Agenda of Local Planning Panel - Tuesday, 16 February 2021

Local Planning Panel 16 February 2021 Item 5.4

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 5.4

SUBJECT OUTSIDE PUBLIC MEETING:
19 Brodie Street, Rydalmere NSW 2116
(Lot 180 DP 14244) - Rosehill Ward

DESCRIPTION Section 8.2 Review of determination of approved Section 4.56 modification DA/513/2009/A for alterations & additions to a commercial building which contains a brothel (sex services premises) and take away shop to modify Condition No.10 (Plan of Management) to allow 6 sex workers between 9:30am and 5:30pm weekdays) and Condition No.14a (Staff numbers) to allow maximum 4 work rooms, 6 sex workers and 1 receptionist between 9:00am and 5:30pm weekdays.

REFERENCE DA/513/2009/A - D07845710

APPLICANT/S Mr X X Wei

OWNERS Mr X X Wei and Ms M D F Xu

REPORT OF Group Manager Development and Traffic Services

DATE OF REPORT 14 January 2021

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO LPP

This Section 8.2 Review of approved Section 4.56 modification DA/513/2009/A is being referred to Parramatta Local Planning Panel as it involves a sex services premises.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This is a summary of the full assessment of the application as outlined in Attachment 1, the Sections 4.15 & 8.2 Assessment Report.

On 7 May 2010, the NSW Land and Environment Court approved Development Application No. DA/513/2009 for ‘alterations and additions to a commercial building which contains an approved brothel and takeaway shop. The application seeks approval to increase the number of client service rooms in the brothel from 2 to 8 and the number of sex workers from 2 to 12. Alteration and additions are proposed at both the ground and first floor levels’ on land at 19 Brodie Street, Rydalmere NSW 2116.

On 16 June 2020, the Parramatta Local Planning Panel granted approval to Section 4.56 modification No.DA/513/2009/A for alterations and additions to a commercial building which contains an approved brothel and a take away shop including alterations to the internal layout, hours of operation and number of staff.

On 29 July 2020, Council received a Section 8.2 review of approved Section 4.56 modification DA/513/2009/A, which provides sufficient opportunity for the consent authority to assess and determine the review within twelve (12) months of the original determination date, being 16 June 2020.

Approval is sought for a Section 8.2 Review of Determination of DA/513/2009/A to modify Conditions No.10 and 14a. Details are as follows:

Ø Approval is sought to amend Condition 10 to read as follows:

10. Section 2.3 of the modified Plan of Management is to be amended to only allow ~~four (4)~~ six (6) sex workers between the hours of 9:30am and 5:30pm Monday to Friday inclusive.

Reason: To ensure compliance with the development consent.

Ø Approval is sought to amend Condition 6 to read as follows:

14. The brothel is to operate with:

~~a) A maximum of 4 sex rooms, 4 sex workers and 1 receptionist between the hours of 9am to 5:30pm, Monday to Friday inclusive;~~

~~b) A maximum of 8 sex rooms, 10 sex workers and 2 receptionists, 1 cleaner and 1 security guard during the period 6pm Friday to 6am Monday; and~~

~~c) A maximum of 8 sex rooms, 8 sex workers, 1 receptionist and 1 cleaner at times other than those referred in (a) and (b).~~

a) A maximum of four (4) work rooms, ~~four (4)~~ six (6) sex workers and one (1) receptionist between the hours of 9am and 5:30pm, Monday to Friday inclusive;

b) A maximum of eight (8) work rooms, eight (8) sex workers, one (1) receptionist and 1 cleaner between the hours of 5:30pm to 9:00am, Monday to Friday inclusive; and

c) A maximum of eight (8) work rooms, ten (10) sex workers, two (2) receptionists and one (1) cleaner during the period 5:30pm Friday to 9:00am Monday.

Reason: To ensure that the development complies with the development consent.

The subject site is zoned IN2 Light Industrial in which ‘sex service premises’ is permitted with consent. The proposal is consistent with the relevant requirements of the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 and the Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011.

The application was reviewed by Council’s Traffic & Transport Engineer, Environmental Health Compliance Officer, Safety and Security and NSW Police (Cumberland Area Command). No objections to the proposal were raised, subject to conditions of consent. Council’s Traffic & Transport Engineer supported the shortfall of one (1) parking space, as the existing use of the premises already operates with a shortfall of one parking space, the intensification of the site by allowing an additional 2 sex workers on premises between 9:30am and 5:30pm weekdays is supported in conjunction to the findings of the on-street parking survey undertaken on Thursday 15^th October 2020 by Lyle Marshall & Partners Pty Ltd.

The application received one (1) submission during the formal 14-day notification period between 6 August 2020 and 20 August 2020. Issues raised within the submissions include hours of operation and unreasonable social impacts. The site is located within the well-established Rydalmere Industrial precinct with adjoining land uses comprising light and general industrial uses. The premises is existing and unchanged in its operation, built form and hours of operation and does not intensify the approved maximum number of staff.

After consideration of the development against Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the relevant statutory and policy provisions, the proposal is suitable for the site and is in the public interest. The proposal is recommended for approval subject to conditions for the following reasons:

1. The development is permissible under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011, satisfies the requirements of all of the applicable planning controls and the intent of the original conditions imposed by the NSW Land and Environment Court.

2. The development will be compatible with the existing and planned future character of the Rydalmere Industrial area.

3. For the reasons given above, approval of the application is in the public interest.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That the Parramatta Local Planning Panel (PLPP), exercising the functions of Council, pursuant to Section 4.16(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, grant development consent to Section 8.2 Review of determination of approved Section 4.56 modification DA/513/2009/A for alterations and additions to a commercial building which contains a brothel (sex services premises) and take away shop to modify Condition No.10 (Plan of Management) to allow 6 sex workers between 9:30am and 5:30pm weekdays and Condition No.14a (Staff numbers) to allow maximum 4 work rooms, 6 sex workers and 1 receptionist between 9:00am and 5:30pm weekdays) for a period of five (5) years within which physical commencement is to occur from the date on the Notice of Determination, subject to conditions of consent in Appendix 1.

The reasons for the conditions imposed on this application are as follows:

1. To facilitate the orderly implementation of the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the aims and objectives of the relevant Council Planning instrument.

2. To ensure that the local amenity is maintained and is not adversely affected and that adequate safeguards are incorporated into the development.

3. To ensure the development does not hinder the proper and orderly development of the subject land and its surrounds.

4. To ensure the relevant matters for consideration under Sections 4.15 & 8.2 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are maintained.

(b) That the objector/s be advised of the PLPP’s decision.

Shaylin Moodliar

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Assessment Report	16 Pages
2 ⇩	Locality Map	1 Page
3 ⇩	Draft Consolidated Conditions of Consent	10 Pages
4 ⇩	LEC Conditions	12 Pages
5 ⇩	Parking Statement Letter	6 Pages
6 ⇩	Plan of Management used during assessment	11 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Local Planning Panel 16 February 2021 Item 6.1

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 6.1

SUBJECT PUBLIC MEETING: Pre-Gateway: Planning Proposal for 64 Victoria Road, North Parramatta

REFERENCE RZ/2/2020 -

APPLICANT/S DDC Planning

OWNERS Thi Thu Thuy Nguyen

REPORT OF Project Officer Land Use

Development applications considered by Sydney central city planning panel - Nil

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to seek the Local Planning Panel’s advice to Council on a request to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway Determination for a Planning Proposal for land at 64 Victoria Road, North Parramatta.

RECOMMENDATION

The Local Planning Panel recommend to Council:

(a) That Council endorse for the purposes of seeking a Gateway Determination from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE), the Planning Proposal (at Attachment 1) for land at 64 Victoria Road, North Parramatta which seeks to amend Schedule 1 of the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 (PLEP 2011) to allow ‘take away food and drink premises’ as an additional permitted use (limited to a maximum gross floor area of 100m²).

(b) That the Planning Proposal be forwarded the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) for Gateway Determination.

(c) That Council advises the DPIE that the CEO will be seeking to exercise its plan-making delegations for this Planning Proposal, as authorised by Council on 26 November 2012.

(d) Further, that Council delegates authority to the CEO to correct any minor anomalies of a non-policy and administrative nature that arise during the plan-making process.

PLANNING PROPOSAL TIMELINE

SUMMARY

1. This report seeks the Local Planning Panel’s (LPP) endorsement to forward a Planning Proposal for land at 64 Victoria Road, North Parramatta in accordance with the recommendations outlined in this report to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) for Gateway determination.

SITE DESCRIPTION

Figure 1 – Site at 64 Victoria Road, North Parramatta subject to the Planning Proposal

Figure 2 – Aerial view

Figure 3 – Street view of the premises

2. The subject site has a site area of 495m², andis located on the northern side of Victoria Road, a busy road with a range of residential dwellings surrounding it. The site currently comprises a 60m² food and drink premises and a dwelling house with parking at the rear which has been on the site since the early 1900’s.

CURRENT PLANNING CONTROLS

3. The subject site is currently zoned R3 Medium Density Residential under Parramatta LEP 2011 as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4 – Zoning Map, Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011

4. The site currently has a height limit of 11m under the Height of Buildings (HOB) map (refer to Figure 5).

Figure 5 – Height of Building Map, Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011

5. This site currently has a floor space ratio of 0.6:1 under the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) map (refer to Figure 6).

Figure 6 – Floor Space Ratio Map, Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011

6. This site does not contain any heritage items (refer to Figure 7).

Figure 7 – Heritage Map, Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011

BACKGROUND

7. On 26 August 2020, Council received a Planning Proposal application relating to land at 64 Victoria Road, North Parramatta, known as Lot 1 DP662142. The planning proposal seeks to amend Schedule 1 Additional Permitted Uses of the Parramatta LEP 2011 by formalising the use of part of the site as a ‘take away food and drink premises’.

8. The need for this Planning Proposal is a result of a Land and Environment Court Order relating to ‘existing use rights’ provisions under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act). It has been determined that the food and drink premises on the site no longer benefits from ‘existing use rights’ despite previous approvals for the use. The Order requires a Planning Proposal to be lodged to legitimise the use under the existing zoning regime and for a development application to be lodged to enable the use to be formally approved.

9. A chronology of key events relevant to this proposal is detailed below:

· July 1997 – Development Application (DA/419/1997) approved for mixed business at the subject site.

· December 2001 – Parramatta LEP 2001 is gazetted. Part 4 clause 43 applied to the subject site (then zoned Residential 2(b)) which permits existing buildings lawfully constructed as a shop to be used, altered, extended or rebuilt for the purposes of commercial premises/shop.

· September 2007 - Development Application (DA/757/2007) approved for the purpose of a Pizza Shop and internal alterations.

· March 2008 - Development Application (DA/757/2007/A) approved for modification to approved pizza shop and change of use from pizza shop to seafood shop.

· October 2011 – Parramatta LEP 2011 is gazetted and rezones the subject site to R3 – Medium Density Residential. The existing commercial use is prohibited as it is defined as a “food and drink premises”.

· July 2018 – A pre-lodgement meeting (PL/552/2018) was held regarding a proposal for signage and modifications to the shop front. Evidence was provided by the applicant supporting ‘existing use rights’ and that the use had not ceased. Council acknowledged that uses had not ceased but legal advice noted failure to ‘activate’ the 2007 development consent (detailed above) via a Construction Certificate or Occupation Certificate. Therefore, the use has not legally commenced irrespective of its ongoing operation on the site.

· September 2019 – Council serves Notice of Intention to Give an Order (Council reference: 349 356) to cease the unauthorised use. This matter became the subject of a Land and Environment Court appeal.

· July 2020 – Council serves modified Order as a result of the Court appeal which allows use of the site as a ‘take away food and drink premises’ to continue, subject to a Planning Proposal and development application being lodged to formalise the use and remove the need to prove existing use rights.

DESCRIPTION OF PLANNING PROPOSAL

10. The submitted Planning Proposal (dated 26 August 2020) seeks approval to amend Schedule 1 of the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 (PLEP 2011) to permit ‘take away food and drink premises’ as an additional permitted use (limited to a maximum gross floor area of 95.45m²). A copy of the Planning Proposal is included at Attachment 1. This planning proposal seeks to exceed the existing shop component of the building which is currently only 60m² but will still be entirely located within the existing building.

11. While the Planning Proposal seeks to limit the floor area of any ‘take away food and drink premises’ specifically to 95.45m², it is considered reasonable for the purposes of inclusion in the LEP clause for this amount to be rounded up to 100m².

PLANNING PROPOSAL ASSESSMENT

Local & Strategic Planning Context

12. The Planning Proposal has been prepared in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) and the NSW DPIE’s A Guide to Preparing Planning Proposals and considers the State and local planning strategies. It is also consistent with Council’s adopted Local Strategic Planning Statement and Parramatta 2038 Community Strategic Plan.

State Planning Policies

13. The Planning Proposal is generally consistent with the relevant state policies and planning strategies including the Central City District Plan, State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) and Ministerial Directions under Clause 9.1 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

14. The Central City District Plan (CCDP) covers the area that includes Blacktown, Cumberland, Parramatta and The Hills LGAs. The role of this Plan is to help deliver the ten directions of the overarching Greater Sydney Region Plan A Metropolis of Three Cities and contains a number of planning priorities and objectives that address infrastructure provision and collaboration, liveability, productivity and sustainability objectives. Whilst the CCDP makes many references to future development in Parramatta. This site is located outside the Parramatta CBD boundary. Nevertheless the Planning Proposal will contribute to some of the key objectives under infrastructure and collaboration, liveability, productivity and sustainability provisions, as it provides a mixed use including a local food business premise in a location that is close to the Parramatta CBD and surrounded by residential development. The existing food and drink premises is considered to be suited to local context and services the local community. Furthermore, the Planning Proposal will make a contribution to jobs and the local economy, and it is considered that the Planning Proposal is generally consistent with the broader Metropolitan and District planning framework.

15. Detailed assessment of the Planning Proposal against the State Policies and Ministerial Directions are detailed in Planning Proposal shown in Attachment 1.

Local Strategies

16. The City of Parramatta Council Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) sets out the long-term vision for land use planning within the City of Parramatta local government area (LGA) and responds to broader priorities identified in the District Plans and Council’s Community Strategic Plan. The LSPS provides greater weight to strategic planning in the broader plan making process and any new planning proposal must justify any inconsistency with this framework and the supporting Local Housing Strategy (LHS) and Employment Lands Strategy (ELS).

17. Council’s LSPS was published on 31 March 2020. The LSPS provides strategic direction for City of Parramatta over the next 20 years. The site is not in an area that is specifically identified for growth within the LSPS, however it falls within the strategic context of enabling the City of Parramatta’s economic and employment growth to increase retail and commercial floor space in the broader region. It is therefore considered that the Proposal is generally consistent with the LSPS, as it provides employment for the local area and supports the local economy (detailed in the Assessment of Key Issues below).

Parramatta 2038 Community Strategic Plan

18. The Community Strategic Plan outlines the community’s shared vision and aspirations for the future, and sets out strategies to achieve this vision. It has been developed based on the social justice principles of equity, access, participation and rights and informs all other Council plans and policies.

19. The planning proposal is considered to meet the key objectives relating to creation of vibrant neighbourhoods, and growing local jobs as it formalises the use of the site as a ‘food and drink premises’ close to public transport and in proximity to the local community it will serve. The proposal to retain the existing commercial premises will also assist in activating the street. Further, the location of the proposal is an easy walk from the northern end of Parramatta CBD and over the road from a church property and higher density housing units.

ASSESSMENT OF KEY ISSUES

20. The following section provides an analysis of the key issues associated with the Planning Proposal including traffic, economic and amenity impacts.

Traffic and Transport

21. The Planning Proposal and Traffic and Parking Analysis were referred to Council’s Development and Traffic Services section for comment and no objections were raised. Council officers are satisfied that the turn path plans demonstrate adequate vehicle accessibility to enter and exit the site in a forward direction.

22. Neither Parramatta DCP nor the RMS Guide to Generating Traffic Developments provide parking rates for take away food and drink premises. Based on Table 3.6.2.3 of the Parramatta DCP 2011, the off street parking rate for retail premises would be applicable in this instance and sets out a rate of 1 space per 30m² of GFA. Applying a parking rate for retail premises and considering the maximum floor area of 95.45m²(100m²), the development is required to provide a minimum of 4 (rounded up from 3.2) parking spaces. As a result, the proposed provision of 8 parking spaces is considered acceptable.

Economic

23. The Planning Proposal was referred to Council’s Economic Development section for comment who have not raised any objections from an economic development perspective.

24. The applicant has also included a petition of 98 signatures from the local community and surrounding suburbs in support of this proposal. The petition is noted, however should this proposal proceed to Gateway Determination a formal public consultation process will need to occur as part of the Planning Proposal process.

25. Given the long standing previous use of the site as a takeaway food and drink premise, there are established supply chains that are supported by the on-going operation of the business on this site.

26. It is considered that the current food and drink premises services nearby businesses, employees and residents in the local area. The use of this site as a takeaway food and drink premises provides employment for the local area, aligning with the aspirations for employment within the Parramatta LGA set by Council’s Economic Development Plan.

27. Council’s Economic Development team are not aware of any implications of the ongoing operation of this business that would hinder the economic development of nearby premises and given the small scale of the proposal, it is unlikely to have any adverse impacts on the Parramatta CBD and North Parramatta commercial precincts.

Amenity Impacts

28. Given the site is immediately adjoining an established residential area, it is important to ensure that the ‘takeaway food and drink premises’ use does not impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties.

29. As referred to above, there have previously been development consents issued for the food and drink premises on the site, and these development applications were subject to the requirements of the planning provisions in force at that time. Any development consent for a use of this nature contains conditions that mitigate potential impacts on adjoining properties.

30. It is noted that there has been a noise complaint made by a nearby resident regarding the operation of the food and drink premises on the site in 2019, however this matter has subsequently been addressed by Council’s Compliance Team. Should the Planning Proposal to include ‘takeaway food and drink premises’ proceed, a new development application will need to be lodged to formalise any such use on the site. As with the previous development applications assessed for this site, should a development consent for the use of part of the site as a ‘takeway food and drink premises’ be issued, it will be subject to a number of conditions in accordance with Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011. These conditions will address noise impacts to adjoining properties, hours of operation and the like that will ensure amenity impacts to adjoining properties are minimised. Should any further issues arise in relation to the operation of a ‘takeaway food and drink premises’ on the site and impacts on adjoining neighbours, compliance action can be undertaken by Council against the property owner.

31. Given this context, it is considered that any amenity impacts in relation to the proposed use can be fully addressed as part of the development application stage should the Planning Proposal be finalised.

RECOMMENDATION

32. The existing food and drink premises on the site has been a long-standing use and no changes are proposed to the existing building height or floor space ratio controls. The zoning remains unchanged as R3 Medium Density Residential.

33. The Proposal to allow ‘take away food and drink premises’ on the site (limited to 100m²) is considered reasonable to facilitate the ongoing operation of a local business premises that serves the local area while not detracting from the uses within the Parramatta CBD.

34. It is therefore recommended that the Planning Proposal be submitted to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) requesting that ‘take away food and drink premises’ up to a maximum of 100m²of the floor area be permitted on the site as an additional permitted use. It is noted that this is slightly greater than the 95.45m² requested by the applicant however this area increase is minor and provides additional flexibility for operations into the future. This area will still be able to be accommodated within the existing building.

PLAN MAKING DELEGATIONS

35. New delegations were announced by the then Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in October 2012, allowing councils to make LEPs of local significance. On 26 November 2012, Council resolved to accept the delegation for plan-making functions. Council has resolved that these functions be delegated to the CEO.

36. Should Council resolve to endorse the Planning Proposal to proceed, it is recommended that Council request that it exercise its plan-making delegations. This means that once the Planning Proposal has been to Gateway, undergone public exhibition and been adopted by Council, Council officers will deal directly with the Parliamentary Counsel Office on the legal drafting and mapping of the amendment. The LEP amendment is then signed by the CEO before being notified on the NSW Legislation website.

PLANNING AGREEMENT

37. The proponent has not provided a letter of offer to enter into a planning agreement associated with the Planning Proposal. Given the Planning Proposal is not seeking changes to planning provisions that would significantly alter a use that had previously been approved on the site (despite the fact that existing use rights have been extinguished), it is considered that a planning agreement is not necessary in this instance due to the minor nature of the proposal.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

38. Should Council resolve to proceed with the Planning Proposal, the financial implications for Council include costs associated with the exhibition process, which include advertising and landowner notification by mail out. These costs are funded from the City Planning and Design budget.

CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS

39. The Planning Proposal will be reported to the next available Council meeting and the recommendation of the Local Planning Panel will be included as part of this report.

40. Subject to Council resolving to proceed with the Planning Proposal, the Planning Proposal will be forwarded to the DPIE for Gateway determination.

41. Following receipt of a Gateway Determination, the Planning Proposal will be placed on public exhibition and the outcomes of the exhibition will be reported to the Local Planning Panel if any objections are received. If no objections are received, the matter will be reported directly to Council post-exhibition.

Jane Liang

Project Officer Land Use

Robert Cologna

Land Use Planning Manager

David Birds

Acting Executive Director, City Planning & Design

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Planning Proposal for 64 Victoria Road, North Parramatta	98 Pages
2 ⇩	Statement of Environmental Effects	34 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Local Planning Panel 16 February 2021 Item 6.2

INNOVATIVE

ITEM NUMBER 6.2

SUBJECT PUBLIC MEETING: Post Exhibition - Planning Proposal, Planning Agreement and Development Control Plan for 197 and 207 Church St and 89 Marsden St, Parramatta

REFERENCE RZ/4/2015 -

APPLICANT/S DFP Consultants

OWNERS Holdmark Properties Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Project Officer Land Use

Development applications considered by Sydney central city planning panel Nil

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to seek the Local Planning Panel’s advice to Council on the outcomes of the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, draft Development Control Plan and draft Planning Agreement for land at 197 and 207 Church Street and 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Local Planning recommend to Council:

(a) That Council receives and notes the submissions made during the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal, draft Development Control Plan (DCP) and draft Planning Agreement at 197 and 207 Church Street and 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta (a summary of submissions is provided at Attachment 1).

(b) That (subject to the clarification outlined in this report relating to removing any references to existing PLEP 2011 Clause 7.14) Council endorse for finalisation the Planning Proposal for land at 197 and 207 Church Street and 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta (provided at Attachment 2) which seeks to amend Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 as follows:

· Apply an FSR of 10:1;

· Apply a height of part 105m part 12m;

· Include provisions that require a minimum 1:1 commercial floor space be provided in any redevelopment and allow for unlimited commercial floor space to be provided;

· apply the full range of car parking rates specified in the current draft Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

(c) That Council submit the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) for finalisation once the Planning Agreement has been executed by the Applicant and Council.

(d) That Council finalise the DCP (Attachment 3) with the following amendments:

(i) removal of controls relating to vehicular access (refer to part (e) of this resolution below for further detail);

(ii) ensuring servicing, loading and set down/pick up activities take place

on site;

(iii) strengthening archaeology controls;

(iv) resolving inconsistencies in the exhibited DCP relating to basement retail use and parking due to flood considerations;

(v) protection of awning on Murray Bros building.

(e) That, with regards to d(i) above, Council’s current policy position on this matter

is to support vehicle access arrangements whereby vehicles enter from Macquarie St and exit onto Marsden St, noting the following:

(i) This position should form the basis of assessment of this matter for

any Design Competition or Development Application at this site.

(ii) The matter of vehicle access at this site will be re-exhibited as part of

the draft Parramatta CBD DCP, or a Development Application at this site, whichever comes first.

(f) That Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to finalise the draft Planning Agreement at Attachment 4, and to sign the Planning Agreement on Council’s behalf.

(g) That Council officers write to DPIE to advise them of Council’s resolution on this matter and to request that DPIE considers commencing finalisation processes (such as legal drafting and map-making) prior to the formal submission of the Planning Proposal referred to in (c) above. (Note: The reason for making this request is to expedite plan-making processes.)

(h) Further, that Council delegate authority to the Chief Executive Officer to make any minor amendments and corrections of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the plan amendment process, relating to the Planning Proposal, Development Control Plan and Planning Agreement.

PLANNING PROPOSAL TIMELINE

PP diagram

SITE DESCRIPTION

1. The site is on the north-western corner of Church and Macquarie Streets, Parramatta. This is a prominent location within the Parramatta City Centre as it is directly north of Centenary Square and Parramatta Square. The subject site consists of two lots (Lot 1 DP 710335 and Lot 1 DP 233150) with a total site area of 4,307.4m². It is an irregular “L” shape, with frontages to Church Street to the east, Macquarie Street to the south, and Marsden Street to the west. (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Site Location

SUMMARISED HISTORY AND CURRENT STATUS OF PLANNING PROPOSAL

2. In December 2015, Council endorsed a Planning Proposal for land at 197 and 207 Church Street and 89 Marsden Street for Gateway determination.

3. In July 2017, the then-Department of Planning and Environment issued a Gateway determination for the Planning Proposal requiring substantial amendments to the Planning Proposal as endorsed by Council.

4. In mid-2019, the Applicant submitted a revised Planning Proposal that was largely consistent with the original (July 2017) Gateway determination.

5. In May 2020, Council endorsed the revised Planning Proposal for exhibition, and also resolved to request amendments to the original Gateway determination to facilitate progression of the revised Planning Proposal.

6. Following this resolution Council officers engaged with the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) seeking a Gateway determination consistent with the May 2020 resolution of Council. However, the Department of Planning were concerned about the length of time since the Gateway had been issued. DPIE raised concerns about the processing time for this application and the proposed timeframe for finalisation, and after further discussion with Council, issued a revised Gateway Determination in October 2020. The revised Gateway Determination has a new reference number and is effectively a new separate Planning Proposal, but is consistent with the decisions Council has previously made to amend the planning controls that apply to this site.

7. The Planning Proposal endorsed by Council in May 2020 and allowed to proceed by the “new” Gateway determination of October 2020 was then the subject of this public exhibition (along with the related site-specific Development Control Plan, draft Planning Agreement, and relevant supporting documentation).

COMPARISON OF PLANNING CONTROLS: EXISTING, PARRAMATTA CBD PLANNING PROPOSAL AND SITE-SPECIFIC PLANNING PROPOSAL

8. Table 1 outlines the planning controls for the site under (1) existing Parramatta LEP 2011, (2) the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal and (3) the site-specific Planning Proposal, and demonstrates that this site-specific Planning Proposal is generally compliant with the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

Table 1: Planning Proposal comparison to Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal

Scenario	Current Controls	Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal Controls	Recommended Site-specific Planning Proposal controls
Land-Use	B4 Mixed Use	B4 Mixed Use	B4 Mixed Use
FSR	Part 3:1 Part 4:1	Base: Part 3:1 and Part 4:1 Incentive: 10:1 (11.5 with bonus)	10:1 (11.5:1 with design excellence bonus). (Plus additional commercial floor space – see below)
HOB	18m (6 storeys) Compliance with Sun Access Protection Provision for Parramatta Square	Base: Part 36m (12 storeys) and part 12m (4 storeys) Incentive: Requirement to comply with Sun Access Protection provision for Parramatta Square and 12m for Church Street frontage.	Part 105m (32 storeys) and part 12m for Church Street frontage (4 storeys) [105m being compliant with Sun Access requirements] Compliance with Sun Access Protection provision.
Land Acquisition	Nil	In the land reservation acquisition map the Marsden Street frontage of the site is subject to the requirement for provision of a regional cycleway.	A draft Planning Agreement has been negotiated to secure a 2m right of public access over the 2m ground floor setback area in order to ensure a satisfactory publically available footpath along Marsden Street.
Minimum Commercial Floor Space	Nil	Minimum 1:1 commercial floor space required in mixed use development Unlimited commercial floor space permitted as long as site area of 1,800 m2 achieved	Insert clause that will require minimum commercial floor space 1:1 and unlimited commercial floor space on this site (given the site area is greater than 1,800m2) consistent with CBD PP This will give the applicant the opportunity to apply for a total FSR of 11.8:1 (in the case that a non-residential option utilises the unlimited commercial floorspace provision) subject to meeting other Council requirements.
Active Street Frontages	N/A	Site identified on Active Frontage Map proposed for CBD PP	The site-specific DCP requires active frontages on Church, Macquarie and Marsden Streets
High performing buildings (residential)	N/A	5% high performing building bonus, potentially allowing up to 12:1 FSR total.	This Planning Proposal does not pursue the high performing building bonus provisions of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal. Solar access and Apartment Design Guide requirements mean this site would be unlikely to achieve an FSR beyond 11.5:1 if it elected to use a residential development option.
High Performing buildings (commercial)		Office premises with a gross floor area (GFA) greater than 10,000m² are required to meet certain standards regarding energy and water targets. Dual piping to allow capacity for future use of recycled water.	This requirement of the CBD PP can be progressed through a design competition brief to achieve Design Excellence and will be further considered at DA stage. The reason why the requirement has not been included in the subject Planning Proposal is due to the age of the Planning Proposal and transitional issues associated with the evolving policy of the Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal progressing alongside numerous site-specific Planning Proposals.
Parking	Parking Rates	Endorsed Parking Rates consistent with City of Sydney CBD Parking rates - Category A. These are subject to future review when more detailed parking and traffic studies can determine if these rates should be amended.	Insert clause setting site specific parking rates as per Council’s resolution on CBD Planning Proposal and Gateway Determination condition. Refer to further commentary in this report on clarifying the rates that will apply.
Solar Access	Clause 7.4 seeks to protect Parramatta Square from overshadowing	Clauses proposed to retain protection to portion of Parramatta Square between 12 noon and 2pm measured on 21 June.	The nominated height (part 105m and part 12m) for this site has been demonstrated through urban design analysis to be compliant with the outcomes sought in the Parramatta CBD. However, clause 7.4 in the existing LEP and the clause proposed in the CBD PP will continue to apply to this site to ensure development of this site cannot overshadow Parramatta Square at the designated time of the year.

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN AND PLANNING AGREEMENT

9. On 11 May 2020, Council endorsed the draft Development Control Plan (DCP) for exhibition. The exhibited draft DCP (Attachment 3) covers matters including building form, public domain, traffic and transport, heritage and flood management.

10. On 11 May 2020 Council also resolved to give delegated authority to the CEO to negotiate and endorse for exhibition a draft planning agreement that takes into consideration the applicant's letter of offer and a particular negotiating position.

11. The exhibited draft Planning Agreement (Attachment 4) makes provision to secure a 2-metre right of public access over the ground floor setback along Marsden Street.

12. The exhibited draft Planning Agreement also makes provision for a monetary contribution to be used towards public domain improvement works within the Parramatta Central Business District, in the event that the land is developed for residential purposes (in line with Council’s policy framework on Community Infrastructure in the Parramatta CBD). Table 2 provides Council officers’ best estimate of a contribution that could be achieved under the current proposed controls if residential development was to occur on the site. There is no reference design available for residential development of this site that does not overshadow Parramatta Square, so the following floor space estimates are based on theoretical modelling undertaken by Council Officers. The FSR proposed by the Applicant can only be achieved for commercial development; once the requirements of SEPP 65 are factored into a hypothetical residential development, the maximum FSR achievable reduces to approximately 8.2:1.

Table 2: Estimated contribution under Parramatta CBD Community Infrastructure framework if site is developed for residential purposes

Development parameters
Site Area	4:1 part of site = 3,331.8 m² 3:1 Part of Site = 975.6 m² Total = 4,307.4 m²
Base FSR	Part 4:1 and Part 3:1
Base Gross Floor Area	4:1 Part of the site = 4 x 3,331.8 = 13,327 m² 3:1 Part of the site = 3 x 975.6 m² = 2,926.8 m²
Estimate FSR Achievable under Residential Scheme	8.2:1 across whole site⁽¹⁾ 4:1 Part of the site = 3,331.88.2 = 27,320.8m² 3:1 Part of the site = 975.68.2 = 7,999.9m²
Phase 1 calculation
Uplift in gross floor area	4:1 Part of Site - (27,320.8m² – 13,327m²)= 13,993.8m² 3:1 Part of Site - (7,999.9m² – 2,926.8m²)= 5,073.1m² Total Uplift = 13,993.8m² + 5,073.1m² = 19,066.9m²
Community infrastructure payment required at $150 /m²	(19,066.9m² x $150) = $2,860,035

(1) Estimate of Council Officers of Maximum FSR achievable to comply with SEPP 65 Design Guidelines and Solar Access Controls

PUBLIC EXHIBITION

13. The Planning Proposal, draft DCP and draft Planning Agreement were publicly exhibited from 16 November 2020 to 16 December 2020, alongside supporting appendices and documents including:

a. Site-specific clause

b. Urban Design Report and Supplementary Urban Design Report*

c. Heritage Impact Statement and Supplementary Heritage Statement*

d. Traffic Assessment and Traffic Study explanatory note*

e. Flood Impact Statement

f. Site survey

g. Explanatory Statement – DCP Inconsistencies

h. Explanatory Note – Draft Planning Agreement

i. Gateway advice and Determinations, including current Determination of 23 October 2020 and documents relating to previous Determination

j. Council minutes and reports for meetings on 7 December 2015, 26 February 2018 and 11 May 2020.

*The reason for supplementary/explanatory information being attached to the original reports as part of the exhibition was to help explain to the community / agencies the context that this Planning Proposal has changed significantly since the original reports were produced.

14. The public exhibition included:

a. Letters to neighbouring landowners and occupiers, as well as nearby landowners and occupiers anticipated to be impacted by overshadowing

b. Letters to Transport for NSW, Heritage NSW, Department of Planning Industry and Environment (Environment, Energy and Science Group), State Emergency Service, Sydney Metro West, Sydney Water, Endeavour Energy, Telstra and NSW Aboriginal Land Council (as required by the Gateway determination)

c. Exhibition materials placed on Council’s website and in hard copy at Council’s Customer Contact Centre at 126 Church Street, Parramatta.

15. The public exhibition activities described above responded to the following considerations:

a. The COVID-19 Legislation Amendment (Emergency Measures) Act 2020 enacted on 14 May 2020 removed the requirement for hard copies of exhibition material to be made available during public exhibitions and removed the need to advertise public exhibitions of DCPs and Planning Agreements in a local newspaper.

b. Council officers have received written advice from DPIE officers confirming that advertisement of Planning Proposals in newspapers is not a requirement of DPIE’s during this time, as hard-copy local paper publishing has effectively ceased.

c. Community members could request alternative access to the exhibition material if required. However, Council officers did not receive any calls from the public requesting to access hard copy material.

16. Five submissions were received during the public exhibition period: four from public agencies and one from Council's Heritage Advisory Committee. A summary of submissions and Council officer responses is provided at Attachment 1. The submissions and response are discussed further in the following sections of this report.

PUBLIC AGENCY SUBMISSIONS SUMMARY AND RESPONSE

17. Four submissions were received from public agencies as follows:

a. Heritage NSW

b. Transport for NSW (TfNSW)

c. Endeavour Energy

d. Sydney Water

18. A general summary and response to the public agency submissions is as follows:

a. The content of the public agency submissions was generally consistent with that received through other exhibition processes for site-specific Planning Proposals in the Parramatta CBD.

b. Council officers do not consider that any of the public agency submissions constitute an unresolved agency objection, nor should they prevent this Planning Proposal from proceeding to finalisation.

c. Council officers consider that many of the matters raised across the public agency submissions are more relevant to the Development Application (DA) stage.

19. Key issues raised during agency consultation together with Council officer response are outlined in Table 3 below (noting that all issues raised in these submissions are addressed in detail in Attachment 1):

Table 3: Key Agency Issues and Council officer response

Agency Issues	Council officer response
Heritage NSW
Requests consultation with the Heritage Division of the Federal Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE) because of potential visual impacts on Old Government House and Domain (OGHD),	Council consulted with the Federal Heritage Division of DAWE in response to this request from Heritage NSW. A summary of DAWE’s response is as follows: · The site is in an area where development may have some impact, but not a significant impact on the heritage values of OGHD. · The relevant OGHD Technical Report states that any development proposal will need to take into account current or approved developments in relation to spacing between buildings to retain a sense of openness and sky between buildings, to respect the OGHD setting. · A self-assessment should be undertaken to determine whether impacts will be significant, and should consider all adverse impacts. This assessment would usually occur during DA stage, with referrals to DAWE if needed. DAWE’s response has been forwarded to the Applicant for their information and action as appropriate. Council officers consider that the matters therein can be addressed at DA stage. Council officers note that Council, State and Federal Governments have a tripartite agreement relating to OGHD. This site is outside the OGHD ‘highly sensitive area’, but is within the ‘sensitive area’. Nothing in DAWE’s comments suggests they require a referral at DA stage, but instead DAWE advises that the appropriate course of action is to undertake the self-assessment referred to in the comments above. Council officers consider it likely that the outcome of a self-assessment referred to in DAWE’s comments would be that impacts are not significant (as already suggested in DAWE’s comments above), and therefore a referral would not be made at DA stage; however, as noted above, DAWE’s comments do not appear to require a referral.
Request that the archaeological controls of the draft DCP should be revised to reflect the potential state significance of the archaeology on the site, require a full archaeological assessment to be undertaken and prioritise conservation of State significant archaeological resources. Suggests the insertion of a new objective and associated control.	It is considered that the proposed revisions to the DCP will strengthen protection of archaeology of potential State significance and are supported. Nevertheless, revisions should also still recognise the importance of protection of archaeology of local significance. It is therefore recommended that the following amendments be made to the DCP: 1. That the current objective under bullet point 5 that states: Opportunities to salvage archaeological items unearthed during demolition works are to be considered. be replaced with: Opportunities to conserve local and State significant archaeological items to be considered. 2. That control C2 that states: If archaeological items are found during demolition and excavation, in the first instance, opportunities to salvage and reuse the items are to be incorporated. Where this is not practical or possible, an interpretation strategy is to be prepared. be replaced with: An archaeological assessment will be prepared for the site and the recommendations of the assessment incorporated into the detailed design. This includes the conservation of local and State significant archaeology. Where this is not possible or practical, excavation, salvage, reuse and/or interpretation of the archaeology in accordance with an approved archaeological research design and excavation methodology is to occur.
Transport for NSW
Advises that the proposed basement parking access on Macquarie Street as identified in the draft DCP is not supported. A vehicle egress at this location would direct vehicles into the light rail corridor and Sydney Metro Precinct and would impact pedestrian safety and reduce amenity within the Sydney Metro Precinct and create isolated delays across the Macquarie Street/Church Street intersection, impacting light rail journey time. Requests that the DCP be amended to require basement parking egress to be provided on Marsden Street, with the option of providing the corresponding ingress separately on Macquarie Street or alternatively combined on Marsden Street.	Council officers consider that the option of entry from Macquarie Street and exit onto Marsden Street is acceptable. Consequently, it is recommended that the following amendments be made to the DCP. Control C1 regarding vehicle access be amended to state: Ingress to the basement parking to be provided from Macquarie Street, immediately adjacent to the western boundary of the site and egress to be provided onto Marsden Street adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. Figure 4: site Reference Development Footprint Site Plan in the DCP should also be amended to reflect these access changes.
Consideration should be given to having a shared driveway/basement with the neighbouring site of 20 Macquarie St	It may be difficult to realise a shared basement given different ownership and construction schedules. However, the amendments recommended above (wherein the entry/exit points for vehicles are adjacent to the neighbouring site) leave open the possibility of negotiating a shared driveway at DA stage.
Requests that the proposed development should provide all loading and servicing parking, vehicle set down/pickup for within the subject site. Suggests the insertion of an appropriate control in the DCP.	Council officers consider the suggested amendment to the draft DCP acceptable. Therefore, it is recommended that the control sought by Transport for NSW should be included as C4 under the heading Traffic and Transport Objectives and Controls. “All loading and servicing parking, vehicle set down/pick up for point to point transport and bus/coach and bus/coach layover parking of adequate capacity to accommodate the demand of the development, is to be located within the site and in accordance with the RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments.”
Council should consider whether there is a need for a left-turn slip lane from Marsden St into Macquarie St.	This issue has been referred to Council’s traffic section for consideration. Council is currently planning for various road widenings and improvements as part of the infrastructure planning for the Parramatta CBD PP. The draft Land Reservation Acquisition map which is part of the Parramatta CBD PP does not identify this as a need at this point in time.
Some concern is raised about a future development at this site in proximity to Sydney Metro West running tunnels. The Applicant is requested to engage as soon as possible (and prior to lodgement of a DA) with TfNSW’s Sydney Metro West team about potential impacts of the basement on the Metro project at this location. Information about what a future DA should address in this regard is also included.	TfNSW is requesting a conversation with the Applicant as soon as possible, and prior to DA stage. Council officers note that a development on this site excavating at least 2m would also trigger a DA referral to Sydney Metro under the terms of the relevant Infrastructure SEPP. TfNSW’s submission has been sent to the Applicant for their action. Council Design Excellence and Development Assessment teams have also been alerted to this issue with regards to future applications.
TfNSW is happy to have further discussions about contributions to state/regional infrastructure	Council officers note that the NSW State Government is yet to implement the State Infrastructure Contribution (SIC) requirement that has been flagged for many years. Requests from State Government agencies in this area have been inconsistent over the past years. The Gateway determination for this site did not ultimately require a satisfactory arrangements clause. Council officers consider this is an issue for DPIE to resolve as the agency advice being provided here does not appear to be consistent with DPIE’s position on this matter.
Endeavour Energy
Raised the issue that a replacement/upgraded indoor substation as well as possibly an additional switching room to house a switching hub might be required onsite.	The Applicant has been notified of this issue, and this issue will be further examined through the Design Competition and Development Assessment stages.
Sydney Water
Sydney Water provided comments to assist in planning for the servicing needs of the proposal.	These comments are noted, and the Applicant has been forwarded a copy of the submission.
Sydney Water raised issue of investigating dual-piping controls	Dual piping controls were not included with this Planning Proposal; this is due to its age and transitional issues associated with the evolving Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal progressing alongside numerous site-specific Planning Proposal processes. The issue of dual piping could potentially be progressed through the design competition and DA stages.

20. Aside from the DCP changes outlined above relating to archaeology and traffic, no other changes are recommended to the Planning Proposal, DCP or Planning Agreement as a result of the public agency submissions.

SUBMISSION FROM COUNCIL'S HERITAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

21. Council's Heritage Advisory Committee was briefed on this matter at the Committee’s meeting of 26 November 2020. The Committee commented in response recommending a 15m tower setback from Church Street to open up the vista to and from Centenary Square and St John’s Cathedral and the Church Street heritage streetscape.

22. Council officers note the Committee's recommendation, but do not support any amendments to the exhibited documents. Council officers consider that a 12m setback along Church St (as exhibited) represents the conclusion of extensive policy work that has examined many issues including those highlighted by the Committee. To summarise, this policy has evolved overtime as follows:

a. The Gateway determination for the CBD Planning Proposal of 13 December 2018 sought a podium setback of 18m along Church Street unless a heritage, urban design and commercial feasibility study could justify a lesser setback.

b. The Urban Design and Commercial Feasibility analysis subsequently undertaken by Council officers concluded that a 12m upper-level (tower) setback control to Church Street will support a viable floor plate within a residential podium and tower typology.

c. City Plan Heritage consultants concluded that the findings of the above urban design and feasibility study justified the reduction of the podium setbacks from 18m and 12m, as the number of sites that would be able to achieve a feasible development under 18m is limited and a 12m setback would provide a consistent approach along the precinct. Hence the adverse impact on the overall heritage characteristics of a low-scale unique historic streetscape could be managed. The consultant's support for a reduced setback was conditional on the implementation and reinforcement of a number of heritage recommendations.

d. A draft DCP for the Parramatta CBD is currently being prepared that will draw on recommendations from City Plan Heritage consultants.

23. Considering the extensive examination of these issues and the conclusion reached that a 12m setback can appropriately balance issues of development feasibility and public domain/heritage impacts, Council officers do not consider it necessary to re-evaluate this policy conclusion as a result of the Committee’s recommendation.

24. Council officers do not consider that any changes are required to the Planning Proposal, DCP or Planning Agreement as a result of the submission received from Council's Heritage Advisory Committee.

OTHER POLICY MATTERS FOR RESOLUTION

25. As well as the submissions received and discussed above, Council officers consider it prudent to address a number of other matters relating to this Planning Proposal and associated documents as part of this report recommending finalisation. These are dealt with in turn below, followed by a concluding statement summarising recommended amendments.

Clarification of parking policy intent

26. Council’s resolution of 11 May 2020 on the subject Planning Proposal was very clear about the policy intent in relation to parking, i.e. that the Planning Proposal should “apply the full range of car parking rates specified in the current draft Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal”.

27. The draft site-specific clause exhibited with the Planning Proposal also makes reference to the full range of car parking rates specified within the current draft Parramatta CBD Planning Proposal.

28. However, the explanation of provisions in the exhibited Planning Proposal makes reference to adding this site to existing Clause 7.14, which deals with maximum parking rates and only includes the residential and commercial parking rates (which Council historically used in site-specific Planning Proposals prior to generally applying the full range of rates).

29. Council officers consider that any references in the Planning Proposal to existing Clause 7.14 should be removed prior to final submission of the Planning Proposal. Making these clarifications would make sure that Council's policy intent (referred to in paragraph 28) is clear for subsequent legal drafting.

30. Council officers do not consider that this clarification requires re-exhibition of the Planning Proposal, as the exhibited draft site-specific clause as well as Council’s resolution (which was also included in the exhibition) on this matter both clearly identify the full range of car parking rates as the preferred drafting approach for this Planning Proposal.

DCP issues identified by Council officers relating to basement

31. Council officers noted two inconsistencies in the DCP between the time the content of the DCP was endorsed by Council on 11 May 2020 and the exhibition period of 16 November 2020 to 16 December 2020.

32. These inconsistencies relate to the relationship between the general wording in the Built Form section of the DCP and some specific controls regarding the provision of basement retail space and car parking located in the Flood Management section of the DCP. These are detailed in the below table:

Table 4: Inconsistencies in DCP regarding basement retail space/car parking

General wording under ‘Built Form Objectives and Controls’	Controls within ‘Flood Management Objectives and Controls’
Retail floorspace will be provided on the ground floor of the podium as well as within a lower ground/basement level, which has been designed to accommodate a small format supermarket. Site servicing (loading/unloading, waste collection) will also occur on basement level 1. [emphasis added]	C.2 Permanent and temporary commercial or retail floor space or uses are not permitted below the Flood Planning Level. [emphasis added]
Car parking will be located within basement levels accessed from Macquarie Street. [emphasis added]	C.5 Basement car parking is discouraged but may be permitted subject to satisfying the requirements set out below.

33. A note on these inconsistencies as detailed above was included in the exhibition material. This note included a statement that these issues would be addressed and any inconsistencies resolved after the public exhibition period.

34. Council officers consider that it is not appropriate to provide retail basement space at this site due to flood management issues. However, Council officers consider that basement car parking may be allowed subject to satisfying certain flood management requirements provided in the DCP.

35. Consequently, in order to resolve the identified inconsistencies it is recommended that the above Built Form Objectives and Controls be amended as follows:

a. “Retail floorspace will be provided on the ground floor of the podium. Site servicing (loading/unloading, waste collection) will occur on basement level 1.”

b. “Car parking, subject to satisfying requirements for flood management, will be located within basement levels accessed from Macquarie Street with egress onto Marsden Street.”

Setback issues in comparison to adjacent site at 20 Macquarie St

36. The adjacent site at 20 Macquarie St, Parramatta was subject to an exhibition of materials (DCP and Planning Agreement) at roughly the same time as the exhibition for 197 Church St that is detailed in this report.

37. The 197 Church St Applicant lodged a submission to the exhibition at the adjacent site, requesting:

a. Assurances that development potential at 197 Church St would not be affected by potential changes in development options at 20 Macquarie St., and

b. An amendment to the Macquarie St tower setback in the 197 Church St DCP (i.e. to change this setback from 6m to 3m, which would make it the same as the Macquarie St tower setback at 20 Macquarie St).

38. As issue “a” above concerns how development at 20 Macquarie St might impact other sites, the parts of the submission dealing with that issue will be addressed in the report about 20 Macquarie St (scheduled for consideration at a future Council meeting in February or March 2021). However, issue “b” above deals directly with a potential amendment to the DCP for 197 Church St; therefore, that part of the submission is dealt with in this report.

39. Council officers acknowledge that the draft DCPs for these two sites nominate different tower setbacks to Macquarie St. 20 Macquarie St has a setback of 3m and 197 Church St has a setback of 6m. This is illustrated in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Illustration of setback controls (Note particularly the tower setbacks along Macquarie St, which are 6m at subject site and 3m at neighbouring site of 20 Macquarie St)

40. Generally speaking, officers support 6m tower setbacks from streets in most contexts throughout the CBD. This is the general requirement of the current Parramatta DCP 2011, as well as the position emerging through work on the new draft Parramatta CBD DCP, and any concessions/variations to this should have strong justification. Key reasons for this position are:

a. To define an appropriately-scaled legible and distinct urban room reinforcing the Georgian street grid of Parramatta.

b. To ensure that the street wall is dominant in views along the street.

c. To ensure that the street wall clearly defines and proportions the street relative to the size of people.

d. To provide maximum visual ‘cut off’ of the towers from the street.

e. To minimise the impact of overshadowing on the street.

f. To maximise the distance across the street between the towers so that internal amenity is optimised.

g. To ensure that the proportion of buildings to streets is not overwhelming. The streets in Parramatta are 20m wide. This is very narrow for the heights of the buildings proposed.

h. To improve the amenity on the street by minimising wind downdraft as well as increasing daylight on the street.

41. The purpose of the setback concession to 3m at 20 Macquarie St was not to create a precedent for other sites in the Parramatta CBD. The concession was arrived at after careful site-specific consideration, particularly:

a. Council’s policy position for the 20 Macquarie St site, which is to waive the FSR sliding-scale in the event that a hotel is developed on this site; this was to support a viable hotel floorplate of 750 sqm.

b. A limit on the building height to protect solar access to Parramatta Square.

c. A proposed 2 metre road widening reservation on Marsden Street.

d. Relatively small site size (approximately 1,286 sqm).

42. Council officers acknowledge that the solar access/height and road widening constraints are also present at the 197 Church Street site. However, 197 Church St is more than three times larger than the Macquarie St site (approximately 4,307 sqm), and also does not have the same policy consideration of waiving the FSR sliding-scale as at 20 Macquarie St. Therefore, Council officers consider that there is adequate space within the exhibited DCP controls for the 197 Church St site to accommodate a viable development option without requiring the same concession as at 20 Macquarie St.

43. Furthermore, Council officers also note that the DCP controls envisage that 197 Church St’s Macquarie St podium will consist of the Heritage facade of the Murray Bros building. Providing a setback concession here would bring the tower closer to that podium/façade, introducing increased impacts on its legibility. This consideration is not present at the 20 Macquarie St, which does not utilise a Heritage façade as its podium.

44. Based on the above analysis, Council officers do not recommend any amendments to the 197 Church St DCP controls insofar as they pertain to the Macquarie St tower setback.

Murray Bros Building Awning

45. The addendum heritage report exhibited with the updated Planning Proposal recommends retention of the awning above the ground level of the Macquarie and Church Street façades as it is of high significance. Council officers agree that the awning is an integral part of the heritage façade of the building and should be retained.

46. Therefore, it is recommended that the objective under the first bullet point of Heritage Objectives and Controls of the DCP that states:

“The façade of the Murray Bros building along Church Street and Macquarie Street is to be retained.”

be amended to read:

“The façade, including the awning, of the Murray Bros building along Church Street and Macquarie Street is to be retained.”

Conclusion – consideration of other matters

47. To summarise, the following amendments are recommended following consideration of the other matters outlined above:

a. the Planning Proposal should be clarified prior to submission for finalisation to remove any references to existing PLEP 2011 Clause 7.14 and ensure the policy intent to include the full range of parking rates under the CBD PP is clear;

b. the draft DCP should be amended with regards to basement retail use and parking due to flood considerations; and

c. the draft DCP should be amended to ensure protection of the awning of the Murray Brothers Building.

RE-EXHIBITION OF THE DRAFT DCP

48. This report has recommended that amendments should be made to the DCP relating to the following issues:

a. Vehicle access arrangements

b. Ensuring servicing, loading and set down/pick up activities take place on site

c. Strengthening archaeology controls

d. Basement retail use/parking due to flood considerations

e. Protection of awning on Murray Bros building.

49. Council officers have analysed these amendments with regards to the need to re-exhibit the DCP.

Table 5: Analysis of whether re-exhibition of the DCP is required

Amendments	Council officer response regarding the need for re-exhibition
Vehicle access arrangements	Amendments to the vehicle access arrangements are recommended in direct response to a State agency submission. These amendments relate to changing the vehicle access from Macquarie St only, to an “entry on Macquarie / exit on Marsden” solution. It is considered that this changes impacts on the local road network, as well as potential visual impacts to neighbours. When considered as an individual issue, Council officers consider that this amendment may impact on adjoining owners and those across the street in terms of traffic safety and pedestrian safety issues. Ideally these amendments to the access arrangements would be tested by re-exhibiting the DCP controls proposed to be amended.
Ensuring servicing, loading and set down/pick up activities take place on site	This amendment is recommended in direct response to a State agency submission. It does not generate additional impacts on public infrastructure, but in fact may have the effect of generating less impact on public infrastructure. When considered as an individual issue, Council officers consider that this amendment would not require re-exhibition.
Strengthening archaeology controls	Minor amendments strengthening archaeological considerations are recommended in direct response to a State agency submission. When considered as an individual issue, Council officers consider that these amendments would not require re-exhibition.
Basement retail use / parking due to flood considerations	These amendments are not in response to a submission, but are in response to inconsistencies noted by Council officers between Council’s resolution to exhibit the DCP and the commencement of exhibition. An explanatory statement noting that these issues would need to be resolved post-exhibition was included in the exhibition, so the community and agencies were given a clear opportunity to respond on how these issues might be resolved. When considered as an individual issue, this amendment is not considered to require re-exhibition.
Protection of awning on Murray Bros building	Given that the Applicant's exhibited addendum Heritage report makes this recommendation, and the exhibited DCP also contains general controls relating to the retention of façade & exploration of other opportunities for retention of other fabric, it is considered that this would be a strengthening/clarification of material already exhibited. When considered as an individual issue, Council officers consider that this amendment would not require re-exhibition.

50. The conclusion of the above table is that only the first of these issues – changing the vehicle access arrangements – should require re-exhibition.

51. Council officers have identified two options for re-exhibition of this issue:

a. Re-exhibit the entire site-specific DCP for 197 Church St

b. Remove controls relating to vehicle access arrangements from the site, and finalise the remainder of the site-specific DCP for 197 Church St. A note would be included in the DCP to say that the access arrangements are still to be determined and that Council’s preferred option (ie one way entry from Macquarie Street and one way exit from Marsden Street) will be exhibited as part of the forthcoming Parramatta CBD DCP. The recommendation of this report includes a statement that these access arrangements are the Council-preferred position for the inclusion in the draft Parramatta CBD DCP and as the basis for the assessment of any Design Competition brief or Development Application that may be pursued ahead of the Parramatta CBD DCP being finalised.

52. Option “a” above is considered less optimal, as the remainder of the DCP (as amended per the other recommendations above) should be finalised promptly to allow a potential development project at this site to proceed.

53. Option “b” allows the remainder of the DCP to be finalised, and for the project to proceed towards Development Application stage. The community and relevant agencies would have the opportunity to comment on the vehicle access arrangements again either at DA stage, or as part of the broader Parramatta CBD DCP (if that DCP is exhibited earlier than a DA for the site).

54. Based on the above analysis, Council officers consider option “b” preferable, and the recommendation of this report supports this.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

55. This report details the consultation undertaken with the community and agencies in relation to this matter.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

56. The exhibited draft Planning Agreement makes provision for a monetary contribution for a possible estimated amount of $2,860,035 to be used towards public domain improvement works within the Parramatta Central Business District (in the event that the land is developed for residential purposes). It also seeks to secure a 2-metre right of public access over the ground floor setback along Marsden Street. The draft Planning Agreement is consistent with Council’s framework for Community Infrastructure in the Parramatta CBD and no amendments to the Planning Agreement are recommended post-exhibition.

Paul Kennedy

Project Officer Land Use

Robert Cologna

Acting Group Manager City Planning

David Birds

Acting Executive Director, City Planning & Design

Attachments:

1 ⇩	Submission Table	10 Pages
2 ⇩	Planning Proposal for 197 & 207 Church Street and 89 Marsden Street, Parramatta	49 Pages
3 ⇩	Exhibited draft DCP	17 Pages
4 ⇩	Exhibited draft Planning Agreement	30 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

1 ⇩	Assessment Report & Conditions	71 Pages
2 ⇩	Locality Map	1 Page
3 ⇩	Plans used during assessment	20 Pages
4 ⇩	Landscape plans used during assessment	5 Pages
5 ⇩	Statement of Environmental Effects used during assessment	48 Pages

Lot	Description
80	‘City of Parramatta’ residue lot to contain Stage 3 portion of the Parramatta Square Public Domain. It will also contain Centenary Square, the Parramatta Town Hall and the 5 Parramatta Square development as approved under DA/476/2019.
81	‘City of Parramatta Council Lot’ to contain the City of Parramatta Council Carpark which is being constructed under DA/46/2018 and associated construction certificates.
82	‘Road Dedication Lot’ to contain a portion of the Darcy St roadway to be rebuilt under DA/436/2016, DA/47/2018 and associated construction certificates.
83	‘Walker Corp 6-8PS Lot’ to contain the 6 Parramatta Square and 8 Parramatta Square commercial towers and basement which is being constructed under DA/46/2018 and DA/47/2018, and associated construction certificates.
84	‘Walker Corp 4PS Lot’ to contain the 4 Parramatta Square commercial tower and basement which was constructed under DA/436/2016 and associated construction certificates.

1 ⇩	Assessment Report & Conditions	36 Pages
2 ⇩	Locality Map	1 Page
3 ⇩	Plans used during assessment	9 Pages
4	Internal plans used during assessment (confidential)	5 Pages

1 ⇩	Assessment Report & Conditions	18 Pages
2 ⇩	Locality Map	1 Page
3 ⇩	Draft Survey Plans	20 Pages
4 ⇩	Draft 88B Instrument	23 Pages
5 ⇩	Statement of Environmental Effects	27 Pages

1 ⇩	Assessment Report and Conditions	27 Pages
2 ⇩	Locality Map	1 Page
3 ⇩	Plans used during assessment	3 Pages
4	Internal plans used during assessment (confidential)	4 Pages
5 ⇩	Waste Management Plan	3 Pages