AGENDA


Environment and Planning Committee

 

Monday, 10 August 2020

7.00pm

 

 

ONLINE MEETING

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Georges River Council - Environment and Planning -  Monday, 10 August 2020                                                                                                                                                        Page 2

 

        Environment and Planning COMMITTEE

ORDER OF BUSINESS

 

1.     Opening

2.     Acknowledgement of Country

3.     Apologies / Leave of Absence

4.     Notice of Webcasting

5.     Disclosures of Interest

6.     Public Forum

7.     Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting  

MINUTES: Environment and Planning - 13 July 2020 (SF19/3593)

8.     Committee Reports

ENV029-20       Adoption of Local Housing Strategy and Inclusive Housing Strategy

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

ENV030-20       Public Exhibition of Draft Georges River Development Control Plan 2020

(Report by Senior Strategic Planner)................................... 14

ENV031-20       Adoption of Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and Masterplan

(Report by Strategic Planner)............................................. 61

ENV032-20       Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2021 (Planning Proposal - Housing Choice and Capacity)

(Report by Strategic Planner/Urban Designer)..................... 71

ENV033-20       Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions) Directions 2020

(Report by Executive Strategic Planner).............................. 88  

 

 


Georges River Council – Environment and Planning -  Monday, 10 August 2020                                                                                                                                                       Page 5

Committee Reports

Item:                ENV029-20   Adoption of Local Housing Strategy and Inclusive Housing Strategy 

Author:            Strategic Planner and Senior Strategic Planner

Directorate:     Environment and Planning

Matter Type:    Committee Reports

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

(a)    That Council adopt the Local Housing Strategy and Inclusive Housing Strategy as strategic planning documents that will inform the development of policies and planning directions.

(b)    That Council delegate to the General Manager to approve any minor modifications in the finalisation of the Local Housing Strategy and Inclusive Housing Strategy.

(c)    That Council write to all those that made a submission advising them of the adoption of the Local Housing Strategy and the Inclusive Housing Strategy.

(d)    That the adopted copy of the Local Housing Strategy be forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.     The draft Local Housing Strategy and the draft Inclusive Housing Strategy and Delivery Plan are part of the harmonised strategic planning framework for Georges River which includes the Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020 (LEP 2020) and the Georges River Development Control Plan 2020. The preparation of a Local Housing Strategy is also required by Action 16 of the South District Plan.

2.     The Local Housing Strategy and Inclusive Housing Strategy are the subject of this report. In accordance with the Council resolution dated 24 February 2020; these Strategies were publicly exhibited with the draft Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020 from 1 April to 31 May 2020.

3.     A total of 24 submissions were received to the Local Housing Strategy. All submissions have been reviewed. Consideration of the submissions in relation to the exhibited draft Local Housing Strategy is provided in Attachment 1 where a response is provided to address each submission.

4.     A total of 21 submissions were received for the Inclusive Housing Strategy. These submissions have been considered and a response is provided to address each submission in Attachment 2.

5.     The draft Local Housing Strategy has been amended following consideration of the issues raised in the submissions. The draft Inclusive Housing Strategy did not require any amendments.  Table 1 provides a summary of the amendments.

6.     This report seeks the adoption of the amended Local Housing Strategy (refer to Attachment 3) and the Inclusive Housing Strategy (refer to Attachment 4) as strategic planning documents that have informed the preparation of the Georges River LEP 2020 and Georges River DCP 2020, as well as the assessment of planning proposals and development applications.

7.     The strategies will also inform the development of policies and planning directions for the local government area.

BACKGROUND TO BOTH STRATEGIES

8.     At its meeting on 26 February 2018, Council considered a report on the new Georges River Local Environmental Plan. Council resolved as follows:

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

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

9.     In accordance with this resolution, the Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) and the Planning Proposal for the Georges River LEP 2020 have been prepared. The LSPS was formally made on 10 March 2020 after receiving a Letter of Support from the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) on 4 March 2020.

10.   The Planning Proposal for the Georges River LEP 2020 was reported to Council’s Environment and Planning Committee on 11 November 2019 and subsequently to Council at its meeting on 25 November 2019. However, Council was unable to form a quorum and exercise its planning proposal authority functions at both meetings as result of Council’s Code of Conduct (reflecting the NSW Model Code of Conduct 2018).

11.   Given advice from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (“DPIE”),  Council’s independent legal advice and in accordance with the General Manager’s delegated functions under Section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993 (“LG Act”), Council’s Acting General Manager appointed the Georges River Local Planning Panel (“LPP”) as the planning proposal authority for the purpose of submitting the Georges River LEP 2020 Planning Proposal for a Gateway Determination to the DPIE, pursuant to Section 378 of the LG Act on 21 January 2020.

12.   The Planning Proposal was forwarded to the DPIE for a Gateway Determination after the LPP meeting which was held on 6 February 2020.

13.   Council at its meeting held 28 October 2019 (ENV035-19) resolved to adopt the LSPS and endorse the following Housing Precincts for inclusion in LEP 2020 and in the Council’s Housing Strategy:

a.     Peakhurst (North and West of Peakhurst Park) Precinct;

b.     South Hurstville – Culwulla Street Precinct;

c.     South Hurstville Hillcrest Avenue Precinct;

d.     Penshurst Apsley Estate Precinct; and

e.     Connell’s Point Rd Precinct.

14.   To implement the LSPS 2040 vision and to provide capacity for additional housing into the medium term, the draft Local Housing Strategy reinforces the importance of investigating the five Housing Investigation Areas for their suitability in delivering additional housing capacity.

15.   The detailed justification for the selection of the five Housing Investigation Areas to deliver an additional 650 dwellings is provided in the Housing Investigations Areas Paper and not directly addressed in the Local Housing Strategy.

16.   The Housing Investigations Areas Paper was exhibited along with the Draft Georges River LEP 2020.

17.   The five Housing Investigation areas are included in the Georges River LEP 2020.

18.   The Planning Proposal (PP) was reported at the Georges River LPP meeting on the 25 and 26 June 2020. At that meeting the LPP resolved to amended the Draft GRLEP 2020 and refer the amended PP to the DPIE for gazettal.

19.   One of the changes made by the Georges River Local Planning Panel was the retention of the existing extent of the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area (FSPA) identified by the Hurstville Local Environment Plan2012, (HLEP 2012), which means approximately 740 lots will lose the potential for dual occupancy developed under the GRLEP 2020. This issue is discussed in this report in paragraphs 40 to 42.

20.   The Local Planning Panel also recommended that Council as part of the preparation of the draft Local Environmental Plan in 2021/2022, further define the role, mapped extent and zoning of Foreshore Scenic Protection Areas, in both the former Hurstville and Kogarah Local Government Areas, having regard to those properties and ridge lines visible to and from the Georges River and its tributaries, and associated environmental protection applying to those areas in order to better reflect the objectives of Clause 6.7 (Foreshore Scenic Protection Area) of the Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020. This may include the consideration of additional environmental protection zones or modifications of the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area.

COUNCILLOR WORKSHOPS

21.   The draft Strategies were presented to Councillor Workshops a number of times as below;

 

Draft Local Housing Strategy

Draft Inclusive Housing Strategy

18 March 2019 (with LSPS briefing)

18 March 2019

3 June 2019

3 February 2020

3 February 2020

 

LOCAL HOUSING STRATEGY

22.   At its meeting on 26 February 2018, Council considered a report on the new Georges River Local Environmental Plan. Council resolved as follows:

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

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

23.   The Local Housing Strategy sets a clear plan for the provision of housing in the Georges River LGA over the next 10 and 20 years. The Strategy provides the link between GRC’s vision for housing and the Actions of the South District Plan by presenting Council’s response to how the housing target will be delivered locally.

24.   The Local Housing Strategy contains a number of Housing Objectives which set out the future policy direction for housing in the Georges River LGA in response to the gaps and issues identified by the evidence base. The objectives are:

a)     Objective 1: Accommodate additional housing growth

b)     Objective 2: Coordinate growth with infrastructure

c)     Objective 3: Provide affordable and inclusive housing

d)     Objective 4: Provide greater housing choice and diversity

e)     Objective 5: Have consistent LEP zones and controls across the LGA (hierarchy of zones)

f)      Objective 6: Enhance and protect the local character

g)     Objective 7: Facilitate good design and sustainable development practices

25.   These Housing Objectives are supported by a set of Actions with the intent of informing the preparation of the Georges River LEP 2020 through the approved four stage approach.

 

Structure of Local Housing Strategy

26.   The Strategy comprises the following chapters:

1.     Introduction – This chapter includes an overview, purpose and housing vision.

2.     Planning context – This chapter provides an overview of Regional, State and Local Policies that are relevant and have informed the strategy.

3.     Georges River LGA snap shot – This chapter includes the opportunities such as open space, social infrastructure, transport and challenges including character, heritage and environmental constraints.

4.     Housing Supply and Demand – This chapter is an overview of the current Housing Supply and Demand in the Georges River LGA.

5.     Housing Preferences – This chapter includes an overview of the housing survey results, feedback from draft LSPS Community Consultation, feedback from targeted Community Consultation on the five investigation areas.

6.     Gaps and Issues – This chapter summarises the gaps and issues in our current and future housing supply for the Georges River LGA.

7.     Policy Response – Housing Objectives – This chapter outlines the objectives of the Strategy to ensure a sufficient supply of appropriate housing over the next 20 years.

8.     Implementation – This chapter outlines the actions that will be implemented to achieve the objectives to create additional housing capacity and deliver housing to meet the needs of the population to 2036.

9.     Monitoring and Review – Explains when the strategy will be monitored and reviewed to ensure that the priorities, objectives and actions of this Strategy are being delivered.

27.   The structure of the finalised Local Housing Strategy remains unchanged from the exhibited draft version. The proposed amendments to the Strategy are outlined under the “Post-Exhibition Amendments” heading of this report.

28.   A copy of the finalised Local Housing Strategy is provided in Attachment 3.

INCLUSIVE HOUSING STRATEGY

29.   At its meeting on 27 November 2017, Council resolved that the General Manager prepare a report for Council that provides information on:

a.     The process that Council will need to follow to prepare an Affordable Rental Housing Policy for the Georges River Local Government Area taking into consideration the actions from the Draft Greater Sydney region Plan and the Revised Draft South District Plan.

b.     That Council commence the preparation of Affordable Rental Housing Policy and associated implementation plan for the Georges River Local Government Area taking into consideration the actions of the Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan and the Revised Draft South District Plan requiring the preparation of Affordable Rental Housing Target Schemes.

c.     That the Policy identify and assess the housing issues within the City and identify mechanisms to increase the supply of affordable housing for households on low to moderate incomes in housing stress.

d.     That the outcomes of the strategic research and the resultant Policy provisions be implemented via Council’s planning framework (such as LEPs, DCPs, VPAs, Section 94 Contributions Plans, etc.) to increase the supply of affordable rental housing in the city.

e.     That Council allocate funds as part of the 2018/2019 budget process to fund the cost of preparing the Policy.

30.   Council engaged Hill PDA to prepare the Inclusive Housing Strategy and Delivery Plan that aims to encourage housing that meets the needs of all members of the Georges River community. This strategy seeks to provide a comprehensive framework to advocate for, facilitate, provide and manage affordable housing in the Georges River LGA for the next 20 years. The Inclusive Housing Strategy provides input into the Local Housing Strategy, which is one of the many strategies that inform the Georges River LEP 2020.

31.   In summary, the Inclusive Housing Strategy describes:

a.     The current housing needs of the Georges River community;

b.     Projected population growth and housing demand;

c.     Principles to guide the location of new housing in the LGA;

d.     Options available to Council to influence housing delivery to address housing needs;

e.     A Delivery Plan to guide Council’s work program and encourage housing delivery that meets the community’s needs.

 

Aims of the draft Inclusive Housing Strategy

32.   The key aims of the Inclusive Housing Strategy and Delivery Plan are:

·        To research and develop strategies to increase affordable housing supply for a range of households, including the very low to moderate income households, singles, families, couples, seniors, people with a disability, students, key workers and the broader residential market, including first home buyers.

·        To encourage the provision of affordable, adaptable and diverse housing.

·        To develop planning controls and mechanisms that prevent the loss of existing, and deliver new, supplies of affordable housing.

·        To advocate for, and build partnerships to increase, affordable and liveable housing.

·        To explore options for providing and managing affordable housing.

33.   The policies and strategies to deliver inclusive housing in the Georges River LGA will be set out in three documents as follows (Refer Figure 1 below):

a)     Inclusive housing strategy – establishes what the housing needs of the LGA are and the overarching strategic and policy response - linked to LEP 2020.

b)     Inclusive housing policy (yet to be prepared) – sets targets and makes Council’s expectations for inclusive housing clear to developers and the community - linked to LEP 2021.

c)     Affordable housing contributions scheme (yet to be prepared) – complies with NSW Government’s guidelines and statutory requirements to enable Council to require affordable housing contributions – linked to LEP 2022.

d)     The program is supported by a Management Policy and Procedures program for the Management of the stock.

 

Figure 1: Policies and strategies to deliver inclusive housing

 

Structure of the Inclusive Housing Strategy

34.   The Strategy comprises the following chapters;

1.     Introduction – This chapter provides a background to the preparation of the Local Housing and the Inclusive Housing Strategies, defines inclusive housing, provides the Strategy objectives, an overview of the Georges River LGA and the desired future character of the LGA by 2038.

2.     Planning context – This chapter explores the planning context (both the state and Council) within which inclusive housing can be supported within the Georges River LGA.

3.     Demographic overview– This chapter includes the LGA’s population and housing trends that will assist Council in preparing their Local and Inclusive Housing Strategies.

4.     Assessment of housing need – This chapter provides the housing supply as per the 2016 Census, indicators of demand, housing costs, housing stress and a summary of housing needs.

5.     Options for responding to housing needs – This chapter includes the role of local government in providing inclusive housing, options to encourage housing diversity and options to encourage affordable housing.

6.     Inclusive housing strategy – This chapter includes the policy framework for the Inclusive Housing Strategy, an account of the locational principles for inclusive housing (such as transportation; retail, employment opportunities and services, access to open space, social infrastructure, etc.) and a discussion about place making and local character.

7.     Delivery Plan – This chapter includes the Delivery Plan for the Strategy in terms of goals, strategies, actions and timeframes.

8.     Appendix A: This section includes additional figures for the LGA’s Demographic Profile.

9.     Appendix B: This section includes Generic Financial Modelling Methodology and Feasibility scenarios.

35.   The structure of the finalised Inclusive Housing Strategy remains unchanged from the exhibited draft version. No amendments have been made to the Strategy as a result of the submissions received.

36.   A copy of the finalised Inclusive Housing Strategy is provided in Attachment 4.

PUBLIC EXHIBITION OF DRAFT STRATEGIES

37.   In accordance with the Council resolution dated 24 February 2020, the draft Local Housing Strategy and the draft Inclusive Housing Strategy were publicly exhibited with the draft Georges River LEP 2020 from 1 April to 31 May 2020, as supporting Strategies to the Georges River LEP 2020.

38.   The draft Strategies were available for viewing on Council’s Your Say webpage and Council’s website.

39.   Council referred the draft Local Housing Strategy to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) for approval. The response from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment’s review is provided in Attachment 5.

40.   In summary the Department advised that following completion of the public exhibition period, Council update the Local Housing Strategy where considered necessary to respond to any submissions received; and once updated it could be re-submitted to the Department.

41.   The Department also advised that Conditions 1(r) and 2 of the Gateway Determination to the GRLEP 2020 did not require the Local Housing Strategy to be approved to satisfy the Gateway conditions. Rather, that the final LEP should be updated where required having regard to any endorsed Local Housing Strategy and Local Strategic Planning Statement, should the endorsement of either document occur prior to finalisation.

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED

42.   A total of 45 submissions were received for both of the Strategies. All submissions have been reviewed. Detailed consideration of the submissions in relation to the exhibited draft Strategies is provided in Attachments 1 and 2 where a response is provided to address each submission.

43.   The following table (Table 1) provides a summary of the key issues raised in the submissions and the response in the Local Housing Strategy.

 

Table 1 – Key issues raised in the submissions received

Key Issues raised in the submissions

Response

Removal of properties in the Foreshore Scenic Protection area:

 

Impacts on the built environment

-Increased development potential for dual occupancies will cause overdevelopment

There will be a loss of existing streetscape character

Existing local traffic issues will be exacerbated

Amenity will be affected by more development

Additional housing will increase pressure on existing infrastructure

 

Impacts on the natural environment

- loss of trees and landscaping

- Existing biodiversity will be threatened

 

Local Housing Strategy

As a result of the GRLEP2020 public exhibition, Georges River Local Planning Panel resolved to retain the existing extent of the FSPA identified by the HLEP 2012. Therefore the proposed development potential of an extra 740 lots to dual occupancies developments will not be realised.

The Local Planning Panel recommends that Council as part of the preparation of the draft Local Environmental Plan in 2021/2022, further define the role, mapped extent and zoning of FSPAs, in both the former Hurstville and Kogarah Local Government Areas, having regard to those properties and ridge lines visible to and from the Georges River and its tributaries, and associated environmental protection applying to those areas in order to better reflect the objectives of Clause 6.7 of the GRLEP 2021.

Recommended change:

Add an action within Objective 5 which states:- Further define the role, mapped extent and zoning of Foreshore Scenic Protection Areas, in both the former Hurstville and Kogarah Local Government Areas in LEP 2021/2022

Inclusive Housing Strategy

No changes required

Overdevelopment of the area

- Loss of existing streetscape character

- Existing local traffic issues will be exacerbated

- Amenity will be affected by more development

- Additional housing will increase pressure on existing infrastructure

- Existing biodiversity will be threatened as trees are removed through new development

Local Housing Strategy

Actions within Objective 6 of the Local Housing Strategy address the identification of key characteristics of each suburb, the protection of local character and to introduce landscaping and design excellence provisions.

The GRLEP 2020 has:

·      Added an additional zone objective for R2 and R3

·      Increased minimum landscaping requirement for dual occupancies development

·      Introduced a new local provision Clause 6.19 Tree protection and landscaping in Zones R2 and R3

Recommended no changes required to the Housing strategy.

However locality statements have been included in the Council’s Georges River DCP which address loss of streetscape character.

Inclusive Housing Strategy

No changes required.

Request amendment to North and West of Peakhurst Park

Local Housing Strategy

These areas will be considered as part of the Riverwood Planning Precinct investigation. Riverwood is a planning precinct identified by the NSW State Government.

Recommended no changes required at this stage.

 

 

 

 

 

HOUSING TARGETS 6-10 YEARS

44.   The Greater Sydney Commission has set indicative draft 6-10 year housing target for the period 2021/22 to 2025/26 of 3,450 – 4,250 dwellings. This target was contained in the GSC assurance letter dated 4 March 2020 to Councils LSPS and Council must show how they can meet this target as part of the Local Housing Strategy.

45.   To ensure Council meets the Greater Sydney Commission’s 6-10 year housing target a Planning Proposal for LEP 2021 will be prepared with the revised intent of promoting housing choice, creating capacity for additional dwellings across the LGA and reviewing the FSPA alongside a number of housekeeping amendments. It will be comprised of five streams:

a)     Housing choice

b)     Housing delivery

c)     Contributory planning proposals

d)     FSPA review

e)     Housekeeping amendments

46.   To provide additional dwellings Council will bring forward the review of future housing investigation areas as part of LEP 2025 and beyond identified by the LSPS 2040 Structure Plan to enable the provision of a range of additional housing in appropriate locations.

47.   A separate report on LEP 2021 has been prepared for the August Environment & Planning meeting.

POST-EXHIBITION AMENDMENTS

48.   The Local Housing Strategy and Inclusive Housing Strategy have been finalised with consideration of the issues raised in the submissions and the finalisation of Georges River LEP 2020.

49.   The Local Housing Strategy has been amended:

1.     In light of the Georges River Local Planning Panel resolution to retain the existing extent of the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area identified by the HLEP 2012. This means approximately 740 lots will lose the potential for dual occupancy development.

 

2.     To include an action to address the recommendation of the Local Planning Panel to further define the role, mapped extent and zoning of the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area in LEP 2021/2022.

 

3.     In light of the name change of the Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code to the Low Rise Housing Diversity Code.

 

4.     To address the 0-5 year housing target of 4,800. Further analysis has revealed that there will be a shortfall in the 0-5 year target of approximately 700 dwellings. It is anticipated however that Council will meet the 2036 target of 14,000 additional dwellings. For the following reasons:

 

a)     With the gazettal of the City Plan Amendment to the Kogarah LEP 2012 in May 2017 Council has issued a number of approvals for residential flat development in various precincts throughout the LGA. The majority of this development is currently under construction.

 

b)     Given the shortfall in the 0-5 years (2016-2021 inclusive) target Council has investigated the time lag between when a development application is approved and when construction is completed which is two to three years. If the DA approval/completion trend continues the applications approved in 2019 will be completed in 2021 and beyond and will contribute to the 6-10 year housing target. From January 2019 to May 2020 Council approved 1,704 multi unit dwellings; and this will assist in addressing the housing target.

 

c)     With the current rate of dwelling approvals and completion Council is close to achieving the South District housing target, but to ensure that the housing targets are meet further work will need to be conducted in future LEPs to add to the supply and diversity of housing within the LGA.

 

50.   The Inclusive Housing Strategy was not amended after public exhibition.

NEXT STEPS

51.   Subject to Council’s adoption of the Local Housing Strategy and Inclusive Housing Strategy, the next steps will be as follows:

a)     The Strategies will be placed on Council’s website; and

b)     Submitters will be advised of the adoption of the Strategies.

c)     The Local Housing Strategy forwarded to the DPIE for approval.

 

52.   These Strategies will be utilised as a strategic documents to inform the preparation of GRLEP 2020, any future amendments to GRLEP 2020, accompanying DCPs and the assessment of planning proposals and development applications.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

53.   Within budget allocation.

RISK IMPLICATIONS

54.   No risks identified.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

55.   Community engagement was conducted from 1 April to 31 May 2020 where the draft Strategies was publicly exhibited with the draft Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020.

56.   All submitters will be advised of the adoption of the Strategies.

57.   The Strategies and all associated Appendices will be made available on Council’s website.

FILE REFERENCES

18/1665

17/1409

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Local Housing Strategy - Summary of Submissions Table - July2020 - published in separate document

Attachment 2

Inclusive Housing Strategy - Summary of Submissions Table - July2020 - published in separate document

Attachment 3

Georges River Local Housing Strategy - published in separate document

Attachment 4

Georges River Inclusive Housing Strategy - August 2020 - published in separate document

Attachment 5

LHS Letter to Georges River from DPIE - published in separate document

 


Georges River Council – Environment and Planning -  Monday, 10 August 2020                                                                                                                                                     Page 16

Item:                ENV030-20      Public Exhibition of Draft Georges River Development Control Plan 2020 

Author:            Senior Strategic Planner

Directorate:     Environment and Planning

Matter Type:   Committee Reports

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

(a)    That Council commence the process of repealing the following DCPs pursuant to Clause 22(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000:

a.     Kogarah DCP 2013

b.     Hurstville Control Plan 1 – applies to land within Penshurst, Mortdale and Hurstville wards

(b)    That Council commence the process to repeal the following Council policies:

a.     Interim Policy DCP (Policy #: Pol-061.01)

b.     Drainage and Onsite Detention Policy (replaced by Georges River Stormwater Management Policy 2019)

c.     Fencing adjacent to public roads (provisions in the draft Georges River DCP 2020)

d.     Balcony Enclosures in Residential flat buildings Policy (provisions in the draft Georges River DCP 2020)

e.     Satellite Dish Policy (provisions in the draft Georges River DCP 2020 and covered by Exempt and Complying SEPP)

f.      Code for the erection of private tennis courts (provisions in the draft Georges River DCP 2020)

g.     Stencilling of street driveways policy (provisions in the draft Georges River DCP 2020)

h.     Underground electricity cabling to developments policy (provisions in the draft Georges River DCP 2020)

i.      Design guidelines for absorption trenches (replaced by Georges River Stormwater Management Policy 2019)

j.      Rainwater Tanks Policy, adopted 18 December 2002 (replaced by Georges River Stormwater Management Policy 2019)

k.     Home Activities Policy, adopted 15 August 2001 (home occupations are permitted without consent)

l.      Code for Commercial Use of Public Footpaths (replaced by Georges River Council Local Approvals Policy – Use of Public Land dated 29 October 2018)

(c)    That Council note the retention of the following DCPs:

a.     Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 9 - Applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre excluding the 'deferred matters' on the Draft Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020 Land Application Map.

b.     Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 5 - Applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre identified as 'deferred matters' on the Draft Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020 Land Application Map

(d)    That, as recommended by the Department of Planning Industry and Environment, the current notification provisions listed in the Development Control Plans below be repealed in accordance with Clause 22(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 by subsequent Development Control Plans:

i.    Section 2.4 of the Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 9 - Applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre excluding the 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map.

ii.    Section 2.2 of the Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 5 - Applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre identified as 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map.

(e)    That Council endorse the draft Georges River Development Control Plan 2020 for public exhibition for a minimum of 60 days.

(f)     That Council publicly exhibit the draft Georges River Development Control Plan 2020 in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 and relevant COVID-19 Planning Orders issued by the NSW Minister for Planning and Public Spaces.

(g)    That Council authorise the General Manager to make minor modifications to any numerical, typographical, interpretation and formatting errors, if required, in preparation for the public exhibition of the draft Georges River Development Control Plan 2020.

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

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.     At its meeting of 23 April 2019, Council resolved to prepare a comprehensive Development Control Plan (DCP) for the Georges River Local Government Area to support the Georges River LEP 2020 (GRLEP 2020). The DCP has been prepared in four stages:

a.     Stage 1 – The Community Participation Plan

b.     Stage 2 – Introduction, general planning considerations, general land uses and land zoned IN2-Light Industry

c.     Stage 3 - Residential Controls and Precincts

d.     Stage 4 - Business Precincts.

2.     The draft Georges River Development Control Plan (GRDCP) 2020 has been prepared and is submitted to Council for consideration to be placed on community consultation in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and its Regulation.

3.     The draft GRDCP 2020 supports the draft GRLEP 2020.

4.     Section 3.43 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (in summary) states that a provision of a DCP that is inconsistent with the provisions of an Environmental Planning Instrument has no effect.

5.     In bringing GRDCP 2020 into effect, the Council needs to begin the process of repealing the current DCPs, Interim DCP and former Hurstville Council policies. Clause 22(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 states that

(2)    A council may repeal a development control plan—

(a)    by a subsequent development control plan, or

(b)    by publishing notice of the decision to repeal the plan on its website.

(3)    At least 14 days before repealing a development control plan under subclause (2)(b), the council must publish notice of its intention to repeal the plan, and its reasons for the repeal, on its website.

(4)    The repeal of a development control plan under subclause (2) (b) takes effect on the date on which the notice is published on the council’s website.

6.     The report is broken up into the following sections to assist Council:

a.     Resolutions of Council

b.     Background

c.     Councillor briefings

d.     Approach to preparation of the draft GRDCP

e.     Content of the draft GRDCP

f.      Matters for consideration by Council

g.     Design Review Panel

h.     Repeal of DCPs and former Hurstville Council Policies

i.      Financial Implications

j.      Risk Implications

k.     Community Engagement

l.      Next Steps

7.     The report has the following Attachments:

a.     Attachment 1 – Final List of Car parking rates and their source

b.     Attachment 2 – Comparison Table of Key Draft GRCDCP controls for various residential styles

c.     Attachment 3 – GRDCP Table of Contents

d.     Attachment 4 – GRDCP Part 1 – Introduction

e.     Attachment 5 – GRDCP Part 2 – Application Process

f.      Attachment 6 – GRDCP Part 3 – General Planning Considerations

g.     Attachment 7 – GRDCP Part 4 – General Land Use

h.     Attachment 8 – GRDCP Part 5 – Residential Locality Statements

i.      Attachment 9 – GRDCP Part 6.1 – Low Density Residential Controls

j.      Attachment 10 – GRDCP Part 6.2 – Medium Density Residential Controls

k.     Attachment 11 – GRDCP Part 6.3 – High Density Residential Controls

l.      Attachment 12 – GRDCP Part 6.4 – Ancillary Development

m.    Attachment 13 – GRDCP Part 6.5 – Foreshore Locality Controls

n.     Attachment 14 - GRDCP Part 7 – Business Precincts

o.     Attachment 15 – GRDCP Part 8 – Kogarah Town Centre

p.     Attachment 16 – GRDCP Part 9 –Industrial Development

q.     Attachment 17 – GRDCP Part 10 – Precincts

r.      Attachment 18 – GRDCP Appendices

RESOLUTIONS OF COUNCIL

8.     Council resolved the following relating to development controls and the preparation of the GRDCP:

a.     Proposed Interim Policy Approach for Development Control Plans (Inconsistent Controls for Development) – dated 24/09/2018

b.     Preparation of a new Development Control Plan for the Kogarah Bay Precinct Princes Highway and the west side of the Princes Highway from Jubilee Avenue to Park Road – dated 23/04/2019

c.     Preparation of Development Control Plan Provisions for Mechanical Parking Installations in Developments within the Georges River LGA – dated 23/04/2019

d.     Preparation of a new Development Control Plan for restrictions on the provision or installation of hostile architecture – dated 26 August 2019

e.     Additional controls relating to use of rainwater for car wash bays in residential flat buildings and the further investigation and review of the setbacks, landscaped areas, and common open space to ensure compatibility between the scale of development at the point of transition between the low density residential zone and the adjoining higher density residential areas - Council resolution dated 25 May 2020 in adopting Part C2 Amendment.

9.     The preparation of the GRDCP has considered and addressed these resolutions of Council.

BACKGROUND

10.   Council has four Development Control Plans that apply to the Local Government Area:

a.     Hurstville Development Control Plan 1 - Applies to land within the Peakhurst, Mortdale and Hurstville Wards;

b.     Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 9 - Applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre excluding the 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map;

c.     Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 5 - Applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre identified as 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map; and

d.     Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 - Applies to land within the Blakehurst and Kogarah Bay Wards.

 

11.   Figure 1 depicts the area covered by each of the DCPs listed above.

Figure 1 – Area covered by each DCP

 

12.   At its meeting of 23 April 2019, Council resolved to prepare a comprehensive Development Control Plan for the Georges River Local Government Area to ensure that it supports the GRLEP 2020.

13.   The draft Georges River DCP 2020 (GRDCP 2020) was prepared in 4 stages:

a.     Stage 1 – The Community Participation Plan, which is a statutory document required under Section 2.23 of the EP&A Act 1979. This Plan was adopted by Council on 28 October 2019 and details how and when the community will be involved in planning matters. This is a separate document.

b.     Stage 2 – This stage covers:

i.    Introduction

ii.    General planning considerations

iii.   General land uses

iv.   Land zoned IN2-Light Industry

c.     Stage 3 - Residential controls and Precincts – This stage covers:

i.    Task 1 - Amendment to Part C2 Medium Density Housing of Kogarah DCP 2013

ii.    Task 2 – Low Density Housing

iii.   Task 3 – Multi Dwelling Housing, Multi Dwelling Housing (Terraces) and Manor Houses

iv.   Task 4 – Residential Flat Buildings

v.   Task 5 - Ancillary Structures

d.     Stage 4 - Business Precincts – Covers all business-zoned land in the LGA.

14.   Council engaged SJB Consultants to undertake Stages 2 and 3 of the DCP 2020. Stage 4 was undertaken in-house.

15.   The first task for Stage 3 of DCP 2020 was to prepare an amendment to Part C2 of Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013.

16.   At the 23 April 2019 meeting, Council also resolved that arising from the significant increase in development activity as a result of the New City Plan (Amendment No. 2) to the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan gazetted in May 2017 which permitted greater density (2:5 and 2:1) and height (21m), Council immediately proceed to prepare an amendment to Part C of the Kogarah Development Control Plan for the area generally bounded by the Princes Highway, Stubbs Street/Poulton Avenue and Wyuna Street, Beverley Park, and Park Road and John Street, Kogarah Bay as a first priority, and as a second priority, the west side of the Princes Highway from Jubilee Avenue to Park Road which is in part High Density B6 zone and in part High Density B2 zone. This amendment to the DCP is to address, but is not limited to the following matters:

a.     Site isolation and amalgamation

b.     Vehicular access, parking and circulation

c.     Traffic impact

d.     Landscape character

e.     Proposed building envelopes that provide a transition/interface to the land zoned R2 at the rear of these high density zones, which allow for a stepping down to a 9m height limit to the rear of developments that back onto R2 residential zones.

f.      Impact on Heritage Item I3 “Sunnyside” at 186-188 Princes Highway

17.   The draft amendment was briefed to Councillors on 16 September 2019 and was considered by Council at its meeting on 25 November 2019.

18.   Council at its meeting on 25 May 2020 and pursuant to Clause 21(1) (b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations adopted the development control plan – being the “Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 (Part C2 – Medium Density Housing Amendment)”.

19.   The multi-unit housing and residential flat building sections of the GRDCP correspond to that adopted by Council on 25 May 2020 for Part C2 of the Kogarah DCP except for the changes outlined in Table 3 of this report and the following two additional controls inserted to limit the extent of excavation and bulk and scale:

a.     Where topography conditions require a basement, the area of the basement should not exceed the area required to meet the car parking requirements for the development, access ramp to the parking, and storage requirements outlined in Section 1.16 of the DCP. Additional basement area to that required to satisfy these requirements may be included as floor space area when calculating floor space ratio.

b.     The maximum size of voids at the first floor level should be a cumulative total of 15m2 (excluding voids created by internal stairs).

 

COUNCILLOR BRIEFINGS HELD ON THE PREPARATION OF THE DRAFT GRDCP 2020

20.   The following Table 1 provides the summary of the briefings that have been held with Council on the contents of the Draft Georges River Development Control Plan 2020.

 

 

Table 1 – Summary of Councillor Briefings held

 

Date

Presentation Topic

 

Issues raised by Councillors

Direction/Action

02/07/2018

LEP and DCP Foreshore Review

This briefing provided an introduction to the LEP and DCP Foreshore Review. It covered:

·      The implementation in the Georges River Estuary Coastal Zone Management Plan 2013

·      A review of all current water and foreshore controls to the ridgeline as viewed from the water under all of the Council’s LEPs and DCPs

·      Visual assessment of foreshore based on photographic analysis of LGA

·      Preparation of a list of LEP and DCP controls that will apply across the LGA and that can be incorporated into the comprehensive LEP and DCP currently being prepared for the Georges River LGA

·      Preparation of a new Foreshore Building Line Map that will be incorporated into the GRLEP 2020

 

No issues raised.

Nil

15/10/2018

Review of Planning Controls for Foreshore Development

 

This briefing covered:

·      Coastal hazard, flood hazard risk and climate change

·      Suggestion that Council strengthen DCP controls to protect views, and incorporate Water Sensitive Urban Design principles and regulate subdivision.

 

The issues raised:

·      Relationship with Georges River Foreshore Access and Improvement Plan (FAIP)

·      Will the FBL change

 

Explanation provided – the FAIP has identified locations of publicly owned foreshore suitable for enhanced recreational access and links between key foreshore assets, opportunities to create resilient estuarine ecosystems and liveable community places. It also considers strategic projects where important access opportunities are identified and considered a high priority. In addition the plan identifies foreshore improvement works to enhance amenity and recreational opportunities such as the creation of formal walking and cycling trails.

The FBL was to be retained.

 

01/04/2019

Interim Policy DCP:

To propose an Interim Policy DCP for assessing development applications until such time as the GRDCP 2020 is adopted by Council. The Interim Policy addresses dwelling houses, dual occupancies, multi-unit dwellings and residential flat buildings, providing harmonised controls for setbacks, landscaped areas, private open space and communal open space, site frontages and solar access.

 

The issues raised were:

·      Side setbacks of the 1st floor for dwelling houses

·      Front setbacks being wholly concreted

·      Have a minimum % landscaped area

·      Excavation for basements

·      Provision of car parking

 

The issues raised were addressed in the final Interim Policy DCP which was adopted by Council on 11 June 2019.

01/04/2019

Draft Foreshore Planning Controls

This briefing covered:

·      DCP provisions for Dual Occupancies which link well with the Codes SEPP and are informed by the built form testing and the Low Rise Medium Density Design Guide:

·      New DCP provisions

Green Web

Siting (e.g. front and side setbacks)

Built Form (e.g. maximum length of building)

Landscaping (e.g. deep soil areas)

 

The issues raised were mainly related to the LEP provisions – which were incorporated into the Draft GRLEP 2020:

 

·      Concerned about the term Foreshore Scenic Protection Area and would be considered an environmentally sensitive area, which will result in excluding exempt and complying development.

·      Could the term Foreshore Scenic Protection Area (FSPA) be called something else

·      The FSPA and the area of the proposed extension into the former KCC seem excessive. Some of these areas are not suitable or relevant. 

·      What additional controls would be introduced in the FSPA?

 

DCP provisions have been included in the draft GRDCP, similar to those contained in the current Hurstville DCP 2012.

 

Council exhibited a reduced FSPA in accordance with the recommendations of the Foreshore Strategic Directions Paper (part of the Foreshore Review).

 

The LPP has resolved to retain the exhibited and reinstate the original FSPA. Further work on the role, mapped extent and zoning of the FSPA will be undertaken as part of the preparation of draft LEP in 2021/2022.

 

06/05/2019

Approach to the preparation of the GRDCP 2020

Staged approach to DCP explained to Council and is as follows:

 

·      Stage 1 – The Community Participation Plan

·      Stage 2 – Introduction, general planning considerations, general land uses and land zoned IN2-Light Industry

·      Stage 3 - Residential Controls and Precincts

·      Stage 4 - Business Precincts.

 

No issues raised.

Nil

05/08/2020

Foreshore Review –

Sea Level Rise

Councillors were briefed on sea level rise.

The main issue raised was the impact on private properties.

 

The draft GRLEP 2020 contains Clause 6.5 – Foreshore area and coastal hazards and risks which deals with the sea level rise affectation on properties. Council will be required to consider the impacts of sea level rise and tidal inundation as a result of climate change.

 

02/09/2019

Industrial Precincts in the GRDCP 2020 (Stage 2 DCP)

 

There are 8 industrial precincts within the Georges River LGA and all zoned IN2 Light Industrial under the draft GRLEP 2020. The Precincts are:

·      Blakehurst

·      Carlton

·      South Hurstville (Halstead Street)

·      Beverly Hills

·      Kingsgrove

·      Peakhurst

·      Penshurst (Forest Road)

·      Penshurst Lane

 

The Councillors were provided with a comparison of the Kogarah and Hurstville DCP controls relating to industrial zoned land and provided with a proposed set of controls covering:

·      Setbacks

·      Interface with residential development and zones

·      Landscaping and trees

 

Precinct controls were proposed for Blakehurst and Penshurst Lane.

 

Feedback included:

·      4.5m setback was agreed with

·      Request to reconsider the secondary road of 3m width – this may not be enough

·      3m landscaped setback to stormwater channels – it was stated that this setback may be difficult to achieve in the smaller industrial precincts

·      For Penshurst Lane Precinct, check the requirements to make sure that there is a viable site left after road widenings and tree setbacks.

 

These matters have been addressed in the draft DCP. Further work was carried out on the Penshurst Lane Precinct, including a tree survey.

16/09/2019

R3 Medium Density Residential Precincts in the KLEP 2012

(Stage 3 DCP)

 

As part of the preparation of Stage 3 – Residential of the GRDCP 2020, a draft amendment to Part C2 - Medium Density Housing of the Kogarah DCP 2013 was prepared as the first task to address inconsistencies between Kogarah LEP 2012 and Kogarah DCP 2013 and transition issues.

 

The following Issues were raised:

·      Relationship between landscape area and the private open space and the extent of its occurrence.

·      Confirmation to delete the inconsistent planning control table and envelope controls in the current Part C2 - Medium Density Housing of the Kogarah DCP 2013 was provided.

·      Question raised on how to ensure that the owners have received a good offer in relation to the matter of site isolation

Clause 6.13 in the draft GRLEP 2020 indicates that the development to which SEPP65 applies is excluded from the 10% minimum landscaped area requirement in Zone R4 High Density Residential.

Therefore this requirement has been deleted from the Landscaped areas and private open space section of Part 1 of the DCP and reference has been made to the NSW Government’s ADG requirement for deep soil (7% of site area)

The inconsistent planning control table and envelope controls have been removed from the draft DCP.

The draft DCP includes controls to encourage site consolidation. It also provides controls in case the amalgamation of the isolated site is not able to occur including requiring Council to get an independent valuation done.

 

04/11/2019

Stage 3 DCP – Dwelling Houses, narrow lot housing, dual occupancies (attached and detached) and secondary dwellings.

The Councillors were provided with a comparison of the Kogarah and Hurstville DCP controls relating to dwelling houses, narrow lot housing, dual occupancies (attached and detached) and secondary dwellings and provided with a proposed set of controls covering:

 

·      Setbacks

·      Wall heights

·      Principal open space

·      Impervious areas

·      Fencing

·      Roof top terraces

·      Extent of glazing used on waterfront dwellings

·      View sharing planning principle to be relied on for view sharing assessments.

·      Elevated rear facing balconies to be provided with privacy screens/solid walls on the side elevations

Councillors requested:

·      Separate controls for dwelling houses and dual occupancies

·      For corner blocks have a front setback and a side setback. If a garage fronts a secondary street then a setback of 5.5m required for additional on-site parking.

·      Require modulation in buildings and buildings have to address both streets if the site is a corner site

·      Side setbacks of 900mm and 1200mm to be streamlined in accordance with site widths and whether it is alterations/additions or newly built dwellings

·      Investigate a building setback to the foreshore

·      Controls for sloping sites to be incorporated

·      Provide wall heights

·      Rooftop terraces should not be allowed

·      Facades fronting the foreshore should be broken up – made interesting

·      Clarify basement setbacks

·      Discouraged the inclusion of a maximum impervious area (as a percentage of the site area) in the low density housing.

 

Controls for low density housing styles in the LGA are included in the DCP.

 

In response to impervious areas, the control related to impervious area in the Landscaping section of the DCP has a reduced impervious area of 40% of the setback area.

 

The other matters raised by Councillors have been incorporated into various sections of the DCP, including clarification of setbacks, modulation in building facades to streets & the foreshore, controls for sloping sites and basement setbacks.

17/02/2020

Stage 2 DCP – General Controls and General land use Types

 

General controls and general land uses briefed to Councillors. It involved a comparison of Kogarah and Hurstville DCP controls as well as a benchmark against other Council DCPs.

 

The only new general controls included were:

·      Earthworks - groups construction management controls 

·      Coastal Hazards and Risk i.e. sea level rise

·      Parking Access and Transport - added end of trip & bicycle controls (NB: Does not include review of car parking controls)

·      Public Domain including Public Art

·      View Impacts

 

The only new general land uses included were:

·      Tourist and Visitor Accommodation (Backpackers, Bed and Breakfast, Motel / Hotel, Serviced Apartments, Short-term Rental Accommodation)

·      Vehicle Repairs, Sales and Hire Premises

·      Swimming pools relocated to Residential Chapter

 

The focus was on simplification i.e. plain English, objectives and controls; updated references to draft LEP, current NSW legislation/ guidance policies, and Australian Standards; relocate DA submission requirements to DA checklist and guidelines and deferral to other Council policy documents / studies e.g. Local Approvals Policy (Outdoor dining).

 

No changes required as a result of the briefing.

 

Nil.

17/02/2020

Stage 3 DCP – multi dwelling housing, multi dwelling housing (terraces) and manor houses

 

The proposed DCP controls seek to complement GRLEP 2020 controls and respond to the controls contained within the Codes SEPP and Low Rise Medium Density Design Guide – Development Applications.

 

·      Question rose regarding car parking for terraces that are allowed on Torrens title land, specifically visitor spaces.

 

·      Question rose regarding number of lots in the LGA that can accommodate medium density development. Around 650 lots identified; Peakhurst / Penshurst area has 15m to 18m wide lots and the Culwulla Street, South Hurstville area has around 600sqm lots; where Council’s controls can be requested in the Low Rise Medium Density Design Code.

 

·      The intent and circumstances around the 5m single storey height restriction at the rear of the lot in the Multi Dwelling Housing was questioned and whether it was to apply at the transition of R2 and R3 zones.

 

The recommended car parking was 1 space per dwelling (no visitor) for Manor Houses, 1 space per dwelling and 1 visitor space per 5 units or part thereof Multi Dwelling Housing (terraces) and 1.5 spaces for Multi Dwelling Housing and 1 visitor space for 5 dwellings or part thereof for Multi-dwelling Housing (excluding terraces)

 

It was clarified that the rear dwelling should be single storey, not 5m to avoid any privacy concerns. This control needs to apply at the interface between the R2 and R3 zones and not where R3 abuts R3.

 

02/03/2020

Georges River Car Parking Strategy

 

Car parking rates for retail and commercial uses were discussed in this briefing on the Georges River Car Parking Strategy. At the Council Meeting on 27 April 2020, Council endorsed the Position Paper and the Car Parking Strategy.

 

Car parking rates were established for business and office premises, retail premises (shops), restaurants and cafes; and medical centres.

 

Attachment 1 to this report indicates the final list of car parking rates and where they have been sourced from and is provided for the Council’s information.

 

Councillors agreed with the overall rates for retail/commercial, shops, restaurants/cafes and medical centres.

 

Suggestion for increasing the car parking rates for restaurants. 

 

Suggestion to include rates for reception halls.

Council recommended amending the rates for restaurants from 1 space per 60sqm to 1 per 40sqm.

 

The car parking rates for reception halls need to be calculated as part of a community facility on individual basis and thus a specific parking rate for the facility cannot be recommended.

02/03/2020

Stage 3 DCP – Residential flat buildings

 

The following issues raised in the submissions received to the draft C2 DCP were discussed with Councillors:

 

·      Combination of two setbacks - 5.0metres for 75% of the width of the building and 7.0metres for the remaining 25%

·      Transition for high rise buildings to be reduced to 3 storeys and not four, for example, LEP requires 21m height in the vicinity of 9m

·      Eliminating encroachments in the front setbacks to encourage deep soil planting

·      Prohibit rooftop Common Open Space (COS) – will cause significant acoustic impacts and have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining developments

·      Question raised regarding why the rooftop COS is permitted in R3 and R4 zones and not R2.

·      Reiterated that the parapet heights need to be included in the 21m maximum permissible height in R3/R4 zones.

·      Permissibility of shops in R4 zones and their maximum size - in areas like Carlton, there is a possibility of residential above a café downstairs. Also, while shop top housing is permitted in the R4 zones, RFBs are also permitted, which means there could be commercial/retail use on ground along the street with residential on top; while the rear could have residential both on the ground and the levels above.

 

In response to the direction provided the following have been incorporated in the residential flat buildings section of the DCP:

·      A consistent front setback

·      For the interface issue at the R2/R4 boundary - use the setback control and leave the podium 4 storeys as exhibited in amendment to C2 to Kogarah DCP 2013.

·      3m of the front setback near the property boundary to be landscaped/deep soil and the rest be Private Open Space

·      The rooftop COS will have 3m setback from the edge of the roof, which will be non-trafficable. It will be landscaped and have a physical barrier. The Local Planning Panel has been permitting a mix of ground and rooftop COS.

·      120sqm maximum size of shops in the R4 zones

16/03/2020

Stage 4 DCP – commercial centres

·      Approach for the commercial centres is “Harmonisation”.

·      Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 5 applies to 3 sites within the Hurstville City Centre identified as 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map - Civic Precinct, Westfield and Treacy Street Carpark sites. This DCP needs to be retained for the Civic Precinct and the Westfield sites.

·      Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 9 applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre excluding the 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map. This DCP needs to be retained for all sites within the Hurstville City Centre excluding the Civic Precinct and the Westfield sites which will be ‘deferred matters’ under the Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 5.

·      Move the controls relating to centres from the Hurstville Development Control Plan 1 which applies to land within the Peakhurst, Mortdale and Hurstville Wards and Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 which applies to land within the Blakehurst and Kogarah Bay Wards into a new Part 4 – Commercial Centres section of the draft GRDCP 2020

·      Generally no introduction of new controls until after Commercial Centres Strategy completed in 2022 except for:

B6 – Enterprise Corridor Controls;

Supermarket controls (shopping trolley management);

Interface controls – as per the recent amendments to Section C2 of the Kogarah DCP 2013; and

Green walls/roofs.

 

 

The following matters  were raised:

·      Investigate green walls/roofs

·      Facade articulation

·      Hostile architecture

·      Rezoning of B6 zone

 

The GRDCP includes controls in relation to the matters raised by Councillors.

 

The rezoning of B6 zone was not recommended, rather the scope for site amalgamations needs to be investigated to enable the bulky goods retailing permissible in B6 zones.

 

APPROACH TO THE PREPARATION OF THE GEORGES RIVER DCP 2020

21.   A staged approach to the DCP was taken as follows:

 

Stage 1 - Notification Requirements

22.   This section is similar to both the former Hurstville and Kogarah DCPs but includes Council’s Pre-lodgement Advisory Service.

23.   Section 402 of the Local Government Act 1993 stipulates that councils must establish and implement a strategy (its Community Engagement Strategy), based on social justice principles, for engagement with the local community.

24.   Reforms to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) required councils across NSW to prepare Community Participation Plans (CPPs) by December 2019. Georges River Council prepared a Georges River Community Engagement Strategy 2018-2028 (CES) to replace Council’s existing Community Engagement Strategy (originally adopted by Council on 5 June 2017). The CES includes the Council’s CPP.

25.   The CES was adopted by Council at its meeting held 28 October 2019. The CES sets out Council’s engagement approach and framework to guide how and when Council will engage with the community and the methods and tools to be used in engagement activities. It also stipulates engagement timeframes and notification requirements relevant to the EP&A Act and key engagement timeframes, from the Local Government Act 1993.

26.   Part C of the CES contains the same notification controls that are in the current Council DCPs. The aim of Part C is to:

a.     Enable public participation in the consideration of Development Applications.

b.     Provide a process for property owners and residents to make submissions.

c.     Provide a process when notification is required.

d.     Set out the matters Council will consider when forming its opinion as to whether or not the enjoyment of adjoining and neighbouring land may be detrimentally affected by a development after its completion.

e.     Ensure notification of landholders who may be affected by a development application even though they do not own adjoining land.

f.      Define the circumstances when notification is not required.

27.   The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) has advised that Council should now revoke the notification requirements from any DCP as the CPP is now made.

28.   When Council adopted the CES on 28 October 2019 it also resolved:

That, as recommended by the Department of Planning Industry and Environment, the current notification provisions listed in the Development Control Plans below be repealed in accordance with Clause 22(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 by subsequent Development Control Plans:

i.    Section 2.2 of the Hurstville Development Control Plan 1 - Applies to land within the Peakhurst, Mortdale and Hurstville Wards.

ii.    Section 2.4 of the Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 9 - Applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre excluding the 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map.

iii.   Section 2.2 of the Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 5 - Applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre identified as 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map.

iv.   Part A2 of the Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 - Applies to land within the Blakehurst and Kogarah Bay Wards.

29.   The following DCPs will be revoked upon adoption of the new GRDCP 2020:

a.     Hurstville Development Control Plan 1 - Applies to land within the Peakhurst, Mortdale and Hurstville Wards; and

b.     Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 - Applies to land within the Blakehurst and Kogarah Bay Wards.

30.   Therefore the current notification provisions listed in the Development Control Plans below will still need to be repealed in accordance with Clause 22(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 by subsequent Development Control Plans:

a.     Section 2.4 of the Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 9 - Applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre excluding the 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map.

b.     Section 2.2 of the Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 5 - Applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre identified as 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map.

Stage 2 - General Controls and Industrial Character Statements

31.   Components of this stage were briefed to Councillors and a comparison of Kogarah and Hurstville DCP controls was benchmarked against other Council DCPs.

32.   Council officers were supported by SJB Planning and Architecture in developing Stage 2 of the DCP which covered:

a.     Introduction

b.     Application process for development within the LGA

c.     General planning considerations such as biodiversity, landscaping, bush fire prone land, earthworks, contaminated land, heritage, views, risks, water management, waste management, ESD, parking access, utilities, subdivision, signage and noise and vibration

d.     General land uses such as child care facilities, places of public worship, tourist and visitor accommodation, boarding houses, late night trading, vehicle repairs, sales and hire premises

e.     Industrial precincts and controls including built form, setbacks, landscaping, vehicle access, signage, environmental protection, creative industries and industrial/sensitive landuse interface.

 

Stage 3 – Residential (including Kogarah North Precinct)

33.   This section included reviewing the previous residential locality statements under former Kogarah LGA as a basis for locality boundaries. Sections of various residential types were briefed to Councillors for their guidance and advice. The RFB section corresponds to that adopted by Council on 25 May 2020 for Part C2 of the Kogarah DCP 2013 except for the matters outlined in Table 3.

34.   Council officers were supported by SJB Planning and Architecture in developing Stage 3 of the DCP which covered:

a.     Locality Statements for each suburb

b.     Dwellings, dual occupancies (attached and detached), secondary dwellings, and dual key dwellings

c.     Multi-unit housing (terraces) and manor houses

d.     Residential flat buildings

e.     Ancillary structures

f.      Kogarah North Precinct – has been reviewed by Council officers in light of the recent court cases. Please refer to paragraphs 84-89 for an overview of the changes.

Stage 4 – Commercial Centres

35.   This stage included the preparation of controls for commercial centres within the LGA and included general controls, controls for B2 Local Centres and B6 Enterprise Corridor.

36.   This stage of the Draft GRDCP 2020 was developed in-house.

37.   Council adopted the Commercial Centres Strategy – Stage 1 Centres Analysis (the ‘Strategy’) at its meeting held 24 February 2020 (Refer Figure 2).

38.   Stage 1 of the Strategy draws on an evidence base informed by independent expert advice, community input and an in-depth review of all centres to support the on-going viability of all centres in the LGA.

39.   The primary purpose of this part is to inform the preparation of GRLEP 2020. This will help to work out an appropriate mix of employment and residential floor space to ensure that the provision of additional housing does not affect the viability of commercial centres and jobs growth.

40.   Stage 1 also conducted a stocktake of all 48 commercial centres in the LGA – providing local context, existing floor space, GRLEP 2020 and GRLEP 2022 recommendations which have been utilised in the Centre Precinct Controls. Stage 1 of the Strategy does not propose any zoning changes as part of GRLEP 2020. Proposed LEP recommendations relate to changes in land use permissibility and the minimum non-residential floor space ratio (“FSR”).  Further investigations are required in Part 2 of this Strategy to inform LEP 2022 and beyond.

 

Figure 2 – Existing Centres Hierarchy

 

41.   Therefore the following approach has been taken for the centres within the LGA:

a.     Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 5 currently applies to three sites within the Hurstville City Centre identified as 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map – the Civic Precinct, the Westfield and the Treacy Street Carpark sites. Refer to Figure 3 for the location of the three sites.

The Schedule of Conditions dated 10 March 2020 to the Gateway Determination for GRLEP 2020 required that the Georges River planning proposal be amended “prior to community consultation to delete the inclusion of the Civic Precinct and Westfield sites. Insufficient information is provided to enable assessment of the rezoning of these sites for Gateway determination. Council is encouraged to pursue rezoning of these sites as part of a future planning proposal. With regards to the Treacy Street Carpark site, the planning proposal is to be amended prior to community consultation to clearly differentiate the proposal from the former proposal granted Gateway in 2017, including an explanation of the difference in development.

This DCP will be retained for the Civic Precinct and the Westfield sites.

Figure 3 – Location of the Deferred Matters Sites

 

b.     Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 9 applies to sites within the Hurstville City Centre excluding the 'deferred matters' on the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Land Application Map (Refer to Figure 3 for the sites). This DCP will be retained for all sites within the Hurstville City Centre excluding the Civic Precinct and the Westfield sites which will be ‘deferred matters’ under the Hurstville Development Control Plan Number 2 - Amendment No. 5.

The Treacy Street Carpark site will be included in HDCP No. 2 (Amend 9) as it will be zoned under the Georges River LEP 2020 (See Figure 4).

 

Figure 4 – Hurstville City Centre

 

c.     The controls relating to centres in the Hurstville Development Control Plan 1 which applies to land within the Peakhurst, Mortdale and Hurstville Wards and in the Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 which applies to land within the Blakehurst and Kogarah Bay Wards will be moved into a new Commercial Centres section in the Georges River DCP 2020. The controls incorporated into the draft GRDCP are:

·        From the Hurstville DCP 1:

o   Built form and setbacks

o   Façade treatments

o   Pedestrian access

o   Active street frontages

o   Public domain

o   Beverly Hills, Riverwood and Mashman Site Kingsgrove

·        From the Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013:

o   Part D1 - Development in B1 and B2 zones – the majority of the controls have been relocated into Stage 3 – DCP General Controls

o   Locality controls for - Blakehurst (Princes Highway), Carlton/ Kogarah Bay (Princes Highway), Oatley (Oatley Ave/Frederick St) and Ramsgate

 

d.     Simplifying of controls (i.e. no repetition of ADG controls)

i.    Removal of controls that conflict with the LEP (i.e. FSR & HOB) including building envelope controls (not required as FSR & height are set. As Council is aware Section 3.43 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (in summary) states that a provision of a DCP that is inconsistent with the provisions of an Environmental Planning Instrument has no effect. Therefore as heights and FSRs are included in the draft GRLEP they are not permitted in the draft GRDCP.

ii.    Removal of the B1 and B2 precinct controls under Kogarah DCP 2013 that do not align with the draft GRLEP controls and the harmonisation of the remaining precinct controls under general controls;

iii.   Removal of repetition in the Hurstville DCPs;

iv.   Generally no introduction of new controls until after Commercial Centres Strategy completed in 2022 except for:

·        B6 – Enterprise Corridor controls

·        Supermarket controls (Shopping Trolley Management Plan);

·        Interface controls – as per recent amendments to Part C2 of Kogarah DCP 2013.

·        Green walls/roofs

 

CONTENT OF THE DRAFT GEORGES RIVER DCP

42.   The following Table 2 outlines the content of the draft DCP along with comments.

 

Table 2 – Table of Contents (Refer Attachment 3)

 

List of Contents

Comments

Part 1 – Introduction (Attachment 4)

 

1.1 Name of Development Control Plan

1.2 Adoption Date and Commencement

1.3 Role of the DCP

1.4 Principles and Purpose of the DCP

1.5 Monitoring and Review

1.6 Relationship to other Planning Documents and Instruments

1.7 Application of the DCP

1.8 Structure of this DCP

1.9 How to use this DCP

1.10 List of Development Contributions and Planning Agreements Policy

1.11 List of Amendments to this DCP

 

This section outlines the administrative and governance issues for the DCP and covers areas of:

·      Role of DCP – contains detail for the design and assessment of developments within the LGA

·      Application of the DCP – applies to:

all land within the LGA, with the exception of deferred matters including the Westfield and the Civic Precinct sites

categories of developments such as residential, business, industrial and general landuses.

Part 2 - Application Process (Attachment 5)

 

2.1 Introduction

2.2 Pre-lodgement Advisory Service

2.3 Types of Development

2.3.1 Aims of this Section

2.3.2 What are the Types of Development?

2.3.3 Exempt and Development

2.4 Neighbourhood Notification and Advertising of Development Applications

 

 

This section provides information on:

·      Pre-lodgement process

·      Development types – exempt, complying and local, requiring the lodgement of development applications.

·      Neighbour notification provisions and requirements are contained within the Georges River Council Community Engagement Strategy

Part 3 - General Planning Considerations (Attachment 6)

 

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Biodiversity

3.2.1 Trees & Vegetation

3.2.2 Green Web

3.3 Landscaping

3.4 Bushfire Prone Land

3.5 Earthworks

3.5.1 Excavation (including cut and fill)

3.5.2 Construction Management / Erosion and Sediment Control

3.6 Contaminated Land

3.7 Heritage

3.7.1 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage

3.7.2 Non-Aboriginal Heritage

3.7.3 Archaeological Management

3.7.4 Heritage Items – Site specific Requirements

3.7.5 Heritage Conservation Areas

3.7.6 Development in the vicinity of a Heritage Item or Heritage Conservation Area

3.8 Views Impacts

3.9 Coastal Hazards and Risks

3.9.1 Coastal Management

3.9.2 Sea Level Rise

3.10 Water Management

3.11 Ecologically Sustainable Development

3.11.1 Energy and Water Efficiency

3.12 Waste Management

3.13 Parking Access and Transport

3.14 Utilities

3.15 Public Domain

3.15.1 Infrastructure

3.15.2 Public Art

3.16 Subdivision and Amalgamation

3.16.1 Lot Size and Shape

3.16.2 Roads, Vehicular Access and Car Parking

3.16.3 Utilities and Services

3.16.4 Drainage

3.17 Universal/Accessible design

3.18 Advertising and Signage

3.19 Crime Prevention/ Safety and Security

3.20 Noise and Vibration

3.20.1 Aircraft Noise and OLS

3.20.2 Development near Road and Rail Corridors

3.20.3 Noise Generating Development

 

This section of the DCP contains controls that assist in ensuring the protection of the environment. It also includes controls for all development for areas such as heritage, waste, parking and access, public domain work, noise vibration.

 

An outline of the intention of some of the key controls in this section are summarised below:

 

·      Biodiversity – controls to ensure the protection of existing trees, requirement for the replacement of trees and maximising tree canopy coverage for habitat and connectivity of bushland.

·      Landscaping – controls that encourage the landscaping of development sites to reduce the visual and environmental impact of the built form, the public domain as well as providing habitat for local wildlife. The controls aim to assist in creating a distinct landscape character for the LGA. The provisions in the DCP complement the landscape requirements in Georges River LEP 2020.

·      Earthworks – the aim of the control is to ensure that the natural topography and landform of an area is maintained, the visual impact of development is minimised and earthworks protect the integrity of the geological elements and do not impact stormwater flows or increase flood conditions. For example, cut and fill should not alter the existing ground level by more than 1m.

·      Parking Access and Transport – the car parking rates for a comprehensive range of development types are outlined within  the control with key rates being:

 

·      Car parking rates for Hurstville and Kogarah Centres

 

Land Use Types

Parking Rate (Minimum)

Business and Office

·        1 space per 60m2 (GFA)

Retail Premises (Shops)

·        1 space per 60m2 (GFA)

Restaurant or Cafés

·        1 space per 40m2 (GFA)

Medical Centre

·        1 space per 50m2 (GFA)

·        NB: Transport and Parking Assessment Study required

 

·      Car Parking Rates for other Centres

 

Specific Commercial / Retail

≤800m walking distance of Railway station

≥800m walking distance of Railway station

Business and Commercial

1 space per 60m2 (GFA)

1 space per 60m2 (GFA)

Retail Premises (Shops)

1 space per 60m2 (GFA)

1 space per 60m2 (GFA)

Restaurant or Cafés

1 space per 60m2 (GFA)

1 space per 60m2 (GFA)

Medical Centre

1 space per 60m2 (GFA)

1 space per 60m2 (GFA)

 

·      Car parking rates for other key landuse types

 

Residential Accommodation

Car Parking Rates

Attached Dwelling

·        1 space per 1 and 2 beds

·        2 spaces per 3 beds or more

·        1 visitor space per 4 dwellings or part thereof for developments of 4 dwellings or more

Dual Occupancy

·        1 garage space and 1 driveway space per dwelling

Dwelling House

·        1 space per 1 and 2 beds

·        2 spaces per 3 beds or more

Secondary Dwellings

·        N/A for secondary dwellings

·        NB: Car parking rate for principal dwelling is to be achieved

Multi-dwelling housing (terraces)

·        1 space per dwelling

·        1 visitor space per 5 units or part thereof and 1 designated car wash bay which may also be a visitor space

Multi-dwelling housing (excluding terraces)

·        1.5 spaces per dwelling

·        1 visitor space per 5 units or part thereof and 1 designated car wash bay which may also be a visitor space

Residential flat building

·        1 space per 1 and 2 beds

·        2 spaces per 3 beds or more

·        1 visitor space per 5 units or part thereof and 1 designated car wash bay which may also be a visitor space

Shop-top housing / mixed use development (residential component)

·        1 space per 1 and 2 beds

·        2 spaces per 3 beds or more

·        1 visitor space per 5 units or part thereof and 1 designated car wash bay which may also be a visitor space

 

·      Public Domain including Public Art – the controls ensure that development is designed and constructed to complement and enhance the public domain, the elements of street furniture, street plantings and foot path improvements. The control also requires the provision of public art in major developments (capital investment value over $5 million) – with 1% of the total cost of the development allocated to public art.

 

Part 4 – General Land Use (Attachment 7)

 

4.1 Introduction

4.2 Early Education and Child Care facilities

4.2.1 Building Setbacks

4.2.2 Provision of Parking

4.2.3 Signage

4.4.4 Management of Operation

4.3 Places of Public Worship

4.3.1 Locational and Site Requirements

4.3.2 Bulk and Scale

4.3.3 Building Design

4.3.4 Solar Access

4.3.5 Energy Efficiency

4.3.6 Traffic, access and Parking

4.3.7 Amenity Impacts

4.3.8 Open Space and Landscaping

4.3.9 Site Facilities, services and Signage

4.3.10 Safety and Security

4.3.11 Management and Operations

4.4 Sex Services Premises

4.4.1 Location of Premises

4.4.2 Layout of Premises

4.4.3 Parking and Access

4.4.4 Hours of Operation

4.4.5 Size of Premises

4.4.6 Noise

4.4.7 Signage

4.4.8 Health and Safety Requirements

4.4.9 Management of Operations

4.5 Restricted Premises

4.5.1 Location of Premises

4.5.2 Layout of Premise

4.5.3 Parking and Access

4.5.4 Display of Goods and Signage

4.6 Tourist and Visitor Accommodation

4.6.1 Backpackers Accommodation

4.6.2 Bed and Breakfast Accommodation

4.6.3 Hotel and Motel Accommodation

4.6.4 Serviced Apartments

4.6.5 Short Term Rental Accommodation

4.7 Boarding Houses

4.8 Vehicle Repairs, Sales and Hire Premises

4.8.1 Vehicle body repair workshops and vehicle repair stations

4.8.2 Vehicle and Hire Premises

4.9 Telecommunications Facilities

 

This section contains controls for a broad range of landuses. A summary of the intent of the key controls in this section are outlined below:

 

·      Early Education and Child care facilities – the controls relate to building setbacks, parking, signage and provisions to guide the management of operations and support the controls within SEPP (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017

·      Places of Public Worship – the controls for this landuse are discussed in paragraphs 82-83 of this report.

·      Sex Services Premises and Restricted Premises – controls are aimed at ensuring such premises are sensitively located and do not cause offense to the community. The controls relate to hours of operations, size of premises and management of operations.

·      Tourist and Visitor Accommodation – This control guides development for alterations and additions, change of use or new visitor accommodation; including backpackers accommodation, bed and breakfast and serviced apartments. The controls focus on occupation period, number of bedrooms/occupants, communal areas and hours of operation

·      Boarding houses – The controls relate to sleeping room requirements, internal communal areas, communal open space, bathroom / laundries and are in addition to the provisions contained in the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

·      Neighbourhood shops in Residential Zones – Shops are permitted in R3 Medium Density and R4 High Density Residential zones. The controls encourage the built form, design and operation to be in character with the local area.

 

Part 5 – Residential Locality Statements (Attachments 8)

 

Locality Statements for residential areas

5.1 Riverwood

5.2 Beverly Hills and Narwee

5.3 Kingsgrove

5.4 Peakhurst

5.5 Penshurst

         5.5.1 Penshurst North

         5.5.2 Penshurst South

5.6 Hurstville (non-CBD)

5.7 Lugarno

5.8 Peakhurst Heights

5.9 Mortdale

5.10 Oatley

         5.10.1 Oatley East

         5.10.2 Oatley West

5.11 Hurstville Grove

5.12 South Hurstville

5.13 Allawah

5.14 Carlton

5.14.1 Carlton North

5.14.2 Carlton South

5.15 Kogarah South

5.16 Connells Point and Kyle Bay

5.17 Blakehurst

5.18 Carss Park and Kogarah Bay

5.19 Beverley Park and Ramsgate

5.20 Sans Souci and Ramsgate

 

This section contains locality statements for each suburb, which are locality specific and identify the unique qualities that make up the local character of the area and provide the future desired character guidelines.

 

The statement provides information on:

 

·      Location

·      Background

·      Heritage

·      Built Form and Setting

·      Streetscape Character

·      Future Desired Character

 

 

Part 6 – Residential Controls (Attachments 9-13)

 

This part outlines the controls for a range of residential accommodation that can be developed in the LGA. A broad overview of the controls for each accommodation type are outlined below:

 

Part 6.1

(Attachment 9)

Dwellings, Dual occupancies (attached and detached), secondary dwellings, Dual key dwellings, Narrow Lot Housing and ancillary dwellings

This part provides controls for a range of low density housing styles for the following development elements:

 

·      Streetscape character and built form

·      Building Scale and Height

·      Setbacks

·      Solar Access

·      Visual Privacy

·      Noise

·      Excavation

·      Vehicular Access, Parking and Circulation

·      Subdivision

·      Private Open Space

·      Landscaping

·      Materials, Colour Scheme and Details

·      Site Facilities

 

Refer to Attachment 2 for a comparison table of key DCP controls for the various residential styles.

 

Part 6.2

(Attachment 10)

Multi-dwelling housing, Multi-dwelling housing (terraces) and Manor Houses

 

This part provides the controls for multi dwelling housing of villas, terraces, manor houses and other forms of low rise medium density housing. The development controls address the following:

 

·      Minimum Site Requirements

·      Building Scale and Height

·      Streetscape Character and Built Form

·      Building Setbacks

·      Façade Treatment and Street Corners

·      Orientation and Public Domain Interface

·      Landscaped Area and Private Open Space

·      Visual Privacy

·      Acoustic Privacy

·      Solar Access

·      Excavation (cut and fill)

·      Vehicular access, parking and circulation

·      Waste and recycling Storage

·      Dwelling mix and size

·      Storage

·      Universal and Adaptable Design

·      Materials, Colour Schemes and Details

·      Subdivision

 

Refer to Attachment 2 for a comparison table of key DCP controls for the various residential styles.

 

Part 6. 3

(Attachment 11)

Residential Flat Buildings

 

This part contains the design controls for residential flat buildings. This part does not apply to for residential flat buildings located in Kogarah North Precinct as this development is governed by a separate Part 10 Kogarah North Precinct of this DCP. The controls, where applicable reference SEPP 65 and parts 3 and 4 of the Apartment Design Guide. Applications for residential flat buildings subject to SEPP 65 must be supported by a Design Verification Statement. This part contains development controls that address the following:

 

·      Minimum Site Requirements

·      Site Isolation and Amalgamation

·      Building Setbacks and street interface

·      Basement Setbacks

·      Façade Treatment and Street Corners

·      Landscaped Treatment and Private Open Space

·      Communal Open Space

·      Solar Access

·      Vehicular Access, Parking and Circulation

·      Dwelling Mix

·      Adaptable Housing

·      Universal Design

·      Shops, Restaurants and Cafes, and Small Bars in R4 zones

 

Refer to Attachment 2 for a comparison table of key DCP controls for the various residential styles.

 

Part 6.4

(Attachment 12)

Ancillary Structures

 

1 Fences and Walls

2 Air Conditioning

3 Outbuildings

4 Setbacks

5 External finishes and cladding

6 Swimming Pools/ Spas

7 Tennis Courts

8 Aerials, antennae and communication dishes

 

·      This part contains controls for development forms that often support residential development.

 

Part 6.5

(Attachment 13)

Foreshore Locality Controls

 

1 Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

2 Development in the Foreshore Area

 

This part contains development provisions and controls that are specific to the protection of the foreshore area. The controls include:

 

·      Environmental qualities and scenic landscape values

·      Controls for specific development in the foreshore area including:

Jetty, Ramp and Pontoon Structures

Residential Waterfront Structures

Boatsheds

Seawalls

Stairways and Inclinators

Fencing

Swimming pools/spas

 

Part 7 - Business Precincts (Attachment 14)

 

Applies to all B1, B2, B4 (Kogarah Town Centre) and B6 centres.

Following the finalisation of the Commercial Centres Strategy and GRLEP 2022, the DCP controls will be updated accordingly.

 

7.1 General

7.2 B2 Local Centres

7.3 B6 Enterprise Corridor

 

This part of the draft GRDCP 2020 contains general controls and precinct controls and will apply to all B zoned land. The general controls cover the following areas:

 

·      Built form

Streetscape

Setbacks

Building height and interface

·      Design

Design excellence

Building facades

Awnings

Public Domain interface at ground level

Active Street Frontages

Materials and finishes

Landscaping

Shop top housing

·      Amenity

Visual privacy

Acoustic privacy

Interface between Business zones and adjoin land uses

Utility Infrastructure

·      Shopping trolley management Plan

·      Plant rooms

·      Servicing

·      Plan of Management

·      Site Isolation and Amalgamation

 

Precinct Controls are provided for the following B2 centres:

·      Kogarah Town Centre (separate part of the DCP)

·      Beverly Hills

·      Kingsgrove

·      Riverwood

·      Blakehurst

·      Carlton/ Kogarah Bay

·      Oatley

·      Ramsgate

 

Enterprise Corridor along the Princes Highway applies to the B6 zone. The Precinct Controls generally cover:

 

·      Existing Character

·      Desired Future Character

·      Site Amalgamation

·      Setbacks

·      Balconies

·      Through block connections

 

Part 8 – Kogarah Town Centre (Attachment 15)

 

This part provides the vision for Kogarah Town Centre and character statements and controls for various precincts that form part of the Kogarah Town Centre. The existing character, desired future character and controls are contained in this part for the following precincts:

 

·      Railway Parade Precinct

·   Premier Street Precinct

·      Montgomery Street Precinct

·   Belgrave Street Precinct

·   Princes Highway

·      Kensington Street Precinct

·   The Hospital Precinct

·   Chapel Street Precinct

·   Railway Parade South Precinct

·      Southern Retail Precinct

 

This part also contains general controls for the centre that relate to:

·      Consolidation of sites  

·      Alignment of buildings 

·      Dedication of Land to Council for Road/Lane Widening

·      Awnings

 

Part 9 - IN2 Light Industrial Zones (Attachment 16)

 

9.1 Introduction

 

9.2 General Provisions

9.2.1 Built Form

9.2.2 Site Area and Subdivision

9.2.3 Setbacks

9.2.4 Building Design and Appearance

9.2.5 Landscaping

9.2.6 Vehicle access and parking

9.2.7 Environmental Protection

9.2.8 Signage

9.2.8 Office Premises

9.2.10 Creative Industries

9.2.11 Industrial / Sensitive Land Use Interface

 

9.3 Precinct / Character Controls

9.3.1 Beverly Hills

9.3.2 Blakehurst

9.3.3 Carlton

9.3.4 Kingsgrove

9.3.5 Peakhurst

9.3.6 Penshurst – Forest Road

9.3.7 Penshurst – Penshurst Lane

9.3.8 South Hurstville

This part contains controls to guide development on land zoned IN2 Light Industrial. The controls address:

 

·      Built form

·      Site area and subdivision

·      Setbacks

·      Building Design and appearance

·      Landscaping

·      Acoustic and visual privacy

·      Operational restrictions such as hours of operation, waste, hazardous development, energy efficiency, and safety and security

·      Signage,

·      Office premises

·      Creative industries

·      Industrial/sensitive land use interface.

 

This part contains 8 industrial precincts within the LGA and all are zoned IN2 Light Industrial under the draft GRLEP2020. Precinct controls are proposed for Beverly Hills, Blakehurst, Carlton, Kingsgrove, Peakhurst, Penshurst – Forest Road, Penshurst - Penshurst Lane and South Hurstville as follows:

 

·      Desired future character

·      Objectives

·      Precinct controls which cover amalgamation of land if required and landscaped setbacks.

 

Part 10 – Precincts (Attachment 17)

 

Kogarah North Precinct

This part contains planning controls for the area known as Kogarah North Precinct. The controls relating to this precinct include:

 

·      Siting and consolidation of development sites

·      Heritage

·      Street Frontage Height

·      Setbacks

·      Trees and Landscape

·      Dedication of land to Council for Road/Lane widening and splays

·      Creation of through site pedestrian links and additional open space

·      Housing Choice

·      Addressing the street and public domain

·      Impact of the development of the road/pedestrian network

·      Acoustic impacts from Road and Rail

·      Vehicular access and car parking

·      Architectural articulation – façade, roof, wall design and balconies

·      Awnings

·      Active Street Frontages along Princes Highway and Railway Parade North

·      Solar Access to Public Domain

·      Safety and Security

·      Waste Minimisation

·      Site Facilities

·      Maintenance

·      Acoustic Privacy

 

The changes are detailed in Paragraphs 84 to 89 of this report.

 

Appendices (Attachment 18)

 

1

Waste Management requirements

(based on Hurstville DCP)

This appendix contains the waste management requirements for development.

 

2

Height and Storeys

This appendix is on height and storey interpretation.

 

3

Road classifications

This appendix contains the State and Regional Road classifications within the LGA.

 

4

Heritage Items and Heritage Conservation Areas

 

This appendix supports Schedule 5 of the GRLEP 2020, providing detailed development controls for specific sites identified as heritage items:

·      No. 24 Penshurst Avenue, Penshurst

·      No. 211-217 Rocky Point Road, Ramsgate

 

5

Heritage Conservation Areas

·      Penshurst HCA

·      Kogarah South HCA

·      O’Brien’s Estate HCA

This appendix supports Schedule 5 of the GRLEP 2020 and provides guidance for development in the three Heritage Conservation Areas.

6

Green Web

The Green Web seeks to conserve and enhance Georges River’s bushland and biodiversity by identifying and appropriately managing key areas of bushland habitat and establishing and maintaining interconnecting linkages and corridors.

 

The Green Web component of the DCP is accompanied by:

·      GRDCP 2020 Green Web Map

·      GRDCP 2020 Biodiversity Guide

 

The key aims of this appendix are to prevent direct loss of habitat in and adjoining Green Web areas and enhance biodiversity and ecological resilience through greater connectivity of bushland areas.

 

 

43.   A comparison of changes to the high density section of GRDCP 2020 in relation to the adopted Part C2 of the Kogarah DCP 2013 is tabulated in Table 3 below. The adopted Part C2 has been further refined in response to the Draft Georges River LEP 2020 and review by the Council officers. A justification has been provided for each change in Table 3.

 

Table 3 - Changes in High Density Residential section of Draft GRDCP as compared to Part C2 Kogarah DCP

 

DCP Section

Control/Note detail

 

Justification

Building Setbacks and street interface

Additional Note under Control 3 added:

Note: A reduced side or rear setback may be permitted where permitted by Part 3F of the NSW State Government’s ADG.

 

To cater to site specific circumstances.

Building Setbacks and street interface

Control 8 amended:

8.       Sub-stations, fire booster assemblies and waste bin storage structures need to be integrated into the development and identified at the DA stage. Where services including fire booster valves, substations and other infrastructure required as part of the any new development present to a public road or public space, they must be concealed by a screen or fence that corresponds with the materiality of the building façade.

 

To allow these services to be concealed by a screen or a fence; in response to the submission from Kogarah Bay Progress Association.

Basement Setbacks

Additional objective inserted:

(e)     To provide capacity to protect existing trees on site and provide capacity for new tree planting.

 

To provide additional protection to existing and capacity for new trees

Façade Treatment and Street Corners

Additional words regarding ‘Architectural character’ have been added in the general blurb.

 

Two objectives have been amended:

(a)  To introduce fine grain built form and varied architectural character in developments.

(d) To ensure that the scale, modulation and façade articulation of development responds to its context.

 

Two controls have been amended:

3. Human scale at street level must be reinforced in the design of the building and overall development. The scale, rhythm, materiality and landscaping treatment need to define the appearance of the building to create physical and visual connections between the private and public domain for pedestrians.

7. Clear glazing to balustrades must be avoided where they are visible from the public domain. Screening of balconies by way of adjustable or fixed panels should be included where there are issues of privacy, and/or excessive exposure to solar impacts.

 

 

 

 

 

Objectives amended in response to the inclusion of the concept of ‘Architectural character’ in the general blurb.

 

 

 

 

Control 3 has been amended to emphasise the connections between the private and public domain for pedestrians.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Control 7 recommends clear balustrades to be avoided and removes specific solutions, e.g. incorporation of solid upturns at the base of the balustrade.

 

Landscaped Treatment and Private Open Space

New control added:

The landscaped area needs to accommodate a minimum of two (2) canopy trees to a mature height of at least 6m.

 

Control added in response to the submission from Kogarah Bay Progress Association.

Common Open Space (COS)

Control 2 amended:

(2)     A maximum of 50% of common open space may be provided above ground level where:

(i)      a location at ground level is not possible due to site constraints;

(ii)     the proposed elevated common open space will provide a similar level of amenity as a common open space at ground level of the site; and

(iii)     there will be no significant impact on surrounding properties in respect to the loss of privacy.

 

2.   Communal open space may be provided above ground level where:

i.        the proposed elevated communal open space will provide a similar level of amenity as a communal open space at ground level of the site; and

ii.       there will be no significant impact on surrounding properties in respect to the loss of privacy.

 

Reference to percentage of COS to be provided on ground or roof top has been removed in response to comments from the Design Review Panel and Council officers.

Vehicle access, parking and circulation

Objective (b) in C2 DCP deleted from this section:

 

(b)  To reduce resident on-site parking where public transport is available within reasonable walking distance or where low car parking demand exists

 

Control 12 deleted:

(12)   If the car wash bay discharges into the sewer, a ‘Permission to Discharge Trade Wastewater’ issued by Sydney Water must be obtained prior to approval of the development.

 

Objective (b) deleted in accordance with the Councillors’ advice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Control 12 deleted as control 13 covers the issue as reproduced below:

 

13. If the carwash bay is not discharged into the sewer, applicants must provide Council with details and evidence of how wastewater will be removed (e.g. removal by an authorised liquid waste disposal contractor).

 

Views and View Sharing

This section has been deleted from this section of the DCP.

This section has been relocated in the Part 3 General Planning considerations of the DCP in accordance with review by Council officers.

 

Dwelling Mix

Control 1 amended:

 

(1)  Developments that propose more than 10 apartments are to provide a mix of dwellings consistent with the following percentage mix:

(i)   Studio and I bed apartments – Minimum of 20%

(ii)  2 bed apartments – Maximum of 30%

(iii) 3+ bed apartments – Minimum of 15%

(1) Developments that propose more than 20 dwellings are to provide a mix of dwellings consistent with the following percentage mix:

i.        Studio apartments and 1 bed apartments – Maximum of 25%

iii.      2 bed apartments – Minimum of 35%

iv.      3+ bed apartments – Minimum of 15%

 

Control 1 amended in accordance with Environment and Planning Committee recommendation.

Adaptable and Accessible Housing

Control 1 part (i) amended:

 

(1)     The minimum number of adaptable units designed in accordance with AS4299 - 1995 Adaptable Housing must be incorporated into the developments included in this section:

(i)      3-10 units – 1 adaptable unit

(i)      5-10 units – 1 adaptable unit

 

Blurb on adaptable housing added at the bottom of the section:

 

Adaptable Housing is defined by Australian Standard AS 4299, which is specifically designed to allow for the future adaptation of a dwelling to accommodate the occupant’s needs.

Range in part (i) changed from 3-10 units to 5-10 units in accordance with Environment and Planning Committee recommendation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Blurb added in preparation of the DCP.

Universal Design

New section added that includes universal design features to promote flexible housing for all community members.

Developments to achieve a benchmark of 20% of the total apartments incorporating the Liveable Housing Guideline's silver level universal design features.

 

Section added in accordance with Council officer review during DCP preparation.

Shops, Restaurants and Cafes, and Small Bars in R4 Zones

New section added that protects the hierarchy of the designated business zones in the Georges River LGA and limits the potential adverse amenity impacts of shops, restaurants and cafes, and small bars on residential apartments and adjoining residential areas.

 

Section added in response to the inclusion of Shops, Restaurants and Cafes and Small Bars in R4 zones of GRLEP 2020.

 

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION BY COUNCIL

44.   This section of the report provides a response to the Council resolutions, addresses issues raised in Councillor Briefings and amendment to the DCP to ensure consistency with the draft GRLEP as endorsed by the Local Planning Panel on 26 June 2020.

45.   This section addresses the following:

a.     Response to the following Council resolutions:

i.    Mechanical Parking Installations in Developments

ii.    Restrictions on the provision or installation of hostile architecture

iii.   Additional controls relating to:

·        use of rainwater for car wash bays in residential flat buildings (RFBs) and

·        the further investigation and review of the setbacks, landscaped areas, and common open space to ensure compatibility between the scale of development at the point of transition between the low density residential zone and the adjoining higher density residential areas.

b.     Foreshore scenic protection area

c.     Places of Public worship

d.     Kogarah North Precinct

 

Response to Council resolutions – this section includes commentary on Council resolutions, its consideration and response.

 

·    Mechanical Parking

46.   Council resolved on 23 April 2019 to prepare draft Development Control Plan provisions for Mechanical Parking Installations for developments within the Georges River LGA.

47.   Draft provisions have been included in the DCP to cover:

a.     Mechanical parking installations i.e. mechanical car stackers, car lifts and turntables.

b.     Stacked parking i.e. sharing a parking space vertically through use of a mechanical car stacker.

c.     Tandem parking i.e. two or more vehicles sharing a parking space at the same level configured nose to tail.

48.   There has been concern raised by the Council in respect of mechanical parking installations, with some of a view that they should be prohibited. However, DCPs cannot prohibit development. The role of the DCP is to support the LEP with controls.

49.   Such installations are becoming a common occurrence and therefore the draft DCP does contain controls to address the installations as follows:

a.     Where development includes a mechanical parking installation, such as car stackers, turntables, car lifts or another automated parking system, the development application is to include a Parking and Access Report.

b.     Access to mechanical parking installations is to be in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards.

c.     Tandem or stacked parking will only be permitted where:

i.      Each tandem or stacked parking arrangement is limited to a maximum of two spaces;

ii.      The maximum parking limit for spaces is not exceeded;

iii.     They are not used for service vehicle parking;

iv.     The spaces are attached to the same strata title in residential buildings and small commercial or retail developments;

v.     In residential buildings and serviced apartments, they are used for tenant parking only;

vi.     In commercial or retail development, they are used for staff parking only; and

vii.    The manoeuvring of and queuing for stacked vehicles is able to occur wholly within the premises, without obstructing the entry or egress of other vehicles.

50.   Mechanical parking installations will be considered for developments involving the adaptive re-use of existing buildings where site or building constraints prevent standard parking arrangements and no inconvenience arises from their use.

51.   Mechanical parking installations, tandem or stacked parking are not to be used for visitor parking or parking for car share schemes.

52.   The minimum length of a tandem space is to be 10.8m.

53.   Car lifts will only be considered where it can be demonstrated that a basement ramp is not feasible/achievable.

54.   Where a car lift is required, car lifts are to be provided at a minimum rate of 1 lift per 25 spaces or part thereof.

Note: Queuing analysis must be completed in accordance with Australian Standard AS2890.1 and Ausroads “Guide to Traffic Management”. The assessment is to establish whether the mechanical lift requires queuing to be accommodated on the property noting that queuing of vehicles on public roads will not be supported.

 

·    Hostile Architecture:

55.   Council resolved on 26 August 2019 as follows:

a.     That the upcoming Georges River Council Development Control Plan 2020, and any future public domain plans for the City, include provisions that prevent the installation of devices, materials or designs in the public domain (hostile architecture) which would make it difficult for homeless people to occupy public spaces.

b.     Such provisions should include (but not be limited to) a restriction on the design and installation of Items such as: slanted or curved benches, rocky pavements, spiked windowsills, segmented benches, street spikes, awning gaps, barred corners, street dividers, raised grate covers, tiered seating, fence grates, retractable spikes and the like.

c.     That a standard condition of development consent be prepared to restrict the provision or installation of hostile architecture within the Georges River Area.

d.     That the General Manager prepare a report on the options available to Council to apply similar design and installation restrictions to development on privately owned land within the Kogarah and Hurstville CBDs.

56.   With respect to the draft DCP and (a) above, the following has been included in Section 3 of the DCP relating to Public Domain:

The installation of hostile architectural features in areas accessible to the public is not permitted. Hostile architecture includes a restriction on the design and installation of items such as: slanted or curved benches, rocky pavements, spiked windowsills, segmented benches, street spikes, awning gaps, barred corners, street dividers, raised grate covers, tiered seating, fence grates, retractable spikes and the like.

 

Additional Controls - this section includes consideration of issues re the use of rainwater for car wash bays in RFBs and further investigation of the setbacks, landscaped areas and common open space to ensure compatibility between the scale of development at the point of transition between the low density residential zone and the adjoining higher density residential areas.

 

 

·        Use of rainwater for car wash bays in the residential flat buildings

57.   Council at its meeting on 25 May 2020 resolved: That Council investigate the use of rainwater for car wash bays in the residential flat buildings as part of the future amendments of DCP 2020.

58.   Recycled water (also referred to as ‘non-drinking water’) is wastewater (sewerage) that has been collected and treated and can be used for variety of purposes depending on the level of treatment. The process of creating recycled water is typically undertaken by Sydney Water and not as part of a new small-scale residential development.

59.   Greywater is re-usable wastewater from washing machines, showers, baths and basins. This requirement could be addressed within any BASIX certificate prepared as part of the development. Therefore, a control seeking the use of recycled or grey water is not recommended to be imposed.

 

·        Review of the setbacks, landscaped areas, and common open space

60.   Council at its meeting on 25 May 2020 resolved:

That Council incorporate the adopted Part C2 Medium Density Housing into the Georges River DCP 2020; pending further investigation and review of the setbacks, landscaped areas, and common open space outline in Part 1 Section 3 - Building Setbacks and Street Interface to ensure compatibility between the scale of development at the point of transition between the low density residential zone and the adjoining higher density residential area.

 

Building Setbacks

61.   A singular setback control creates a more uniform street wall and better overall streetscape presentation for individual buildings. Articulation of the building will occur through the incorporation of balconies orientated towards the street, individual entries to the ground floor apartments addressing the street and the main entrance into the building. This must also be considered in conjunction with the minimum side boundary setbacks of 6.0m which are required. This results in a minimum gap between buildings of 12.0m breaking up the built form presentation to the street.

62.   The DCP provisions proposed a base of up to four storeys (approximately 12m in height) creating a four storey street wall to the street address. Above the four-storey street wall, is a two to three storey top element to the building.

63.   The proposed 4 storey street wall is considered more appropriate where a lower density zone (9m) and higher density zone (21m) are located on opposite sides of a street, for the following reasons:

·        A distance of at least 30m separates the different density zones when the width of the road, road reserve and setback of the buildings from the front property boundaries is considered. The minimum separation requirements (between buildings) directed by the Apartment Design Guide (the ‘ADG’) for buildings up to eight storeys in height is 18m. The separation achieved is well above the minimum guided by the ADG.

·        The four storey street wall height is considered to be a scale that is comfortably perceived in the streetscape, particularly when the separation of buildings across the street (30m) is greater than the maximum building height (21m).

·        The four storey base in conjunction with the setback will partially screen the next level (fifth storey). The suggested lower base height of three storeys will screen less of the upper levels and therefore increase the perceived height of a building from the street.

·        The proportioning would be visually awkward having a taller three to four storey element sitting above the three storey element. Having the base taller than the upper level visually anchors the building and reduces the perception of height for the upper levels.

·        A deep soil zone of 3m is required to be provided within the front setback of the higher density zone to allow for substantial tree planting which will provide a visual and landscape buffer between the two zones and built form. Street tree planting will further complement tree planting within the front setback.

Figure 5 – Setback and interface treatments

 

64.   The above review demonstrates that the existing control should remain unchanged.

 

Encroachments and Private Open Space

65.   The DCP states that ground floor private open space (POS) is permitted within the last 2m of the required 5m front setback. However, the first 3m of the front setback (from the street/property boundary) will be deep soil area and will provide for adequate landscaping opportunities including tree planting, that will complement the public domain including any street planting. Figure 5 above demonstrates the interface between the street (front property boundary) and the front wall of the building.

 

Figure 6 - Location of private open space (POS) and deep soil within the 5m front setback

 

66.   Providing POS within the front setback provides opportunities for an apartment building and its landscape to respond to the human scale of the streetscape (Figure 6). The location of POS within the front setback facilitates direct access from the street which provides increased street frontage activation and passive surveillance of the public domain. The location of POS within the front setback is consistent with Part 4L Ground Floor Apartments of the ADG.

67.   The location of substations and fire booster valves as highlighted within the KBPA submission are determined by other statutory bodies.

68.   Nevertheless, a control could be imposed requiring the location of these services be considered in the design of the building, including the concealment of services by a screen or fence that corresponds with the materiality of the building façade, when presenting to a street.

69.   For example, a control could be worded as follows:

Where services including fire booster valves, substations and other infrastructure required as part of the any new development present to a public road or public space, they must be concealed by a screen or fence that corresponds with the materiality of the building façade.

 

70.   The location of POS within the front setback is appropriate and the above proposed control should be included in RFB section of the GRDCP 2020.

 

 

Common Open Space

71.   The size, location and design of communal open space will vary depending on the site context and the scale of development. Communal open space (COS) can be provided on the ground floor of the development or on the rooftop.

72.   Part 3D of the ADG which applies to RFBs, including the recently up-zoned areas where Part C2 Kogarah DCP 2013 applies, permits the provision of COS on the ground floor and/or on the rooftop of RFBs.

73.   The provision of ground floor COS is typically provided on larger sites or precincts that have been strategically set aside to accommodate increased density.

74.   Providing ground floor COS on suburban infill sites as part of any RFB is more difficult as the sites are smaller in area and frontage, and share multiple boundaries with existing development (including lower density zoned properties) which limits the building envelopes in relation to separation distances, privacy and overshadowing. In these instances, the provision of COS on the ground floor within the side or rear setbacks can impact upon the visual and acoustic amenity of courtyards and habitable rooms of ground floor apartments.

75.   Neighbouring properties will also be impacted by the provision of COS on the ground floor within the side or rear setbacks, particularly where a higher density zone shares a boundary with a lower density zone.

76.   Therefore, the provision of roof top COS on some suburban infill sites is more appropriate as it does not share a direct interface with courtyards and habitable rooms of ground floor apartments, and allows for improved visual and acoustic amenity. Further, upper level setbacks ranging from 2.5m – 4m are proposed for any roof top COS from the level directly below (from all boundaries) to mitigate any potential acoustic or overlooking opportunities onto neighbouring properties, as demonstrated in Figure 7.

Figure 7 - Application of the setbacks required for the location of communal open space zone interface

 

77.   The total setback of roof top COS from side boundaries will be 11.5m (5-8 storey building) and 13m (5-8 storey building) from the rear boundary. Where a building shares an interface with a lower density zone, the total setback will increase to 14.5m from a side boundary and 16m from the rear boundary.

78.   The prohibition of roof top COS is inconsistent with the Part 3D of the ADG and will hinder the orderly development of land by constraining a building to the provision of ground floor COS only. Further, the upper level setbacks proposed for any roof top COS from the level directly below (from all boundaries) will mitigate any potential acoustic or overlooking opportunities onto neighbouring properties.

 

Foreshore Scenic Protection Area (FSPA)

79.   The Local Planning Panel (the ‘LPP’) considered the GRLEP 2020 on 25 and 26 June 2020 and in terms of the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area resolved to retain the existing Foreshore Scenic Protection Area as identified by the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Foreshore Scenic Protection Area Map; and add the proposed Foreshore Scenic Protection Area as exhibited by the Planning Proposal Map entitled “Foreshore Scenic Protection Area Map” and shown in pink shading.

80.   The Panel also recommended that Council as part of the preparation of the draft Local Environmental Plan in 2021/2022, further define the role, mapped extent and zoning of Foreshore Scenic Protection Areas, in both the former Hurstville and Kogarah Local Government Areas, having regard to those properties and ridge lines visible to and from the Georges River and its tributaries, and associated environmental protection applying to those areas in order to better reflect the objectives of Clause 6.7 of the Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020. This may include the consideration of additional environmental protection zones or modifications of the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area.

81.   In response to the LPP recommendations, the draft GRDCP adopts the current Hurstville DCP 2012 foreshore controls. Additionally, controls related to specific development types in the Foreshore area, including jetties, ramps, pontoon structures, residential waterfront structures, boatsheds, seawalls, stairways, inclinators, fencing, swimming pools and spas, have also been included in the draft GRDCP.

 

Places of Public Worship

82.   The draft GRLEP 2020 prohibits places of public worship in the R2 Low Density Residential zone due to the adverse amenity impacts considered to be generated by these uses. However, the existing places of public worship will retain their use through the inclusion of these sites in Schedule 1 Additional permitted uses.

83.   The General Land Uses section of the DCP contains the following controls for places of public worship:

a.     Locational requirements: located on sites of sufficient size to accommodate all proposed buildings, parking areas, outdoor areas etc.; must maintain the general amenity of the area; must optimise the use of surrounding and potential infrastructure, with a particular emphasis on public transport; large scale places of public worship should be located a minimum of 250 metres away from any other existing or approved large-scale place of public worship; must not be located on lots with a frontage to a road with a carriageway width less than 10 metres; and must not be located on lots where access is via a cul-de-sac.

b.     Site Requirements: restricts the minimum allotment size of a new place of public worship to 800m2 and the minimum allotment width to 20m (measured at the front building line) and 15 metres for a corner allotment.

c.     Building Scale: restricts the maximum site coverage for places of public worship located within a residential zone to 40%; and any spire, tower or similar structure must be considered on the basis of the form, bulk, scale and height and its relationship with the prevailing character of the locality.

d.     Setbacks: The minimum setback from the principal street frontage in residential zones is 6 metres and where a place of public worship is to be located immediately adjacent to a property used primarily for residential purposes, a buffer of a minimum of 3 metres must be provided to the side boundaries and a minimum of 6 metres to the rear boundary. This setback area shall be landscaped and shall not be used for parking areas, outdoor assembly areas or the like.

e.     General Design:  The design of the development must consider the amenity of the surrounding locality, especially sites within or near residential localities. Any place of public worship within or in close proximity to a residential neighbourhood must be well designed and incorporate high quality external materials and finishes as well as suitable landscape treatment around the perimeter of the site.

f.      Façade Design: Development must articulate the façade to achieve a unique and contemporary architectural appearance that:

i.    Unites the facade with the whole building form;

ii.    Ensures the facade has an appropriate scale and proportion that responds to the use of the building and the desired contextual character;

iii.   Combines high quality materials and finishes.

g.     Front Fences: The maximum fence height for a front fence is 1.5 metres. Front fences along an arterial road must not be made of chain wire, metal sheeting, brushwood, electric fences or noise attenuation walls. The external appearance of a front fence along the front boundary of an allotment or facing an arterial road must ensure:

i.    The section of the front fence that comprises solid construction must not exceed a fence height of 1 metre above natural ground level; and

ii.    The remaining height of the front fence must comprise open style construction such as spaced timber pickets or wrought iron that enhance and unify the building design.

Kogarah North Precinct

84.   The Kogarah North Precinct DCP controls have been reviewed in light of Council’s experience with the implementation of controls under the Kogarah North DCP (KNDCP), in particular in relation to the issues identified in the controls in recent developments in the Precinct that have been subject to appeal to the Land and Environment Court.  The review also includes controls from the new Part C2 Medium Density Housing in Kogarah DCP 2013.

85.   The main basis for the review is the outcome as a result of the loss of the appeal for the residential flat building development at the site at 2-4 Gladstone Street and 10 Victor Street Kogarah - Vortex Property Group (NSW) P/L vs Georges River Council [2019] NSWLEC 1153 (Vortex). This site is on the corner of Railway Parade Lane, Gladstone Street, and Victor Street, opposite the Kogarah High School oval.

86.   The current KNDCP references the Kogarah North Precinct Urban Design Study (November 2017) (UDS) by adopting controls aimed at a lower FSR than that allowed in the KLEP.

87.   The UDS presented three options for development, and the Council for the purposes of preparing a DCP adopted “Option 3”, being development with an FSR 2.5:1 and 10 storey buildings having a four storey street wall. The building heights along Victor Street are reduced to minimise overshadowing to the new community open space ‘common’ (on part of the school oval).

88.   Option 3 was adopted by the Council in May 2017 as the interim set of planning controls.  The problem with this approach as identified in Vortex, is that some of the controls are explicitly contrary to the KLEP.  Whist an attempt was made to argue that the KLEP controls are a maximum and a suitable urban design outcome should prevail, an underlying premise of the planning system is that the LEP controls must be achievable.

89.   To avoid any issues related to this in the future, this review of the KNDCP has concentrated on deleting any direct references that could be construed that the DCP is based on a lower density than the LEP allows. The changes include:

·        Updating the introductory section to include the work of the GSC and the Kogarah Place Strategy.

·        Updating references to GRLEP 2020 and the EP&A Act 1979.

·        Deleting references to height and FSR as they are in the GRLEP 2020.

·        Deleting references to compliance with ADG as this is a given.

·        Adding in relevant information from the Kogarah Place Strategy (the ‘Strategy’) relating to:

o   The focus - that one of the places in the Kogarah Collaboration Area is Kogarah North which will be a focus for new housing close to the health, knowledge and wellness education core.

o   The shared objectives in the Strategy relates to Kogarah North - Kogarah North Precinct will be a renewed neighbourhood village for the community – an authentic place where the community enjoys attractive and safe pedestrian and cycle paths and facilities, green infrastructure, and a variety of public open spaces.

o   Relevant actions from the Strategy relating to:

§  Action 6: Use the Movement and Place framework to achieve the desired future character for streets and places in the Collaboration Area

§  Action 8: Refine and plan for the Green Grid in the Collaboration Area

§  Action 26: Explore precinct-wide and site-specific energy efficiency initiatives, with a focus on NSW Government-owned land, high energy users and catalyst projects

§  Action 29: Plan for sustainable development through controls for new buildings and higher BASIX targets

§  Action 34: Map open space deficiencies, explore the expansion of open space, investigate acquisition of land for new open space and investigate initiatives for large roof surface areas and car parks for open space

§  Action 35: Increase the percentage of urban tree canopy

Note: The Strategy states on page 71- Increase the urban tree canopy as identified in Kogarah North and Rockdale Town Centre master plans, and prioritise planting according to urban heat mapping, heat vulnerability and Green Grid planning

§  Capture discussions and work undertaken as part of the Movement and Place Framework pilot and seek in part to identify:

·        a desired 2036 future character statement for streets and places in the Collaboration Area

·        issues and opportunities for that street or place

·        actions to deliver the desired character

·        Adding in Section 4 – The Kogarah North Urban Design Strategy:

o   The controls in this DCP (as amended) are informed in part by the analysis undertaken in the UDS.  Since the introduction of KLEP Amendment No. 2, there has been several development applications lodged in the Precinct.  The controls in this Part of the DCP (as amended) are also based on a review of the recent development applications, including those approved by the Land and Environment Court in the Precinct.  This is with a view to ensure that the aims of the up-zoning of the Precinct under LEP Amendment No. 2 with regards to increased density can be realised.

·        Retaining the vision but deleting or converting the principles into objectives in the controls section where applicable; as they have more weight as objectives.

·        Deleting Tables 2 and 3 relating to setbacks and replacing with words as it is simpler for interpretation. The court has found that there is inconsistency in the current text in the references to the following terms that are in the controls – Frontage, Boundary, Property boundary, Site boundary, etc. In the Vortex appeal, much discussion was about the ambiguity of these controls – the meaning of ‘frontage’, whether the control applies only to that part of the site that had a boundary to the street.  Also, whether if a site had a visual frontage to the street (which in Vortex was Railway Pde North), that the control would apply to the whole boundary that had a visual aspect to the street.  The applicant successfully argued that as that site had an outlook to Railway Pde North, then the setback applied to the site (even though the actual boundary was to Gladstone Street).

·        Including in the dwelling mix control what was adopted by Council for Part C2 – Kogarah DCP 2013:

(1)    Developments that propose more than 10 apartments are to provide a mix of dwellings consistent with the following percentage mix:

(i) Studio and I bed apartments – Minimum of 20%

(ii) 2 bed apartments – Maximum of 30%

(iii) 3+ bed apartments – Minimum of 15%

(2)    Any variations to the apartment mix are to take into consideration:

(i) the distance to public transport, employment and education centres.

(ii) the current market demands and projected future demographic trends.

(iii) the demand for social and affordable housing.

(iv) different cultural and socioeconomic groups.

 

Apartment configurations are to support diverse household types and stages of life including single person households, families, multi-generational families and group households.

·    Amending the residential car parking controls to reference the Objective 3J-1 of the ADG as the precinct is within 800m of Kogarah Railway Station.

 

DESIGN REVIEW PANEL

90.   In accordance with Clause 21A Approval of development control plans relating to residential apartment development of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, the Amendment to Part C2 - Medium Density Housing of the Kogarah DCP 2013 was referred to the Design Review Panel (the ‘DRP’) for review and comments. The DRP comments were addressed in the report adopted by Council at its meeting held on 25 May 2020.

REPEAL OF DCPS AND FORMER HURSTVILLE COUNCIL POLICIES

91.   At its meeting on 11 June 2019, Council endorsed the Georges River Interim Policy DCP (Policy #: Pol-061.01) for assessing development applications until such time as the GRDCP 2020 is adopted by Council.

92.   The Interim Policy is a public document used by Development Assessment planners in their assessment of residential development applications (Das). It will ensure that assessment is consistent across the LGA. The controls have been formatted in accordance with the operative DCPs.

93.   The draft Georges River DCP 2020 will replace the following:

a.     Interim Policy DCP (Policy #: Pol-061.01);

b.     Kogarah DCP 2013; and

c.     Hurstville Control Plan 1 – applies to land within Penshurst, Mortdale and Hurstville wards

94.   The following policies will also need to be repealed for the land covered by the GRDCP 2020:

a.     Drainage and On site Detention Policy (replaced by Georges River Stormwater Management Policy 2019)

b.     Fencing adjacent to public roads (provisions in the draft Georges River DCP 2020)

c.     Balcony Enclosures in Residential flat buildings Policy (provisions in the draft Georges River DCP 2020)

d.     Satellite Dish Policy (provisions in the draft GRDCP 2020 and covered by Exempt and Complying SEPP)

e.     Code for the erection of private tennis courts (provisions in the draft GRDCP 2020)

f.      Stencilling of street driveways policy (provisions in the draft GRDCP 2020)

g.     Underground electricity cabling to developments policy (provisions in the draft GRDCP 2020)

h.     Design guidelines for absorption trenches (replaced by Georges River Stormwater Management Policy 2019)

i.      Rainwater Tanks Policy adopted 18 December 2002 (replaced by Georges River Stormwater Management Policy 2019).

j.      Home Activities Policy adopted 15 August 2001 (home occupations are permitted without consent).

k.     Code for Commercial Use of Public Footpaths (replaced by Georges River Council Local Approvals Policy – Use of Public Land dated 29 October 2018).

95.   Clause 22(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 states that

(2)    A council may repeal a development control plan—

(a)    by a subsequent development control plan, or

(b)    by publishing notice of the decision to repeal the plan on its website.

(3)    At least 14 days before repealing a development control plan under subclause (2)(b), the council must publish notice of its intention to repeal the plan, and its reasons for the repeal, on its website.

(4)    The repeal of a development control plan under subclause (2) (b) takes effect on the date on which the notice is published on the council’s website.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

96.   There is no budget in the Strategic Planning Budget for financial year 2020/2021 for extensive exhibition (which includes letters to owners) of the draft Georges River DCP.

 

RISK IMPLICATIONS

97.   Operational risk/s identified - if the GRDCP 2020 is not approved, the GRLEP 2020 will be without a DCP.

 

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

98.   Community engagement is proposed to be undertaken for an extended period of 60 days beyond the 28 days required under Council’s Community Engagement Strategy. It is intended to work together with Council’s Communication team. The extended time frame will also provide the community sufficient time to review the draft DCP. The proposed engagement activities are outlined in Table 3 below.

 

Table 3 – Community Engagement Program

 

Community Engagement

Proposed Action

Online and digital

 

·      Council’s website

·      Social media (Facebook page)

·      Council’s ‘Your Say’ Georges River DCP 2020 page

 

Drop in sessions

·      1 per ward (reliant on funding)

 

Letters

 

·      Bayside Council

·      Canterbury Bankstown Council

·      State MPs

·      Federal MPs

·      Transport for NSW (including Sydney Trains and RMS)

·      Other relevant Government agencies and authorities.

 

Letterbox drop

A postcard will be sent to residents in LGA. (Reliant on funding

 

Public notice

 

Public notice to be placed in the local newspaper and the NSW Government’s Planning Portal, notifying the exhibition of the draft GRDCP 2020.

 

Telephone Consultation

Council’s Strategic Planning staff will be available during office hours to answer telephone enquiries.

 

Customer Service centres and Libraries’

Copies of the Draft GRDCP 2020 available for the public to review

 

 

NEXT STEPS

99.   The next steps for this project include:

Date

Step

August 2020

Council endorses the draft GRDCP 2020 for public exhibition

September 2020

Preparation of public exhibition materials

October 2020 to November 2020

Public Exhibition 60 days

December 2020

Consideration of submissions

February 2020

Council report on submissions received and adoption of GRDCP 2020.

 

FILE REFERENCES

D20/76428

19/497 – Stage 2

19/999 – Stage 3

19/1731 – Stage 4

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

GRDCP - Final Car Parking Rates - published in separate document

Attachment 2

GRDCP - Comparison Table of key controls for various residential styles - published in separate document

Attachment 3

GRDCP Table of Contents - published in separate document

Attachment 4

GRDCP Part 1 – Introduction - published in separate document

Attachment 5

GRDCP Part 2 – Application Process - published in separate document

Attachment 6

GRDCP Part 3 – General Planning Considerations - published in separate document

Attachment 7

GRDCP Part 4 – General Land Use - published in separate document

Attachment 8

GRDCP Part 5 – Residential Locality Statements - published in separate document

Attachment 9

GRDCP Part 6.1 - Dwellings, Dual Occupancies, Secondary Dwellings (Low Density Residential) - published in separate document

Attachment 10

GRDCP Part 6.2 - Multi dwelling housing, terraces and manor houses (Medium Density Residential) - published in separate document

Attachment 11

GRDCP Part 6.3 - Residential Flat Buildings (High Density Residential) - published in separate document

Attachment 12

GRDCP Part 6.4 - Ancillary Development - published in separate document

Attachment 13

GRDCP Part 6.5 - Foreshore Locality Controls - published in separate document

Attachment 14

GRDCP Part 7 - Business Precincts - published in separate document

Attachment 15

GRDCP Part 8 – Kogarah Town Centre - published in separate document

Attachment 16

GRDCP Part 9 – Industrial Development - published in separate document

Attachment 17

GRDCP Part 10 – Precincts - published in separate document

Attachment 18

GRDCP - Appendices - published in separate document

 


Georges River Council – Environment and Planning -  Monday, 10 August 2020                                                                                                                                                     Page 69

Item:                ENV031-20   Adoption of Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and Masterplan 

Author:            Strategic Planner

Directorate:     Environment and Planning

Matter Type:    Committee Reports

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

(a)    That Council, pursuant to section 40(2)(b) of the NSW Local Government Act 1993, confirms that the amendments to the Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management are not substantial and do not require further public exhibition.

(b)    That Council adopt the Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and Masterplan in accordance with section 40 of the NSW Local Government Act 1993 (LG Act) and in accordance with section 3.23(6) of the Crown Lands Management Act (CLM Act).

(c)    That Council authorise the General Manager to make minor editorial modifications in the finalisation of the Hurstville Oval Plan of Management and Masterplan.

(d)    That all individuals who provided a submission during the public exhibition of the Hurstville Oval Plan of Management and Masterplan be notified of Council’s decision.

(e)    That the adopted Plan of Management and Masterplan be forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment - Crown Lands.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.     Council endorsed the draft Masterplan and Plan of Management for Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve for public exhibition and for the draft plan to be forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (landowners) for consent at its meeting on 8 July 2019.

2.     The draft Masterplan and Plan of Management for Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve were forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (landowners) for consent on 12 August 2019. Landowners consent was provided by the Department on 28 November 2019.

3.     The draft Masterplan and Plan of Management for Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve were publicly exhibited from 22 January 2020 to 4 March 2020.

4.     A total of five (5) submissions were received. Detailed consideration of the submissions in relation to the exhibited draft Plan of Management and Masterplan is detailed in the report and provided in Attachment 1.

5.     Under Section 40A of the NSW Local Government Act 1993 Council was required to hold a public hearing into the proposed re-categorisation of Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve. Hurstville Oval is currently categorised as “park” and Timothy Reserve is categorised as both “sportsground and park”.

6.     On 11 June 2020 a public hearing was independently chaired by Gondwana Consulting. The public hearing report supports the re-categorisation Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve – Hurstville Oval to part “park” and part “sportsground” and Timothy Reserve to “park”. A copy of the public hearing report is provided in Attachment 2.

7.     The draft Plan of Management and Masterplan has been amended following consideration of the issues raised in the submissions. Section 40(2)(b) of the NSW Local Government Act 1993 states that Council - if it is of the opinion that the amendments are not substantial - can adopt an amended draft plan of management without public exhibition.

8.     The report recommends that the Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management (Refer to Attachment 3) and Masterplan (Refer to Attachment 4) be adopted and finalised in accordance with the requirements of section 40 of the NSW Local Government Act 1993 and in accordance with section 3.23(6) of the Crown Lands Management Act 2016.

BACKGROUND

9.     Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve comprises of two allotments, one being Community Land (Lot 53 DP 9355, 30D Dora Street) owned by Georges River Council and the other Crown Land (Lot 1 DP 919317, 30 Dora Street) and managed as a Reserve Trust by Georges River Council. (Refer to Figure 1)

 

Figure 1: Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve (Source Google Earth)
(Note: The red colour is the Council owned land)

 

10.   The Hurstville Council deferred consideration of a draft Plan of Management and Masterplan for Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve at its meeting held 25 May 2011 for the following reasons:

a.     retention of the cycle velodrome

b.     increase areas and quantities of trees for shade

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

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

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

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

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

h.     improved access to Oval for wider community use

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

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

k.     new media room and scoreboard for Oval

l.      upgraded and extended spectator seating

m.    creation of a formal entry into Timothy Reserve

n.     upgraded main entry into Oval

o.     screen maintenance area behind Booth Saunders Pavilion

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

11.   In late 2018, Council engaged Gondwana Consulting to finalise the draft Plan of Management and Masterplan for Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve.

12.   The draft Plan of Management and draft Masterplan was the subject of a briefing (first councillor briefing) to the Councillors on 4 March 2019. The current location of the new double storey community pavilion in the draft Masterplan was raised as an issue at the briefing.

13.   At its meeting on 23 April 2019, Council considered a report on the new Hurstville Oval and Timothy Plan of Management and Masterplan and resolved that:

a)     That a further report be submitted to the Committee that undertakes a feasibility study examining the extension of the Booth Saunders Pavilion towards the entrance gate.

14.   The location of the new pavilion was the subject of a briefing (second councillor briefing) on 1 July 2019. A review of the proposal to extend the Booth Saunders Pavilion was undertaken by Harrison Friedmann & Associates Pty Ltd.  Harrison Friedmann advised that the proposal to extend the Booth Saunders Pavilion at Hurstville Oval will be rejected by Sydney Water on the following grounds:

i.    The construction of any structure over a SW owned maintenance manhole is strictly prohibited. There is a SW manhole located under the proposed site of the Booth Saunders extension.

ii.    Notwithstanding the existence of the manhole, the construction of a structure over a SW sewer pipe requires the clay pipe to be replaced with a UPVC, concrete  encased pipe which must then be protected by concrete beams supported by piers to ensure the pipe is not weight bearing. Pipe protection also applies to footings over storm water pipes.

iii.   Sydney Water Act 1994 (No.88) Division 4, Section 44 Protection of Works

15.   At its meeting on 22 July 2019, Council considered a report on the new Hurstville Oval and Timothy Plan of Management and Masterplan and resolved that:

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

b)     That Council amend the draft plan of management and masterplan to include the two options for the location of the pavilion in order to allow further investigation on the suitable location and community consultation on the two options:

i.    Option 1 - as shown in figure 2 of this report

ii.    Option 2 - Adjoining the existing Pavilion towards the entrance gate

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

d)     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.

e)     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.

f)      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.

g)     That information on the costings of the Plan of Management of the two Pavilion options be presented to a Councillor workshop during the exhibition period.

16.   The draft Masterplan and Plan of Management for Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve was forwarded to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (landowners) for consent on 12 August 2019 which was received on 28 November 2019.

17.   A third Councillor briefing on the Plan of Management and Masterplan was held on 18 November 2019 on the Feasibility Study prepared by Webber Architects. The Study was undertaken to identify the optimal location for the new Community Pavilion at Hurstville Oval given the constraints of the site. This feasibility study considered the impact on existing services and landscape, visual impact, buildability, environmental conditions, aspect, function, amenity, security, parking being located and cost estimates.

18.   The feasibility study recommended new pavilion being located within a zone to the south eastern corner to the Gordon Street end of the site (Option 2).

19.   At its meeting on 24 February 2020, Council considered the Hurstville Oval Feasibility Study and resolved that:

a)     That Council receive and note the Hurstville Oval Pavilion Feasibility Study prepared by Webber Architects who has been engaged to prepare the designs for the pavilion.

b)     That Council approves the location of Option 2 as the site for the new Hurstville Oval Pavilion.

 

20.   The final location of the pavilion has been reflected in the Masterplan (refer to Attachment 4).

Consent from Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (Landowners)

21.   Council referred the draft Plan of Management on 12 August 2019 to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment as the owner of Crown Land in accordance with section 39 of the Local Government Act seeking landowners consent.

22.   The plan was reviewed by a delegate for the Minister for Water, Property and Housing, who found that the plan satisfied the requirements under section 3.23 of the Crown Land Management Act 2016.

23.   Council’s request to alter the initial assigned categorisation for Crown reserve (R500461) from “Park” to “part Sportsground”/”part Park” was granted.

24.   The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment’s review and consent to alter categorisation was provided on 28 November 2019 (Refer to Attachment 5).

PUBLIC EXHIBITION

25.   The draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and Masterplan was publicly exhibited from 22 January to 4 March 2020.

26.   The draft Plan of Management and Masterplan were available for viewing on Council’s YourSay webpage and Council’s website. Hard copies were also available for viewing at Council’s Service Centre and Hurstville Library.

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED

27.   There were five (5) submissions received during the public exhibition as summarised below. A detailed summary of each submission and response to the comments made is provided in Attachment 1.

28.   The following table (Table 1) provides a summary of the key issues raised in the submissions and the response in the draft Plan of Management and Masterplan:

 

Table 1 – Key Issues raised in the submissions received

Key Issue raised in the submission

Response in draft Plan of Management and Masterplan

Overall enjoyment and comfort of people who use both facilities

The Masterplan proposes a number of facilities to be enhanced.

The plan needs to address more space available to the public – open up more areas for public use and relocate the cricket nets to main oval.

 

The proposed relocation of the Hurstville Oval fence will improve public access to the open space associated with Hurstville Oval.

Provide free Wi-Fi and seating provisions

Actions have been included for the provision of Wi-Fi stations nearby high use locations throughout Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve

Allow for retail near the park so parents can use it for coffee/food everyday not just have it open on ‘game’ days

Draft Plan of Management recommends the repurposing of Dunbar Pavilion for the development of a museum and café on the ground floor. With the proposed reconfiguration of the Hurstville Oval boundary fence the café would effectively adjoin the open space area of Timothy Reserve. The café is approximately 60m from the playground site.

 

Extend the existing pavilion to accommodate both players and spectators. Having two pavilions could create a sense of separation.

A Feasibility Study was prepared by Webber Architects in regard to the new pavilion. The Feasibility Study considered the optimal location of the pavilion after consideration of a range of relevant matters. The Study resolved the new pavilion be located at the Option 2 site.

New boundary fence needs to adequately enclose and secure the venue for safety and ticketing

The Draft Plan of Management acknowledges the need for the new perimeter fence to provide for managed access into the Oval during ticketed events / scheduled matches.

Amendments to draft Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and Masterplan

29.   As a result of community feedback a number of changes have been proposed to the Draft Plan of Management and Masterplan.

30.   The Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management has been amended to provide:

a.     Details of the community consultation and comments made during the public exhibition

b.     Details of the Public Hearing held

c.     Update the Figures and Action Plan Table in the document to reflect changes to the Masterplan (see below)

31.   The Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Masterplan has been amended to:

1.     The location of the new community pavilion with cafe / canteen and public amenities on ground floor open to the public shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2 –New pavilion

2.     Remove ‘Redeveloped as café and museum with all abilities public access.’

3.     The addition of the following general note

o   Sensors to support maintenance and use of the reserve and oval e.g. smart lighting which is sensor based, noise monitoring, sensors on furniture and bins to allow for pro-active maintenance / Smart furniture with USB ports / General use of recycled materials to support any new or infrastructure planned for renewal.

 

32.   A copy of the amended Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and the amended Masterplan are included in Attachments 3 and 4.

33.   Section 40(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1993 states that Council - if it is of the opinion that the amendments are not substantial - can adopt an amended draft plan of management without public exhibition. It is confirmed that the amendments outlined above are not substantial and do not require the re-exhibition of the plans.

Categorisation of Community Land, and Council Managed Crown Reserves

34.   The Local Government Act 1993 governs the preparation of plans of management – setting out how a plan is to be prepared and what they are required to contain.

35.   A central requirement of the Local Government Act 1993  is that all Community land, owned and managed by a Council, must be assigned to one or more land “categories”, and that this “categorisation” is set out clearly in the plan of management covering the land in question.  Land categorisation defines how Council will manage certain areas of land.  Each category has an associated set of objectives and broad directions for the management for land so categorised.  Consequently any area of land can only be assigned to a single category, to avoid overlapping or conflicting objectives.

36.   Following the Crown Lands Management Act 2016 (CLM Act) coming into force on 1 July 2018 “Council managers” (responsible for the care, control and management) of a Crown reserve must now also plan and manage these reserves as if they were, and in accordance with, the public land provisions of the LGovt Act.  Section 3.22 of the CLM Act requires (with some specific exceptions) that a Council manager of a Crown reserve “must manage the land as if it were Community land under the Local Government Act 1993”, and section 3.23 requires Council managers to categorise the land making up a Crown reserve using the community land categories set out in section 36 of the LGovt Act.

Available Categories

37.   Section 36(4) of the LGovt Act identifies the five (5) categories that may be applied to the Community land.  These categories are:

a.     Sportsground;

b.     Park;

c.     Area of Cultural Significance;

d.     General Community Use; or

e.     Natural Area.

38.   Section 36(5) of the LGovt Act requires that land categorised as “Natural Area” is further categorised as one or more of the following:

a.     Bushland;

b.     Wetland;

c.     Escarpment;

d.     Watercourse; or

e.     Foreshore.

 

Guidelines for the Categorisation of Community Land

39.   The Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 provides guidance as to the most appropriate categorisation of an area based on the characteristics, values and uses of the land in question.  Sections 102 to 111 of the Regulation prescribe guidelines for the categorisation of each of the 10 categories or sub-categories listed above.

40.   Section 103 sets out guidelines for the categorisation of land as a “Sportsground” as follows – Land should be categorised as a sportsground under section 36 (4) of the Act if the land is used or proposed to be used primarily for active recreation involving organised sports or the playing of outdoor games.

41.   Section 104 sets out guidelines for categorisation of land as a “Park” as follows – 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 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.

Core Objectives for Management – By Category

42.   The Local Government Act 1993 sets out management objectives for each of the above categories, providing broad directions to be pursued in the management of an area (this includes guiding, and being reflected in, an area’s plan of management).

43.   Section 36F sets out the core objectives for management of community land categorised as a “Sportsground” as follows.

The core objectives for management of community land categorised as a sportsground are:

(a)    to encourage, promote and facilitate recreational pursuits in the community involving organised and informal sporting activities and games; and

(b)    to ensure that such activities are managed having regard to any adverse impact on nearby residences.

44.   Section 36G gives the core objectives for management of community land categorised as a “Park” as follows:

The core objectives for management of community land categorised as a park are:

(a)    to encourage, promote and facilitate recreational, cultural, social and educational pastimes and activities; and

(b)    to provide for passive recreational activities or pastimes and for the casual playing of games; and

(c)    to improve the land in such a way as to promote and facilitate its use to achieve the other core objectives for its management.

Public Hearing

45.   Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve were managed under the dual categories of ‘Sportsground’ and ‘Park’ within a Generic Plan of Management for Sportsgrounds adopted in 2006. When the amendments to the Crown Land Management Act came into effect on 1July 2018, Council was required to categorise all Crown lands managed by Council. In the case of the Crown Reserve at Hurstville Oval Council provided advice to the Crown that this area be categorised as Park. This advice effectively superseded the categorisation in the Generic Plan of Management for Sportsgrounds.

46.   The categorisation of “park” and “sportsground” will apply to the Crown Land parcel (Lot 1 DP919317) – all of Hurstville Oval and associated current and proposed built structures will be managed in accord with the core objectives of ‘Sportsground’, whilst remaining areas of Lot 1 will be managed in accord with the core objectives of ‘Park’. Lot 53 (Timothy Reserve) is proposed to be categorised as “Park”.

47.   The spatial extent of the proposed categorisation of land for Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve is shown in Figure 3 and further details are provided in Table 2.

Figure 3 – Land Categorisation as per the LG Act – Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve

 

48.   Table 2 below compares both the categorisation of community land under the existing Generic Plan of Management for Sportsgrounds (2006) and Council’s advice to the Crown regarding categorisation of Crown Land in 2018 with the categorisations proposed in the Plan of Management.

Table 2 – Land Categorisation

Land Parcel

Initial categorisation advice to Crown

Category in Generic Sportsground PoM, 2006

Proposed category in Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve PoM

 

Lot 1 DP 919317

Crown

 

Park

Not applicable (superseded by 2018 advice to the Crown)

Part Sportsground

Part Park

 

Lot 53 DP9355

GRC

 

N/A

Sportsground and Park

Park

Refer to figure 1 for the identification of the Lots

 

49.   Under Section 40A of the Local Government Act 1993 Council was required to hold a public hearing into the proposed re-categorisation of Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve. Hurstville Oval is currently categorised as “park” and Timothy Reserve is categorised as both “sportsground and park”.

50.   On 11 June 2020 a public hearing was independently chaired by Gondwana Consulting. Council is to note that no one from the public attended.  The public hearing report supports the re-categorisation Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve – Hurstville Oval to part “park” and part “sportsground” and Timothy Reserve to “park”. A copy of the public hearing report is attached in Attachment 2.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

51.   Within budget allocation.

RISK IMPLICATIONS

52.   No risks identified.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

53.   The draft Plan of Management and Masterplan were placed on community consultation from 22 January to 4 March 2020. As part of the community consultation and stakeholder consultation the following was undertaken:

a.     Inclusion on Council’s Your Say web page;

b.     Letters to adjoining landowners; and,

c.     Notification to key stakeholder groups and key users.

Next steps

54.   If Council resolves to adopt Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management and Masterplan, the next steps will be as follows:

a)     The Plan of Management and Masterplan will be placed on Council’s website; and

b)     Submitters will be advised of the adoption of the Plan of Management and Masterplan.

c)     Council to publish notice of its decision on its website within 28 days after the decision is made.

FILE REFERENCE

18/1965

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Submission Report - Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve PoM - published in separate document

Attachment 2

Public Hearing Report - Proposed Categorisation of Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve - published in separate document

Attachment 3

Hurstville Oval and Timothy Reserve Plan of Management July 2020 FINAL - published in separate document

Attachment 4

Hurstville Oval and Timothy Res Master Plan FINAL July 2020 - published in separate document

Attachment 5

Attachment D - Letter - Approval PoM - request to alter categorisation - Georges River Council - published in separate document

 


Georges River Council – Environment and Planning -  Monday, 10 August 2020                                                                                                                                                     Page 78

Item:                ENV032-20   Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2021 (Planning Proposal - Housing Choice and Capacity) 

Author:            Strategic Planner/Urban Designer

Directorate:     Environment and Planning

Matter Type:    Committee Reports

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

(a)    That Council resolve to prepare a Planning Proposal (stage 2 of the Principal LEP to be known as LEP 2021) to amend the Kogarah and Hurstville Local Environmental Plans (or if gazetted, Georges River LEP 2020) to promote housing choice and create capacity for additional dwellings to meet the Greater Sydney Commission’s 6-10 year housing target (3,450 - 4,250 additional dwellings).

(b)    That Council authorise the General Manager to execute the renewed funding agreement with the NSW Government to utilise the surplus grant funding from the Accelerated LEP Program to enable the preparation of stage 2 of the Principal LEP, the Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2021 (“LEP 2021”), and to commence stage 2 of the Commercial Centres Strategy including the preparation of the masterplan for the Mortdale Local Centre.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.     On 7 September 2018, Council received $2,500,000 funding from the NSW Government’s Accelerated LEP Program for an accelerated review of Council’s existing LEPs and the preparation of a new LEP that aligns with the priorities outlined in the South District Plan.

 

2.     In accordance with the statutory agreement, the revised Planning Proposal for the Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020 (“LEP 2020”) was endorsed by the Georges River Local Planning Panel (“LPP”) at its meeting in June 2020 and was submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (“DPIE”) for final legal drafting on 30 June 2020. Approximately $750,000 of the grant funding has not yet been utilised.

 

3.     The LEP 2020 was the first stage of a four stage approach to preparing the Principal Georges River LEP. The staged approach was developed to enable detailed investigations to be conducted to support the full suite of actions and changes proposed by Council’s Local Strategic Planning Statement 2040 (“LSPS 2040”).

 

4.     LEP 2021 is the next stage within the Georges River LEP staged approach and was endorsed by Council at its meetings in 23 April 2019 and October 2019 to focus on housing choice through the promotion of inclusive and affordable housing and the investigation of mechanisms such as big house conversions and build to rent to provide more housing choice across the local government area (“LGA”).

 

5.     Council was advised by the DPIE in June 2020 that the LGA is required to create zone capacity for additional dwellings to meet the Greater Sydney Commission’s 6-10 year housing target of 3,450 - 4,250 dwellings. The DPIE also advised that the surplus grant funding would be made available to enable the expedited preparation of LEP 2021 to address this shortfall in housing capacity.

 

6.     The revised Local Housing Strategy demonstrates that the LGA will struggle to meet its 0-5 year target of 4,800 additional dwellings as specified by the South District Plan. The shortfall has been identified to be approximately 700 dwellings.

 

7.     To ensure Council delivers an additional 14,000 dwellings as required by 2036, further work will need to be conducted in LEP 2021 (and perhaps LEP 2022) to accommodate the shortfall of dwellings in the 0-5 year period and create flexibility for additional take up in the 6-10 year and 10-20 year dwelling targets.

 

8.     It is Council officers’ intention to accepted the renewed the funding agreement with the DPIE to enable the utilisation of the remaining grant funding subject to the provision of additional dwellings through LEP 2021 to rectify the 700 dwellings shortfall and the submission of the Planning Proposal for finalisation by 31 March 2021.

 

9.     This funding also presents an opportunity to commence Part 2 of the Commercial Centres Strategy by starting with a detailed review of one local centre within the LGA through a place-based masterplanning process, which will go on to inform the preparation of the future LEP 2022.

 

10.   Out of the 8 local centres in the LGA, the Mortdale Local Centre has been selected as an appropriate centre.

 

11.   Therefore, this report outlines the revised program of works proposed to be conducted to inform the preparation of the Planning Proposal for LEP 2021 and broadly outlines the program for the development of the Mortdale Local Centre Masterplan.

 

BACKGROUND

12.   At its meeting dated 26 February 2018, Council resolved to prepare a principal Local Environmental Plan (“LEP”) for the Georges River local government area (“LGA”) which gives effect to the South District Plan and harmonises the following existing LEPs:

 

·    Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (“KLEP 2012”);

·    Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (“HLEP 2012”); and

·    Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994 (“HLEP 1994”).

 

13.   On 7 September 2018, Council received funding from the NSW Government of $2,500,000 for an accelerated review of Council’s existing LEPs and the preparation of a new LEP that aligns with the priorities outlined in the South District Plan. The grant funding also enabled Council to prepare the Local Housing Strategy and Inclusive Housing Strategy to inform the new LEP and a local strategic planning statement for the LGA.

 

14.   The Planning Proposal for the Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2020 (“LEP 2020”) was revised with consideration of the public exhibition outcomes and was reported to the Georges River Local Planning Panel (“LPP”) in June 2020 seeking endorsement to submit the revised Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (“DPIE”) for final legal drafting.

 

15.   At this meeting, the LPP resolved to endorse a number of revisions to the exhibited Planning Proposal for LEP 2020, including the retention of the existing Foreshore Scenic Protection Area (“FSPA”) as identified by the HLEP 2012 Foreshore Scenic Protection Area Map to allow Council the opportunity to further define the role, mapped extent and zoning of FSPA across the LGA as part of the preparation of LEP 2021/2022.

 

16.   The LEP 2020 was the first stage of a four stage approach to preparing the principal Georges River LEP. The staged approach was developed to enable detailed investigations to be conducted to support the full suite of actions and changes proposed by Council’s Local Strategic Planning Statement 2040 (“LSPS 2040”).

 

17.   The LSPS 2040 provides a ‘line of sight’ between the South District Plan and strategic planning and delivery at the local level through the Georges River LEP. It sets out the land use vision for the next 20 years to strengthen the character of the LGA’s suburbs and builds upon the social, environmental and economic values of the Georges River community.

 

18.   The following staged approach to preparing the Georges River LEP is outlined in the LSPS 2040 and has been endorsed by Council at its meetings in April 2019 and October 2019:

 

Stage 1: Housing and Harmonisation (LEP 2020 – submitted for plan making on 30 June 2020)

·    Harmonise the existing LEPs

·    Seek to achieve housing targets and housing choice through upzoning certain areas

 

Stage 2: Housing Choice (scheduled for 2021)

·    Seek to promote inclusive and affordable housing

·    Investigate mechanisms such as big house conversions and build to rent to provide more housing choice across the LGA

 

Stage 3: Jobs and Activation (scheduled for 2022)

·    Review development standards in centres

·    Infrastructure delivery mechanisms

·    Review and implement the outcomes of the Hurstville City Centre and Beverly Hills Local Centre masterplans

 

Stage 4: Housing and Future Growth (previously* scheduled for 2025 and beyond)

·    Focus on land use changes beyond the next 5 years

 

*It is now intended to include the Stage 4 LEP (previously scheduled for 2025 and beyond) into Stage 2 as required by DPIE, to ensure that Council can meet its 10 year housing supply target.

 

19.   To support the staged approach to preparing the Georges River LEP, the LSPS 2040 also identifies a staged program of investigation to deliver additional housing. The following targets have been nominated, equating to an additional 14,000 dwellings by 2036:

 

·    2016 to 2020 inclusive (0-5 year target): +4,800 dwellings as specified by the South District Plan

·    2021 to 2026 (6-10 year target): +3,450 dwellings

·    2026 to 2036 (11-20 year target): +5,750 dwellings

 

20.   To plan for the provision of new housing, the LSPS 2040 Structure Plan (refer Figure 1 below) nominates a number of locations to be investigated. The areas hatched in yellow on the Structure Plan have been included in LEP 2020 as Housing Investigation Areas which will contribute to the 6-10 year housing target. The five Housing Investigation Areas will enable the provision of approximately 650 dwellings in total.

 

21.   The additional locations for future housing (hatched in purple) previously scheduled to be investigated as part of LEP 2025 will now be investigated as part of LEP 2021 to ascertain whether they are required to achieve the 10 year housing target set by the Greater Sydney Commission.

 

Figure 1 – LSPS 2040 Structure Plan

 

22.   As noted above, Council has fulfilled the terms of the statutory funding agreement through the timely submission of LEP 2020 for plan making. Of the total $2,500,000 grant funding allocated to the program, approximately $750,000 of the funds was not utilised. 

 

23.   In June 2020, Council received advice from DPIE providing additional time to utilise the surplus grant funds until 31 December 2020 subject to the following conditions:

 

·    That the Local Housing Strategy is submitted to the DPIE by 30 September 2020; and

·    That an additional LEP is submitted for plan making by 31 March 2021 to address the shortage of housing supply as compared to the Greater Sydney Commission’s 6-10 year housing targets and the current housing pipeline of supply and completions.

 

24.   The Greater Sydney Commission’s 6-10 year housing targets for the LGA is specified within its Letter of Support for Council’s LSPS 2040 dated 4 March 2020 (refer Attachment 1). This letter requires Council to show how the 6-10 year housing target of 3,450 - 4,250 dwellings can be met as part of its Local Housing Strategy.

 

25.   The revised Local Housing Strategy, which is the subject of a separate report to this meeting, analyses the DPIE’s Greater Sydney Region Local Government Area dwellings data with the intent of understanding the shortage of housing supply in meeting the 6-10 year housing target.

 

26.   The analysis of DPIE’s dwellings data reveals that within the 4 year period from January 2016 to March 2020, there have been over 3,300 dwellings completed across the LGA which equates to an average of around 800 dwellings per year.

 

27.   There are also a significant number of dwellings in the pipeline which are yet to be constructed.

 

28.   Historic approvals and completions trends indicate that there is typically a two to three year delay/offset in the completions date as compared to the approvals date. Therefore, the majority of dwellings in the pipeline could be completed in 2021 and beyond, however due to the COVID-19 pandemic there is no guarantee that the usual development cycles will continue.

 

29.   The average completion rate of 800 dwellings per year from January 2016 to March 2020 indicates that it will be challenging for the LGA to meet the South District Plan target of 4,800 dwellings for the 0-5 years’ timeframe (2016-2020 inclusive), and there will be a shortfall of approximately 700 dwellings when compared to the specified dwelling target.

 

30.   To ensure Council delivers an additional 14,000 dwellings as required by 2036, further work will need to be conducted in future LEPs to accommodate the shortfall of completions in the 0-5 year period and create flexibility for additional take up in the 6-10 year and 10-20 year dwelling targets.

 

31.   A portion of the remaining grant funds of approximately $750,000 will assist in expediting the preparation of the next stage of the LEP program – LEP 2021 and will include the provision of capacity for new dwellings with the aim of rectifying the 0-5 year shortfall of and also achieving the 10 year housing supply target.

 

Next LEP Stage – LEP 2021

32.   Following the submission of LEP 2020 for plan making, Council officers have commenced the preparation of the Planning Proposal for LEP 2021 which focuses on promoting housing choice in accordance with the endorsed LEP program.

 

33.   Innovative mechanisms to promote inclusive and affordable housing such as big house conversions and build to rent models and provisions for affordable housing through infill development will be investigated in light of the recommendations of the Inclusive Housing Strategy. It should be noted that the adoption of the Inclusive Housing Strategy is the subject of a separate report at this meeting.

 

34.   However, the original scope of LEP 2021 is required to be broadened in light of the following events:

 

·    Identification of a shortfall in the number of completions within the 0-5 year timeframe of approximately 700 dwellings when compared to the target of 4,800 dwellings specified by the South District Plan;

·    LPP’s recommendation at its meeting dated 25 and 26 June 2020 requiring further definition of the role, mapped extent and zoning of Foreshore Scenic Protection Area (“FSPA”), in both the former Hurstville and Kogarah LGAs as part of the preparation of LEP 2021/2022; and

·    Identification of a number of anomalies within the existing HLEP 2012 and KLEP 2012 that have not been rectified by LEP 2020 such as mapping errors.

 

35.   Accordingly, the Planning Proposal for LEP 2021 will be prepared with the revised intent of promoting housing choice, creating capacity for additional dwellings across the LGA and reviewing the FSPA alongside a number of housekeeping amendments. It will be comprised of five streams:

 

·    Housing choice

·    Housing delivery

·    Contributory planning proposals

·    FSPA review

·    Housekeeping amendments

 

36.   The anticipated project timeline for preparation of the Planning Proposal for LEP 2021 is shown below in Table 1:

 

Table 1 – Anticipated Project Timeline for LEP 2021

Task

Anticipated Timeframe

Prepare Planning Proposal (LEP 2021)

September to November 2020

Report to Council/LPP on Planning Proposal

December 2020

Planning Proposal to be forwarded to the DPIE for a Gateway Determination

December 2020

Anticipated commencement date (date of Gateway Determination)

January 2021

Timeframe for public exhibition (including both government agency and community consultation as required by Gateway Determination)

January to February 2021

Timeframe for consideration of submissions

February to March 2021

Report to Council/LPP on community consultation and finalisation

March 2021

Submission to the Department to finalise the LEP

31 March 2021

 

37.   It is noted that the project timeline will be assessed by the DPIE and may be amended by the Gateway Determination and affected by the approvals issued by the DPIE.

 

Additional Works – Mortdale Local Centre Masterplan

38.   The LSPS 2040 identifies a total of 8 local centres in the LGA. All of these local centres have been nominated as appropriate locations to be investigated for additional jobs and housing opportunities and potential expansion (refer Figure 1 above).

 

39.   Part 2 of the Commercial Centres Strategy will inform the future LEP 2022 (Jobs and Activation) amendment and the accompanying development control plan. The review of built form controls will be a key aspect of this Part of the Strategy, alongside considerations of the role and function of each commercial centre in the LGA.

 

40.   The remaining LEP grant funding provides Council with the opportunity to pilot a detailed review of one local centre within the LGA through a place-based masterplanning process, which will go on to inform the preparation of the Commercial Centres Strategy and LEP 2022.

 

41.   All of the 8 local centres have been assessed as potential candidates for this pilot masterplan project. The outcome of the assessment is outline in Table 2 below:

 

Table 2 – Justification for the Selection of Local Centre for Masterplan

Local Centre

Justification

Beverly Hills

Not selected - current masterplan process underway – on community consultation until 28 September 2020.

Kingsgrove

Not selected due to the fragmented nature of the existing centre which is shared between Georges River, Bayside and Canterbury-Bankstown Councils. An extensive collaboration process is required.

Mortdale

Selected due to:

·    There are no maximum heights (no height limits) under the existing HLEP 2012;

·    Development controls require review in light of the KLEP 2012 controls which were increased in May 2017 as part of the New City Plan amendment;

·    Opportunity to investigate uplift in the surrounding low density residential areas between Mortdale and Penshurst, which have been identified as future housing investigation areas by the LSPS 2040;

·    Council has committed funding for streetscape improvements;

·    Presence of proponent-led planning proposal at the periphery of the centre which seeks significant uplift in controls.

Oatley West

Not selected due to its location within the existing and proposed FSPA. This local centre should be reviewed after the completion of LEP 2021.

Penshurst

Not selected as this centre is landlocked by existing constraints and is unsuitable for expansion. It is bound by two schools to the north, existing residential flat building developments and small industrial precincts to the east and west, and the Penshurst Heritage Conservation Area to the south. It is considered to be more appropriate for the development controls applied to this centre to be reviewed as part of the Commercial Centres Strategy.

Ramsgate

Not selected as the development controls applied are less than 5 years old (increased in May 2017 as part of the New City Plan amendment to the KLEP 2012). A review of the controls through LEP 2021 is considered to be inconsistent with the strategic merit test. Recent development activities demonstrate viable development controls.

Riverwood

Not selected due to Planned Precinct status, which requires extensive collaboration with Canterbury-Bankstown Council and other State agencies.

South Hurstville

Not selected as the development controls applied are less than 5 years old (increased in May 2017 as part of the New City Plan amendment to the KLEP 2012). A review of the controls through LEP 2021 is considered to be inconsistent with the strategic merit test. Recent development activities demonstrate viable development controls.

 

42.   Therefore in addition to the expanded scope of works for LEP 2021, a portion of the remaining grant funds can assist in preparing a masterplan for the Mortdale Local Centre which will go on to inform the review of the other local centres as part of the preparation of the Commercial Centres Strategy and LEP 2022, as well as providing guidance for the assessment of proponent-led planning proposals in the area.

 

43.   The masterplan will seek to encourage urban renewal, improve the amenity and quality of the built environment and public domain as well as provide new housing and employment opportunities to create a vibrant local centre. It will be supported by considerations of infrastructure, traffic and development feasibility to enable a holistic review.

 

44.   It is anticipated that the Mortdale Local Centre Masterplan will be completed in June 2021.

 

Financial Implications

45.   There is a current budget of $120,000 within the 2020/21 Financial Year allocated to the preparation of LEP 2021. This will be supplemented by the surplus grant funds provided by the NSW Government as part of the Accelerated LEP Review program (approximately $750,000).

 

46.   However, it should be noted that the NSW Government requires Council to submit the Planning Proposal for LEP 2021 to the DPIE for final legal drafting by 31 March 2021.

 

47.   A consequence of not meeting these mandated timeframes may include having to reimburse NSW Government funding of up to $750,000, and as such Council needing to meet the full costs of all LEP related expenses once the current budget has been exhausted.

 

RISK IMPLICATIONS

48.   The risk of not meeting the mandated timeframe to finalise the Planning Proposal for LEP 2021 has been identified as an enterprise risk due to the financial consequences arising from having to reimburse the NSW Government.

 

49.   This risk may be attributed to a variety of factors including delays in the preparation of the required studies and strategies, delays in the issue of the Gateway Determination and unforeseeable events arising from the COVID-19 pandemic.

 

50.   Council will need to meet the cost of relevant LEP related expenses once the current budget of $120,000 has been exhausted.

 

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

51.   Should the Planning Proposal be supported it will be forwarded to the DPIE requesting a Gateway Determination.

 

52.   If a Gateway Determination (Approval) is issued for the Planning Proposal, it is anticipated public exhibition will be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and its Regulation 2000, relevant COVID-19 Planning Orders and any requirements of the Gateway Determination.

 

53.   Details regarding the community engagement program for LEP 2021 will be developed as part of the preparation of the Planning Proposal.

 

54.   The community will be consulted on the draft Mortdale Local Centre Masterplan. Further details will be developed as part of the Masterplan project.

 

 

FILE REFERENCE

20/1112 - D20/169753

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Letter from GSC dated 4 March 2020 - Support for LSPS 2040

 


Georges River Council - Environment and Planning - Monday, 10 August 2020

ENV032-20             Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2021 (Planning Proposal - Housing Choice and Capacity)

[Appendix 1]           Letter from GSC dated 4 March 2020 - Support for LSPS 2040

 

 

Page 86

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Environment and Planning -  Monday, 10 August 2020                                                                                                                                                     Page 90

Item:                ENV033-20   Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions) Directions 2020 

Author:            Executive Strategic Planner

Directorate:     Environment and Planning

Matter Type:    Committee Reports

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council note the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions) Directions 2020. 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.     The NSW Government recently made changes to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation (EP&A Regulation) and the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces issued three new Ministerial Directions in relation to infrastructure contributions.

2.     An amendment to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (EP&A Regulation) was also made – this amendment requires certifiers to obtain written documentation from councils that certifies there are no outstanding contributions or levies prior to issuing an occupation certificate.

3.     These Directions and changes have been made as part of a whole-of-government response to the economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and seek to ensure the planning system continues to support productivity, investment and community wellbeing across the State.

BACKGROUND

Local Infrastructure Contributions - Pooling of Contributions Direction 2020

4.     The Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions – Pooling of Contributions) Direction 2020 was issued on 18 May 2020 (see Attachment 1).

5.     The Direction was given to all councils and states that “if a council holds contributions that have been paid for different purposes, including purposes identified in more than one contributions plan that applies in the LGA concerned, the council is to endeavour to pool those contributions, apply them progressively, in order to facilitate the provision of the public amenities and public services to which any of those contributions plans relate”.

6.     The DPIE has advised that under the Direction, contributions can only be pooled for projects that are listed in councils contributions plans and can be pooled between plans that apply to different areas in the same LGA. Also councils can pool contributions for projects that are in shared plans (i.e. the plan covers two LGAs), but only for the proportion of the cost allocated to the particular council that is pooling the contributions.

7.     Also contributions can be pooled to deliver projects that are at a higher cost than stated in the plan, as the cost in the plan is estimated and subject to inflation and changes in construction costs. If a plan, from which contributions were pooled, is retired, any balances owing or accumulated from that plan would need to be carried over to the plan replacing it.

 

 

Local Infrastructure Contributions – Information Direction 2020

8.     The Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions – Information) Direction 2020 was issued on 18 May 2020 (see Attachment 2).

9.     This Direction applies to 16 councils, including Georges River, and required councils to submit information to the DPIE by 3 July 2020 on projects within their existing contributions plans that are scheduled for delivery in the next 12 to 18 months. The Direction states:

“A local council to whom this direction is given is to provide the Minister with information relating to the delivery of public amenities and public services specified in any contributions plan applying to land in the LGA concerned, including the staging of works to provide those amenities or services, as indicated in the table below….

The information required by this Direction is to be provided to the Minister within 6 weeks of this Direction taking effect”.

10.   Council staff reviewed the existing Contributions Plans and identified up to 41 projects that could be delivered in the next 12-24 months. These projects include the embellishment of parks and sporting fields, compulsory acquisition of land for the provision of open space, public domain works, upgrades to local libraries and child care centres throughout the LGA.

Local Infrastructure Contributions – Timing of Payments Direction 2020

11.   The new EP&A (Local Infrastructure Contributions – Timing of Payments) Direction 2020 (see Attachment 3) requires councils to temporarily defer the payment of s7.11 and s7.12 contributions and levies until at least the issuing of the first occupation certificate for developments (with active consents) with an estimated cost of $10 million or more.

12.   In summary the Direction:

a.     applies to relevant consents granted before the Direction takes effect and modifies existing consents;

b.     applies from 8 July until 25 September 2020 (when the COVID-19 prescribed period ends). If needed, a further regulation can extend the prescribed period until 25 March 2021;

c.     expires on the 25 September 2020 but continues to have effect on relevant development consents granted before and during that period;

d.     the deferral of payments will cease to apply if a construction certificate has not been issued for the development by 25 September 2022. After 25 September 2022, contributions must be paid before the issue of the first construction certificate or as identified in the pre-existing conditions of consent;

e.     only applies to developments with an estimated cost of $10 million or more that require an occupation certificate.  The direction does not apply to:

-       development with an estimated construction cost of less than $10 million,

-       development involving the subdivision of land, whether or not they also involve construction, or

-       complying development

f.      the Direction does not prevent entry into any deferred payment arrangements set out in councils’ contributions plans. However, it does prevent councils from requiring the developer to enter into a deferred payment arrangement, including the provision of a bank guarantee to secure payment, before the occupation certificate stage.

Amendment to EP&A Regulation - evidence of payment prior to issue of an occupation certificate

13.   From 8 July 2020 amendments to the EP&A Regulation (EP&A Amendment (Occupation Certificates) Regulation 2020) requires certifiers to confirm that there are no outstanding s7.11 or s7.12 contributions prior to issuing an occupation certificate. 

14.   If the certifier is an accredited certifier (rather than council), an application for an occupation certificate must include a document from council certifying that a contribution or levy under s7.11, s7.12 or s7.24:

a.     is not required at any time before the issue of an occupation certificate, or

b.     is required before the issue of an occupation certificate and the requirement has been met.

15.   Under the Regulation, a certifier must not issue an occupation certificate if the application is not accompanied by this evidence. The certifier will need to confirm that the documents are authentic, and also that no further contributions or levies are required to be made since the document was issued.

16.   The new requirement only applies to developments with an estimated construction cost of $10 million or more (as indicated in the DA).

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

17.   The Budget currently forecasts $15 million in developer contributions to be received in 2020/21.

18.   Over a five year period Council receives an average of $15 million per year, though can experience highs and lows depending on the size/scale of developments being undertaken in the Local Government Area (LGA).

19.   Initial projections for the 2020/21 financial year indicate a reduction in income from $15 million to less than $10 million as a result of these reforms. Similar reductions in income can be assumed for the following 2 financial years.

20.   Council also receives interest income on developer contributions. Assuming a drop of at least $5 million in income per year and a rate of return of 0.85% to 1.90%, the drop in interest income could be up to $95,000 per year for the next 3 years.

21.   These impacts to Council’s budget will need to be taken into consideration during the preparation of the Capital Works Program for at least the next 3 years.

RISK IMPLICATIONS

22.   Operational risk/s identified and management process applied.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT                                            

23.   No community engagement was undertaken by the NSW government on the proposed changes and Directions.

 

FILE REFERENCE

D20/174818

 

 


 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Ministerial Direction - Local Infrastructure Contributions - Pooling of Contributions - issued 18 May 2020

Attachment 2

Ministerial Direction - Local Infrastructure Contributions Information - issued 18 May 2020

Attachment 3

Ministerial Direction - Local Infrastructure Contributions - Timing of Payments - issued 25 June 2020

 


Georges River Council - Environment and Planning - Monday, 10 August 2020

ENV033-20             Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions) Directions 2020

[Appendix 1]           Ministerial Direction - Local Infrastructure Contributions - Pooling of Contributions - issued 18 May 2020

 

 

Page 91

 


Georges River Council - Environment and Planning - Monday, 10 August 2020

ENV033-20             Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions) Directions 2020

[Appendix 2]           Ministerial Direction - Local Infrastructure Contributions Information - issued 18 May 2020

 

 

Page 94

 


 


 


Georges River Council - Environment and Planning - Monday, 10 August 2020

ENV033-20             Environmental Planning and Assessment (Local Infrastructure Contributions) Directions 2020

[Appendix 3]           Ministerial Direction - Local Infrastructure Contributions - Timing of Payments - issued 25 June 2020

 

 

Page 97