ensure height compatibility.

·      Identify opportunities to create new active building frontages in areas of higher amenity with lower traffic and noise impacts.

·      Identify development controls that provide a feasible development framework and encourage investment in the Centre as well as support design quality.

·      Enhance housing diversity to deliver new housing and support the activity within the walking catchment of Beverly Hills Town Centre.

·      Enhance the diversity of uses in the centre to encourage more activity during day and night time hours.

·      Improve streetscape quality and comfort with better street furnishings, tree planting and landscaping and tree canopy.

·      Improve permeability and walkability of local streets is an opportunity for this Centre. A key challenge will be to balance the needs of pedestrians and vehicles especially given the extension of clearways/ removal of car parking spaces further afield along King Georges Road.

·      Provide affordable housing in the Centre, consideration for incentives and delivery models.

·      Consider potential joint use of school grounds for public recreation purposes outside of school hours. This opportunity may be explored with key stakeholders in upcoming master planning processes.

 

 

Urban Design Analysis

 

30.    The urban design analysis involved an investigation of current land uses, built form, transition to adjoining residential areas, subdivision patterns, infrastructure and public domain. The analysis included a review of the following issues: historic overview, topography and landform, urban structure, land use and activity nodes, land ownership, built form, open space and landscape, views and legibility, access and connectivity, flooding and stormwater. A copy is attached to this Report (Attachment 3).

 

31.    For the purpose of the urban design analysis, the study area was further defined into five precincts as identified below and in Figure 3.

 

Precinct

Overview of key characteristics

1.   North-western educational

 

·   Consists of Beverly Hills Girls High School and Intensive English Centre.

·   Creates a northern leafy entry gateway to the Centre and an educational anchor to the King Georges Road strip.

2.   South-western residential

 

·   The majority of the precinct has been infilled with mainly two to three storey residential flat buildings, many relatively recently constructed.

·   Some streets of remaining single-storey red brick bungalows (e.g. part of Edgbaston Road).

·   Limited permeability due to long street blocks.

·   Strata titled properties are prevalent in this precinct.

3.   North-eastern residential

 

·   Tooronga Terrace shops provide a “Village” retail character away from busy King Georges Road and includes a small open space/ plaza area.

·   This is primarily single-storey red brick and tile bungalows facing relatively narrow treed streets, very cohesive in character and style.

·   Some Art Deco architectural influences and occasional Spanish Mission styles, some contemporary infill and housing additions.

·   Warrawee Place exhibits a “Garden City” character with a strong open space axis terminating at Yarallah Place.

·   Street frontages are often garage-free with rear service laneways for garages located to the rear of the relatively large lots.

4.   Eastern residential

 

·   Similar to the north-eastern residential precinct except less cohesive in character and style.

·   The streets are wider and there is less of the early housing stock remaining.

·   There is more contemporary infill – one and two-storey mixed scale dwellings.

·   Most streetscapes are impacted by overhead electricity wiring requiring lopping of street trees.

·   Stormwater concrete channels sometimes exposed to view and pass through private property.

5.   The Strip

 

·   The King Georges Road strip is both single-storey restaurant/shop frontages with low parapets and intermittent two-storey frontages.

·   Key land uses include the cinema, two-storey shops or commercial/personal services to the top floor, the two-storey Beverly Hills Hotel and adjacent “Hepburn Court”.

·   Restaurants are a strong feature of the precinct and a key defining element that Beverly Hills is known for. Lacks ‘people places’/ town heart.

·   The restaurant/commercial frontages return into side streets only marginally except for along Tooronga Terrace where two-storey frontages face south.

·   Has high traffic volumes and accommodates the movement of large trucks, which can be noisy, particularly at peak times.

·   Opportunities for pedestrians to cross over King Georges Road are limited to key intersections, pedestrian crossings adjacent to the cinema and the railway underpass.

·   Some gaps in the streetscape due to some vacant tenancies, car park and vacant site adjacent to the cinema.

·   Limited parking opportunities.

 

 

32.    The urban design analysis provides recommended objectives and principles to guide the preparation of the Masterplan in Phase 2.

 

(i)      Re-imagine King Georges Road

·    Support King Georges Road as an active, vibrant and attractive day and night destination

·    Support key night time uses – restaurant vitality, cinema

·    Define entry gateways and the main avenue of King Georges Road with new and distinctive buildings, structures and landscapes

·    Enclose the street - determine the most desirable relationship of new development to the street edge

·    Inviting to pedestrians to use the footpaths “alfresco”

·    Increase the buffer from the traffic for people on the street

·    Examine the potential for widened footpaths with trees.

 

 

(ii)     Better Public Domain

·    A new strategically located public open space(s) as a catalyst for new development. A space for respite, for greening and shade, for people to gather e.g. markets/events

·    Determine the most desirable location for a new Town Square

·    Enhance existing open spaces and create safe, attractive laneways

·    Provide places for people to meet – parks, bars, cafes, cinema

·    Create opportunities to make new public spaces associated with private enterprise development to promote revitalisation of the Strip

·    The east-west canalised stormwater system to be a combined water management and enhanced public open space asset.

 


 


Figure 3. Urban Structure (Precincts in Study Area)

 

 

 

(iii)    Improve Connectivity, Safety And Amenity

·    Residential areas to be connected to the Town Centre

·    Promote permeability from adjacent residential areas to the Strip including open air arcades

·    Safer, more connected Town Centre with identified pedestrian areas, shareways and bicycle routes in private development

·    Integrate new lift for access to platform on west side and new bridge link on Warrawee Place axis.

 

(iv)    Enhance Local Character

·    Respect local character and enhance identity

·    Encourage fine grain mixed use – mixing old and new

·    Identify and protect important 1940s/50s red brick residential streetscapes and individual buildings

·    Conserve any important early shopfronts/commercial buildings

·    Retain vistas to landmark sites and buildings

·    Recognise the “Garden City” character of the Warrawee Avenue area and key views to landmark elements.

 

(v)     Integrate Infrastructure - Greener Streets

·    Green residential streets to combat heat island effect

·    New residential street planting programme and footpath improvements

·    Develop a street tree masterplan that establishes a street hierarchy

·    Canalised stormwater system as green corridor.

 

(vi)    Encourage Mixed Use Redevelopment

·    Encourage King Georges Road frontage redevelopment for mixed use purposes. Retail/restaurants on ground floor, commercial or residential

·    Vertical mix of uses to increase activity through night and day

·    Undertake Urban Design studies to determine appropriate infill development height and density, develop the typology

·    Provide passive surveillance of the public domain

·    Co-locate complementary uses – retail/entertainment/residential

·    Concentrate mixed use in the vicinity of the Station

·    Support a “fine grain” of uses for diversity

·    Activate the edges of streets and lanes, encourage outdoor dining - protected from excessive traffic impacts

·    Encourage an integrated shopping “centre” (with supermarket) as part of the revitalisation of the Strip - a “one-stop destination”

·    Integrate car parking with other uses where possible

·    With increased density include housing mix and affordable options. Density uplift linked to public benefit outcomes e.g. setbacks, land dedication, open spaces, public cross links.

 

(vii)   Appropriate Development Controls

·    New urban design guidelines, planning controls and incentives to foster rejuvenation and quality design outcomes

·    Enclosing the street - determine the desirable relationship of new development to the street edge

·    Develop Design Guidelines for noise and air quality control within the urban corridor strip including:

o Built form massing

o Apartment layout and orientation

o Integrated Design elements

o Prepare public domain/streetscape shopfront guidelines for King Georges Road.

 

Transport and Accessibility Assessment

 

33.    The transport and accessibility assessment provides a desktop assessment of the traffic and parking considerations with respect to the constraints and opportunities of the study area, prior to a more detailed study being undertaken in Phase 2 of the Masterplan. A copy is attached to this Report (Attachment 4).

 

34.    The study reviews State transport strategies; provides an assessment of the existing transport and accessibility situation at Beverly Hills; identifies the opportunities and constraints of existing public infrastructure; and reviews the existing parking demand and supply in the Centre.

 

35.    The following is a summary of the findings:

·        A review of the Beverly Hills Masterplan study area highlights the need to facilitate improved connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists throughout the Town Centre. King Georges Road acts as a physical barrier for pedestrians, effectively limiting access from the western side to the eastern side.

·        Currently, there are limited crossing opportunities along King Georges Road between Stoney Creek Road and Broadarrow Road. It is recommended that the existing infrastructure be upgraded to facilitate improved pedestrian connectivity across the precinct.

·        In terms of public transport infrastructure, bus services are generally infrequent and provide limited connectivity to the wider Beverly Hills area and neighbouring town centres which may discourage usage. A detailed review of bus connections and scheduling to provide additional services by TfNSW can allow for improved accessibility by bus.

·        With regards to train connectivity, Beverly Hills Station is situated in a strategic location which provides connection to the Sydney CBD and Sydney Airport. However, it is noted that the station is currently served only by all-stops trains and could be better leveraged through the provision of more frequent and express services, such as during the commuter peak periods. Pedestrian access to the station can also be improved by facility upgrades to provide disabled access to the platform from the western side of King Georges Road. In consideration of these points, there is potential for Beverly Hills Station to serve as a strong alternative mode of transport to private car usage.

·        In terms of cycling, the existing cycling infrastructure is under-developed and does not provide a safe, connected environment conducive to active transport modes. Cycling infrastructure to the south and south of the Town Centre is limited and existing cycleways are primary targeted for recreational use due to lack of connections to the Beverly Hills Town Centre. In light of this, infrastructure improvements to active transport facilities should also be prioritised in the development of the Beverly Hills Masterplan.

 

·        The high traffic activity along King Georges Road presents a physical barrier between the eastern and western sides of the carriageway. Based on historical crash data, the occurrence of vehicle and pedestrian crashes has been identified, highlighting a need to consider the safety of pedestrians along the primary road connections through the Beverly Hills Town Centre.

·        A review of the existing parking demand within the study area indicates that the streets closest to the shopping strip have high occupancy. This may be attributed to the use of these on-street parking spaces by staff and visitors.

·        During the detailed development of the Beverly Hills Masterplan, the findings identified within this report should be considered to ensure that the different user groups including pedestrians, cyclists and people with disabilities are not disadvantaged. Improvements to public transport infrastructure may also assist in the long-term reduction in car dependence in the precinct and facilitate greater uptake of alternative modes of transport.

 

·       The key findings of this study indicate that there is a need to plan for a Town Centre which possesses the following characteristics:

 

o Prioritisation of pedestrians over vehicles;

o Improved accessibility for all user groups catering for the elderly and people with a disability;

o Improved public transport infrastructure to reduce congestion in the locality (including modernisation of Beverly Hills Station, pedestrian and cycling infrastructure upgrades); and

o The provision of sufficient parking to meet demand, particularly during weekends and evenings when the King Georges Road shopping strip becomes activated.

Development Feasibility Study

36.    An economic and feasibility study was prepared to provide: an understanding of the existing market for various land uses in the study area; advice on the financial feasibility of providing new developments in the Centre with respect to the existing planning controls, and high level advice on the appropriate floor space ratio (FSR) for new development to be financially viable in the Centre. A copy is attached to this Report (Attachment 5).

 

37.     Research on the existing market in Beverly Hills has revealed:

·    There is a low vacancy rate (4.8%) in the Centre owing to the strong demand for food retailing that complements the Cinema. This in turn has provided a stable nightlife economy. However, day time economy in the Centre is absent. The Centre seems to lack in the variety of retail offers and services other Centres provide. With the good connectivity to the M5 motorway and railway, it is believed that Beverly Hills has the potential to be revitalised into a successful Centre. It is suggested that a full line supermarket, a variety of services such as a medical centre and additional residential, community space, public car parking would attract more shoppers during the day time.

 

·    The residential market showed high growth in 2017, however over the last 12 months the housing and apartment market has started to decline. This however did not stop the developers and landowners considering the potential opportunities of their sites.

 

·    The development activity has demonstrated keen interest in redevelopment along The Strip Precinct, however due to the limiting planning controls and requirement for amalgamation of sites, this seems to have deterred development and in some cases resulted in the withdrawal of development applications.

 

·    Development sites bought over four years ago appear to have only been viable for redevelopment over the last 12-24 months. This demonstrates that the developer was required to hold the sites until land values increased to a level where redevelopment was feasible i.e. redevelopment value > improved value. Again confirming that the major barriers hindering development is the existing FSR and the costs of amalgamating sites.

 

·      Overall the research and discussions with local agents revealed that Beverly Hills is an emerging Centre with potential to be revitalised into an established and thriving Centre. The study area as a whole has great development opportunities and interest to establish and deliver the new life and energy back into Beverly Hills.

 

38.     The study tested six sites within the study area for hypothetical development options to determine development feasibility. Each site was tested with the following inputs: lot size, existing FSR control, potential gross floor area, permissible uses within the existing zoning, as well as existing gross building area.

 

39.     To undertake the feasibility modelling, a software program EstateMaster was used which is considered to be an industry benchmark used by developers, financers and property valuers. The model calculates the residential land value (RLV), which is the maximum price that a hypothetical developer would pay for the land to achieve an acceptable rate of return, based on the highest and best use or optimal option for the land.  For development to be viable, the RLV must be higher than the existing improvement (market) value “as-is”.

 

40.     The results revealed that all six sites were found to be not viable under their existing planning controls. This indicates that the existing improvement (market) values were higher than the site redevelopment values (or RLV).  The model then calculates a FSR “tipping point” for each site. The “tipping point” is the minimum FSR required to achieve a financially viable development. To determine the “tipping point”, additional residential floor space is added to the calculation until it can achieve a financially feasible target project internal rate of return (for a hypothetical development of residential apartments, the internal rate of return is 18%).

 

41.     The study recommends that to encourage redevelopment in the Centre our modelling results identify the need to increase FSRs and building heights on particular sites within the Centre to incentivise developers and landowners to redevelop and provide access and open space within their developments.

 

To this effect we would recommend Council and the project team to consider a review of their planning controls for the Masterplan stage to increase FSRs of between 0.5:1 to 1.54:1 dependant on the zoning and location. The most appropriate FSR or FSRs within this increased FSR range (or otherwise) would be dependent on urban design testing and other environmental considerations. Each site and its ‘tipping point’ must however be considered on its merits.

 

Phase 2 - Preparation of the Masterplan

 

42.     The work that has been undertaken in Phase 1 of the Masterplan, in particular the vision principles from community engagement, and key recommendations from the technical reports will be used to inform the preparation of the Masterplan in Phase 2. The concerns, ideas, visions and aspirations of the local residents, landowners, business owners and other key stakeholders will be considered and will inform the preparation of the draft Masterplan to ensure future development reflects the needs and expectations of the community.

 

43.     The following additional studies are required for Phase 2 of the Masterplan:

·    Land Economics Analysis – to test financial viability of development with consideration of Council’s Commercial Economic and Feasibility Study

·    Public domain plan – detailing improvements, such as street tree planting, activation of street frontages, paving, lighting and street furniture.

·    Urban Design study – building mass analysis with consideration to adjoining lower density areas and overshadowing of the public domain.

·    Traffic, transport and parking study with consideration to Council’s Car Parking Strategy

 

44.    Phase 2 of the Masterplan will identify areas for potential rezoning and amendments to development standards (height and FSR) for inclusion in a future amendment to the local environmental plan. Specifically the Masterplan will provide recommendations for amendments to the following:  

·        To a future Comprehensive Georges River Local Environmental Plan;

·        Georges River DCP;

·        Public Domain Plan – detailing the public domain improvements required such as street tree planting, extension of footpaths in the side streets to create outdoor eating areas, paving, lighting and street furniture; and

·        Mechanisms to fund the required infrastructure - Contributions Plan and/or Voluntary Planning Agreements.

 

Conclusion

45.     Phase 1 of the Masterplan was completed in March 2019, and provides a vision for the Beverly Hills Town Centre. The technical studies, which include a planning review, an urban design analysis, transport and accessibility assessment, and an economic feasibility study provide further guidance for Phase 2 – the development of the Masterplan. The Masterplan would recommend changes to land use and built form controls to a future Comprehensive LEP. The key aim of the Beverly Hills Masterplan is to provide a coordinated approach to future development of this Centre with an Implementation Plan.

 

46.    A Masterplan of Council’s vision for the Centre provides guidance to developers and greater transparency to the community. It is important to note that planning proposals for sites within the study area may be submitted at any time and preparing a Masterplan and Implementation Plan for the Centre would assist Council in determining whether a proposal has strategic merit and meets community expectation, including the delivery of public benefits.

 

47.    Accordingly, it is recommended that Council note the outcomes of Phase 1 of the Beverly Hills Masterplan and endorse the preparation of Phase 2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Financial Implications

48.    Phase 1 costs were covered by the Stronger Communities Fund 2017/2018 budget. 

 

Risk Implications

49.    No risks identified.

 

 

Community Engagement

50.    Community engagement for Phase 1 was conducted in November 2018. Refer to section on community engagement in this Report. Community engagement for Phase 2 will be undertaken in accordance with the timeframe provided by the successful consultant.

 

 

File Reference

 

TRIM: 17/640

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Community Engagement Report - published in separate document

Attachment 2

Planning Review

Attachment 3

Urban Design Analysis

Attachment 4

Transport and Accessibility Assessment

Attachment 5

Development Feasibility Study - published in separate document (Confidential)

 


Georges River Council -         Environment and Planning - Monday, 8 April 2019

ENV008-19             Beverly Hills Masterplan - Phase 1

[Attachment 2]        Planning Review

 

 

Page 22

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council -         Environment and Planning - Monday, 8 April 2019

ENV008-19             Beverly Hills Masterplan - Phase 1

[Attachment 3]        Urban Design Analysis

 

 

Page 102

 


 


 


 

 



 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council -         Environment and Planning - Monday, 8 April 2019

ENV008-19             Beverly Hills Masterplan - Phase 1

[Attachment 4]        Transport and Accessibility Assessment

 

 

Page 152

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Page Deliberately left blank


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council –          Environment and Planning -  Monday, 8 April 2019                                                        Page 161

Item:                   ENV009-19        Planning Proposal 2017/0001 - No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale 

Author:              Coordinator Strategic Planning

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Committee Reports

 

Recommendation

(a)     That Council publicly exhibit the Planning Proposal PP2017/0001 for No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale 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.

 

Executive Summary

1.      On 12 April 2017, the Planning Proposal (PP2017/0001) for No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale, was submitted by Urbis on behalf of Romanous Construction Pty Ltd.

2.      The objective of the Planning Proposal is to enable the current use on the site for retail premises, and additional uses of centre-based child care facilities and specialised retail premises to be permissible with consent under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan (HLEP) 2012.

3.      This Planning Proposal seeks to permit the uses of retail premises, specialised retail premises and centre-based child care facilities on the site by way of a Schedule 1 Additional Permitted Uses amendment to the HLEP 2012.

4.      Council, at its meeting on 23 October 2017, considered the Planning Proposal for No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale, and resolved:

a)   That Council endorse the Planning Proposal to amend Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 by way of a Schedule 1 amendment to permit the uses of retail premises, bulky goods premises and centre-based child care facility, in relation to 84D Roberts Avenue (legally known as Lot 21 DP 542051).

b)   That Council endorse the Planning Proposal to 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.

5.      A copy of the Council report and resolution of 23 October 2017 is provided in Attachment 3.

6.      In accordance with Council’s resolution, the Planning Proposal was forwarded to the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) on 11 January 2018 seeking a Gateway Determination.

7.      On 31 October 2018, the DPE issued a Gateway Determination to enable the Planning Proposal to proceed to exhibition subject to a number of conditions (Attachment 2). Refer to Section 37 of this Report. The Planning Proposal was supported for the following reasons:

·    it is consistent with state, regional and local planning directions seeking to retain and manage industrial and urban services zoned land;

·    it will not result in the loss of industrial land; and

·    it will support the ongoing use of the site for existing approved uses.

8.      The Planning Proposal has since been updated to address the conditions of the Gateway Determination, namely to consider the final Greater Sydney Region Plan and South District Plan and replace references to 'bulky goods premises' with 'specialised retail premises', as a result of changes to the Standard Instrument definitions. 

9.      The Planning Proposal has also been updated to address the Georges River Industrial Land Review which was endorsed by Council as a strategic planning document on 17 December 2018.

10.    The revised Planning Proposal is now submitted to Council for approval for public exhibition (Attachment 1).

 

Background

11.    The site is located in the Peakhurst Industrial Precinct and is currently zoned IN2 Light Industrial under the HLEP 2012, which currently prohibits the use of retail premises, specialised retail premises (previously bulky goods premises) and centre-based child care facilities in the Land Use Table.

12.    The site contains an existing shopping centre development known as Mortdale Plaza shopping centre which opened in 2014. The shopping centre was approved by the former Hurstville Council in 2009 under the former HLEP 1994 which enabled development for shops or commercial premises within industrial zones, but only when it was demonstrated that the development could not occur in an existing business centre and is appropriate in an industrial zone. The consent (08/DA-411) permitted a three-storey mixed use development comprising a supermarket, bulky goods retail, gymnasium and office with basement parking.

13.    The development operates under existing use rights, which enables the lawful operation of uses which are otherwise prohibited by the HLEP 2012.

14.    In April 2017, Urbis (the Proponent) submitted the Planning Proposal request (PP2017/0001) on behalf of Romanous Construction Pty Ltd for the site, which sought an amendment to the HLEP 2012 to permit, with consent, retail premises, bulky goods premises and centre-based child care facilities.

15.    The Planning Proposal seeks to:

·    legitimise the existing retail uses pursuant to the 2009 development consent (Development Application No. 08/DA-411) so that the existing employment within the shopping centre is protected and the centre remains economically viable; and

·    allow for centre-based child care facilities, a community service that is increasing in demand in the area.

16.    The Planning Proposal was referred to the Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) at its meeting on 21 September 2017. The IHAP supported the proposal and recommended that Council:

·    endorse the Planning Proposal to amend the HLEP 2012 by way of a Schedule 1 amendment to permit the additional uses of retail premises, bulky goods premises and centre-based child care facility at the site; and

·    forward the Planning Proposal to the delegate of the Greater Sydney Commission for a Gateway Determination.

17.    Council resolved to support the recommendations of the IHAP (detailed above) at its meeting on 23 October 2017 following consideration by Council’s Environment and Planning Committee on 9 October 2017 (Attachment 3).

18.    The Planning Proposal was then forwarded to the DPE in January 2018 for a Gateway Determination in accordance with Council’s resolution of 23 October 2017 and Section 3.34 (previously Section 56) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act).

19.    The DPE issued a Gateway Determination on 31 October 2018 to enable the Planning Proposal to proceed to exhibition subject to a number of conditions. Refer to Section 37 of this Report and Attachment 2 for a copy of the Gateway Determination.

20.    The Planning Proposal (Attachment 1) has since been updated by the proponent to address the conditions of the Gateway Determination, namely to consider the final Greater Sydney Region Plan and South District Plan and replace references to 'bulky goods premises' with 'specialised retail premises', as a result of changes to the Standard Instrument definitions.

21.    On 17 December 2018, Council resolved to endorse the Georges River Industrial Land Review as a strategic planning document. The proposal is consistent with the recommendations of the Review as it retains the existing industrial zoning, while providing additional local employment opportunities and social infrastructure to accommodate the local population. This strategic planning document has been addressed throughout the amended Planning Proposal (as discussed in Section 45).

22.    Council’s Voluntary Planning Agreement Policy was not applied to the Planning Proposal as it does not seek uplift, rather it solely pursues additional permissible uses.

23.    The revised Planning Proposal is now submitted to Council for approval for public exhibition.

 

Site Description and Context

 

Description of site

24.    The site is known as No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale and is legally described as Lot 21 DP 542051. The site is an irregular battle-axe with vehicle access on Roberts Avenue.

25.    The site contains one existing development at the eastern boundary, a shopping centre known as Mortdale Plaza which currently contains a range of tenancies. Within the western section of the site is an unbuilt upon area that surrounds a watercourse which cuts through this area. Refer to Figure 1 for an aerial view of the site and Table 1 for a list of land uses within the tenancies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1    Aerial view of the site and surrounds (subject site outlined in red)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source: Urbis 2018

 

Table 1     Current tenancies and land use types

Shop Name

Shop Type

Standard Instrument Definition

HLEP 2012 Land Use

Woolworths

Supermarket

Shop (a type of retail premise)

Prohibited

Diana Sadig

Pharmacy

Shop (a type of retail premise)

Prohibited

The Brasserie Club

Café

Food and drink premise (a type of retail premise)

Prohibited

BSW Liquor

Liquor Shop

Shop (a type of retail premise)

Prohibited

Crunch

Fitness Club / Gymnasium

Recreation facility (indoor)

Permitted with consent

 

26.    As noted in the table above, the existing retail uses operating on the site are prohibited under the current HLEP 2012. Notwithstanding, the retail uses are operating lawfully under existing use rights (pursuant to the Act), in accordance with the development approval for the shopping centre issued under the former HLEP 1994 (Development Application 08/DA-411).

 

 

 

 


 

Surrounding development

27.    Roberts Avenue is a two-way road with one lane of traffic for each direction. It also features street parking on both sides. It is used by both local residents and workers at the Peakhurst Industrial Precinct.

28.    The site is located at the interface of light industrial, residential and recreational land uses. Land immediately surrounding the site to the north, east, and west is characterised by light industrial uses, known as the Peakhurst Industrial Precinct.

29.    Further to the east, south, and west of the site are single dwelling houses.

30.    The primary interfaces of the site are described below in Table 2.

 

Table 2     Surrounding land uses

Aspect

Description

North

 

Light industrial warehouses are located to the north of the site.

East

 

Light industrial warehouses are located immediately to the east of the site.

A series of single dwelling houses begin approximately 200m east of the site.

South

 

Immediately to the south-west of the site is St George Masonic Club (86 Roberts Avenue). The site is bound to the south by Roberts Avenue. Beyond Roberts Avenue is a series of single dwelling houses and Hurstville Golf Club.

West

 

Land immediately to the west of the site is landscaped. Beyond this are light industrial warehouses.

 

 

Existing Planning Controls

 

31.    Under the HLEP 2012 the site:

·    is zoned IN2 Light Industrial which currently prohibits the use of retail premises, specialised retail premises and centre-based child care facilities in the Land Use Table (Refer Figure 2 and Table 3);

·    has a maximum building height of 10m; and

·    has a maximum floor space ratio of 1:1.

32.    The allotments immediately adjoining the site are zoned IN2 Light Industrial.  Surrounding lots are zoned IN2 Light Industrial, R2 Low Density Residential, and RE1 Public Recreation (Refer Figure 2).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2    Zoning map of the site and surrounds (subject site outlined in red)

 

Source: Urbis 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3     Zone IN2 Light Industrial Land Use Table  

Zone IN2   Light Industrial

1   Objectives of zone

·    To provide a wide range of light industrial, warehouse and related land uses.

·    To encourage employment opportunities and to support the viability of centres.

·    To minimise any adverse effect of industry on other land uses.

·    To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of workers in the area

·    To support and protect industrial land for industrial uses.

·    To enable industrial development which does not pollute or adversely affect adjoining land, air or water.

·    To ensure industrial development creates areas that are pleasant to work in, safe and efficient in terms of transportation, land utilisation and service distribution.

2   Permitted without consent

Home occupations

3   Permitted with consent

Depots; Garden centres; Hardware and building supplies; Industrial training facilities; Kiosks; Landscaping material supplies; Light industries; Neighbourhood shops; Places of public worship; Plant nurseries; Roads; Take away food and drink premises; Timber yards; Vehicle sales or hire premises; Warehouse or distribution centres; Water recycling facilities; Any other development not specified in item 2 or 4

4   Prohibited

Agriculture; Air transport facilities; Airstrips; Amusement centres; Biosolids treatment facilities; Boat launching ramps; Boat sheds; Camping grounds; Caravan parks; Cemeteries; Centre-based child care facilities; Charter and tourism boating facilities; Commercial premises; Community facilities; Correctional centres; Crematoria; Eco-tourist facilities; Educational establishments; Entertainment facilities; Environmental facilities; Exhibition homes; Exhibition villages; Extractive industries; Farm buildings; Forestry; Function centres; Health services facilities; Heavy industrial storage establishments; Helipads; Highway service centres; Home occupations (sex services); Information and education facilities; Industries; Jetties; Marinas; Mooring pens; Moorings; Mortuaries; Open cut mining; Passenger transport facilities; Public administration buildings; Recreation areas; Recreation facilities (major); Recreation facilities (outdoor); Registered clubs; Research stations; Residential accommodation; Respite day care centres; Rural industries; Sewage treatment plants; Tourist and visitor accommodation; Water recreation structures; Water supply systems; Wholesale supplies

 

Source: Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Description of the Planning Proposal

 

33.    The Planning Proposal seeks to permit the uses of retail premises, specialised retail premises and centre-based child care facilities on the site by way of a Schedule 1 Additional Permitted Uses amendment to the HLEP 2012.

34.    It is proposed to amend Schedule 1 Additional Permitted Uses of the HLEP 2012 to insert the following: 

Use of certain land at 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale

(1) This clause applies to land at 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale being Lot 21, DP 542051.

(2) Development for the purpose of a retail premises, specialised retail premises, and centre-based child care facility is permitted with development consent.

 

35.    There are no amendments proposed to zoning or built form provisions (i.e. maximum building height and maximum floor space ratio) and the proposal only concerns land use permissibility.

 

Gateway Determination

36.    On 31 October 2018, the DPE (as delegate of the Greater Sydney Commission) issued a Gateway Determination (Attachment 2) under Section 3.34(1) of the Act to enable the Planning Proposal to proceed subject to a number of conditions as follows:

1.         Prior to community consultation, the planning proposal is to be updated to consider the final Greater Sydney Region Plan and South District Plan.

2.         Prior to community consultation, the planning proposal is to be updated to replace references to 'bulky goods premises' with 'specialised retail premises'.

3.         Community consultation is required under section 3.34(2)(c) and schedule 1 clause 4 of the Act as follows:

a)   the planning proposal must be made publicly available for a minimum of 28 days; and

b)   the planning authority must comply with the notice requirements for public exhibition of planning proposals and the specifications for material that must be made publicly available along with planning proposals as identified in section 5.5.2 of A guide to preparing local environmental plans (Department of Planning and Environment 2016).

4.         No consultation is required with public authorities/organisations under section 3.34(2)(d) of the Act.

5.         A public hearing is not required to be held into the matter by any person or body under section 3.34(2)(e) of the Act. This does not discharge Council from any obligation it may otherwise have to conduct a public hearing (for example, in response to a submission or if reclassifying land).

6.         The planning proposal authority is authorised as the local plan-making authority to exercise the functions under section 3.36(2) of the Act subject to the following:

a)   the planning proposal authority has satisfied all the conditions of the Gateway determination;

b)   the planning proposal is consistent with section 9.1 Directions or the Secretary has agreed that any inconsistencies are justified; and

c)   there are no outstanding written objections from public authorities.

7.         The time frame for completing the LEP is to be nine months following the date of the Gateway determination.

37.    Further, the DPE also agreed that the Planning Proposal's inconsistency with Section 9.1 Direction 1.1 Business and Industrial Zones is justified in accordance with the terms of the Direction. No further approval is required in relation to this Direction.

38.    The correspondence also noted that while the South District Plan supports the retention and management of industrial and urban services land, the Planning Proposal is supported on the basis there are existing uses that are operating in accordance with a valid development consent. These uses are lawful and were existing prior to the District Plan. Further, the proposal does not seek to amend the zoning or development standards applying to the site. The issuing of the Gateway does not hinder the objectives or the ongoing implementation of the District Plan. It seeks to manage the existing uses on the site and provide additional urban services uses to those that are already permitted onsite.

39.    At the time of preparing the Planning Proposal, the Greater Sydney Region Plan and South District Plan were in draft form. The Planning Proposal has since been updated to address the finalised Plans in accordance with Condition 1 of the Gateway Determination.

40.    When the Planning Proposal was lodged with Council, ‘bulky goods’ was a Standard Instrument LEP term. Since then, the land use term ‘bulky goods premises’ has been replaced by a new term, ‘specialised retail premises’ to reflect the changing business models in the large format retail industry. As such, the Planning Proposal has been updated to reference the new term in accordance with Condition 2 of the Gateway Determination.

 

Strategic Planning Context

 

Greater Sydney Region Plan and South District Plan

41.    The Greater Sydney Region Plan and South District Plan contain an objective/planning priority to retain and manage industrial and urban services land.

42.    The Planning Proposal is consistent with the actions and directions of the Greater Sydney Region Plan and South District Plan as:

·    It does not seek to rezone industrial land;

·    It does not result in the reduction of available existing industrial land;

·    The site is located at the interface of light industrial, residential and recreational land uses and will not result in conflict with surrounding land uses; and

·    The additional land uses will promote opportunities for employment diversification and growth.

 

Georges River Community Strategic Plan 2018-2028

43.    The Planning Proposal is consistent with the relevant key goals and objectives of the Georges River Community Strategic Plan 2018-2028 as follows:

·    Provide high quality, affordable and economically viable education and care across Council’s children’s services.

The Planning Proposal will allow for the provision of a centre-based child care facility within the existing shopping centre. This is essential to ensure the economic viability of the shopping centre as well as meet the community’s growing needs for centre-based child care facilities, which satisfies the above objective.

·    Local businesses are supported to help protect jobs and create employment opportunities.

The Planning Proposal will serve to support the existing employment generating uses whilst providing additional local employment opportunities within the shopping centre. This will ensure the ongoing viability of the shopping centre which supports local businesses and serves the local community.

 

Georges River Industrial Land Review

44.    The Planning Proposal is consistent with the recommendations contained in the Georges River Industrial Land Review as it retains the existing IN2 Light Industrial zone pertaining to the site. This document clearly indicates that the Mortdale Plaza and its current uses should be retained as they strengthen the precinct and support the surrounding industrial uses. This Planning Proposal will protect the existing uses, which in turn will protect the amenity of this industrial precinct.

 

State Environmental Planning Policies

45.    The Planning Proposal is generally consistent with the relevant State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) summarised as follows:

·    SEPP No. 55 – Remediation of Land: The existing development (shopping centre and associated retail uses) was approved under Development Application 08/DA-411, which indicates that the site is unlikely to be subject to further contamination. This Planning Proposal is for the purpose of permitting additional land uses only, and is consistent with this SEPP.

·    SEPP (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017: Any future development application for the purposes of a centre-based child care facility will be assessed under the relevant provisions of this SEPP.

 

Section 9.1 Directions

46.    The Planning Proposal is consistent with all relevant ministerial directions as assessed by the applicant in Table 4 below.

 

Table 4        Section 9.1 Directions

S9.1 Direction

Assessment

1.1 Business and Industrial Zones

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of this direction. The Planning Proposal does not seek to rezone the industrial land, rather, it seeks to include additional permissible uses which will expand upon the variety of employment generating uses on the site, as well as uses that support the local community, such as centre- based child care facilities.

 

The existing uses were considered appropriate in the approval of Development Application 08/DA-411 and the additional uses sought under the Planning Proposal will serve to provide a new variety of employment opportunities which do not conflict with the existing uses on the site.

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 currently permissible under the IN2 Light Industrial zone and the additional permitted uses to be included under Schedule 1 of the HLEP allows flexibility for the type of employment generating land uses on the site, which are compatible with those currently operating and approved under Development Application 08/DA-411.

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 detailed in Section 43.

 

Existing Use Rights

47.    Under Division 4.11 (Existing Uses) of the Act, 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”.

48.    In accordance with the above definition, the existing development on the site is deemed to possess existing use rights in that the uses of “supermarket, bulky goods retail, gymnasium and office with basement parking” were approved in 2009 prior to the commencement of the HLEP 2012.

49.    The Planning Proposal request to permit the prohibited land uses of retail and specialised retail premises will not establish a precedent for the expansion of retail and non-industrial uses in an industrial zone.

50.    There will be no reduction in the availability of existing industrial land. The proposal seeks to enable the continued usage of existing non-industrial purposes, which is isolated to the subject site through existing use rights.

51.    The proposed Schedule 1 amendment to HLEP 2012 to enable retail premises and specialised retail premises will legitimise these current uses on the site and remove the ambiguity associated with the existing use rights of ‘supermarket’ and ‘bulky goods retail’ as these terms are not Standard Instrument terms defined in the HLEP 2012.

52.    No additional retail purposes are proposed on the site.

 

Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Amendment Order

53.    The NSW State Government released the draft Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Amendment Order (No 2) 2016, which proposed to amend all Local Environmental Plans to permit centre-based child care facilities in all R2 Low Density Residential and IN2 Light Industrial zones.

54.    The intent of the draft Amendment Order was to allow child care centres in more locations closer to homes and workplaces.

55.    On 1 September 2017, the Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Amendment (Child Care) Order 2017 was gazetted, and permitted centre-based child care facilities in all R2 Low Density Residential zones with development consent. However, the same amendment has not been made for all IN2 Light Industrial zones.

56.    The Planning Proposal was submitted and assessed by Council prior to the gazettal of the Standard Amendment (Child Care) Order 2017. At the time of assessment, the request to permit centre-based child care facilities on the subject site was aligned with the intent of draft Standard Instrument Amendment Order (No 2) 2016 and was deemed to be appropriate, as the proposed land use of centre-based child care facility will present minimal additional conflicts with existing developments on surrounding IN2 Light Industrial land.

57.    The proposed centre-based child care facility is intended to be located within the existing Mortdale Plaza shopping centre, which will not reduce the availability of existing industrial land. Furthermore, permitting the use of a centre-based child care facility on the site will contribute to the vibrancy of this local shopping centre by offering an essential service close to homes and workplaces.

58.    In light of the above, it is considered that the proposed location under this Planning Proposal for a centre-based child care facility within the IN2 Light Industrial zone is appropriate given that existing industrial activities will not be compromised.

59.    To enable this use on site, a Schedule 1 amendment to the HLEP 2012 is required to permit a centre-based child care facility.

 

Voluntary Planning Agreement

60.    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.

61.    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.

62.    The proposal does not seek development uplift, and is only concerned with land use permissibility. As such, Council has not applied the VPA Policy to the Planning Proposal.

 

Community Consultation

63.    In accordance with the Gateway Determination issued on 31 October 2018, the Planning Proposal will be exhibited for a minimum period of 28 days. The public exhibition will comply with the notice of requirements for material that must be made available along with planning proposals as identified in Section 5.5.2 of A guide to preparing local environmental plans (Department of Planning and Environment 2018).

64.    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.


 

 

65.    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; and

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

66.    As per Condition 4 of the Gateway Determination, no consultation is required with public authorities/organisations under Section 3.34(2)(d) of the Act.

 

Conclusion

67.    The Planning Proposal seeks to permit additional uses of retail premises, specialised retail premises and centre-based child care facilities at No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale, by way of a Schedule 1 Additional Permitted Uses amendment to the HLEP 2012.

68.    In summary, the Planning Proposal has strategic and site-specific merit, in that:

·    it is consistent with the objectives and actions of state, regional and local strategies as it does not seek to rezone or reduce available industrial zoned land;

·    it will support the ongoing use of the site for existing approved uses;

·    the proposed land uses will utilise spaces within the existing development on the site and as such, there are no identified environmental constraints;

·    it will not cause any conflict with neighbouring sites given the context of the existing and surrounding land uses; and

·    permitting retail/non-industrial land uses on this site represents an isolated case and will not set a wider precedent as the proposal is supported on the basis of its existing use rights.

69.    As per the Gateway Determination, the Planning Proposal is due to be completed by 31 July 2019. The anticipated project timeline is shown in Table 5.

Table 5     Indicative project timeline

Task

Timeframe

Commencement and completion of public exhibition period (28 days)

May-June 2019

 

Timeframe for consideration of submissions

June 2019

Timeframe for the consideration by Council of a proposal post exhibition

July 2019

Date of submission to the Department to finalise the LEP

July-August 2019

 

Financial Implications

70.    Within budget allocation.

 

Risk Implications

71.    No risks identified.

 

 

File Reference

PP2017/0001

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Revised Planning Proposal PP2017/0001 - No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale

Attachment 2

Gateway Determination

Attachment 3

Council Report and Resolution - 23 October 2017

 


Georges River Council -         Environment and Planning - Monday, 8 April 2019

ENV009-19             Planning Proposal 2017/0001 - No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale

[Attachment 1]        Revised Planning Proposal PP2017/0001 - No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale

 

 

Page 202

 

 



 


 

 



 



 


 


 



 




 


 





 


 


 



 


 


 


 



Georges River Council -         Environment and Planning - Monday, 8 April 2019

ENV009-19             Planning Proposal 2017/0001 - No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale

[Attachment 2]        Gateway Determination

 

 

Page 206

 


 


 


 


Georges River Council -         Environment and Planning - Monday, 8 April 2019

ENV009-19             Planning Proposal 2017/0001 - No. 84D Roberts Avenue, Mortdale

[Attachment 3]        Council Report and Resolution - 23 October 2017

 

 

Page 226

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council –          Environment and Planning -  Monday, 8 April 2019                                                        Page 236

Item:                   ENV010-19        Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Draft Plan of Management and Masterplan 

Author:              Strategic Planner

Directorate:      Environment and Planning

Matter Type:     Committee Reports

 

Recommendation

(a)     That Council endorse the categorisation of Community Land known as Hurstville Oval as Sportsground and Park.

(b)     That Council forward the draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management to the Department of Industry (landowners) for consent.

(c)     That Council delegate the General Manager to make amendments to the draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management to address points raised by the Department of Industry.

(d)     That Council endorse the draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and Draft Masterplan (with any amendments resulting from the issuing of the consent from the landowner) for public exhibition.

(e)     That Council hold a public hearing for the Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management as the proposed plan would be altering the categorisation of, community land from park to park and sportsground.

 

 

Executive Summary

1.      A Draft Plan of Management and Draft Masterplan has been prepared for Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve by Gondwana Consulting.

 

2.      This report summarises the provisions and actions included in the draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and the improvements identified in the draft Masterplan.

 

3.      The draft Plan of Management details how Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve will be used, improved and managed in the future.  It identifies Council’s goals and objectives for the land and establishes the overall direction for planning, resource management and maintenance of the land.

 

4.      The draft Plan of Management is accompanied by the Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Masterplan which shows the proposed landscape improvements and allows Council to set priorities when preparing works programs and related budgets.

 

5.      This report recommends that, subject to the support of the Department of Industry (landowner), Council place the draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and Draft Masterplan on public exhibition in order to receive feedback from the local community.

 


 

Background

6.      Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve includes two parcels of land, one being Community Land (Lot 53 DP 9355) owned by Georges River Council and the other Crown Land (Lot 1 DP 919317)  and managed by as Reserve Trust by Georges River Council, and is known as 30 and 30D Dora Street, Hurstville. (Refer to Figure 1)

Figure 1 Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve

 

7.      Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and concept Masterplan were originally prepared by Clouston Associates and Council received the final draft in May 2010.

 

8.      On 25 May 2011, Council did not adopt the draft Plans, based on the strong community feedback and public submissions, and resolved to defer the Draft Plan of Management (and Concept Masterplan) so that the following could be included:

 

•   retention of the cycle velodrome

•   increase areas and quantities of trees for shade

•   relocate and enlarge playground in Timothy Reserve (currently being undertaken as part of the Regional & Local Community Infrastructure Program)

•   relocate cricket practice wickets from Oval to Timothy Reserve (currently being undertaken as part of the Regional & Local Community Infrastructure Program)

•   new flexible green space on the Gordon Street boundary to include BBQ's, shelters, exercise trail, etc

•   toilet block to be made available to all park users (currently being undertaken as part of the Regional & Local Community Infrastructure Program)

•   new pavilion (adjacent to Booth Saunders Pavilion) to increase spectator space

•   improved access to Oval for wider community use

•   increased seats (both in sun and shade) for Oval and Reserve

•   extension of Dunbar Pavilion to allow for a future cafe and / or museum

•   new media room and scoreboard for Oval

•   upgraded and extended spectator seating

•   creation of a formal entry into Timothy Reserve

•   upgraded main entry into Oval

•   screen maintenance area behind Booth Saunders Pavilion

•   new pedestrian crossings at key entry points, subject to RTA approval

9.      In 2018, Council engaged Gondwana Consulting to finalise the draft Plan of Management and Master Plan for Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve; and the landscape improvements within the draft Plan of Management reflect those in the Masterplan as well as the matters that Council resolved on 25 May 2011.

 

Community Consultation

 

10.    The “Issues and Options Discussion Paper” was publicly exhibited on the Council “Have Your Say” web page for a three-week period concluding on 14 December 2018. The web page had provision for users to view and download the paper and make submissions. The option was also available for completion of a feedback form via email or reply paid post.

 

11.    The Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve major sporting and recreation users, including schools, identified by Georges River Council were all notified of the availability of the Paper and invited to review, comment and provide feedback.

 

Submissions Received

 

12.    In total 6 submissions to the Issues and Options Discussion Paper were received.

 

13.    The key points highlighted within the 6 submissions included the following:

·    A particularly high value is placed on the History and Heritage of Hurstville Oval;

·    Desire for the retention of the mature landscape values of the Park;

·    Desire for enhancement of the velodrome and associated facilities; and

·    Need for consideration of noise impacts to neighbouring properties.

Masterplan

14.    Figure 2 (below) is the final concept draft Masterplan for Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve. The draft Masterplan provides the broad management direction and layout intended for the future use and development of the open space area.

Figure 2 – Concept Masterplan

 

15.    It is intended that the Masterplan presented is implemented over time as resources become available.

 

16.    Key elements of the Masterplan are outlined below:

 

·    Construction of a new double storey community pavilion to be located on the eastern side of Hurstville Oval (corner of Gordon and Dora Streets) which will cater for top grade sports and the community incorporating:

o Public amenities with DDA compliance;

o 2 Change Rooms (including unisex showers, toilets etc);

o Referees/Umpires Room;

o Medical Room (including a doping control room);

o Canteen;

o Storage

o First floor viewing area with office and deck

·    Reconfiguration of the Hurstville Oval perimeter security fencing to enable secured events / sporting fixtures while providing for accessibility to surrounding parklands outside of scheduled events;

·    Removal of existing boundary fencing along Gordon and Patrick Streets, retention of trees and replacement of shrub plantings with lawn for public access;

·    New spectator seating at the south-eastern perimeter of the oval;

·    Upgrade of existing terrace seating at western perimeter of the oval;

·    Establishment of new entry from Gordon Street to avoid conflict with intersection with Dora Street;

·    Increased shade planting to park areas;

·    Perimeter pathways connecting all entries to Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve;

·    Upgrade and construction of new all abilities access to all entries;

·    Upgrade of all entry points to Timothy Reserve;

·    Retention and ongoing maintenance/upgrade of all listed Heritage items, including velodrome and Art Deco entry along Dora Street;

·    Redevelopment Players Pavilion as café and museum with all abilities access;

·    Upgrade of existing toilet facility to enable all abilities access;

·    Upgrade of existing turf practice wickets run ups to include a synthetic playing surface to increase carrying capacity and reduce wear and tear of natural turf run ups and incorporate an active playspace available to community use outside cricket club scheduled/licenced use;

·    Reconfiguration of contours at the interface of Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve to increase extent of level open grassed areas within Timothy Reserve; and

·    Reconfigure access pathway network between Dora Street and Patrick Street to incorporate all abilities access and connectivity to Hurstville Oval and Timothy Street.

 

Council Briefing held 4 March 2019

17.    The draft Plan of Management and draft Masterplan were the subject of a briefing to the Councillors on 4 March 2019. The current location of the new double storey community pavilion in the Masterplan in Figure 2 above was raised as an issue at the briefing.

 

18.    A couple of alterative suggestions were made at the briefing - the corner of Patrick Street and Gordon Street or adjacent to the existing pavilion, towards the corner of Timothy and Dora Streets.

 

19.    The location of the new double storey community pavilion has been the subject of discussions with the Director Assets and Infrastructure and Manager Special Projects. The new pavilion has been proposed for the corner of Gordon and Dora Streets for the following reasons:

 

a.   There are two 450mm diameter stormwater pipes, one 750mm stormwater pipe and a 300mm sewerage pipe at a depth of 3 metres below the surface adjacent to the existing Booth Saunders Pavilion. New guidelines have been introduced by Sydney Water preventing the building over stormwater lines and it would be difficult, if not impossible, of relocating all of these pipes and getting enough fall/grade to ensure the continuous flow of stormwater and sewerage.

b.   In addition the above, the existing cricket table would need to be re-aligned to ensure the sightscreen did not block the building.

c.   The estimated costs of these works, if indeed it was capable of completing, and approval was given by Sydney Water, would be approximately $1 M.

d.   This would also add about 8 months to the construction program and possibly impact on the cricket season.

e.   An additional benefit of moving the new building to the proposed location is player safety and the separation of players from the spectators to comply with Cricket Australia guidelines.

 

20.    The draft Masterplan shown in Figure 2 shows the location of the new pavilion at the corner of Gordon and Dora Streets.

 

Draft Plan of Management

21.    The Plan of Management has been prepared under the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 (LG Act) and provides the statutory requirements, clear guidelines and designation of areas, to enhance the use of Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve by all the community and minimise any conflict between existing and future user groups.

 

22.    The key objective of the Plan of Management is to provide a clear strategic direction for the future management and use of Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve. The draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserves Plan of Management is structured in four (4) parts as follows:

 

23.    Part A – Management Context: introduces Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve and contains information about the management context within which the Plan of Management was developed. A basis for management is proposed, the planning context outlined and key site values identified.

 

24.    The Crown Land Management (CLM) Act 2016 commenced on 1 July 2018. The CLM Act introduces significant changes to the management of Crown Land by Councils. Councils are now required to manage dedicated or reserved Crown Land as if it were public land under the LG Act.

 

25.    In relation to Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve, Crown Reserve CR500461 covers the majority of the site as indicated in Figure 3. It is classified as “community land” under the LG Act and managed accordingly, meaning that Council is required to have a Plan of Management in place for the land.

Figure 3 – Crown Reserve (red is community land and green is Crown land)

 

26.    With the legislation changes to Crown Land, Council is required to submit the draft Plan of Management to NSW Department of Industry, as representative of the owner of the land under section 39 of the LG Act 1993.

 

27.    Part B – Site Description: contains a description of the current condition of Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve. It includes information about the Reserve’s local and regional context, heritage and history, recreational uses, landscape character, access and circulation and existing services and infrastructure.

 

28.    Part C – Management Framework: outlines the framework within which Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve is to be managed. Consistent with requirements of the LG Act, the site has been categorised and the associated objectives listed. Management, future use and development is described and a Concept Masterplan is also contained in Part C.

 

29.    A central requirement of the LG Act 1993 is that all Community Land must be assigned to one or more land “categories” whereby the land categorisation defines how Council will manage each parcel of land. Each category has an associated set of objectives in providing guidance to the management of land so categorised.

 

30.    Consequently any area of land can only be assigned to a single category, to avoid overlapping or conflicting objectives.

 

31.    Land is categorised into one of the below five categories:

·    Park

·    Sportsground

·    General Community Use Area

·    Area of Cultural Significance or

·    Natural Area, which must be further categorised as either

o Bushland

o Escarpment

o Foreshore

o Watercourse or

o Wetland.

 

32.    The Draft Plan of Management prepared in 2010 categorised the land as Sportsground and Park.

 

33.    In this Plan of Management dual categorisation will apply to the Crown Land parcel (Lot 1 DP919317) which incorporates all of Hurstville Oval, which will be managed in accord with the core objectives of ‘Sportsground’, whilst remaining areas of the park outside the physical limits of Hurstville Oval will be managed in accord with the core objectives of ‘Park’.

 

34.    Guidelines for categorisation of land as a sportsground – Land should be categorised as a sportsground under section 36 (4) of the Act if the land used or proposed to be used primarily for active recreation involving organised sports or the playing of outdoor games.

 

35.    Guidelines for categorisation of land as a park – Land should be categorised as a park under section 36 (4) of the Act if the land is, or is proposed to be, improved by landscaping, gardens or the provision of non-sporting equipment and facilities, for the use mainly for passive or active recreational, social, educational and cultural pursuits that do not unduly intrude on the peaceful enjoyment of the land by others.

 

36.    Figure 4 (below) shows the proposed land categorisation as Sportsground and Park as per the LG Act 1993.

 

Figure 4 – Land Categorisation as per the LG Act

 

37.    The Actions Table in Part C – Management Framework present a variety of management actions – comprising both policies and management directions or guidelines, as well as more specific on-ground or tangible actions that will implement the management direction of the Concept Masterplan. The actions cover matters such as access and circulation, buildings and facilities, landscaping, leases and licences, and park management. The actions are ranked minor, moderate, high or not applicable.

 

38.    Resource requirements are generalised according to the following categories:

·   minor – actions that are routinely part of the Reserve’s management and can be met from normal Reserve or Council operational budgets (e.g. installing signage around the park);

·   moderate – actions that will require special allocations in the Reserve’s or Council’s operational budgets, additional resourcing, may extend over a number of funding cycles, and/or require a level of capital works funding (e.g. install pedestrian lighting to enable evening use and safe access);

·   high – actions that are significant projects, typically requiring sizeable capital works or other funding; (e.g. the construction of the new community pavilion) and

·   not applicable (n/a) – actions that are of a policy nature or guidelines, that do not have a resource requirement attached or where implementation / operational costs are part of other actions.

 

39.    Part D – Implementation and Review: considers the implementation of this Plan of Management and contains information on potential funding sources, reporting, evaluation and review.

Next Steps

 

40.    If Council resolves to support the Draft Plan of Management and Masterplan for Hurstville Oval and Timothy reserve the following steps are anticipated:

·   Council refers the draft Plan of Management to Department of Industry as the owner of Crown Land in accordance with section 39 of the LG Act seeling landowners consent.

·   Once landowner approval is provided the draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and Masterplan will be placed on public exhibition for a period of no less than 28 days.

·   Council must hold a public hearing for the Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management as the proposed plan would be altering the categorisation of, community land under section 36 (4) of the LG Act.

·   A revised draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management (and Masterplan) will be prepared which addresses comments raised during the public exhibition

·   The draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and Masterplan will be reported back to Council for adoption.

 

Community Engagement

41. The draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and Masterplan will be placed on public exhibition for a period of no less than 28 days in accordance with section 38 of the LG Act 1993.

 

 

File Reference

D19/62935

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Draft PoM 28-02-19

 


Georges River Council -         Environment and Planning - Monday, 8 April 2019

ENV010-19             Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Draft Plan of Management and Masterplan

[Attachment 1]        Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Draft PoM 28-02-19

 

 

Page 270