Item 8.2 - Attachment 2

Detailed report: Granville RSL

Granville RSL

Introduction

A report seeking endorsement of the comprehensive draft Local Environmental Plan was reported to Council at its meeting of 15 December 2008. At this meeting Council resolved, inter alia:

(a) That consideration of this matter be deferred to the Council Meeting to be held on 23 February 2009 and the application for rezoning submitted by Granville RSL be considered in the meantime.

The following attachment considers the request made by representatives of the RSL site for a great density of development potential on this site.

The site & current controls

The site the subject of the request is located at 5 Memorial Drive Granville (Lot 100 DP 813998) and contains the Granville RSL building. Pursuant to Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Heritage & Conservation), the site is identified as a Heritage Item of Local Significance. The site is approximately 9500m² in area, is relatively level and is identified as being flood prone land.

Council’s Heritage Inventory provides the following information:

“Curvilinear/circular plan form club building possible influenced by Frank Lloyd Wright/Eero Saarinen free organic planned concrete buildings of the 1950’s. Sloping walls oversailed by bevelled concrete roofs with plain wall areas and clerestory lights. Later entrance portico/porte cochere. Modern “Fake Victorian” metal fencing. Domed concrete roof forms. Architectural style 1960’s “Organic Modernism”

Significance – A remarkable (perhaps singular) and distinctive local community complex, prominently sited and understandably the focus of much community life.”

Pursuant to Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001, the property is zoned Residential 2 (e). The current maximum floor space ratio (f.s.r) applicable to the site for the purposes of residential development is 0.5:1. The site is located approximately 400m from Granville train station.

Proposed zoning under Draft LEP

Draft Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2008 proposes to zone the site R4 (High Density Residential) with a maximum f.s.r of 0.8:1 and maximum height of 11m. An extract of the current proposed zoning, height and f.s.r is included below.

X

Figure 1: Proposed Zoning

X

Figure 2: Proposed maximum height

X

X

Figure 3: Proposed floor space ratio

The standard LEP template does not contain an equivalent zoning of Parramatta’s current Residential 2(e) zone. The approach taken through the draft LEP has been that the proposed zoning of sites currently zoned 2(e) has been considered having regard to all planning constraints and opportunities, including surrounding land uses, RDS objectives, heritage and flood hazard information. Detailed flood studies must be submitted with future development applications. In some instances the drainage and flooding constraints may be such that increased development is not possible. In others, design solutions may be available to mitigate any flooding concerns. It should also be noted that flooding is not a static condition, developments and other measures can be taken on properties upstream or elsewhere in the catchment which modify the severity and extent of inundation of downstream properties during heavy rain events.

In respect to the site being a heritage item, any development potential of the site under the draft LEP may not necessarily be fully achieved and would be subject to a detailed heritage analysis that would accompany any future development application.

Submissions

Two written submissions have been received from representatives of the site. These are attached to this report.

The first submission, dated 13 December 2008, from the Secretary Manager of the R.S.L requests that the club’s site be given a greater density given the site’s proximity to Granville Railway Station and local businesses and amenities. No specific maximum height or development potential is identified. The letter then states that once the LEP is publicly exhibited, a formal submission will be prepared for Council’s consideration.

A further submission has been received, dated 2 February 2009, prepared by a planning consultant and requests that the site be zoned to allow residential development between 9-12 storeys in height. The submission, described by the consultant as an interim submission, then provides several reasons as to why the site is suitable for increased development. The reasons primarily focus on the site’s close proximity to Granville train station and town centre.

No further analysis (e.g. traffic, hydrology, heritage reports) has been supplied by the applicant.

The submission also states that a more detailed reasoning to increase density on the site will be provided once the LEP is placed on public exhibition.

Response

The two submissions received do not contain any detailed analysis of the site’s potential constraints and opportunities or seek any maximum floor space ratio for the site and simply request that the site be zoned so as to allow 9-12 storeys development.

As indicated in the extracts of the proposed zoning, height and f.s.r maps, several sites located to the east of the Granville RSL are also zoned R4 (high density) but have a greater maximum height limit of 20m (6 storeys) and f.s.r of 1.7:1.

The context of the site and surrounds including the centrally located Granville pool and memorial park provide recreational opportunities for future increases in residential population in the town centre. The sites to the east and south of the RSL site are proposed to have increased development potential and it may not be incongruous to continue this to the east of the park/pool as well.

The R.S.L site the subject of this report is significantly larger (9500m2) in area and would likely require more detailed urban design analysis to determine the appropriate f.s.r and height limits as well as some rudimentary shadow analysis and consideration of its heritage status.

Conclusion

It is recognised that the site may have some development potential for residential development that, given its proximity to good public transport and facilities is in keeping with the Residential Development Strategy. However, it is advised that, similar to various other submissions received over the past 18 months since an earlier version of the LEP was endorsed, a better approach is to publicly exhibit the LEP and consider detailed submissions from all members of the public. This approach would enable Council to make a more informed strategically based decision and would allow representatives of the RSL site to make a more detailed submission to Council to justify proposed increases in height and f s r.