|
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 21 May 2024 |
GB.11 / 1 |
|
|
|
|
Item GB.11 |
S14428 |
Low and mid-rise housing policy - Feedback to NSW Department of Planning, Housing & Infrastructure
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Purpose of Report
To have Council consider feedback on the Low & Mid-rise Housing policy application to Ku-ring-gai LGA.
Background
The State Government’s Explanation of Intended Effect (EIE): Changes to create low- and mid-rise housing was on public exhibition from 15 December 2023 to 23 February 2024. Council made a submission on EIE for Low and Mid-rise housing on 21 February 2024.
The Department of Planning, Housing and Industry (DPHI) have now reviewed all submissions and are preparing a ‘What We Heard' report to capture all feedback and insights received through the public exhibition process. They have stated that this report will be released ‘shortly’.
DPHI are now seeking to hold one-on-one workshops with council staff to gain feedback on the low- and mid-rise housing policy in May 2024. Ku-ring-gai Council’s workshop was scheduled for 14 May. This has now been rescheduled to 22 May 2024 to allow Council to consider this report and make a formal Council resolution in providing the required feedback.
In preparation for these workshops, DPHI have provided the following information:
· Workshop agenda (Attachment A1)
· Policy Refinement Paper (Attachment A2)
· Feedback form – Station and town centre precinct selections (Attachment A3)
· Feedback form – Bushfire, Flood, and other hazards (Attachment A4)
Comments
Workshop Agenda
The agenda for the workshop seeks to focus on the following two issues:
· Any proposed exclusions of stations and centres where DPHI feels further justification is needed.
· The possible exclusion of the policy on land affected by high-risk natural hazards or other constraints, and evacuation issues.
DPHI Policy Refinement Paper
The DPHI Policy Refinement Paper outlines the key issues identified in the submissions to the EIE, along with proposed refinements to address them. Each issue is addressed through one or more policy refinements, some of which DPHI wish to collaborate one-on-one with councils to develop an appropriate policy position.
The proposed refinements relate to the following:
1. Collaborate with Councils to remove unsuitable stations and town centres
This is discussed below under the heading ‘Station and town centre precinct selections.
2. Do not apply standards in employment zones (E1, E2, MU1 zones)
This proposed refinement is for the policy to no longer apply within employment zones. In the case of Ku-ring-gai, this is E1 Local centre and MU1 Mixed-use zones. Under the EIE, the policy would have allowed shop-top housing up to six storeys in height in all the local centres surrounding a railway station. Under the refinement, this will no longer be the case and these centres will retain their existing development standards.
However, the policy will continue to apply to all residential zones within an 800m walking catchment surrounding the centres.
3. Collaborate with Councils to address concerns in R1 zones
This refinement does not affect Ku-ring-gai as there is no R1 zoned land with 800m of stations.
4. Note that the main heritage concerns are addressed by refinements 2 and 3
The proposed refinements 2 and 3 do not address the heritage concerns in Ku-ring-gai. Refinements 2 and 3 only relate to E1, MU1 and R1 zones. Most heritage items and heritage conservation areas in Ku-ring-gai potentially impacted by the low and mid-rise controls are within the R2 low density zones. This includes permitting 2 storey town houses and manor houses (apartments) in R2 zones within 800m of centres and stations. While the proposed building heights are similar to those currently permitted in the current R2 zones, the proposed building densities (FSR) and limited landscaping and deep soil provisions will greatly compromise the heritage significance of surrounding heritage items and HCAs. The same will be the case in permitting dual occupancies in the R2 zone across Ku-ring-gai. The proposal will result in widespread, irreversible and unavoidable impact to heritage conservation areas and heritage items.
5. Exclude land affected by high-risk flooding
This is discussed below under the heading ‘Bushfire, Flood, and other hazards- background and recommendations.’
6. Exclude land affected by high-risk bushfire
This is discussed below under the heading ‘Bushfire, Flood, and other hazards- background and recommendations.
7. Exclude land affected by other high-risk hazards
This is discussed below under the heading ‘Bushfire, Flood, and other hazards- background and recommendations.’
8. Recalibrate the FSR and height for mid-rise standards
As identified in Council’s submission and many others, there was a complete mismatch between the proposed FSR and building height provisions contained in the EIE. It has been acknowledged that development to the proposed standards would result in bulky buildings, built to site boundaries with minimal landscaping. As a result, Refinement 8 proposes the following changes to the FSR and height standards for mid-rise buildings.
|
Mid-rise Apartment buildings |
EIE Standards |
Proposed refinements |
|
Residential Flat buildings in R4 and R3 zones within 0-400m of stations and centres. |
Height: 21m FSR: 3.0:1 Min Lot size: Nil Min Frontage: Nil |
Height: - 22m for residential flat buildings - 24m for shop top housing - Maximum 6 storeys FSR:2.2:1 Min Lot size: Nil Min Frontage: Nil |
|
Residential Flat buildings in R4 and R3 zones within 400 – 800m of stations and centres. |
Height: 16m FSR: 2.0:1 Min Lot size: Nil Min Frontage: Nil |
Height: - 17.5 for residential flat buildings - Maximum 4 storeys FSR:1.5:1 Min Lot size: Nil Min Frontage: Nil |
It has also been confirmed that these controls will apply within the R3 and R4 zone within 800m of stations and town centre precincts. The exhibited EIE had suggested that mid-rise controls would only apply within R3 zones.
While it is acknowledged that the suggested changes to height and FSR standards will result in a better built form than that contained in the EIE, this still represents a greater density of development, with significantly less landscaping and deep soil than currently permitted within the R3 and R4 zones in Ku-ring-gai.
Significantly, there is no discussion of, or proposed refinements to the proposed controls for low-rise housing. It is assumed that these will remain the same contained in the EIE. This will result in:
· 2-3 storey manor houses and multi-dwelling terraces/townhouses on all R2 (Low Density Residential) land within 800m of Roseville, Lindfield, Killara, Gordon, Pymble, Turramurra, Warrawee, Wahroonga railway stations, and 800m within the St Ives centre; and
· 2-3 storey dual occupancies on all R2 (Low Density Residential) land across Ku-ring-gai.
As made very clear in Council’s submission on the EIE, the proposed FSR, minimum lot size and width and the deep soil targets for the low-rise typologies are in direct conflict with the existing controls in Ku-ring-gai. They will result in developments that are incredibly dense with limited deep soil landscaping and on small lots which impact on the ability to retain significant trees and vegetation, provide dwelling and neighbour amenity and design appropriate basement parking. The standards are incapable of allowing tall canopy trees of the type prevalent in Ku-ring-gai, to be retained due to built form intruding into the root system, nor will they enable such large trees to be planted and to grow successfully.
9. Do not make changes to the Apartment Design Guide.
The EIE proposed several changes to the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) to accommodate the proposed standards for mid-rise apartment buildings. This included decreases in building separation, setbacks, landscaping and communal open space as well as changes to access requirements for waste service vehicles. Council’s submission on the EIE opposed any changes to the ADG and the watering down of design standards.
DPHI have now acknowledged that the proposed FSR in the EIE was too high to achieve good design and the reduction in the FSR to 2.21:1 may alleviate many of the issues. It has therefore recommended that no changes be made to the ADG.
Station and Town Centre precinct selections
The DPHI are seeking advice to determine which station and town centre precincts are suitable to be included. They have undertaken preliminary screening to eliminate the most unsuitable stations and centres, focusing on location and service levels without considering other factors (see Attachment A2 Low and Mid-Rise Housing Policy Refinement Paper; Attachment A3 Station & Town centre selection form). As a result of this screening process, the Department has identified the following town centre precincts and stations in Ku-ring-gai for inclusion in the policy.
Town Centre Precincts
· Gordon Shopping Mall
· Lindfield Shops (Lindfield Ave)
· St Ives Shopping Village
· Turramurra Shops
Station Precincts
· Roseville Station
· Lindfield Station
· Killara Station
· Gordon Station
· Pymble Station
· Turramurra Station
· Warrawee Station
· Wahroonga Station
The Ku-ring-gai Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) only identifies the primary local centres of Gordon, Turramurra, Lindfield and St Ives as being suitable for additional housing as these are the only centres that contain the appropriate level of goods, services and amenities. However, the inclusion of St Ives in the LSPS was subject to provision of priority bus infrastructure from Mona Vale to Macquarie Park.
It is noted that the Department’s list of town centre precincts refers to specific shopping centres or groups of shops. The exhibited EIE referred to town centre precincts as all land in a centre within a particular employment zone. Clarification has been sought from the Department on this issue as well as how and from what point will the 400m and 800m walking distances will be measured. The Department provided the following advice:
· The proposed intention is to map the extent of the E1 zone applying to the centre. The 400m and 800m walking distance is to be measured from the mapped boundary of the E1 zone.
· We are not proposing to map the extent of the 400m and 800m walking catchment around each centre, instead we will define this in the SEPP similar to the existing affordable housing provisions.
Criteria for further exclusions of station and town centres
The Department will assess the evidence provided by councils for proposed further exclusions of stations and town centres from the initial lists. The factors that the Department will consider for further station and town centre exclusions will include, but are not limited to, the following:
· Essential infrastructure: These concerns should be critical and urgent, rather than general issues that can be addressed over time. Essential infrastructure includes water, sewage, stormwater, and electricity.
· Road infrastructure: These issues should be critical and urgent, rather than general issues that can be addressed over time. General traffic management is not considered a critical issue.
· Quality of train service: DPHI have already screened for frequencies, distance to major hubs, and co-location with town centres, so the remaining issues may relate to capacity and reliability.
· Quality of bus services in town centres: DPHI have only done a basic bus service screening for town centres, the remaining issues may relate to capacity, reliability, and frequency.
· Level of service of town centres: DPHI have screened for major supermarkets to predict the Level of service of a centre, however there may be some centres with major supermarkets that do not also have a range of other frequently needed goods and services.
· Land constraints and environmental risks within the precincts will be dealt with separately via direct land exclusions in Recommendations 5-7.
Recommendations for station and Town Centre exclusions
Essential infrastructure and Road Infrastructure
The critical and urgent provision of essential infrastructure and road infrastructure are exclusion criteria Council raised and provided evidence of in its February 2024 submission on the EIE. The submission noted that there were the significant issues of sewerage overflows in the Ku-ring-gai LGA, the growing stormwater flooding, the congested Pacific Highway and major roads, the over-subscribed schools forcing smaller catchment areas, the long hospital waiting lists, the costs of providing open space had not been addressed or considered. Further, there is zero commitment to support the new communities with the required infrastructure, including no commitment of funding to ensure delivery.
These infrastructure issues remain and on the basis of Council’s submission, the low and mid-rise housing policy should not be implemented in any areas until such critical infrastructure issues are addressed.
Level of services in centres
An exclusion criterion relates to the range of goods and services (other than supermarkets) available to support an increase in housing densities and population. It is noted that the Warrawee station precinct has no goods and services or employment zone land within an 800m walking distance and therefore little capacity to adequately service an increase in housing and population. Likewise, the Killara station precinct has very few services and limited capacity to expand the provision of services. As noted earlier in this report, the Ku-ring-gai LSPS only identifies the primary local centres of Gordon, Turramurra, Lindfield and St Ives as being suitable for additional housing as these are the only centres that contain the appropriate level of goods, services and amenities.
Based on this criterion, the Wahroonga, Warrawee, Pymble, Killara and Roseville station precincts should be excluded from the application of the low and mid-rise housing policy.
Bushfire, Flood, and other hazards- background and recommendations
1. Bushfire
Exclude land designated as Bushfire prone land Category 1 on Rural Fire Service mapping.
Any additional bushfire prone land nominated for exclusion should be confined to issues that cannot be managed at the DA stage, and should be well-evidenced (e.g., studies, mapping).
· All Bushfire Prone Land Mapped areas should be excluded, not just Category 1 Land. It is imperative that any increases in density within mapped areas (including the buffer) is strategically assessed for evacuation and RISK, not just hazard. This is because the BFPL mapping identifies HAZARD (presence of a certain type of vegetation and size of patch), however, this does not specifically identify bushfire RISK which needs to consider other factors such as slope, prevailing wind, microclimate, evacuation opportunity etc. The density of development in an area impacts on the relative RISK and as such cannot be appropriately determined at DA stage, particularly where appropriate areas for increased density have not been specifically assessed.
2. Flood
Exclude land below the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) level in the catchments of Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley and Georges River. Council should assist in determining the appropriate exclusion areas to be mapped by the Department.
Any additional flood prone land nominated for exclusion should be confined to issues that cannot be managed at the DA stage and should be well-evidence.
· Properties identified with Overland Flow or mainstream flow should be excluded in all areas.
· Properties that do not have a direct, gravity-fed connection to the stormwater system should be excluded. Nuisance flooding caused by inefficient stormwater disposal via charged systems (prone to failure where maintenance is not maintained) and infiltration/dispersal systems can cause significant damage and increased density of development in the area will exasperate existing issues.
· Council should also be able to exclude properties in areas that are known to have undersized stormwater systems (anywhere unable to covey above the 10yr ARI event), until such time that infrastructure can be upgraded as required.
· In areas where flood studies have not yet been completed, councils should be able to exclude properties with drainage easements, stormwater infrastructure, creeks and other drainage lines until such time that a study can be completed, and flood risk can be understood.
3. Evacuation
Exclude land based on evacuation capacity constraints or other evacuation issues, arising from hazards risk (e.g. bushfire, flooding or other hazard).
Any land nominated for exclusion based on evacuation risks should be those which are unable to be managed at the DA stage. These must be appropriately evidenced (e.g., through previous evacuation studies).
· All Identified Bushfire Evacuation Exclusion Areas should also be excluded. This is land shown cross-hatched on the Bush Fire Evacuation Risk Map and listed as Environmentally sensitive land under Schedule 3 of SEPP (Housing) 2021. These are areas that have been identified as having sufficient risk to not be suitable for seniors living and should not be subject to increased development without strategic assessment and planning.
· Due to the steep topography and relatively short timeframe for flooding in Ku-ring-gai, evacuation risk for flooding is not a significant issue, however staff would support the exclusion of areas identified as Low Flood Islands. That is areas identified in Flood Studies as Low Flood Islands or FIS (where all the land in the isolated area will be fully submerged in a PMF after becoming isolated) Emergency Response Category,
4. Other Hazards or constraints
The Department has investigated other hazards including coastal management, contaminated lands, acid sulfate soils, land slip, pipelines and dangerous industries.
The Department considers that these risks can generally be managed at DA stage however there may be circumstances that councils advise are high risk and cannot be adequately managed in the DA. Council’s should identify these lands and they can be considered for exclusion.
The Department’s review of potential exclusion areas appears to be specially focused on natural hazards and constraints. There has been no consideration given to any other environmental planning constraints, including those that are already mapped at the state level such as the NSW Biodiversity Values Map and the Terrestrial Biodiversity Map and Riparian Lands and Watercourses Map in the Ku-ring-gai LEP 2015. Council’s submission on the EIE raised a number of concerns over potential impacts of the low and mid-rise housing policy on biodiversity and other environmental issues. None of these issues have been responded to or addressed in the Low-and Mid-Rise Refinements Paper.
Areas identified on the NSW Biodiversity Values Map should be excluded from the low and mid-rise housing SEPP. Although the Biodiversity Offsets Scheme may be likely to be triggered for development in these areas, the piecemeal implementation leaves significant risk that the cumulative impacts of development activities cannot be effectively considered (death by a thousand cuts).
Consideration of the impacts of increased intensity of development in these areas is much better considered through a thorough strategic planning process, that would enable due consideration of cumulative impacts across an area. Thorough strategic planning also provides the opportunity to implement specific controls to aid in the protection and enhancement of the state’s most important biodiversity assets.
integrated planning and reporting
Theme 1 – Community, People and Culture
Theme 3 – Places, Spaces and Infrastructure
|
Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective |
Delivery Program Term Achievement |
Operational Plan Task |
|
C6.1 Housing diversity, adaptability and affordability is increased to support the needs of a changing community
|
C6.1.1 Councils planning approach to the provision of housing across Ku-ring-gai is responsive and addresses the supply, choice and affordability needs of the community and the changing population
|
C6.1.1.1 Implement the Ku-ring-gai Housing Strategy to 2036 C6.1.1.3 Identify opportunities to provide a range of housing choices and part of the implementation of the Ku-ring-gai Housing Strategy to 2036 |
|
P2.1 A robust planning framework is in place to deliver quality design outcomes and maintain the identity and character of Ku-ring-gai |
P2.1.1 Land use strategies, plans and processes are in place to effectively manage the impact of new development |
P2.1.1.1 Prepare plans and strategies as required by the Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS) |
Governance Matters
The NSW DPHI are now seeking to hold one-on-one workshops with Council staff to gain feedback on the low and mid-rise housing policy in May 2024. Ku-ring-gai Council’s workshop was scheduled for 14 May 2024. This has now been rescheduled to 22 May 2024 to allow Council to consider this report and make a formal Council resolution in providing the required feedback.
Risk Management
Council staff sought a deferral of the workshop with the DPHI specifically to allow formal Council consideration of the workshop materials and agenda. Deferral of the workshop was specifically facilitated on this understanding.
The NSW DPHI are now seeking to hold one-on-one workshops with council staff to gain feedback on the low and mid-rise housing policy in May 2024. Ku-ring-gai Council’s workshop was scheduled for 14 May. This has now been rescheduled to 22 May 2024 to allow Council to consider this report and make a formal Council resolution in providing the required feedback.
Financial Considerations
The cost of preparing the Council submission on the Low & Medium-rise SEPP was covered by the Urban Planning – Strategy & Environment Department Budget.
Social Considerations
This report is linked to the Social considerations that were addressed in Council’s comprehensive submission on the Low & Medium-rise SEPP presented to Council on 20 February 2024.
Environmental Considerations
This report is linked to the environmental considerations that were addressed in Council’s comprehensive submission on the Low & Medium-rise SEPP presented to Council on 20 February 2024.
Community ConsultatioN
Community consultation not required for this report to Council.
Internal Consultation
Where relevant, internal consultation has occurred within the Strategy & Environment Department and other Departments for the preparation of this report.
Council’s GMD and Councillors have been kept informed of emerging issues in relation to housing policy changes since they were announced in late 2023.
Councillors were briefed by staff on the matters covered in this report on 14 May 2024.
Summary
The NSW Dept of Planning, Housing & Infrastructure are seeking feedback on the upcoming Low and Mid-rise housing policy reforms prior to their finalisation and implementation later in 2024.
This report provides the context and supporting documentation and Council’s feedback on the proposed Low and Mid-rise Housing Policy in particular its application to the stations and town centres precincts in Ku-ring-gai.
The Department have requested specific feedback on the following:
· Any proposed exclusions of stations and centres where further justification is needed.
· The possible exclusion of the policy on land affected by high risk natural hazards or other constraints, and evacuation issues.
The areas where Council should seek exclusion from the Low and Mid-rise Housing Policy are discussed above and specified in Attachment A3 - Feedback form – Station and town centre precinct selections and Attachment A4 - Feedback form – Bushfire, Flood, and other hazards.
Recommendation:
A. That
Council endorse the exclusions from the Low and Mid-rise Housing Policy as
discussed in the report and specified in Attachment A3 - Feedback
form – Station and town centre precinct selections and Attachment
A4 - Feedback form – Bushfire, Flood, and other hazards and
submit the documents to the NSW Department of Planning, Housing &
Infrastructure for their consideration.
B. That a copy of this report is provided to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure as part of Council’s response to the Low and mid-rise housing - Policy Refinement Paper.
|
Andrew Watson Director Strategy & Environment |
|
|
Attachments: |
A1 |
Low and Mid-rise Housing - Policy Refinement Workshop Agenda 14/05/2024 |
|
2024/167569 |
|
|
A2 |
Low and mid-rise housing - Policy Refinement Paper - 29 April 2024 |
|
2024/167563 |
|
|
A3 |
Feedback form - Stations and centres selection |
|
2024/167555 |
|
|
A4 |
Feedback form - Bushfire, Flood and other hazards |
|
2024/167549 |
