|
Item 8.8 - Attachment 3 |
Assessment of 117(2) Directions |
2-12 River Road West
Section 117(2)
Directions prepared by Hampden Property Services.
Comments by Don Fox Planning
Assessment of the
Proposed Rezoning with the Relevant Directions
|
DIRECTION |
HAMPDEN PPROPERTY
SERVICES COMMENTS |
DON FOX PLANNING COMMENTS |
|
1.1 Business and Industrial Zones |
|
|
|
Objectives |
|
|
|
(1) The objectives of this direction are to: |
|
|
|
(a) encourage employment growth in suitable locations, |
The proposed change in zoning of this site, despite
changing from an industrial land use, would see employment outcomes greater
than the current situation and greater than if the use of the site were for a
purpose associated with industrial use, even if redeveloped. The Economic Assessment prepared by Hill PDA sets out the
following in this regard: The site area is 1.8ha. Using a
yield of 55-60 employees per hectare which is consistent with our approach at
Section 5.2 of this chapter this would equate to a total of around 100 jobs
on site if it were redeveloped for light industrial purposes. Notwithstanding
this, we consider that the redevelopment of this site for such purposes is
financially unviable for the reasons set out previously. The new development
would however offset the loss of jobs by providing new employment both during
construction process and post construction in retail and commercial
operations. Setting
aside employment during construction, the anticipated Post Construction
Employment Opportunities are considered to reach potential levels of 218
employees, which is ...more than double the number
of workers likely to be employed on the site if it were to be redeveloped for
light industrial purposes only. The retail industry employs more part-time
and casual staff than it does full-time workers. Total number of full-time
and part time workers is likely to be around 300 based on the rates of 1
worker per 24sqm of restaurant space and 1 worker per 18sqm of convenience
retail (ABS Retail Surveys 1991-92 and 1998-99). Therefore, the proposed change in
zoning and subsequent development outcomes will result in an employment
capacity that is double that which currently exists on the site. Therefore,
the employment generation associated with the on-going use of the site will
exceed the current situation. |
The
employment opportunities likely to created as a result of a mixed use
development on the site are expected to be significantly greater than those
that might be generated by the retention of an industrial zoning of the
subject land. |
|
(b) protect employment land in business and industrial
zones, and. |
As detailed in the Economic Assessment Report prepared by
Hill PDA the proposal will not compromise the employment land availability as
a result of the change in zoning of the site.
As detailed at 4(d) below, the proposal has a greater employment
capacity if it were rezoned than over the current situation as industrial
land. |
We agree with the proponent’s economic assessment which concluded
that given its location and constraints in terms of size and configuration,
the subject site is not well suited for redevelopment for industrial purposes |
|
(c) support the viability of identified strategic centres. |
The proposed change in zoning will not adversely affect
the outcomes of identified strategic centres. |
Development of the subject site for mixed use purposes could
provide support for existing and proposed businesses in the Parramatta CBD. |
|
Where this direction applies |
|
|
|
(2) This direction applies to all relevant planning
authorities. |
This direction is applicable in the circumstances of this
case. |
|
|
When this direction applies |
|
|
|
(3) This direction applies when a relevant planning
authority prepares a planning proposal that will affect land within an
existing or proposed business or industrial zone (including the alteration of
any existing business or industrial zone boundary). |
The subject site is located within an existing and
proposed industrial zone. |
|
|
What a relevant planning authority must do if this
direction applies |
|
|
|
(4) A planning proposal must: |
|
|
|
(a) give effect to the objectives of this direction, |
The objectives of this direction, with respect to the
proposed change in zoning have been addressed above. |
|
|
(b) retain the areas and locations of existing business
and industrial zones, |
As is demonstrated in the Economic Impact Assessment
Report prepared by Hill PDA, the proposed change in zoning of this site, will
not result in adverse outcomes as a result of this change. The proposal will
provide for economic and employment opportunities associated with the use of
the site that are superior to the current situation and, given the extent of
change that would be required in terms industrial facility on the site, is
unlikely to be used for such purposes. The proposed zoning of the land will facilitate businesses
uses of the site, by way of convenience retail, medical and possibly child
care facilities (subject to flooding constraints). These uses will continue
to assist the employment base of the locality and provide an outcome that is
superior to the existing situation in this regard. |
Agreed |
|
(c) not reduce the total potential floor space area for
employment uses and related public services in business zones, |
The proposal is unlikely to have any significant reduction
in the floor area available for employment uses, given the mixed use nature
of the development that is proposed. As demonstrated by the Economic Impact Assessment Report,
the proposal will provide greater employment opportunities over the existing
situation, as a result of its rezoning. In the event that the site was not rezoned, it is unlikely
that such outcomes could be achieved to the same extent if the existing
facilities on the site were retained in their current form. In the event that
capital investment was undertaken to redevelop for industrial purposes, the
advice provided by Hill PDA suggests that such a facility may not be able to
competitively compete with other locations for such purpose. |
Agreed |
|
(d) not reduce the total potential floor space area for
industrial uses in industrial zones, and |
The proposed change in zoning will reduce the potential
floor space for industrial use, within an industrial zone. However, the Hill PDA report states as follows in this
regard: For industrial users
the subject site is considered inferior to other industrial clusters in It is small and isolated from other industrial clusters; It is largely severed from the Camellia industrial area by
Other industrial estates have superior access;
Access to These weaknesses will undermine
interest for industrial uses if the site was redeveloped. The presence of The report goes on to state as
follows: We consider that
potential industrial occupiers of the subject site are more likely to take up
floorspace within the more established and larger industrial locations within
Parramatta LGA or in the adjacent LGA’s over this site even if it were
redeveloped for industrial purposes. In light of the surplus of employment
land recorded, any potential occupiers have a range of better located,
larger, vacant sites from which to choose if they are looking for new
industrial land in Parramatta LGA. This case is supported when we review
development pipeline data derived from Cordells which shows a concentration
of industrial investment on existing large and well located employment sites
for example refurbishment works at the Shell Refinery and the development of
five new factory units on land at Harbour Street adjacent to the M4. On this basis, and despite being contrary to this direction, it
is considered that the proposed change in zoning will not result in a
reduction in industrial land that would impact upon the capacity of the
locality to service the industrial needs of the LGA. |
A change of zoning is acceptable in the circumstances |
|
(e) ensure that proposed new employment areas are in
accordance with a strategy that is approved by the Director-General of the
Department of Planning. |
While the proposed outcome is contrary to the Metropolitan
Strategy, the evidence supplied above indicates that, if the site were retained
in its current form, it would not satisfy the demand sought for industrial
floor space in this locality. In the event that the site could not be used, or
redeveloped for a purpose that would satisfy this, its opportunity as an
employment supplier is likely to disintegrate over time and the objectives of
the Strategy would therefore not be achieved. |
Agreed. The location, configuration and size of the subject site
does not render it suitable for redevelopment for industrial purposes. |
|
Consistency |
|
|
|
(5) A planning proposal may be inconsistent with the terms
of this direction only if the relevant planning authority can satisfy the Director-General of the
Department of Planning (or an officer of the Department nominated by the Director-General) that the
provisions of the planning proposal that are inconsistent are: |
|
Inconsistency with this Direction is justified in the
circumstances. |
|
(a) justified by a strategy which: |
|
|
|
(i) gives consideration to the objective of this
direction, and |
|
|
|
(ii) identifies the land which is the subject of the
planning proposal (if the planning proposal relates to a particular site or
sites), and |
|
|
|
(iii) is approved by the Director-General of the
Department of Planning, or |
|
|
|
(b) justified by a study (prepared in support of the
planning proposal) which gives consideration to the objective of this
direction, or |
The studies prepared in support of this planning proposal
set out the consideration of this direction accordingly and the outcomes
associated with the use of the site for industrial purposes into the future. |
|
|
(c) in accordance with the relevant Regional Strategy or
Sub-Regional Strategy prepared by the Department of Planning which gives
consideration to the objective of this direction, or |
|
|
|
(d) of minor significance. |
|
|
|
Note: In this direction, “identified strategic centre” means a centre that
has been identified as a strategic centre in a regional strategy,
sub-regional strategy, or another strategy approved by the Director General |
|
|
|
2.1 Environment Protection Zones |
|
|
|
Objective |
|
|
|
(1) The objective of this direction is to protect and
conserve environmentally sensitive areas. |
The proposal will not result in any adverse outcomes in
terms of environmentally sensitive areas. |
The area along the river frontage of the subject site has
been identified as an environmentally sensitive area. Therefore this
Direction applies |
|
Where this direction applies |
|
|
|
(2) This direction applies to all relevant planning
authorities. |
This direction is applicable in the circumstances of this
case. |
|
|
When this direction applies |
|
|
|
(3) This direction applies when a relevant planning
authority prepares a planning proposal. |
This direction is applicable in the circumstances of this
case. |
|
|
What a relevant planning authority must do if this
direction applies |
|
|
|
(4) A planning proposal must include provisions that
facilitate the protection and conservation of environmentally sensitive
areas. |
|
|
|
(5) A planning proposal that applies to land within an
environment protection zone or land otherwise identified for environment
protection purposes in a LEP must not reduce the environmental protection
standards that apply to the land (including by modifying development
standards that apply to the land). This requirement does not apply to a
change to a development standard for minimum lot size for a dwelling in
accordance with clause (5) of Direction 1.5 “Rural Lands”. |
|
|
|
Consistency |
|
|
|
(6) A planning proposal may be inconsistent with the terms
of this direction only if the relevant planning authority can satisfy the
Director-General of the Department of Planning (or an officer of the
Department nominated by the Director-General) that the provisions of the
planning proposal that are inconsistent are: |
|
It is not considered that this planning proposal will be
inconsistent with this Direction. The proposal provides for the provision of a foreshore
setback of 15 metres between any buildings and the River. Relevant public authorities and agencies will be consulted
should this planning proposal proceed to and through the Gateway. More detailed assessment of environmental impacts will be
required at the DA stage should this planning proposal proceed. |
|
b. justified by a strategy which: |
|
|
|
i. gives consideration to the objectives of this
direction, |
|
|
|
ii. identifies the land which is the subject of the
planning proposal (if the planning proposal relates to a particular site or
sites), and |
|
|
|
iii. is approved by the Director-General of the Department
of Planning, or |
|
|
|
(b) justified by a study prepared in support of the planning
proposal which gives consideration to the objectives of this direction, or |
|
|
|
(c) in accordance with the relevant Regional Strategy or
Sub-Regional Strategy prepared by the Department of Planning which gives
consideration to the objective of this direction, or |
|
|
|
(d) is of minor significance. |
|
|
|
2.3 Heritage Conservation |
|
|
|
Objective |
|
|
|
(1) The objective of this direction is to conserve items,
areas, objects and places of environmental heritage significance and
indigenous heritage significance. |
|
The site is within an Area of National Significance and is
also affected by historic view corridors to and from Elizabeth Farm. This Direction is relevant to this planning proposal. |
|
Where this direction applies |
|
|
|
(2) This direction applies to all relevant planning
authorities. |
|
|
|
When this direction applies |
|
|
|
(3) This direction applies when a relevant planning
authority prepares a planning proposal. |
|
|
|
What a relevant planning authority must do if this
direction applies |
|
|
|
(4) A planning proposal must contain provisions that
facilitate the conservation of: |
|
|
|
(a) items, places, buildings, works, relics, moveable
objects or precincts of environmental heritage significance to an area, in
relation to the historical, scientific, cultural, social, archaeological, architectural,
natural or aesthetic value of the item, area, object or place, identified in
a study of the environmental heritage of the area, |
The planning proposal the subject of this application will
not result in adverse outcomes with respect to heritage conservation. The subject site is positioned within Historic View
Corridors 5 and 16 of the Draft Parramatta Development Control Plan (DCP)
2010. These views are associated with views to and from Elizabeth Farm House,
which is located to the south of the subject site. The research undertaken in this regard reflects that the
proposed built form outcomes, in the current form, will not result in views
to and from the historic locations being achieved. This matters is further addressed by way of the photomontages
that have been prepared by PTI Architects, along with the report prepared by
Archnex Pty Ltd. |
The concept proposal indicates that building separation
has been provided as a means of retaining historic view corridors. |
|
(b) Aboriginal objects or Aboriginal places that are
protected under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, and |
The planning proposal will not have any adverse impacts in
this regard. |
Consultation with NPWS will be undertaken should this
planning proposal proceed. |
|
(c) Aboriginal areas, Aboriginal objects, Aboriginal
places or landscapes identified by an Aboriginal heritage survey prepared by
or on behalf of an Aboriginal Land Council, Aboriginal body or public
authority and provided to the relevant planning authority, which identifies
the area, object, place or landscape as being of heritage significance to
Aboriginal culture and people. |
The planning proposal will not have any adverse impacts in
this regard. |
|
|
Consistency |
|
|
|
(5) A planning proposal may be inconsistent with the terms
of this direction only if the relevant planning authority can satisfy the
Director-General of the Department of Planning (or an officer of the
Department nominated by the Director-General) that: |
|
|
|
(a) the environmental or indigenous heritage significance
of the item, area, object or place is conserved by existing or draft
environmental planning instruments, legislation, or regulations that apply to
the land, or |
The built form envelopes that have been prepared by PTI
Architects demonstrate that built form outcomes may be achieved on the site
that limit the impact on the historic view corridors that are relevant to
this location. The positioning of built form ensures that the historic
view corridors may be maintained in alignment with the principles of the
Draft DCP. |
Insufficient detail has been provided at this stage to
make any recommendations with respect to building heights and FSR for a mixed
use development on the site. |
|
(b) the provisions of the planning proposal that are
inconsistent are of minor significance. |
It is not considered that the Historic Views are of minor
significance. |
|
|
Note: In this direction: “conservation”, “environmental heritage”, “item”,
“place” and “relic” have the same meaning as in the Heritage Act 1977. |
|
|
|
“Aboriginal object”, “Aboriginal area” and “Aboriginal
place” have the same meaning as in the National Parks and Wildlife Act
1974. |
|
|
|
Heritage conservation is covered by a compulsory clause in
the Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Order 2006. A LEP that
adopts the Standard Instrument should identify such items, areas, objects or
places of environmental heritage significance or indigenous heritage
significance as are relevant to the terms of this direction on the Heritage
Map and relevant Schedule of the LEP. |
|
The heritage item located immediately adjacent to the
site, being the wetland areas along the |
|
3.1 Residential Zones |
|
|
|
Objectives |
|
|
|
(1) The objectives of this direction are: |
|
|
|
(a) to encourage a variety and choice of housing types to
provide for existing and future housing needs, |
The proposed outcomes on this planning proposal will see a
variety of housing types achieved to service the residential market place.
This will accord with the desired needs to the locality and provide an array
of choice in terms of housing affordability. It will also enable the
provision of a diversity of accommodation in close proximity to public
transport facilities. |
Should this planning proposal proceed it will add to the
housing stock available with |
|
(b) to make efficient use of existing infrastructure and
services and ensure that new housing has appropriate access to infrastructure
and services, and |
The proposed outcomes will enable the use of existing infrastructure;
in the event that further augmentation of services is required, such would be
administered as part of the implementation of the development and may be
subject to terms under a Voluntary Planning Agreement. |
Upgrading of existing infrastructure may be required
however all services are currently available. |
|
(c) to minimise the impact of residential development on
the environment and resource lands. |
The planning proposal by way of residential development
will not result in adverse outcomes in terms of the environment. Instead, as part of the works associated with the proposal
would see improvements to the natural environment fronting the River and
result in a land use that is more environmentally friendly than the current
industrial use of the land. |
Any impacts on environmentally sensitive areas along the
River frontage can be appropriately addressed at DA stage. |
|
Where this direction applies |
|
|
|
(2) This direction applies to all relevant planning
authorities. |
This direction is applicable in the circumstances of this
case. |
|
|
When this direction applies |
|
|
|
(3) This direction applies when a relevant planning
authority prepares a planning proposal that will affect land within: |
|
|
|
(a) an existing or proposed residential zone (including
the alteration of any existing residential zone boundary), |
This direction is applicable in the circumstances of this
case. |
|
|
(b) any other zone in which significant residential
development is permitted or proposed to be permitted. |
|
|
|
What a relevant planning authority must do if this
direction applies |
|
|
|
(4) A planning proposal must include provisions that
encourage the provision of housing that will: |
|
|
|
(a) broaden the choice of building types and locations
available in the housing market, and |
As indicated above, the proposal will broaden the housing
choice within this part of the locality. The current residential supply within the locality is of a
density that it relatively low in scale and does not necessarily support
directions with respect to urban consolidation. This site presents an
opportunity to provide a density of developments that will significantly
broaden the availability of choice within close proximity to public transport
opportunities. The provision of one, two and three bedroom apartments
within the development, in close proximity to employment generating
activities, in particular that of the Parramatta CBD, in conjunction with
proximity to the University of Western Sydney will assist to complement the
existing low density context that is in proximity to the site. The provision of such accommodation will also support
infrastructure improvements with respect to public transport, that are being
made in close proximity to the site. The Hill PDA Report also reflect the following in this
regard, with respect to the demand and diversity for accommodation: The Taking account of the above, in
our view it is more appropriate to provide much needed residential floorspace
on the Site, in place of compromised commercial space for which there is
unlikely to be demand. Our assessment has shown strong
demand in the area for high density residential developments, in the form of
units. Not only is there market demand but also a strategic need for
additional housing if the State is to achieve its growth targets and avoid a
major housing affordability crisis. This site is well located to
accommodation demand from the key drivers of the local residential market
given its position in between the |
Should this planning proposal proceed it will add to the
housing stock available with |
|
(b) make more efficient use of existing infrastructure and
services, and |
As detailed previously, any proposal will respond to the
necessary upgrade of infrastructure and services as required. Beyond this, it is understood that an array of public
transport opportunities are being contemplated within the vicinity of the
site which will see the use of these reinforced through a greater diversity
of population in proximity to these. |
Upgrading of existing infrastructure may be required
however all services are currently available. |
|
(c) reduce the consumption of land for housing and
associated urban development on the urban fringe, and |
This planning proposal will enable the consumption of land
within an urban context to avoid undue pressure on urban fringe areas and is
suitably positioned in this regard. |
This proposal provides for consolidation and development
of an existing underutilised site. |
|
(d) be of good design. |
The design response proposed under this planning proposal
is set out in the architectural documentation prepared by PTI Architects. It is considered to be so exemplary design within this
urban context and will act as a gateway element into In addition, it will provide a complementary gateway
element to that which is presented by the |
It is
considered that a requirement for any development proposal to be subject to a
design competition would be appropriate. |
|
(5) A planning proposal must, in relation to land to which
this direction applies: |
|
|
|
(a) contain a requirement that residential development is
not permitted until land is adequately serviced (or arrangements satisfactory
to the council, or other appropriate authority, have been made to service
it), and |
Adequate servicing arrangements will be provided in
association with this proposal. |
Agreed |
|
(b) not contain provisions which will reduce the
permissible residential density of land. |
The proposal will not reduce the permissible residential
density of land. |
|
|
Consistency |
|
|
|
(6) A planning proposal may be inconsistent with the terms
of this direction only if the relevant planning authority can satisfy the
Director-General of the Department of Planning (or an officer of the
Department nominated by the Director-General) that the provisions of the
planning proposal that are inconsistent are: |
|
The planning proposal is not inconsistent with this
Direction. |
|
(a) justified by a strategy which: |
|
|
|
(i) gives consideration to the objective of this
direction, and |
|
|
|
(ii) identifies the land which is the subject of the
planning proposal (if the planning proposal relates to a particular site or
sites), and |
|
|
|
(iii) is approved by the Director-General of the
Department of Planning, or |
|
|
|
(b) justified by a study prepared in support of the
planning proposal which gives consideration to the objective of this
direction, or |
The relevant studies justify the implementation of this
planning proposal. |
|
|
(c) in accordance with the relevant Regional Strategy or
Sub-Regional Strategy prepared by the Department of Planning which gives
consideration to the objective of this direction, or |
|
|
|
(d) of minor significance. |
|
|
|
3.4 Integrating Land Use and Transport |
|
|
|
Objective |
|
|
|
(1) The objective of this direction is to ensure that
urban structures, building forms, land use locations, development designs,
subdivision and street layouts achieve the following planning objectives: |
|
|
|
(a) improving access to housing, jobs and services by
walking, cycling and public transport, and |
The proposed outcomes, in conjunction with the site’s
strategic location to train services, presents as an ideal opportunity for
the integration of higher density housing with public transport facilities. The density of the development will allow for increased
residential population that has good walking access to train facilities. It is also understood that a new bus terminal is to be
developed in the vicinity of the site which will also reinforce the
complementary relationship between land use and transport on this site. The improvements that will result through the
implementation of public pathway along the river front of the site will also
enhance opportunities for walking and cycling which cannot be implemented
without the rejuvenation of this site, due to current limitations with
respect to built form. |
Agreed |
|
(b) increasing the choice of available transport and
reducing dependence on cars, and |
The proposal has the capacity to reduce car dependence by
limiting parking provision associated with the development, at the
application stage. However, the Council’s planning policies with respect to
car parking will need to be adequately considered in this regard. In addition, the improvements that will be made to public
pathway areas along the River front as a result of this proposal will ensure
that potential car dependence is reduced, by enabling improvements to walking
and cycling access. This will have a benefit beyond the site itself and
facilitate improved access to public transport facilities between significant
land uses, such as the CBD and the University. |
Agreed. The provision of a pedestrian/cycleway path along the
River frontage has significant benefits. |
|
(c) reducing travel demand including the number of trips
generated by development and the distances travelled, especially by car, and |
Such matters may be addressed at the development
application stage and will need to be contemplated in terms of relevant
Council policy at the time of consideration. It is, however, considered that there are opportunities to
reduce car dependence associated with the proposal, given the site’s
proximity to public transport, both in its current form and as proposed into
the future. |
Agreed |
|
(d) supporting the efficient and viable operation of
public transport services, and |
The proposal will assist to ensure the viability of public
transport services within proximity to the site and will reinforce the
viability of future initiatives which are being contemplated as a result of
the potential density which may be achieved on the site in this regard. |
Agreed |
|
(e) providing for the efficient movement of freight. |
The proposal will not adversely impact the efficient
movement of freight within the vicinity of the site. As part of this proposal, it is important to consider the
proposed zoning in light of surrounding land uses. It is considered that the balance of the River Road West
precinct may be continued in its current form and support some form of
industrial or commercial use without resulting in land use conflict between
the subject site and that of neighbouring ones, particularly directly to the
south of this site. The nature of land uses within the River Road West
Precinct are not considered to be of a traditional industrial scale and the
extent of these is relatively limited in comparison to other industrial land
use precincts within the vicinity of the site. In particular the general
operations and traffic movements of these are not considered to result in
outcomes that will see conflict with the proposed context of the site. Instead, there will be opportunities for cross-reliance
between the sites, providing improved opportunities for workers within this
precinct, as a result o the mixed use nature of the precinct, by way of the
retailing offering at a convenience level, in conjunction with other
facilities such as medical and child care facilities. It is therefore considered that a complementary
relationship is achievable between the subject site and neighbouring
industrial or commercial land uses within the vicinity. |
Matters of traffic management will be addressed in detail
at the DA Stage should this proposal proceed. |
|
Where this direction applies |
|
|
|
(2) This direction applies to all relevant planning
authorities. |
This direction is applicable in the circumstances of this
case. |
|
|
When this direction applies |
|
|
|
(3) This direction applies when a relevant planning
authority prepares a planning proposal that will create, alter or remove a
zone or a provision relating to urban land, including land zoned for residential,
business, industrial, village or tourist purposes. |
This direction is applicable in the circumstances of this
case. |
|
|
What a relevant planning authority must do if this
direction applies |
|
|
|
(4) A planning proposal must locate zones for urban purposes
and include provisions that give effect to and are consistent with the aims,
objectives and principles of: |
It is considered that the proposed outcomes will achieve
the relevant intent of the Guidelines, as detailed below. As set out above, it is considered that the proposed
development outcomes on the site may provide a complementary relationship
with the existing land uses, for industrial purposes and that, into the
future, the on-going use of these for industrial and/or commercial purposes
would see this complementary relationship being reinforced. The nature of industrial land use within the precinct in
its current form is not one of a traditional industrial nature and the
proposed outcome will see a complementary land use relationship achieved
without adverse impacts between land uses or land use conflict. It is also important to recognise that the demand for
industrial land use, in comparison to that of residential, which is set out
in the Hill PDA report reflects that the proposed outcomes on this site will
see an appropriate balance of land use being achieved to satisfy the outcomes
associated with these policies. |
Agreed |
|
(a) Improving Transport Choice – Guidelines for
planning and development (DUAP 2001), and |
|
|
|
(b) The |
|
|
|
Consistency |
|
|
|
(5) A planning proposal may be inconsistent with the terms
of this direction only if the relevant planning authority can satisfy the
Director-General of the Department of Planning (or an officer of the
Department nominated by the Director-General) that the provisions of the
planning proposal that are inconsistent are: |
|
The planning proposal is not considered to be inconsistent
with this Direction |
|
(a) justified by a strategy which: |
|
|
|
(i) gives consideration to the objective of this
direction, and |
|
|
|
(ii) identifies the land which is the subject of the
planning proposal (if the planning proposal relates to a particular site or
sites), and |
|
|
|
(iii) is approved by the Director-General of the Department
of Planning, or |
|
|
|
(b) justified by a study prepared in support of the
planning proposal which gives consideration to the objective of this
direction, or |
The documentation accompanying the planning proposal
justifies the position in this regard. |
|
|
(c) in accordance with the relevant Regional Strategy or
Sub-Regional Strategy prepared by the Department of Planning which gives
consideration to the objective of this direction, or |
|
|
|
(d) of minor significance. |
|
|
|
4.1 Acid Sulfate Soils |
|
|
|
Objective |
|
|
|
(1) The objective of this direction is to avoid
significant adverse environmental impacts from the use of land that has a
probability of containing acid sulfate soils. |
Matters of Acid Sulfate Soils in alignment with this
direction have been dealt with in a separate report and suitably justify the
rezoning of the land in this regard. |
The site is subject to ASS and additional investigation in
this regard will be required should this planning proposal proceed. However the information submitted to date demonstrates that
the site can be developed for mixed use purposes having regard to the
potential for ASS to occur. |
|
Where this direction applies |
|
|
|
(2) This direction applies to all relevant planning
authorities that are responsible for land having a probability of containing
acid sulfate soils, as shown on Acid Sulfate Soils Planning Maps held by the
Department of Planning. |
Matters of Acid Sulfate Soils in alignment with this
direction have been dealt with in a separate report and suitably justify the
rezoning of the land in this regard. |
|
|
When this direction applies |
|
|
|
(3) This direction applies when a relevant planning
authority prepares a planning proposal that will apply to land having a
probability of containing acid sulfate soils as shown on the Acid Sulfate
Soils Planning Maps. |
Matters of Acid Sulfate Soils in alignment with this
direction have been dealt with in a separate report and suitably justify the
rezoning of the land in this regard. |
|
|
What a relevant planning authority must do if this
direction applies |
|
|
|
(4) The relevant planning authority must consider the Acid
Sulfate Soils Planning Guidelines adopted by the Director-General of the
Department of Planning when preparing a planning proposal that applies to any
land identified on the Acid Sulfate Soils Planning Maps as having a
probability of acid sulphate soils being present. |
Matters of Acid Sulfate Soils in alignment with this
direction have been dealt with in a separate report and suitably justify the
rezoning of the land in this regard. |
|
|
(5) When a relevant planning authority is preparing a
planning proposal to introduce provisions to regulate works in acid sulfate
soils, those provisions must be consistent with: |
|
|
|
(a) the Acid Sulfate Soils Model LEP in the Acid Sulfate
Soils Planning Guidelines adopted by the Director-General, or |
Matters of Acid Sulfate Soils in alignment with this
direction have been dealt with in a separate report and suitably justify the
rezoning of the land in this regard. |
|
|
(b) such other provisions provided by the Director-General
of the Department of Planning that are consistent with the Acid Sulfate Soils
Planning Guidelines. |
Matters of Acid Sulfate Soils in alignment with this
direction have been dealt with in a separate report and suitably justify the
rezoning of the land in this regard. |
|
|
(6) A relevant planning authority must not prepare a
planning proposal that proposes an intensification of land uses on land
identified as having a probability of containing acid sulfate soils on the
Acid Sulfate Soils Planning Maps unless the relevant planning authority has
considered an acid sulphate soils study assessing the appropriateness of the
change of land use given the presence of acid sulfate soils. The relevant
planning authority must provide a copy of any such study to the Director-General
prior to undertaking community consultation in satisfaction of section 57 of
the Act. |
Matters of Acid Sulfate Soils in alignment with this
direction have been dealt with in a separate report and suitably justify the
rezoning of the land in this regard. |
|
|
(7) Where provisions referred to under paragraph (5) of
this direction have not been introduced and the relevant planning authority
is preparing a planning proposal that proposes an intensification of land
uses on land identified as having a probability of acid sulfate soils on the
Acid Sulfate Soils Planning Maps, the planning proposal must contain
provisions consistent with paragraph (5). |
|
|
|
Consistency |
|
|
|
(8) A planning proposal may be inconsistent with the terms
of this direction only if the relevant planning authority can satisfy the
Director-General of the Department of Planning (or an officer of the
Department nominated by the Director-General) that the provisions of the
planning proposal that are inconsistent are: |
|
|
|
(a) justified by a study prepared in support of the
planning proposal which gives consideration to the objective of this
direction, or |
Matters of Acid Sulfate Soils in alignment with this
direction have been dealt with in a separate report and suitably justify the
rezoning of the land in this regard. |
An ASS management plan will be required to be submitted
with a DA should this planning proposal proceed. |
|
(b) of minor significance. |
|
|
|
4.3 Flood Prone Land |
|
|
|
Objectives |
|
|
|
(1) The objectives of this direction are: |
|
|
|
(a) to ensure that development of flood prone land is
consistent with the NSW Government’s Flood Prone Land Policy and the
principles of the Floodplain Development Manual 2005, and |
Matters of flooding have been addressed in the report
prepared by HKMA Engineers and subsequent advice in response to the Council’s
concerns with respect to the proposal. |
The site is flood affected and therefore this Direction is
relevant. Independent assessment of the information submitted by the
proponents has been undertaken by Bewsher Consulting. Bewsher Consulting conclude that more detailed
investigation with respect to flooding and floodplain issues is required
before any endorsement of the planning proposal can be recommended. In their opinion the proponents submission has not demonstrated
that the site is capable of being developed for mixed use purposes. |
|
(b) to ensure that the provisions of an LEP on flood prone
land is commensurate with flood hazard and includes consideration of the
potential flood impacts both on and off the subject land. |
Matters of flooding have been addressed in the report
prepared by HKMA Engineers and subsequent advice in response to the Council’s
concerns with respect to the proposal. |
|
|
Where this direction applies |
|
|
|
(2) This direction applies to all relevant planning
authorities that are responsible for flood prone land within their LGA. |
Matters of flooding have been addressed in the report
prepared by HKMA Engineers and subsequent advice in response to the Council’s
concerns with respect to the proposal. |
|
|
When this direction applies |
|
|
|
(3) This direction applies when a relevant planning
authority prepares a planning proposal that creates, removes or alters a zone
or a provision that affects flood prone land. |
Matters of flooding have been addressed in the report
prepared by HKMA Engineers and subsequent advice in response to the Council’s
concerns with respect to the proposal. |
|
|
What a relevant planning authority must do if this
direction applies |
|
|
|
(4) A planning proposal must include provisions that give effect
to and are consistent with the NSW Flood Prone Land Policy and the principles
of the Floodplain Development Manual 2005 (including the Guideline
on Development Controls on Low Flood Risk Areas). |
Matters of flooding have been addressed in the report
prepared by HKMA Engineers and subsequent advice in response to the Council’s
concerns with respect to the proposal. |
|
|
(5) A planning proposal must not rezone land within the
flood planning areas from Special Use, Special Purpose, Recreation, Rural or
Environmental Protection Zones to a Residential, Business, Industrial,
Special Use or Special Purpose Zone. |
The land us not currently zoned for such purpose. |
|
|
(6) A planning proposal must not contain provisions that
apply to the flood planning areas which: |
Matters of flooding have been addressed in the report
prepared by HKMA Engineers and subsequent advice in response to the Council’s
concerns with respect to the proposal. |
|
|
(a) permit development in floodway areas, |
|
|
|
(b) permit development that will result in significant
flood impacts to other properties, |
|
|
|
(c) permit a significant increase in the development of
that land, |
|
|
|
(d) are likely to result in a substantially increased
requirement for government spending on flood mitigation measures, infrastructure
or services, or |
|
|
|
(e) permit development to be carried out without
development consent except for the purposes of agriculture (not including
dams, drainage canals, levees, buildings or structures in floodways or high
hazard areas), roads or exempt development. |
|
|
|
(7) A planning proposal must not impose flood related
development controls above the residential flood planning level for
residential development on land, unless a relevant planning authority
provides adequate justification for those controls to the satisfaction of the
Director-General (or an officer of the Department nominated by the
Director-General). |
Matters of flooding have been addressed in the report
prepared by HKMA Engineers and subsequent advice in response to the Council’s
concerns with respect to the proposal. |
|
|
(8) For the purposes of a planning proposal, a relevant
planning authority must not determine a flood planning level that is
inconsistent with the Floodplain Development Manual 2005 (including the Guideline
on Development Controls on Low Flood Risk Areas) unless a relevant
planning authority provides adequate justification for the proposed departure
from that Manual to the satisfaction of the Director-General (or an officer
of the Department nominated by the Director-General). |
Matters of flooding have been addressed in the report
prepared by HKMA Engineers and subsequent advice in response to the Council’s
concerns with respect to the proposal. |
|
|
Consistency |
|
|
|
(9) A planning proposal may be inconsistent with this
direction only if the relevant planning authority can satisfy the
Director-General (or an officer of the Department nominated by the
Director-General) that: |
|
The proponent has not adequately demonstrated consistency
with this Direction. |
|
(a) the planning proposal is in accordance with a
floodplain risk management plan prepared in accordance with the principles
and guidelines of the Floodplain Development Manual 2005, or |
Matters of flooding have been addressed in the report
prepared by HKMA Engineers and subsequent advice in response to the Council’s
concerns with respect to the proposal. |
|
|
(b) the provisions of the planning proposal that are
inconsistent are of minor significance. |
|
|
|
Note: “flood planning area”, “flood planning level”, “flood prone land” and
“floodway area” have the same meaning as in the Floodplain Development
Manual 2005. |
|
|
|
6.2 Reserving Land for Public Purposes |
|
|
|
Objectives |
|
|
|
(1) The objectives of this direction are: |
|
|
|
(a) to facilitate the provision of public services and
facilities by reserving land for public purposes, and |
The proposed outcomes on this site will see a proposal
which results in land for public purpose along the foreshore. The terms of this will be set out in accordance with a
Voluntary Planning Agreement with respect to the extent of works proposed. The public benefits associated with this change will see
improved public access to the River frontage, far superior to the current
outcomes. Access which is currently precluded will be enabled between the CBD
and the broader locality, which cannot be implemented as a result of the
existing land use configuration on the site. |
The planning proposal includes provision of a public
reserve area along the |
|
(b) to facilitate the removal of reservations of land for
public purposes where the land is no longer required for acquisition. |
|
|
|
Where this direction applies |
|
|
|
(2) This direction applies to all relevant planning
authorities. |
This direction applies in the circumstance of the case. |
|
|
When this direction applies |
|
|
|
(3) This direction applies when a relevant planning
authority prepares a planning proposal. |
This direction applies in the circumstance of the case. |
|
|
What a relevant planning authority must do if this
direction applies |
|
|
|
(4) A planning proposal must not create, alter or reduce
existing zonings or reservations of land for public purposes without the
approval of the relevant public authority and the Director-General of the
Department of Planning (or an officer of the Department nominated by the Director-General). |
The terms of that part of the site with respect to public
purpose will be resolved with the Council as part of this process. |
The provision of a public reserve area along the |
|
(5) When a Minister or public authority requests a
relevant planning authority to reserve land for a public purpose in a
planning proposal and the land would be required to be acquired under
Division 3 of Part 2 of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act
1991, the relevant planning authority must: |
The terms of that part of the site with respect to public
purpose will be resolved with the Council as part of this process. |
|
|
(a) reserve the land in accordance with the request, and |
|
|
|
(b) include the land in a zone appropriate to its intended
future use or a zone advised by the Director-General of the Department of
Planning (or an officer of the Department nominated by the Director-General),
and |
|
|
|
(c) identify the relevant acquiring authority for the
land. |
|
|
|
(6) When a Minister or public authority requests a
relevant planning authority to include provisions in a planning proposal
relating to the use of any land reserved for a public purpose before that
land is acquired, the relevant planning authority must: |
The terms of that part of the site with respect to public
purpose will be resolved with the Council as part of this process. |
|
|
(a) include the requested provisions, or |
|
|
|
(b) take such other action as advised by the
Director-General of the Department of Planning (or an officer of the
Department nominated by the Director-General) with respect to the use of the
land before it is acquired. |
|
|
|
(7) When a Minister or public authority requests a
relevant planning authority to include provisions in a planning proposal to
rezone and/or remove a reservation of any land that is reserved for public
purposes because the land is no longer designated by that public authority
for acquisition, the relevant planning authority must rezone and/or remove
the relevant reservation in accordance with the request. |
|
|
|
Consistency |
|
|
|
(8) A planning proposal may be inconsistent with the terms
of this direction only if the relevant planning authority can satisfy the
Director-General of the Department of Planning (or an officer of the Department
nominated by the Director-General) that: |
|
The planning proposal is considered to be consistent with
this Direction. |
|
(c) with respect to a request referred to in paragraph
(7), that further information is required before appropriate planning
controls for the land can be determined, or |
|
|
|
(d) the provisions of the planning proposal that are
inconsistent with the terms of this direction are of minor significance. |
|
|
|
Note: Clause 12 of the EP&A Reg 2000 provides that a planning proposal
for a proposed local environmental plan: |
|
|
|
(a) may not contain a provision reserving land for a
purpose referred to in section 26 (1) (c) of the EP&A Act, and |
|
|
|
(b) may not contain a provision in respect of that
reservation as required by section 27 of the EP&A Act, unless the public
authority responsible for the acquisition of the land has notified the
relevant planning authority of its
concurrence to the inclusion of such a provision in the planning proposal. |
|
|
|
In this direction: |
|
|
|
“public authority” has the same meaning as section 4 of
the EP&A Act. |
|
|
|
the use or reservation of land for a public purpose has
the same meaning as in section 26(1)(c) of the EP&A Act. |
|
|
|
6.3 Site Specific Provisions |
|
|
|
Objective |
|
|
|
(1) The objective of this direction is to discourage unnecessarily
restrictive site specific planning controls. |
Terms of site specific planning controls will be addressed
as part of the planning proposal process. |
A site specific DCP will be required to be developed
should this planning proposal proceed. |
|
Where this direction applies |
|
|
|
(2) This direction applies to all relevant planning
authorities. |
This direction is relevant in the circumstances of this
case. |
|
|
When this direction applies |
|
|
|
(3) This direction applies when a relevant planning
authority prepares a planning proposal that will allow a particular
development to be carried out. |
This direction is relevant in the circumstances of this
case. |
|
|
What a relevant planning authority must do if this
direction applies |
|
|
|
(4) A planning proposal that will amend another
environmental planning instrument in order to allow a particular development
proposal to be carried out must either: |
|
|
|
(a) allow that land use to be carried out in the zone the
land is situated on, or |
It is intended that any amendments sought would occur
under the Draft Parramatta LEP 2010 and Draft DCP 2010. |
Noted |
|
(b) rezone the site to an existing zone already applying
in the environmental planning instrument that allows that land use without
imposing any development standards or requirements in addition to those
already contained in that zone, or |
It is considered that the site will be rezoned in
alignment with the Draft Parramatta LEP 2010. Certain site specific provisions may be required to
control built form outcomes in alignment with the site’s unique nature on the
waterfront, in conjunction with outcomes being balanced to preserve the
historic view corridors that occur across this site. |
Depending on timing the relevant planning instrument to be
amended may be SREP 28 being the current applicable planning instrument. |
|
(c) allow that land use on the relevant land without
imposing any development standards or requirements in addition to those
already contained in the principal environmental planning instrument being
amended. |
The land uses proposed are consistent with the zoning of
the site under the Draft LEP 2010. |
Depending on timing the relevant planning instrument to be
amended may be SREP 28 being the current applicable planning instrument |
|
(5) A planning proposal must not contain or refer to
drawings that show details of the development proposal. |
Indicative outcomes have been provided to demonstrate the
capacity of the site only. Further details would be required under any
specific development application, subject to rezoning of the land. |
Indicative concept plans have been provided to inform this
process |
|
Consistency |
|
|
|
(6) A planning proposal may be inconsistent with the terms
of this direction only if the relevant planning authority can satisfy the
Director-General of the Department of Planning (or an officer of the
Department nominated by the Director-General) that the provisions of the
planning proposal that are inconsistent are of minor significance. |
|
The planning proposal is considered to be consistent with
this Direction. |
|
7.1 Implementation of the Metropolitan Strategy |
|
|
|
Objective |
|
|
|
(1) The objective of this direction is to give legal
effect to the vision, land use strategy, policies, outcomes and actions
contained in the Metropolitan Strategy. |
This objective is noted, as part of this planning
proposal. |
Noted |
|
Where this direction applies |
|
|
|
(2) This direction applies to land comprising of the
following local government areas:
|
This direction applies to the local government area of |
This Direction applies |
|
When this direction applies |
|
|
|
(3) This direction applies when a Relevant Planning
Authority prepares a planning proposal. |
This direction is relevant to this proposal. |
|
|
What a Relevant Planning Authority must do if this
direction applies |
|
|
|
(1) Planning proposals shall be consistent with: |
|
|
|
(a) the NSW Government’s Metropolitan Strategy: City of
|
The consistency of this proposal with the Metropolitan
Strategy is set out previously in this document. |
|
|
Consistency |
|
|
|
(5) A planning proposal may be inconsistent with the terms
of this direction only if the Relevant Planning Authority can satisfy the
Director-General of the Department of Planning (or an officer of the
Department nominated by the Director-General), that the extent of
inconsistency with the Metropolitan Strategy: |
The consistency of this proposal with the Metropolitan
Strategy is set out previously in this document. |
The planning proposal is considered to be consistent with
this Direction. |
|
(a) is of minor significance, and |
|
|
|
(b) the planning proposal achieves the overall intent of
the Strategy and does not undermine the achievement of its vision, land use
strategy, policies, outcomes or actions. |
|
|
