All Residents and Ratepayers urged to study closely the new Shoalhaven Local Environment Plan (LEP)

 

The Draft Shoalhaven Local Environment Plan (SLEP2009) is Currently being finalised by Council. The LEP governs land use through zoning, development controls and details of the activities that may be carried out in particular zones. For example it defines the areas where only single houses can be built and those areas where apartments may be built, or areas where say boarding house and hotels can be built.

Height of Buildings

The draft LEP sets an default height limit for buildings of 11 metres. Height of Building maps have been provided for land that can have buildings higher than 11 metres. Council did not map the residential or business areas that are currently less than 11 metres. However, Council has passed a motion indicating an intention, subsequent to the exhibition of SLEP2009, to include HOB maps for the R2 Low Density Residential zone setting the height at 8.5 meters except for foreshore land covered by DCP62 to have a height of 7.5 metres (previously 6m to 7.5m).

For Vincentia this leaves unmapped and subject to the default height of 11 metres the R1 General Residential zone which stretches from Edward Street to Minerva Avenue and the Burton Street shops. Development Control Plans that previously controlled height can no longer contain a height limit expressed in metres.

Assuming Council do as intended in respect of the R2 zone and foreshore land, we are left with the prospect of future development in the area from Edward Street to Minerva Avenue including the Burton Street shops being built to a height of 11 metres (3 perhaps 4 storeys).

This will completely change the character of Vincentia and in the opinion of your Committee is completely unacceptable.

Burton Street Shops

The new LEP has to conform to standard template issued by the NSW Government. To achieve a best fit this requires that existing zones be converted to a corresponding zone in the template.

The existing Burton Street shops are zoned 3(c) as a neighbourhood shopping centre. The land surrounding the Bi Lo car park is zoned 2(c) residential. In preparing the new LEP Council could have chosen new zonings that match the old zoning and nothing would have changed except height limits referred to above. However, at the request of the largest landowner, Council propose to rezone all the shops, the car park, The Vincentia Community Hall, the residential land surrounding car park and Burton Street itself, as B4 Business mixed use.

The current uses of land in this area are predominately retail and single dwellings; but the new zone B4 has an objectives “To ensure that retail uses do not compete with the local retail centre” In the case of Vincentia “the local retail centre” is the Woolworths development at the crossroads. Given that this will have 2 supermarkets, a Big W discount department store, specialty shops and a food court, very few of the Burton Street existing retail uses are likely to be developed in the future. Surrounding the Bi Lo car park are 23 single dwellings, but dwellings will be prohibited under the proposed B4 zoning.

So the two principal current uses of the area, retail and dwellings will be restricted or not allowed as developments in the future.

On the other hand there are some 50 uses that are permissible in the B4 zone. But given the experience in Huskisson, which has several B4 zones, development is likely to be apartments in the form of residential flats or serviced apartments with perhaps a cafe underneath. Even if some of the retail operations survive for a while, other land in this area could be redeveloped immediately as apartments. As discussed above with al have a height limit 11 metres (3 to 4 storeys).

Need for a Vincentia Town Plan

The advent of the Vincentia District Centre has completely changed the structure of Vincentia. The retail focus is now at the junction of Wool Road and Naval College Road and the existing shops will, over time become redundant. The advantage that some 400 landowners had of living close to the Burton Street shops will be lost and with a B4 zoning could become a disadvantage.

Clearly, in zoning the area B4, Council has put the cart before the horse; before all the ramifications have been considered and all landowners and the community consulted. Your Committee believe there must be a Town Plan developed for Vincentia that preserves its character whilst allowing sensitive redevelopment, before any rezoning takes place. Landowners and the community must be given every opportunity to consider the future of their village. It follows that for the Burton Street area the existing zoning should be transferred on a “best fit” basis, the 3(c) business zone should be translated into B1 and the 2(c) residential area translated into R1 and no increase in height limits to be allowed.

Submission

The formal exhibition process is now closed. Proposed amendments to the draft will be decided by Councillors and it may be decide to re-exhibit the draft.

In the meantime any concerns you have should be conveyed to our local Councillors. See the Council website for contact details.

 

Resolution of Council re the processing of the Draft Shoalhaven LEP (SLEP2009) 29/11/2011

RESOLVED on a MOTION of Clr Ward, seconded Clr Fergusson, that Council:
a) Receive the overview and outcomes of the exhibition period of draft Shoalhaven LEP 2009, as detailed in the report, for information;
b) Continue the draft Shoalhaven LEP 2009 process as outlined in the “Next Steps in the draft Shoalhaven LEP Process” section in the body of this report;
c) Ensure that strategic planning matters of merit that are not consistent with the “best fit transfer” are prioritised as strategic planning projects to be further investigated and included in a future review of the Citywide LEP.
d) In continuing the draft Shoalhaven LEP 2009 process, ensure all Council decision making occurs via open Committee meetings or open forums; and
e) Prioritise the scheduling of the open Committee meetings or open forums to consider the submissions so 2-3 meetings can be held per week for a 3-4 week period as required in early 2012;
f) Secure sufficient resources, such that other projects are not relegated and the LEP continues to be the central priority with options including supplementing resources from the private sector.

 

Email sent to Council 15/12/2011

 

To the General Manager

Copy Clr. Fergusson.

 

Dear Russ,

We note the resolution of Council (1139) regarding the processing of SLEP2009 adopted on 29th November 2009 and in particular item c)

“Ensure that strategic planning matters of merit that are not consistent with the “best fit transfer” are prioritised as strategic planning projects to be further investigated and included in a future review of the Citywide LEP.”

We seek your assurance that the rezoning of the Vincentia Village Shops to B4 Mixed Use with a restriction on the development of future retail activities and prohibition of dwellings, will be considered consistent with a “best fit transfer” and that the rezoning will be deferred pending further investigation after the completion of SLEP2009.

 

The area concerned is bounded by Elizabeth Drive, The Wool Road, St George Avenue and Excellent Street and contains:

The restriction on future retail developments results from an additional objective inserted in the Standard Instrument by Council to restrict competition with the Vincentia District Centre (Woolworths). The B4 zone prohibits dwellings.

Clearly the rezoning is not a “best fit’ but seeks a major redevelopment of the centre of Vincentia. A very significant part of the retail area has just been sold “with redevelopment potential”.

We appreciate that the main commercial focus will now be at the junction of Wool Road and Naval College Road and many of the existing shops will, over time become redundant. However, the existing Vincentia shops contain many retail uses which will not compete with Woolworths but would not be able to afford the high rents to be charged by the VDC. There is a need to continue to provide a shopping facility that supplements the VDC to meet the requirements of those retailers and to provide the basic necessities of life for the local area residents including the disabled, who wish/need to be close to the shops. This implies that any redevelopment of the site must retain areas equivalent to a B1 Neighbourhood Centre.

 

Vincentia requires a strategic plan before this rezoning is considered. A strategic plan that most certainly deserves detailed public consultation. To quote from the recent Grattan Institute report on development (2011-7 Nov 2011):

“Many overseas cities that have managed growth well have involved their residents in decision-making. Australians

must also have the chance to participate in decisions on how we accommodate growth.”

 

We have detailed the reasons for reconsidering this rezoning in our submission, copy attached, but in summary:

The Vincentia Village shops are a vital community resource and no rezoning to B4 should be considered until a detailed Town Plan has been prepared for Vincentia and discussed with all landowners and the community. It follows that on a “best fit” basis, the existing 3(c) business zone should be translated into B1 Neighbourhood Centre and the 2(c) residential area translated into R1 General Residential.

Brian Saunders

President,

 

SLEP2009 Detailed submissions be the VRRA.

Draft Shoalhaven LEP 2009 - Submission

Rezoning of Vincentia Village Shops and Surrounding Area is unacceptable

At the request of one landowner it is proposed under the Draft Shoalhaven Local Environment Plan (SLEP2009) to rezone the existing Vincentia shops and surrounding area to B4, thus restricting future retail uses and prohibiting dwellings but allowing other uses including residential flats.

Recommendation

We submit that:

The Vincentia Village shops are a vital community resource and no rezoning to B4 should be considered until a detailed Town Plan has been prepared for Vincentia and discussed with all landowners and the community. It follows that on a “best fit” basis, the existing 3(c) business zone should be translated into B1 Neighbourhood Centre and the 2(c) residential area translated into R1 General Residential.

We have separately submitted that “To retain the character of Vincentia SLEP2009 must contain Height of Buildings Maps for all land in Vincentia showing heights of no greater than 8.5 metres (2 storeys).”

Reasons:-

Land proposed to be rezoned

The land to be rezoned is shown on Map “A” attached. It contains retail outlets, offices, car parks, Burton Street, the Vincentia Community Hall and 23 residential lots.

Not an Administrative Transfer to SLEP2009

Fact sheet 3 states SLEP2009 “has been largely been prepared based on “ground rules? set by Council and as an administrative change over or “best fit? transfer from the current LEP (Shoalhaven LEP 1985)”.

However, “best fit” is not the case with existing Vincentia (Burton Street) shops and the surrounding land which has all been rezoned B4 Business Mixed Use.

Map “B” shows the current zoning under SLEP1985. If it had been a best fit, The 3(c) Business, Neighbourhood would have been rezoned B1 Neighbourhood Centre not B4 Business Mixed Use and the 2(c) Residential Living Area rezoned to R1 General Residential not B4 Business Mixed Use.

Apparently the request for this rezoning came from the largest business landowner on the block. There are 3 other owners of land zoned 3(c) and there are 23 blocks of land zoned 2(c). We are not aware that any of the other landowners were consulted and certainly the community were not consulted about this rezoning.

Councils unnecessary haste to Rezone

Council has justified this rezoning on the basis that the when the Vincentia District Centre (VDC) is built the Vincentia Village shops will need to be redeveloped. We are not convinced this is so and it does not follow that this matter needs to be considered urgently under cover of SLEP2009 for the following reasons:-

Why a B4 Mixed Use zoning is inappropriate

The principal current uses of land shown are retail and single dwellings; but Zone B4 objectives include: “To ensure that retail uses do not compete with the local retail centre” i.e. the VDC and Woolworths. Given that the VDC will have 2 supermarkets, a Big W discount department store, specialty shops and a food court, many of the existing retail uses could not be developed in the future. The land contains 23 single dwellings, but under B4 dwellings are prohibited. So no renewal of dwellings is possible.

The two principal current uses of the area, retail and dwellings will be restricted or no longer be allowed under a B4 zoning.

Whilst the existing uses are restricted or prohibited in B4, there are some 50 uses that are permissible. However, given the experience in Huskisson which has several B4 zones, development is likely to be apartments in the form of residential flats or serviced apartments with perhaps a cafe underneath. Even if some of the retail operations survive for a while, other land in this area could be redeveloped as apartments immediately the rezoning takes effect.

Buildings on the land are currently 1 to 2 storeys but SLEP2009 proposes to increase the height limit applying to this land to 11 metres (3 or perhaps 4 storeys). This increase in height would make the construction of apartments with views over the Bay attractive. We could see small but tall apartment blocks sprouting up across the area. The financial return from high rise apartments will, we believe, be superior to the return from the existing low rise shops and will encourage redevelopment at the earliest opportunity. We note that Stockland has advertised their part of the Village shops for sale and that they are being advertised with a “proposed mixed use zoning under draft LEP potentially allowing for more intensive development (S.T.C.A.)”

The development of a high rise enclave in the centre of Vincentia would be completely out of character with Vincentia and the needs of the community.

B4 zoning affects the Surrounding 2(c) Residential Zone

Surrounding the proposed B4 zone is a residential zone currently zoned 2(c) which will become R1. This zone stretches 1.3 kilometres from Edward Street to Minerva Avenue and contains some 400 lots. The zoning allows medium density developments but is overwhelmingly single dwellings. Clearly, this area was zoned to allow residents to be within easy walking distance of the shops. Council proposes to increase height limits in the R1 zone from 2 storeys to 11 metres (3 to 4 storeys) except for the foreshore area to be 7.5 metres. This will change the density of the area.

However, the B4 zone will exclude developments that compete with Woolworths and so the advantage of being near the shops will be negated. Landowners who have purchased or developed properties on the basis of the proximity to the shops will naturally be concerned at this loss of advantage and perhaps value, particularly, as this has been done without community consultation.

The effect on landowners in the adjacent R1 zone of rezoning the shops has not been considered by Council.

Community needs have been ignored with this rezoning – it requires a new Town Plan

The advent of the Vincentia District Centre has the danger of completely changing the structure of Vincentia. The main retail focus will now be at the junction of Wool Road and Naval College Road and many of the existing shops will, over time become redundant. The advantage of living close to Burton Street could be lost and if a B4 zoning is allowed could become a disadvantage.

However, the existing Vincentia shops contain many retail uses which will not compete with Woolworths but would not be able to afford the high rents to be charged by the VDC. There is a need to continue to provide a shopping facility that supplements the VDC to meet the requirements of those retailers and to provide the basic necessities of life for the local area residents including the disabled, who wish/need to be close to the shops. This implies that any redevelopment of the site must retain an area as B1 Neighbourhood Centre.

Also redevelopment must consider current low rise, village style, which is the attraction that brings residents and tourists to Vincentia. Council has often said that it was encouraging high rise developments in Huskisson so that Vincentia and other Jervis Bay villages can be spared from that sort of development. Rezoning the Village shops to B4 with an 11 metre height limit and increasing the height in the large surrounding 2(c) zone to 11 metres is completely at odds with this protestation.

We submit that, in zoning the Village shops to B4, Council has not considered all the full ramifications of this action and particularly the services needed by the community. Before rezoning, with landowners and the community consultation, there must be a Town Plan developed for Vincentia that preserves its character, provides the needed services whilst allowing sensitive development.

Recommendation

The Vincentia Village shops are a vital community resource and no rezoning to B4 should be considered until a detailed Town Plan has been prepared for Vincentia and discussed with all landowners and the community. It follows that on a “best fit” basis, the existing 3(c) business zone should be translated into B1 Neighbourhood Centre and the 2(c) residential area translated into R1 General Residential.

We have separately submitted that “To retain the character of Vincentia SLEP2009 must contain Height of Buildings Maps for all land in Vincentia showing heights of no greater than 8.5 metres (2 storeys).”

Draft Shoalhaven LEP 2009 - Submission

Increased Height of Buildings in the Vincentia Village Shops and Surrounding Residential Area to 11 metres is unacceptable

 

We submit that the approach taken by Council in respect of Height of Buildings (HOB) is not the “best fit”. It differs from the approach taken by neighbouring Councils and as proposed will create uncertainty for landowners and developers and completely changes the character of Vincentia.

We recommend that in:

Clause 4.3 (1)

Delete - objective (a).

Clause 4.3 (2)

Delete – “the height of a building on any land is not to exceed 11 metres except when the maximum height is shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map”

Insert - “the height of a building on any land is not to exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map”

AND

To retain the character of Vincentia SLEP2009 must contain Height of Buildings Maps for all land in Vincentia showing heights of no greater than 8.5 metres (2 storeys).

Reasons:-

Administrative Transfer to SLEP2009

Fact sheet 3 states SLEP2009 “has been largely been prepared based on “ground rules? set by Council and as an administrative change over or “best fit? transfer from the current LEP (Shoalhaven LEP 1985)”.

SLEP1985 sets height of Buildings in clause 33 as “A building must not be erected to a height greater than 2 storeys... without the consent of Council.” and DCPs have been used to control a height limit in metres.

The draft SLEP2009 only provide Height of Building (HOB) maps for land that can exceed 11 metres, so the default height for Vincentia has become 11 metres as indicated by blank Height of Building maps. This compares with the height previously set by locally applicable DCPs of 6 to 8.5 metres.

This is a 50% increase in the default height cannot be considered “an administrative change over or “best fit? transfer”.

Intention to amend SLEP2009

Council has passed a motion indicating an intention subsequent to the exhibition of SLEP2009 to include HOB maps for all R2 and RU5 zones setting the height at 8.5 meters except for foreshore land covered by DCP62 to have a height of 7.5 metres (previously 6m to 7.5m). Land that has a site specific DCP including height controls will also be mapped. We expect Council to honour this intention.

However, this leaves many areas unmapped including R1 General Residential which includes single dwellings and medium density, R3 Medium Density Residential, all Business zones, Public Recreation areas and Environmental zones, all of which can have developments to 11metres.

In the case of Vincentia is not intending to map the proposed R1 zone which contains some 400 lots stretching 1.3 kilometres from Edward Street to Minerva Avenue, nor the B4 zone covering the shops and surrounding areas. (See map attached). These zones currently have no buildings over 2 storeys, but new development will be able to build to 3 or possibly 4 storeys.

This limited mapping will result in a complete change in the character of Vincentia and is not acceptable.

Use of DCPs to control HOB

Council have indicated that they can use DCPs to control HOB if the land is not mapped. The existing DCPs will need to be amended to do this as they contain specific height limits e.g. DCP91 Dwellings, has a maximum height limit of 8.5 metres. The reason for the amendment is that DCPs can no longer have a maximum height limit that differs from the maximum height limit in the LEP, which in SLEP2009 is 11 metres.

The DoP&I has suggested the three dimensional diagrams can be used in DCPs to control height. However, neither Council nor DoP&I have been able to demonstrate how this can be done. The DoP&I also suggest the use of storeys to control height, but this would require specifying ceiling heights etc. and would severely restrict architectural design.

Shoalhaven’s DCPs are “performance based” and allow for “acceptable solutions”. On many occasions Council staff has indicated that DCPs should only be treated as a guide to allow for flexibility. Whilst this may be satisfactory for minor design matters, height is so crucial to fabric and character of an area that it cannot be left to chance.

Neither Council nor DoP&I have been able to demonstrate how DCPs can control height below the legal limit set by the LEP. DCPs are not an effective alternative to mapping all land and so avoiding uncertainty for landowners and developers.

Clause 4.3 (1) Objectives

Clause 4.3 (1) (a) seeks to set height of buildings at levels that are compatible with the “desired future characteristics of a locality”. Like most areas of the Shoalhaven, Vincentia does not have a DCP or similar document setting out the desired future characteristics of the locality and there have been no discussions with the community on this issue. So this phrase will only confuse landowners as to what is Council’s future intent is for their land. To provide certainty this objective should be deleted and the “desired future characteristics of a locality” reflected in the Height of Building map for Vincentia following community consultation and the development of a Town Plan.

The desired future characteristics of Vincentia should be determined after community consultation and the development of a Town Plan not by arbitrary changes made under cover of SLEP2009.

Other Local Councils

We have examined the LEPs or draft LEPs of Eurobodalla, Kiama, Shellharbour and Wollongong. They have all included in clause 4.3 the wording from the Standard Instrument - “the height of a building on any land is not to exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map” AND they have mapped either all land or urban land. None of these Councils has set an overall height limit in clause 4.3.

Shoalhaven’s approach to HOB differs significantly from that taken by other Councils.

Recommendation

We submit that the approach taken by Council in respect of Height of Buildings (HOB) is not the “best fit”. It differs from the approach taken by neighbouring Councils and as proposed will create uncertainty for landowners and developers and completely changes the character of Vincentia.

We recommend that in:

Clause 4.3 (1)

Delete - objective (a).

Clause 4.3 (2)

Delete – “the height of a building on any land is not to exceed 11 metres except when the maximum height is shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map”

Insert - “the height of a building on any land is not to exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map”

AND

To retain the character of Vincentia SLEP2009 must contain Height of Buildings Maps for all land in Vincentia showing heights of no greater than 8.5 metres (2 storeys).

Draft Shoalhaven LEP 2009 - Submission

Review of SLEP 2009 and certain issues concerning the Vincentia

 

Because they will completely change the character of Vincentia we have separately made submissions on the rezoning of Vincentia Village shops to B4 Mixed Use, instead of the like for like zoning of B1 Neighbourhood Centre and on the increase in height of buildings to 11 metres (3 – 4 storeys) in the B4 and R1 zones compared with existing maximum of 2 storeys.

We now comment on a certain other issues affecting Vincentia.

1. Inappropriate Land Uses

We refer to Part 2 of SLEP2009 – Zonings and permissible uses. Council has allowed a greater number of permissible uses in zones compared with other surrounding Councils. Whilst we realise that the uses generally still require Council consent, the inclusion of so many activities creates uncertainty for residents.

We submit that the following land uses should be deleted from SLEP2009.

R1 General Residential - Area around the shops from Minerva to Edward Street

Delete- Boat repair facilities (noisy business activity, use B, IN or W zone)

Home industries (light industry not compatible with residential)

Registered clubs (not compatible, noise and traffic, use R3, B or RE2)

Tourist and visitor accommodation (not compatible due to noise and traffic, use SP3 or R3)

Veterinary hospital (not compatible due to noise, use R3 or B zones)

Also delete objective “To identify land suitable for future urban expansion” from R1 as this could pre-empt consideration of the appropriate zoning when land is to be released.

R2 Low Density Residential – Most of Vincentia including Bayswood

Delete – Dual occupancy (now allowed in R1 and R3, not compatible with R2 ”Low Density” residential, an oxymoron.)

Emergency service facilities (not compatible due to noise and traffic)

Home industries (light industry not compatible with residential)

B2 Local Centre - The Vincentia District Centre

Delete - Residential care facilities (should be adjacent not part of shopping centre)

B 4 Mixed Use – Proposed for Vincentia Village shops and surrounding houses

Delete - Crematorium (inappropriate)

Add - Mortuaries (appropriate)

RE1 Public Recreation – Plantation Point and some other areas, see maps

Delete - Agriculture (incompatible with passive recreation)

Caravan parks (incompatible with passive recreation)

Child care centres (cannot meet objectives)

Entertainment facility (potentially large buildings and noise, incompatible with passive recreation, use B zones)

Function centres (potentially large buildings and noise, incompatible with passive recreation, use SP3 or B zones)

Recreation facilities (indoor) (potentially large buildings e.g. squash courts and incompatible with passive recreation, use B zones)

Restaurants (too intensive and incompatible with passive recreation, but kiosks are allowed)

E2 Environment Conservation – Captain Street, around Bayswood and some other areas, see maps

Delete - Aquaculture (cannot meet objectives)

Bed and breakfast accommodation (if appropriate zone land E4)

Dwelling houses (if appropriate zone land E4)

Home businesses (if appropriate zone land E4)

Home industries (if appropriate zone land E4)

E4 Environmental Living

Include this zoning the objectives of which are:

1 Objectives of zone

• To provide for low-impact residential development in areas with special ecological, scientific or aesthetic values.

• To ensure that residential development does not have an adverse effect on those values.

We submit that E4 is the appropriate zone to be used where housing is allowed instead of E2.

2. Subdivisions

4.1A Exceptions to minimum Lot Sizes for dual occupancies

This clause allows the subdivision of existing dual occupancies with, in the case of Vincentia, a minimum lot size of 350 sqm. We continue to argue that such subdivision should not apply in the R2 zones of Vincentia. There is no place for inner city style living in an area up to 7 kilometres from the District Centre.

It is noted that the DOP&I approval for Bayswood does not allow dual occupancy subdivision although it is adjacent to the District Centre.

We submit the R2 zone in Vincentia should be excluded from clause 4.1A.

3. Principle Development Standards

4.4 Floor space ratio (FSR)

Maps are blank for Vincentia.

We submit that for clarity and to provide certainty for landowners all lots should have a FSR shown on the FSR map.

4. Vincentia District Centre

Currently controlled by the DoP&I Part 3A consent but is to be absorbed into SLEP2009. Zoning of R2 and B2 are OK.

We submit that any changes made to the DoP&I approval as this land is incorporated in SLEP2009 must be re-exhibited for public comment.

5. Heritage Estate

Council rezoning to general residential was stopped by the Commonwealth. It follows that land should be rezoned E2 Environmental Conservation but Council have transferred to old zoning equivalent RU2 Rural Landscape but effectively blocked development with 40h lot size. The objectives of the RU2 zoning are completely at odds with the Commonwealth’s ruling. An appropriate zoning is E2 Environmental Protection.

We submit that the appropriate zoning for the Heritage Estate is E2.