Draft Western District Plan

Transcription

1 Powered by TCPDF ( Draft Western District Plan Submission_id: Date of Lodgment: 15 Dec 2017 Origin of Submission: Online Organisation name: Hawes and Swan Planning Organisation type: Other First name: Jeremy Last name: Swan Suburb: 2010 Submission content: Please find attached our submission on behalf of Tidapa Landowners Group, Cobbitty. Number of attachments: 1

2 Hawes & Swan Planning Pty Ltd PH (02) Suite 4, Level 4 35 Buckingham Street Surry Hills NSW December 2017 Greater Sydney Commission PO Box 257 Parramatta NSW 2124 info@gsc.nsw.gov.au Dear Sir / Madam, Submission on Draft Western District Plan on behalf of Tidapa Landowner Group. Thank you for providing the opportunity to comment on the draft Western District Plan dated October 2017, which is currently on pubic exhibition. This submission has been prepared by Hawes and Swan Planning and lodged on behalf of the owners of Tidapa Landowner Group. This submission supports the planning priorities of the draft Western District Plan relating to livability specifically to housing supply and affordability, and creating and renewing great places and local centres,. It is noted our client own a significant land holding within the Cobbitty area (identified as Figure 1) and referenced as the Tidapa site throughout this letter. Our clients welcome the draft Western District Plan however our concerns and this submission primarily relates to the following: inclusion of the Tidapa site for redevelopment; ambiguous management strategies for rural areas within the south-western growth centre; and impacts of the Outer Sydney Orbital (OSO) as per the Greater Sydney Structure Plan 2056 on the South West. These concerns are addressed in this letter below.

3 Figure 1: The Tidapa Site owned by Tidapa Landowner Group (Source: JBA Submission). 1.0 The Tidapa site The Tidapa site presents an opportunity to sensitively expand the South West Priority Growth Area to contribute significantly to the supply of new homes in the South West, whilst preserving important agricultural and scenic values currently experienced on lands adjoining the South West Growth Precinct. The inclusion of the Tidapa site for redevelopment presents as an opportunity to contribute to the housing aims of the Draft Western City District plan. Tidapa Landowner Group have previously submitted a submission prepared by Ethos Urban (formally JBA) to the Greater Sydney Commission on the Draft South West District plan dated 31 March 2017, requesting the inclusion of the Tidapa site in the South West Priority Growth Area. A copy of this submission is provided at Attachment A. The Tidapa Landowner Group have had ongoing discussions with the Department of Planning and Environment and Camden Council requesting for the inclusions of these lands within the South West Priority Growth corridor. The key rationale for the inclusion of the Tidapa site in the South West Priority Growth Area can be summarized below: There is logic in extending the boundary of the South West Priority Growth Area to include the Tidapa Precinct as the site presents a transitional area between the adjoining urban renewal precincts and existing rural area; The site provides an opportunity to increase housing supply in the short term; 2

4 The site has access to existing and proposed upgraded transport infrastructure; The land is suitable for urban development; Utilities services already have, or can easily be provided to enable development, at no cost to government; and The scenic and agricultural production values of the Metropolitan Rural Area will not be impacted by the proposed development. A copy of the full submission and report has been included at Attachment A and provides a full synopsis of this rationale. 1.1 Consistency with the ten directions and planning priorities of the draft Western City District Plan The following table summarizes the ten directions and planning priorities of the draft Western City District Plan. The Tidapa Precinct can deliver on the majority of these directions and planning priorities. Table 1 - Draft Western City District Plan ten directions and planning priorities. Directions Planning Priorities Consistency of Proposal 1. A city Planning Priority W1 The proposal will maximise the supported by Planning for a city supported by utility of existing infrastructure infrastructure infrastructure. assets and, to reduce the demand for new infrastructure. 2. A collaborative city 3. A city for people Planning Priority W2 Working through collaboration. Planning Priority W3 Providing services and social changing needs. Planning Priority W4 Fostering healthy, creative, culturally rich and socially connected communities. The land owners have held discussions with local Council and DPE for the site. The land welcome collaborations with the GSC to help deliver on these directions. The proposal will provide the social infrastructure that is reflective the needs of the local community now and in the future by including the delivery of community infrastructure, including primary and secondary schools, and a community facility. The proposal includes substantial open space and community infrastructure and the preliminary masterplan adopts place making principles with a strong emphasis on providing spaces that foster a sense of community and the public domain will provide opportunities. 3

5 4. Housing the city 5. A city of great places 6. A wellconnected city 7. Jobs and skills for the city 8. A city in its landscape Planning Priority W5 Providing housing supply, choice and affordability, with access to jobs and services. Planning Priority W6 Creating and renewing great places and local centres, and respecting the Planning Priority W7 Establishing the land use and transport structure to deliver a liveable, productive and sustainable Western Parkland City. Planning Priority W8 Leveraging industry opportunities from the Western Sydney Airport and Badgerys Creek Aerotropolis. Planning Priority W9 Growing and strengthening the metropolitan city cluster. Planning Priority W10 Maximising freight and logistics opportunities and planning and managing industrial and urban services land. Planning Priority W11 Growing investment, business opportunities and jobs in strategic centres. Planning Priority W12 Protecting and improving the health and enjoyment of the waterways. A range of housing typologies is proposed ranging from large lots, to medium density that is close to planned and existing infrastructure and jobs. The proposal will Conserve and enhance environmental heritage of the Cobbitty Village and Hills as the site will provide a transitional area between the adjoining urban renewal precincts and existing rural area. The proposal will provide an integrated land use strategy and will connect into existing and planned infrastructure plans to deliver the 30-minute city. The proposal will foster new opportunities for industry to support the Western Sydney Airport and Badgerys Creek Aerotropolis. The proposal includes the delivery of community infrastructure, including primary and secondary schools that will support the surrounding health and education precincts. The proposal will support the delivery of integrated planning, by utilising existing infrastructure to increase connectivity to existing and planned employment and services. The proposal would provide a mix of construction jobs as well as on going employment in the services and education industry. The proposal supports the protection of waterways, facilitate the preservation of existing waterways. 4

6 Planning Priority W13 Creating a Parkland City urban structure and identity, with South Creek as a defining spatial element. Planning Priority W14 Protecting and enhancing bushland and biodiversity. Planning Priority W15 Increasing urban tree canopy cover and delivering Green Grid Connections. Planning Priority W16 Protecting and enhancing scenic and cultural landscapes. Planning Priority W17 Better managing rural areas. Whilst the site is not located adjacent South Creek, does not traverses Cobbitty Creek less than 20 metres from the boundary of the site. This proposal seeks to rejuvenate Cobbitty Creek and protect this environmentally sensitive waterway. The proposal will retain any existing sensitive biodiversity present on site. Development will also allow funding for the preservation and restoration of the landscape of the ridgeline as envisaged in the Camden Biodiversity Strategy The proposal supports the connection of the Green Grid, particularly retaining links to Oran Park to the east, and links to the Green Grid between Harrington Grove and Badgerys Creek airport. The proposal retains and protects the scenic landscape of the Cobbitty hills and the existing ridgeline and creates a visual barrier for the urban area to the rural land to the west. The proposal offers more efficient land use that is no longer viable for rural uses and offers a form of ruralresidential development. The site provides a transitional area between the adjoining urban renewal precincts and existing rural area; Planning Priority W18 Delivering high quality open space. The proposal includes substantial open space and community infrastructure and the preliminary masterplan adopts place making principles with a strong emphasis on providing spaces that foster a sense of community and the public domain will provide opportunities for people to interact. 5

7 9. An efficient city Planning Priority W19 Reducing carbon emissions and managing energy, water and waste efficiently. The site is large enough to implement an off-grid approach to sewage treatment and disposal and the land owners have had preliminary discussions with private utilities companies with a view to exploring innovative and environmentally sustainable servicing solutions that aid in reducing carbon emissions and managing waste efficiently. 10. A resilient city Planning Priority W20 Adapting to the impacts of urban and natural hazards and climate change. The proposal will include Green corridors along creek lines and ridges that will provide amenity for residents and help communities adapt and be more resilient to extreme heat conditions. The protection of Cobbitty Creek will offer help create a greener and cool precinct. Management of Rural Lands Planning Priority W17 Better managing rural areas of the Draft Western City District Plan notes Western mineral and energy resources, and sustain the local rural towns and villages. The Tidapa site is zoned for rural land use however site is no longer viable for rural uses which was supported by Feasibility analysis of the site conducted by GHD and submitted with the owners first submission to the Draft South West District plans. Further, Planning Priority W17 also prescribed limits on investigation areas for urban development to Horsley Park, Orchard Hills, and east of The Northern Road, Luddenham. The Tidapa site sits west of the Northern Road and as mentioned above is no longer viable for rural uses however is not included in these investigation areas. This submission formally requests the inclusion of the Tidapa site in the South West Growth corridor. It is our opinion the draft Western City District Plan proposes limited actions and provides ambiguous management strategies for rural areas within the South-Western Growth Center, specifically where major infrastructure projects are forecasted. Our concerns largely relate to the following: no mention of the livability impacts on rural town ships such Cobbitty that are located on periphery of urban renewal precincts; limited discussion regarding site and earth works of the Scenic Hills earmarked for planned major infrastructure projects; lack of traffic implication to rural areas such as Cobbitty that will experience a major increase in heavy traffic attracted by the planned major infrastructure projects; 6

8 limited discussion on other important waterways and creek lines such as Cobbitty Creek; lack of transitional area between the adjoining urban renewal precincts and existing rural area; and the impacts on planned major infrastructure projects on various Grade One Agricultural lands. The inclusion of the Tidapa site in the priority growth areas provides for transitional area between existing rural lands and the adjoining urban renewal precincts. Currently, our clients site is subject to a minimum lot size area of 40Ha under the provisions of the Camden LEP 2010, whereas the adjoining lands to the east that are identified as urban renewal precincts contain a minimum lot size of 125m 2 under the provisions of the SEPP (Sydney Region Growth Centres) The draft Western City District plan lacks discussion on transition areas between urban renewal precincts and existing rural lands. It is requested the Greater Sydney Commission provide clearer actions and management strategies for rural lands and transition areas and consider the inclusion of the Tidapa site in the priority growth areas. Greater Sydney Structure Plan 2056 The following section of this letter further details the implications of rural lands that will be heavily affected by planned major infrastructure projects such as the Outer Sydney Orbital in the south west. Draft Western City District Plan provides a strategic approach to land use planning that follows on from the Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan Our Greater Sydney The draft Western District Plan earmarks the visionary location of the Outer Sydney Orbital (OSO) which appears to traverse through Cobbitty Village, our clients site and directly bounds the South West Growth Precinct. Figure 58 Greater Sydney Structure Plan 2056 of Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan notes the location of the Outer Sydney Orbital, whereas the Draft Western City District Plan Western City District Structure Plan 2036 does not include the visionary location of the Outer Sydney Orbital. It is requested the Western City District Structure plan 2036 be updated to aligns with the Greater Sydney Structure Plan 2056 to ensure consistency between the two structure plans. As previously mentioned the Draft Western City District Plan lacks the discussion surrounding the land use conflicts that will arise from this major piece of infrastructure traversing existing rural lands and the Tidapa Site. The Draft Western City District Plan references the Greater Sydney Structure Plan 2056 in Figure 5 of the plan and notes the earmarked the location of the Outer Sydney Orbital (OSO). However, the Draft Western City District Plan fails to consider the impacts of the OSO as noted in the Greater Sydney Structure Plan 2056 on rural villages such as Cobbitty in the South west. A submission was prepared by Hawes and Swan Planning and submitted to Transport for NSW 3 December 2017 on the Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 highlighting how the proposed location of the OSO will have significant impacts on not only our clients land but on rural areas such as Cobbitty Village. A copy of this submission is provided at Attachment B. The key implications of the visionary location of the Outer Sydney Orbital, specifically to the rural area and the Tidapa site are summarized below: 7

9 view and amenity loss to rural areas such as Cobbitty Village; substantially diminish the heritage values of Cobbitty and drastically impact upon scenic views present to Camden; significantly impact on the Scenic and Cultural Landscape of the Cobbitty Valley including Topography; positioned in a location that contains significant topographical constrains that would result in high construction and operating costs where better and alternative options are available; location so close to urban renewal precincts constraints future Land Use Development Potential on surrounding lands; and insufficient Information & Justification has been provided to the public to allow for adequate and effective consultation and understandings of the impacts resulting from the amended OSO corridor. Of note, the submission included an alternative option that will reduce the route by approximately 20% and protect the residents of Cobbitty and surrounding residential communities. This submission and alternative OSO Route aligns with Action 18 of Planning Priority W6 Creating and renewing great places heritage of the Draft Western City District plan where the GSC seeks to conserve and enhance environmental heritage by engaging with the community early in the planning process to understand natural heritage values. The submission to the Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 was written using local knowledge and expertise to provide a place-based and collaborative approach to planning, design and development. A draft Framework plan prepared by Tract has been prepared to demonstrate the alternate route for the OSO in conjunction with the proposal for the Tidapa site for redevelopment. The Draft Framework plan is provided at Attachment C. It is our professional opinion that this alternative route is more appropriate and is worthy of consideration. It is recommended the Greater Sydney Commission review this alternative option and consider this route on its significant merits. Recommendation In our professional opinion the Draft Western City District plan whilst showing merit into shaping and guiding the growth of the district, contains inconsistencies to the of Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan and lacks clear direction on the management of rural lands. The Draft Western City District plan lacks guidance on the implications for planned and envisaged major infrastructure projects, which in turn does not provide clear direction to when planning for their futures. The following provides a summary of our recommendations for the consideration of the Greater Sydney Commission: 8

10 acknowledge the Tidapa site is no longer viable for rural uses and presents as a viable option to be included into the investigation areas for urban development under Planning Priority W17 of the Draft Western City District plan; update the draft Western City District plan to align with the Greater Sydney Structure Plan 2056 to include the OSO to ensure consistency between the two structure plans; provide clearer actions and management strategies for rural lands and transition areas with consideration of the inclusion of the Tidapa site in the South West Growth corridor; provide clearer and legible plans detailing the location of the OSO to provide guidance to affected local ; and consider the alternative route for the OSO. We thank you for providing the opportunity to comment on the on the Draft Western City District plan and we look forward to future engagement prior to any final decision on the South West Growth corridor and the Western City District plan. Should you wish to discuss any of the details of this submission please do not hesitate to contact me on or jeremy@hawesandswan.com.au. Yours sincerely, Jeremy Swan DIRECTOR Hawes and Swan Planning Pty Ltd 9

11 ATTACHMENT A PM/NC/PR March 2017 Sheridan Dudley South West District Commissioner Greater Sydney Commission Dear Ms Dudley DRAFT SOUTH WEST DISTRICT PLAN SUBMISSION TIDAPA, CHITTICK LANE COBBITTY 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission on the draft South West District Plan, currently on exhibition. This submission has been prepared by JBA on behalf of Tidapa. Tidapa is a group of land owners that control the majority of land within an approximately 700 hectare Precinct in Cobbitty (see Figure 1). This submission supports the objectives of the draft District Plan relating to housing supply and affordability, and the emergence of a Western City focused on the Western Sydney Airport at Badgerys Creek. The Tidapa site is an opportunity to sensitively expand the South West Priority Growth Area to contribute significantly to the supply of new homes in this part of Sydney, while preserving important agricultural and scenic values in the Metropolitan Rural Area. The owners of the Tidapa property have had ongoing discussions with the Department of Planning and Environment (The Department) and Camden Council (Council) since the formative stages of establishing the South West Priority Growth Area. The current boundary of the Oran Park Precinct (and the Priority Growth Area boundary) follows a creek line that is the boundary between the Denbigh property (in the Oran Park Precinct) and Tidapa. A significant portion of new residential development in Oran Park is within the catchment of Cobbitty Creek, which runs through the Tidapa Precinct towards the Nepean River. The current Priority Growth Area boundary is not logical as it contradicts the catchment management principles that are a key element of the draft District Plan. From recent discussions with the Department and Council it is understood that the identification of the Outer Sydney Orbital (OSO) corridor alignment is key to the consideration of this site being included within the growth centre. It is understood that the South West Growth Centre Strategy is to be finalised within the next month, however the boundary will not be amended, and this will need to be revisited when the OSO corridor is set. Key issues as discussed with Camden Council over some time have been considered within the master planning exercise for this site, as illustrated in the Concept Report by Tract (See Attachment A). This submission demonstrates that: There is logic in extending the boundary of the South West Priority Growth Area to include the Tidapa Precinct; The site provides an opportunity to increase housing supply in the short term; The site has access to existing and proposed upgraded transport infrastructure; The land is suitable for urban development; Utilities services already have, or can easily be provided to enable development, at no cost to government; and

12 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 The scenic and agricultural production values of the Metropolitan Rural Area will not be impacted by the proposed development. 2.0 THE SITE & PRELIMINARY VISION The Tidapa Precinct includes the following properties (see Figure 1): Lots 2-5/DP (Tidapa); Lot 1/DP (Freshfields); Lots 64/DP852681, 2/DP234006, 1/DP and B/DP (Roseneath); and Lots 1/DP562336, 34/DP826181, 33/DP (Anglican Church). The site boundary illustrated at Figure 1 is the extent of the land owned by the Tidapa landowners. The site area illustrated in Figure 2 and Figure 3 is inclusive of Lots 1/DP376114, 455/DP , 13/DP604645, 12/DP and 11/DP604645, which would be vital in facilitating the realisation of the concept plan, and integration with Oran Park. 2.1 Context The proposed area is located directly adjacent to the South West Priority Growth Area, immediately adjoining the Oran Park Precinct. The site is at the fringe of the metropolitan urban area, with new suburbs at Harrington Park, Harrington Grove, Oran Park, and Kirkham Rise. Schools, community facilities and shopping areas are located approximately ten minutes drive along Peter Brock Drive within central Oran Park. The University of Sydney, Camden Main and Cobbitty Campus is located 8 min drive south west of the site with potential to link the site area from the southern boundary and from Cobbitty Road. The existing town of Cobbitty is located to the immediate south of the site and is characterised by a linear historical township development along Cobbitty Road. Cobbitty is experiencing significant change associated with development within the Wollondilly LGA that is resulting in truck movements along Cobbitty Road. At the same time the community is changing with the change of ownership of dwellings in the township. A single General Store serves Cobbitty and residents avail of the benefits and amenity in the Oran Park town centre as the development of the Oran Park precinct advances towards Cobbitty. The existing town is not currently serviced by any significant public open space or community facilities and the town is in decline. In effect the town and its residents are impacted by development with minimal direct benefit. As such there is growing sentiment within Cobbitty in support of urban development and the benefits that may be derived as well as the ability to ameliorate the impacts of existing development on the town. Whilst urban development of the Tidapa site could provide new spaces for building the Cobbitty community, the do nothing option will only see the town further decline. JBA PM/PR 2

13 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 Figure 1 Macro context Source: JBA JBA PM/PR 3

14 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 Figure 2 Site context and surrounding development Source: Tract JBA PM/PR 4

15 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 Figure 3 Site Location Source: Tract 2.2 Study Area The site has previously explored potential for development, resulting in a Structure Plan shown in Figure 4 Structure Plan, with an area of approximately 700HA. Importantly, our analysis of land form, utilities infrastructure planning and delivery, and transport connectivity demonstrates that the Tidapa site is a logical extension of the South West Priority Growth Area. One key aspect of this logical extension is the assumption that the Outer Sydney Orbital will form the logical boundary for urban growth in the South West Growth Area. The Outer Sydney Orbital investigation includes planning for both freight rail and motorway. Given the maximum grade requirements of rail infrastructure our assumption is that the OSO corridor will fall to the west of the site, thus providing increased justification for extending the South West District boundary to adjoin this corridor. 2.3 The Vision The unique qualities and location of this large site immediately adjacent to the existing urban boundary, provides a significant opportunity to contribute to the housing objectives of the South West District Plan. The site is ideally suited for rezoning from its existing rural zone to accommodate a mix of residential land uses, open space, and environmental protection zones that respect the natural features of the site including Cobbitty Creek and the ridgelines that form a rural scenic backdrop. The preliminary structure plan (Figure 4) indicates the site could accommodate approximately 5,400 new dwellings and associated supporting land uses. JBA PM/PR 5

16 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 The key principles of the Tidapa Structure Plan are: The majority of the residential lots would be within 400m walking distance from a neighbourhood centre and public park; Protecting and enhancing existing riparian corridors by preserving it as a green grid of parks and open space linking to Oran Park; and Retain existing ridgeline as a natural/visual barrier for the urban area (i.e. Oran Park and Marylands) to the east and the rural land to the west. The outcomes for the Tidapa Structure Plan are as follows: Approximately 5,400 dwellings located on the proposed urban land; 16,500 population (based on an average household size of 3.07); 8 small Neighbourhood Centres (400m catchment); and 2 Community Facilities; 2 Primary Schools and 1 High School; Over 40% of the site is Open Space, of which 8.03ha is Active Open Space and 1.71ha of Neighbourhood Park; 1,600 construction jobs over 15 years; Development serviced at no cost to government; and Contribute to a regional bicycle trail linking the Camden LGA heritage properties of Orielton, Kirkham, Oran Park, Camelot, Wivenhoe, Denbigh and Maryland and potentially Bents Basin. JBA PM/PR 6

17 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 Figure 4 Structure Plan Source: Tract JBA PM/PR 7

18 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March STRATEGIC PLANNING 3.1 Towards our Greater Sydney 2056 In general, we support the Greater Sydney Commission s vision for the Western City being reinforced by green and blue grid and by integrated transport and land use planning to create urban, transit oriented and sustainable built form. Towards our Greater Sydney 2056 highlights the need to accelerate housing supply across Greater Sydney, including the Western City. Existing land release areas in the South West Growth Centre are either fragmented and require significant government investment to unlock, or are controlled by a relatively small number of landowners. As such land release is constrained by either the ability to service or the decision by a small group of landowners to release land. The proposed development will allow for the delivery of approximately 5,400 dwellings, which has the potential to increase competition and put downward pressure on housing prices. The proposal aligns with metropolitan priority aims to deliver housing supply that broadens choice and diversity, particularly as the proposal will prioritise new housing in places where daily needs can be met within close proximity. 3.2 A Plan for Growing Sydney A Plan for Growing Sydney is the Regional Plan for metropolitan Sydney. There are three key principles in A Plan for Growing Sydney: Increase housing choice Stronger economic development in strategic centres & transport gateway Connecting centres with networked transport The draft District Plan emphasises the importance of creating and integrated network of transport corridors to link centres and other key destinations in the Western City. The Western Sydney Rail Needs Study, released jointly by the NSW and Commonwealth Governments in 2016, identifies a broad range of potential rail corridors to connect the Western Sydney Airport with the rest of Sydney. The South West Rail Link Extension corridor preservation, as shown in the Western Sydney Rail Needs Scoping Study Discussion Paper, indicates the potential for rail extension from St Marys to Oran Park (See Figure 5- Transport initiatives in Western Sydney). This provides added incentive for the inclusion of the Tidapa site in the South West District Plan, to increase housing supply within close proximity to proposed rail network infrastructure, and facilitate the provision of housing within employment zones along this proposed train line. 3.3 Western Sydney City Deal The City Deal seeks to improve housing affordability through support for increased supply and housing diversity. The draft District Plan identifies existing zoned areas and areas under investigation or already in the planning phase as part of the Priority Growth Area programs as creating housing capacity. Tidapa presents an opportunity to provide further land for housing supply that would support the City Deal objective. JBA PM/PR 8

19 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 Figure 5 Transport Initiatives in Western Sydney Source: Transport for NSW & NSW Making it Happen JBA PM/PR 9

20 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March THE DRAFT SOUTH WEST DISTRICT PLAN 4.1 Consistency with the objectives and priorities of the draft South West District Plan The following tables summarise the key priorities for the South West District, from the draft District Plan. The Tidapa Precinct is capable of delivering on the majority of these priorities. The sections that follow explore the relationship of the Tidapa Precinct to the objectives and outcomes of the draft District Plan in more detail. Table 1 Draft South West District Plan Priorities and Actions Productivity Priorities Creating a framework to deliver the Western City Integrating land use and transport planning to drive economic activity Planning for job target ranges for strategic and district centres Growing and diversify the economic opportunities of the District s strategic centres Growing jobs in the health and education sectors Coordinating infrastructure planning with population growth enhancing local access Strengthening the diversity of employment choice Consistency of Proposal Discussions with Council and DPE indicate agreement that the logical, visible, defensible boundary to Sydney s outer western city to define urban growth will be the Outer Sydney Orbital. The proposal will support the delivery of integrated planning, by utilising existing infrastructure to increase connectivity to existing and planned employment and services. The development provides an opportunity for an access to the OSO that bypasses Cobbitty Village The proposal will support the growth of planned strategic and district centres, by utilising existing and planned infrastructure to connect additional population, to these existing and future employment centres. The increase in population facilitated by the proposal, will support the further growth of District s strategic centres. The proposal will support the delivery of jobs in the education sector, through the addition of educational establishments within the site, which will provide the critical mass for an education precinct with the area The Tidapa Precinct is well placed to connect with existing and planned utilities infrastructure. Local infrastructure will be delivered on site to meet the needs of future residents and to increase the availability of public open space, recreation facilities and community facilities for the Cobbitty community. Green corridors along creek lines and ridges will provide amenity for residents and preserve the important natural features and rural interface that is a defining characteristic of the locality. The proposal would see a mix of construction jobs as well as on going employment in the services and education industry. JBA PM/PR 10

21 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 Liveability Priorities Improving housing choice Improving housing diversity and affordability Coordinating and monitoring housing outcomes and demographic trends Creating great places Fostering cohesive communities Responding to people s need for services Consistency of Proposal The proposal allows for the delivery for various housing typologies, ranging from large lots, to medium density. The proposal will support the delivery of additional housing, contributing to the supply of housing and increasing affordability The proposal will support the delivery of additional housing, in excess of the planned housing, based on the medium growth scenario projections. The largely unconstrained, unique landscape and physical characteristics of the greenfield site, provide opportunities for aesthetically appealing and high amenity places. The proposal includes substantial open space and community infrastructure and the preliminary masterplan adopts place making principles with a strong emphasis on providing spaces that foster a sense of community and the public domain will provide opportunities for people to interact. The proposal includes the delivery of community infrastructure, including primary and secondary schools, and a community facility. JBA PM/PR 11

22 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 Sustainability Priorities Enhancing the South West District in its landscape Protecting the natural beauty of District s visual landscape Protecting the District s waterways Protecting and enhancing biodiversity Delivering Sydney s Green Grid Managing the Metropolitan Rural Area Creating an efficient South West District Planning for a resilient South West District Managing flood hazards in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley Consistency of Proposal The largely unconstrained, unique landscape and physical characteristics of the greenfield site, provide opportunities for aesthetically appealing and high amenity places. The proposal retains the existing ridgeline and visual barrier for the urban area to the rural land to the west. The proposal supports the protection of waterways, particularly establishing a blue grid to the east of the site, to facilitate the preservation of existing waterways. The proposal will retain any existing sensitive biodiversity present on site. Development will also allow funding for the preservation and restoration of the landscape of the ridgeline as envisaged in the Camden Biodiversity Strategy The proposal supports the connection of the Green Grid, particularly retaining links to Oran Park to the east, and links to the Green Grid between Harrington Grove and Badgerys Creek airport. The proposal more efficiently utilises land that is no longer viable for rural uses. The proposal more efficiently utilises the existing and proposed network for the South West District. The proposal can support the inclusion of sustainable built form practices during the detailed design stage. The proposal does not include development within the 1:100 Year flood risk catchment of the Nepean River. 4.2 Increase the Supply of Housing The draft district plan identifies the requirement of the Department of Planning and Environment to continue to identify areas of additional capacity, to sustain the key principles mentioned previously. Action L2 of the draft Plan involves identifying new opportunities to create the capacity to deliver the 20- year strategic housing supply targets. Based on medium growth scenario projections, the South West District is predicted to require an additional 143,000 dwellings over the currently planned housing for the period to It is recommended that due to the long term nature of this planning challenge, in order to achieve these targets within the next 20 years, the planning process to increase housing capacity will require partnership with councils beginning now. On this bases, the Commission proposed a number of approaches to guide the process: 1. A 20-year strategic housing target by local government that allows for the planning for sustained capacity over the period of this draft Plan. 2. The identification of new areas for housing to achieve these targets. In addition to the general guidance in A Plan for Growing Sydney the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) has established a set of criteria for investigating areas to deliver urban renewal. The site meets many of the desired attributes for new urban renewal precincts, including: it aligns with significant investment in regional and district infrastructure currently being investigated such the Outer Sydney Orbital and Badgery s Creek Airport. JBA PM/PR 12

23 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 it has good access to nearby existing and planned employment areas, facilitating the 30 minute city objective of the District Plan, including: Badgery s Creek Airport; Western Sydney Employment Area via the Hume Highway; Oran Park Town Centre Smeaton Grange Ingleburn Leppington Narellan (District Centre) Prestons it is located in proximity to education and health facilities within Oran Park, Narellan and Camden such as; Oran Park Anglican College Oran Park Public School University of Western Sydney Camden/Cobbitty Campuses Macarthur Anglican School it is not strata titled and represents a large, consolidated site, and does not increase land fragmentation; it is possible to stage the delivery of the site in line with infrastructure and community facilities; it is located within the same drainage catchment as Oran Park; it facilitates significant environmental and conservation outcomes; it improves scenic and heritage outcomes; and it assists in the transition between SWGC boundary and existing areas. 4.3 Infrastructure In analysing the proposed site based on existing and proposed infrastructure it is logical to expand the South West Priority Growth Area to include the site. Trunk level utilities infrastructure has been delivered to service the Oran Park Precinct, including a sewer pump station on Cobbitty Creek less than 20 metres from the boundary of this proposal, that currently collects all sewage from Oran Park and pumps it to the West Camden Sewage Treatment Plant. A new water supply reservoir is proposed at the northern end of the Oran Park Precinct, and could provide interim capacity to service early stages of development at Tidapa. Electricity supply can be provided, with connections possible to the Endeavour Energy distribution network. We note that Figure 5-2 of the South West District Plan incorrectly illustrates an extent of Urban Area within the South Creek Catchment, however part of the existing Growth Centre falls within various other catchments including within the Cobbitty Creek Catchment as indicated in Figure 6 Creek Catchments. JBA PM/PR 13

24 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 Figure 6 Creek Catchments Source: Tract We are aware of constraints to servicing new development in the South West Priority Growth Area, particularly associated with environmental approvals to discharge to the Nepean River and South Creek. Drinking water can be pumped to the development from the existing connection at Peter Brock Drive. While there is potential to connect to trunk utilities infrastructure, the Tidapa site is large enough to implement an off-grid approach to sewage treatment and disposal and the land owners have had preliminary discussions with private utilities companies with a view to exploring innovative and environmentally sustainable servicing solutions. In addition, the current draft SEPP Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities, will facilitate the expansion of the existing and creation of new educational and child care facilities within the Cobbitty locality. Should the precinct be included in the South West Priority Growth Area, the land owners would progress discussions with the NSW Department of Education to explore collaborative approaches to the delivery of new schools in the Precinct. The concept Master Plan for the site has taken into consideration the provision of additional social infrastructure, including Primary and High School sites, open space and neighbourhood centres. There are substantial opportunities to provide active and passive open space that could not only meet the needs of new residents in the Precinct, but provide larger district scale facilities to support local sports clubs from Oran Park and Cobbitty. The investigation area for the Outer Sydney Orbital corridor includes the Tidapa site and an indicative corridor is shown in the draft South West District Plan, in close proximity to the site. The Outer Sydney Orbital corridor would form a logical urban boundary in the Cobbitty locality, as it would create a clear distinction between urban and rural areas and would assist to protect rural areas in the Nepean valley to the west of the site. While the government is at this stage aiming to preserve a corridor for the Orbital, JBA PM/PR 14

25 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March 2017 and there is no timeframe for construction, the corridor would provide a clear structural boundary to growth. When the Outer Sydney Orbital is constructed, we have assumed that Cobbitty Road will interchange with it providing direct regional connection to the Western Sydney Airport and other destinations, assisting to meet a key objective of the District Plan, a maximum 30 minute commute to employment & services. As highlighted in the draft District Plan, planning for an integrated transport network will be central to the development of the Western City. We support the need for identification and preservation of transport corridors. In the shorter term, the Tidapa Precinct has the potential to be well connected to The Northern Road and to Oran Park, Leppington and Narellan. We support the NSW Government s investigations to protect a corridor for the extension of the South West Rail Link from Leppington to Oran Park, and onwards to Narellan and Campbelltown Macarthur. Passenger rail along this corridor would give residents of the Tidapa Precinct relatively close access to rail transit, reducing commuter reliance on private vehicles. A key element of the inclusion of the Tidapa Precinct in the South West Priority Growth Area is the ability to plan for road and public transport connections to link the Precinct to Oran Park and the transport network that will be the backbone of the Western City. 4.4 Agriculture and the Metropolitan Rural Area Feasibility analysis of the site conducted by GHD (see Attachment B), demonstrates the land does not meet the major objective of the rural zone, which is to encourage sustainable primary industry production. This is not economically viable for the site with the current use of beef cattle production. Due to the limited size of the Lots 2-5/DP (Tidapa), the enterprise is unable to support the costs of this business and often operates at annual loss. Alternative agricultural uses were evaluated to pose a high level of risk in implementation and potential for negative environmental impacts. In addition, Camden Local Biodiversity Strategy prepared reaffirms that the agricultural value of the lands in this precinct is considered to be low. An additional risk for the site as an agricultural use, is its proximity to the adjacent residential growth area, which over time is likely to lead to increased land use conflicts between agricultural and urban uses. Land within the Cobbitty Creek catchment has been rezoned already for housing and housing will be highly visible from the subject site. As development proceeds in the area in accordance with the current planning framework there will be an interface of 125m2 R1 lots with 40HA rural lots. The Tidapa site not only provides for development of the area according to a more logical catchment precinct but will provide a more appropriate transition between the rural and urban land uses. 4.5 Heritage Due to the site s proximity to the State Heritage Listed Denbigh Estate in its surrounding context, particular attention has been placed on the treatment and impacts of potential development. Heritage advice by Richard Lamb & Associates recommends the inclusion of the Tidapa site within the South West District Urban Release Area due to a number of reasons (see Attachment C). Urban use of the land could occur without unacceptable impacts on the general scenic and cultural values of the landscape of Denbigh, with appropriate treatment of land adjoining the Denbigh Estate, similar to Oran Park. The scenic amenity of the locality and landscape of Denbigh can be preserved and enhanced by the strategies employed in the existing concept Master Plan for the site. These strategies are similar to those approved by the Heritage Council on Denbigh Estate. There would be no impacts on any landscape or fabric of European cultural heritage significance, Tidapa being wholly outside the curtilage of Denbigh. In particular, there are opportunities to rehabilitate and revegetate the creek corridor that is the approximate boundary of the Tidapa and Denbigh properties, to create a natural buffer between the Denbigh heritage curtilage and residential development to the west. Limiting development in the Tidapa Precinct to the lower elevations and flatter land will also assist to maintain a rural outlook from the Denbigh homestead, an important element of preserving the heritage setting. JBA PM/PR 15

26 Tidapa, Chittick Lane Cobbity Draft South West District Plan 31 March CONCLUSION We largely agree with all the initiatives of the NSW Government is facilitating growth and improving Western Sydney, and feel that the Tidapa site provides opportunities to further this potential. The structure plan allows for the significant provision of much needed housing, within close proximity to existing as well as planned transport, social infrastructure and employment areas. Due to the large site area, proximity to existing and planned infrastructure and unique land characteristic, the site area provides key opportunities for quality housing, and we feel should be considered for inclusion within the South West District Priority Growth Area. As a result of preliminary analysis and development of draft concept plans, we recommend that the site be excluded from the study area for the alignment of Outer Sydney Orbital, as the site presents key opportunities for further, much required residential development adjacent to the existing South West Priority Growth Area. In particular, we are requesting that the GSC recognises that it is appropriate that the Growth Centre boundary be revisited once the Outer Sydney Orbital corridor is determined. Should you have any queries about this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me on or PRobilliard@jbaurban.com.au. Yours faithfully, Paul Robilliard Director JBA PM/PR 16

27 Hawes & Swan Planning Pty Ltd PH (02) Suite 4, Level 4 35 Buckingham Street Surry Hills NSW 2010 ATTACHMENT B 315 December 2017 Transport for NSW PO Box K659 Haymarket NSW 1240 Dear Sir / Madam, Submission on Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 on behalf of Tidapa Landowner Group This submission has been prepared on behalf of the Tidapa Landowner Group, who represent a number of landowners that make up a significant land holding within the Cobbitty area (identified in Figure 1). Our client has also engaged Christopher Hallam, an experienced traffic and transport engineer. His report is summarised in this submission and is attached to this submission (Attachment A). We have significant concerns that can be summarised under the following headings: Impact on Cobbitty Village including amenity Impacts Impact on Scenic and Cultural Landscape including Topography Land Use Development Potential Insufficient Information & Justification; and Alternative Option; These matters are addressed in detail in this letter below. 1.0 Impact on Cobbitty Village including Amenity Impacts The proposed Outer Sydney Orbital (OSO) route demonstrated in Figure 2 below is likely to result in significant adverse amenity impacts to landowners in the Cobbitty Area for the following reasons.

28 Submission on Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 on behalf of Tidapa Landowner Group Figure 1 Figure 2 OSO Proposed Route 2

29 Submission on Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 on behalf of Tidapa Landowner Group The proposed route will pass to the east of Cobbitty Village and the nature and scale of the development will have significant acoustic and visual impacts to nearby properties including existing residential properties along Ellis Lane and the eastern end of Cobbitty. The route is also likely to cause adverse noise impacts within the Mater Dei Precinct residential area resulting from the proposed bridge over the river and any interchange on Cobbitty Road. The route would cause significant noise vibration and pollution impacts to Cobbitty. Furthermore, the tight turns of the proposed OSO route increase the likelihood of noise and vibration impacts from freight transport. As identified on page 84 of the Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056, the freight rail will have 24/7 operation movements that would significantly impact upon the liveability of Cobbitty. Adverse noise impacts are expected to result from this proposal, especially at night time. The traffic on Cobbitty Road has drastically increased over the past decade of which a significant increase in truck movements has been observed. This has had a major impact on livability for Cobbitty and the proposed OSO entry and exit at the entrance to Cobbitty village will further attract an increase in traffic on Cobbitty Road. The proposed route would require the acquisition of residential properties along Ellis Lane due to the topographical constraints of the land that could result in the road and rail line being elevated in response to flooding. Cobbitty Village contains several heritage items including St Pauls Anglican Church (established 1827) and the proposed OSO would not be characteristic of existing development in the locality or the traditional nature of the village. The visual impact of the proposal will destroy the heritage values of Cobbitty and drastically impact upon views present to Camden. 2.0 Impact on Scenic and Cultural Landscape including Topography Cobbitty Hills has been identified for the Green Grid and local biodiversity strategy. The amended OSO route would adversely impact upon the scenic and cultural landscape values of Cobbitty Valley and demonstrates significant topographical constraints as discussed below: Impact on Scenic and Cultural Landscape Values The amended OSO route is considered to be incompatible with objective No. 28 of the Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan 2017 relating to the protection of scenic and cultural landscapes as follows: contemporary urban environment with natural and historic urban landscapes. Their continued protection is important to the character of the region and for their aesthetic, social and economic values. They create a sense of identity, preserve links to Aboriginal, colonial and migrant era heritage and culture, and create opportunities for tourism and 3

30 Submission on Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 on behalf of Tidapa Landowner Group The proposed eastern route is inconsistent with the above objective as it would pass through the centre of Cobbitty Valley that has strong scenic and cultural landscape values as demonstrated in Figures 3-6 below. Figures 3-6 Views of Cobbitty Hills on the proposed OSO route to be impacted. In order to facilitate an interchange at Cobbitty Road, it is estimated that 20 hectares of land would need to be allocated for the development that would have significant adverse impacts on the local landscape. Alternatively, locating the OSO to the west of Cobbitty Valley would have a substantially lesser impact than the proposed route. This is further discussed in section 5.0 of this letter. In addition, Objective 27 of the Draft Greater Sydney Regional Plan 2017 states: The proposed alignment is not consistent with this objective. Significant bushland and biodiversity will be impacted with the alignment going through the middle of important biodiversity and the topography will be significantly impacted with cut and fill used. Topography The vertical alignment of the proposed OSO corridor demonstrates significant constraints due to the topography of the land that includes the following: Design flood level 100yr ARI; Freight rail maximum grade 1%; and the 4

31 Submission on Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 on behalf of Tidapa Landowner Group Camden Airport has a maximum building height restriction of 113m within radius of the Airport. These significant topographical constraints would result in high construction and operating costs of the OSO corridor when compared to alternative options and it is estimated that the cutting required would be 6km long and up to 100m high and at least 150m wide through the entire length of the Cobbitty Hills Valley. In relation to road and rail geometry the proposed OSO route would have greater changes in grade and a tighter turning radii when compared to alternative options that would result in higher operating costs. Shorter routes could also be considered that would result in reduced vehicle operating costs. Section 5.0 of this letter details an alternate route that should be considered. 3.0 Land Use Development Potential Land that has been identified for the OSO route is adjacent to land identified as part of the Growth Centres for residential housing. In addition, our clients land has been identified in a number of planning documents as having future residential development potential given its close proximity to Oran Park Town Centre, future rail to Narellan and proximity to the Northern Road. In our opinion it would make more logical sense that land within close proximity to public transport, town centres including employment lands and existing residential areas within the growth centres would be not sterilised for the future orbital and that the orbital alignment be adjusted as suggest in Figure Insufficient Information & Justification It is considered that insufficient information and justification has been provided in relation to the altered OSO alignment proposed by the Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan The insufficient information provided is detailed as follows: Change in Route of OSO The Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan 2017 provides insufficient information and no justification on the changes proposed to the original OSO alignment (2014) which was generally considered to be acceptable by landowners in the Cobbitty area. Route Details Provided No graphics have been provided that demonstrate an overlay of the altered OSO proposed corridor that would enable a landowner to effectively determine the impacts of the proposal. Therefore, inadequate information has been provided on the altered alignment to allow for meaningful and fair public consultation. Transport Modelling and Planning It is considered that modelling of the corridor should be made available for public review and submission for a landowner to adequately comprehend the nature and scale of the proposal to gain 5

32 Submission on Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 on behalf of Tidapa Landowner Group a better understanding of the impacts of the proposed development on their property and the surrounds. x Interchanges The OSO motorway interchanges were made available in June 2015 of which included interchanges at the Hume Highway, Camden Valley Way and at Bringelly/Greendale Road within the Cobbitty area. However, as proposed in the 2017 Strategy, interchanges are proposed at Burragorang Road, Cobbitty Road and Bringelly/Greendale Road. No justification has been provided for altering the middle link from Camden Valley Way to Cobbitty Road that would have substantial adverse impacts on residential amenity of the Cobbitty Village area. It is considered that the location of interchanges should be an outcome of traffic modelling where the location of a range of interchange options is tested. Therefore, it is considered that insufficient information and justification has been made available to the public to allow for adequate and effective consultation and understandings of the impacts resulting from the amended OSO corridor. 5.0 Alternative Option Our client has prepared the following alternative option as shown in Figure 7 below. Figure 7 ʹ Alternative route option illustrated in orange. 6

33 Submission on Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 on behalf of Tidapa Landowner Group In summary the alternative route has the following significant advantages to the proposed route. Placing the OSO on the western side of the ridge line and Cobbitty village will greatly reduce its impact on the Cobbitty landscape. The alternative route will divert the majority of through traffic around Cobbitty village. The alternative route is approximately 20% shorter and have less cutting through ridges and bridges over flood affected land. The cost of constructing the alternative route will be significantly cheaper because of the shorter distance and more appropriate topography. The alternative route will protect the residents of Cobbitty and surrounding residential communities from noise, vibration and visual impacts. The alternative route protects land for future residential purposes given its location in close proximity to future public transport, Oran Park town centre and growth centre. Interchanges are an important consideration in determining the preferred route of the OSO. The proposed route is inappropriate as discussed by Christopher Hallam at Attachment A. 6.0 Recommendation It is in our professional opinion that the proposed OSO route within the Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 is inappropriate and will significantly impact on the Cobbitty community. As identified at Section 5 of this submission there is a more logical alternative which we strongly advocate for Transport for NSW to investigate this alternative route. In summary the proposed route is inappropriate, and the alternative route is more appropriate because: The impact on Cobbitty Village including amenity impacts will be significant. Locating the route to the west around Cobbitty as shown in the alternative route will reduce these impacts and impact less residents. The impact on Scenic and Cultural Landscape including Topography. Locating the route to the west around Cobbitty as shown in the alternative route will reduce cut and fill impacts, reduce the need for bridges over flood prone land and will reduce impacts on significant ridge lines with quality vegetation. Land Use Development Potential. The alternative route around Cobbitty will result in land located within close proximity to future public transport, Oran Park town centre being available for development and not impacted the OSO. Insufficient Information & Justification. Further justification needs to occur and alternative routes explored including business cases. 7

34 Submission on Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 on behalf of Tidapa Landowner Group Thank you for providing the opportunity to comment on the on the Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 and we look forward to future engagement prior to any final decision on the OSO route. Should you wish to discuss any of the details of this submission please do not hesitate to contact me on or Yours sincerely Jeremy Swan DIRECTOR Hawes and Swan Planning Pty Ltd 8

35 Submission on Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 on behalf of Tidapa Landowner Group ATTACHMENT A Traffic Submission Christopher Hallam 9

36 OUTER SYDNEY ORBITAL CORRIDOR PRESERVATION SUBMISSION RELATING TO ALIGNMENT NEAR COBBITTY 1.0 Introduction This submission has been prepared by Christopher Hallam BE, MEngSc, and was commissioned by the Tidapa Landowner Group, who represent a number of landowners in the Cobbitty area. For reference, my curriculum vitae is provided in an Annexure. I have practised as a professional traffic & transport engineer in New South Wales for 46 years. The issues I wish to discuss are set out through individual Sections, with Conclusions at the end. 2.0 Insufficient Information Change in Route of OSO The 2014 State Infrastructure Strategy Update outlined an approximate route for the Outer Sydney Orbital (OSO). It is of course hard to know if the route chosen was a generic route or that more could be taken into it. The OSO route set out in the Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan 2017 shows a different alignment at various locations. It could be that it is simply a refinement of the 2014 plan, based on more knowledge of future development or more knowledge of topographical and other constraints. This is particularly relevant near the proposed Western Sydney Airport Badgerys Creek Aerotropolis. However the documentation in the Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan 2017 provides no information on any such constraints or any reason to alter the alignment. I am informed that in broad terms, many landowners in the Cobbitty area were happy with the 2014 OSO alignment, but are not happy with the draft 2017 alignment. From their point of view, a justification for changes in alignment would be appropriate, for better transparency in the assessment process. OSO Route Details The 2017 draft OSO route is still very broad-brush. In what appears to be a deliberate choice to not overlay the route on a proper base plan, the general public, and local landowners, have no idea just where this route would go. While it is good planning for the Greater Sydney Commission and Transport for NSW to request public feedback on the proposed corridor, how can the public provide feedback when they do not know where the corridor will go, in specific terms? Will the local landowners first understand where the 1

37 corridor will go when they see caveats placed on their land indicating a future transport corridor will affect their plans and livelihood? While it is commendable that Transport for NSW is undertaking long term planning and corridor preservation, what about the local landowner wishing to also make long term plans, for their business, their home and/or their retirement plans? For a landowner to understand the implications, they need access to a proper overlay plan. A combined corridor width of 134m, assuming both road and rail, has the potential to impact a number of properties in different ways. It is recognised that with this width and with the minimum curve radius of 1,500m for a freight rail line, there will be some limitations on minor corridor adjustments to avoid particular properties. In summary, local landowners cannot be expected to be able to make sensible submissions when they do not know where the route will go. While the process might allow Transport informed that more details of the OSO corridor will be available in early 2018, and that there will be further opportunities for consultation. In this regard, the corridor should not be confirmed until this next stage of consultation is undertaken. Further, I understand that this 2017 OSO alignment is being used by the Greater Sydney Commission in their District Plans already, despite the lack of detail available to the public, despite the fact that this alignment has not been subject to public consultation. The proposed alignment needs to be publicised in detail, on a proper map base and public comments sought, as a matter of urgency, before any District Plans are finalised. 3.0 Justification Transport Modelling and Planning While it appears logical that the construction of the OSO is a good idea, before its planning and corridor reservation is set in stone, there needs to be some overall justification for the OSO. Traditionally, when planning new highways, regional and sub-regional traffic modelling is undertaken, to obtain a feeling for the likely future use, and hence the number of lanes needed, and hence the corridor width required. Such modelling would also allow a first-cut review of the benefits and costs, so that there is some confidence that when it is constructed, the later more detailed modelling will show a good benefit/cost ratio. In justifying legal restrictions on properties, there needs to be confidence that the project is viable and will proceed. I understand that background studies and modelling might have been undertaken, but there is nothing available for public review and submissions. 2

38 Interchanges In June 2015 the OSO Motorway Interchanges were listed. In the Cobbitty area these were at the Hume Highway, at Camden Valley Way and at Bringelly Road/Greendale Road. Clearly, the OSO will not cross over Camden Valley Way in the Cobbitty area, and a more specific location is required, in due course. Cobbitty Road immediately east of Cobbitty village has logic when considering the 2017 OSO route, for the moment ignoring local impacts. However given its likely proximity to Cobbitty village, it would have substantial negative impacts on noise and amenity, plus additional future traffic from development areas to the West using the western end of Cobbitty Road to access the OSO, driving through Cobbitty village. The location of interchanges should be an outcome of the traffic modelling, with new land use developments added to the network and different interchange options tested, to determine the interchange locations with the greatest network benefits. To simply nominate the OSO route, and at the same time nominate the interchange locations, is jumping the gun. I have prepared a map with the proposed OSO route and an alternative western OSO route shown, overlaid on the NSW Land & Property Information topographic maps of Camden (9029-4N) and Warragamba (9030-3S), at an original scale of 1:25,000. As is further discussed, the 2017 OSO route threads its way through all of the hills overlooking the Cobbitty valley. I have shown the centre of the route taking into account the topography, and also looking for that has been suggested by the Tidapa Landowner Group, which avoids most of the hills surrounding the Cobbitty valley and travels in a shorter more direct path. Relative differences between these two routes are discussed in Section 4. However in my discussion on Justification and Interchange location, before an interchange on Cobbitty Road is decided on, an alternative is suggested. I have shown this in dotted outline on the attached map. The 2015 plans suggested Camden Valley Way as a road that needs to link through to the OSO. The Oran Park Drive-Dan Cleary Drive-Cobbitty Road route does provide a road link between Camden Valley Way and the OSO, in either east or west alignments. However with local road planning of Oran Park Drive-Dan Cleary Drive, where it is no longer a straight route, and with the dog-leg of this route along The Northern Road, it is less than ideal. A better route is arguably along Peter Brock Drive. At its eastern end I note that the Southwest Growth Centre Structure Plan (Edition 3) attached shows this Peter Brock Drive route continuing through Catherine Fields (part) Precinct and through to Camden Valley Way. West of The Northern Road, the extension of Peter Brock Drive provides the spine of development in this western area, then linking down to Cobbitty Road. An option would be for this route, including Cobbitty Road from this western end connection, provide the access to the OSO. An arguably better alternative, with substantially less impact on Cobbitty village 3

39 would be to retain the link down to Cobbitty Road, but via a T-junction, continue the Peter Brock Drive extension in a westerly direction, locating it just to the north of Cobbitty Creek. In this position it would allow an interchange with the 2017 eastern OSO route, or the alternative western OSO route. It is recognised that this would not provide direct connectivity to areas to the West, if the eastern route was adopted. If the alternative western route was adopted, Cut Hill Road could be used for traffic from the West. This route would also provide more direct access to trip generators within the new Oran Park residential area, without requiring drivers to first drive down to Oran Park Drive or Dan Cleary Drive. Depending on future land use planning and zoning, such a route could also form the spine of new residential development to the north of Cobbitty. 4.0 Construction of OSO and Route Comparison Topography To simplify the comparison, I refer to the currently proposed OSO route as the eastern route, and the alternative suggested by the Tidapa Landowner Group as the western route. The centre of these routes is shown on the attached map. The attached map covers the OSO route between the junction of May Farm Road with Werombi Road in the South, and Greendale Road in the North. On the horizontal alignment of both routes, the tightest turn would be the curve on the eastern route just north of the bridge over the Nepean River. The centre-of-corridor radius shown on the plan is approximately 2,000m, so the minimum radius for freight rail of 1,500m would be met. The western route would have an almost straight alignment, with benefits for construction and operation. The vertical alignment due to the topography provides greater constraints. The factors are: Design flood level 100yr ARI Freight Rail maximum grade 1% Camden Aerodrome Building height restriction of 113m close to aerodrome The eastern route, being closer to Camden Aerodrome, will be more affected by the river flood limit than the western route, in that the route along Ellis Lane will have a minimum height because of the flood constraint, and a maximum height because of the aerodrome. On the northern side of the river the land immediately rises 20-30m. A bridge with long approaches would be the logical approach, and/or the construction of a cutting along the northern side. The western route would not be as constrained in this regard. With the distance between the river and Cobbitty Road, the corridor would logically be in cutting, with Cobbitty Road passing over. There would need to be a design review of the options, given the Freight Rail requirement for a 7.1m vertical clearance, more than any road. 4

40 Where the western route crosses Cobbitty Road the terrain is relatively flat, with a greater separation from the river bridge, so that the design of the underpass or overpass at this location would be easier. North of Cobbitty Road, the western route has minimal topographic constraints until it reaches Cobbitty Creek, and the hill behind. A cutting would be required in the shoulder between the 150m and 145m high points on each side. The natural level of the shoulder here is about 110m. The resulting ground level would of course be lower than the existing 110m. North of Cobbitty Road, the eastern route would drop down to Cobbitty Creek. For the corridor width involved, this would probably need substantial land fill over the Cobbitty Creek delta. After this point however this eastern route would rise substantially. The attached photographs illustrate the nature of the topography. To the east of Cut Hill, the natural level of this route is about 140m. The route then continues through a range of hills, passing just west of Cobbitty Trig (188m). This eastern route passes along the north-south spine of the Cobbitty Hills, as shown by the contours of the map. Much of the route is currently wooded, so the land clearing required will have an added impact on the scenic landscape. This would particularly be the case in the section leading up from Cobbitty Creek, where the corridor will be seen from the new residential areas. In the northern section there is clear contrast between the two alignments, with the western route passing through more open terrain, while the eastern route continues through higher ground. Both routes join near Bringelly Creek. To estimate the relative gradients and hence the required lengths of cuttings to achieve the Freight Rail maximum of 1% would require detailed long-sections, which have not been done. However it is very clear that the eastern route has significantly higher topographic constraints on its vertical alignment compared with the shorter and straighter western route and hence the eastern route would have a higher construction cost, and higher vehicle operating costs. I note that the Tidapa Landowner Group estimate that the cutting on the eastern route would be 6km long and be up to 100m high and 200m wide through the Cobbitty Hills, whereas on the western route they estimate that the required cutting would be 2.2km long. Impact on Properties The eastern route passes through the Ellis Lane peninsula. To provide the required 134m corridor and at the same time have an acceptable horizontal alignment, it would require acquisition of a number of residential properties along Ellis Lane. With the topography and the need to be above the 100 year ARI flood level, the road and rail line might need to be elevated. This would also impact on properties. 5

41 While this eastern route would pass just to the east of Cobbitty village, its size and presence would have an amenity and visual impact. Further to the North there would be little impact on property. Cobbitty village includes several heritage-listed properties, with St Pauls Anglican Church defining the character of this traditional rural village. The western route would not impact on Ellis Lane. It would pass to the east of the University of Sydney Camden Campus, well clear of the campus buildings, and to the east of the more low key University of Sydney Cobbitty Farm. Further to the North it would have low key impacts on various small farms. Impact on Scenic and Cultural Landscape The eastern route would pass through the centre of Cobbitty Valley and cut through the surrounding hills, with substantial cuttings required. In contrast, the western route would pass to the west of the Cobbitty Valley. It would still need to cut through the western end of the hills, near Cut Hill Road, but with a cutting of less depth and length required. The Greater Sydney Commission Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan 2017 Objective 28 is to ensure scenic and cultural landscapes are protected. This Objective states in part: Scenic and cultural landscapes create symbols of Greater Sydney and connect the contemporary urban environment with natural and historic urban landscapes. Their continued protection is important to the character of the region and for their aesthetic, social and economic values. They create a sense of identity, preserve links to Aboriginal, colonial and migrant era heritage and culture, and create opportunities for The Cobbitty Valley is such a scenic and cultural landscape. The construction of a 132m wide road and rail corridor through it would seriously impact on its scenic value. The planned extension of the Oran Park residential area as far as the creek line to the east of the corridor would have some impact, without a doubt. The location of the OSO to the west of this valley would have a substantially lesser impact than the eastern route. The construction of an east-west connector road through to the OSO along the low point of the creek line should not of itself have a significant impact. Access Interchanges As discussed in Section 3, the location of an interchange in the Cobbitty area is an important design consideration. With the eastern route, the location of an interchange just east of Cobbitty would have a substantial adverse impact on the amenity of this village. Such an interchange would draw traffic through the village from development to the West. With the western route, the suggested interchange location would be off an extended Peter Brock Drive. Cut Hill Road could provide access from properties to the West. 6

42 5.0 Operation of OSO Vehicle Operating Costs On my measurements, the western route is approximately 1400m shorter than the eastern route. Exact differences would depend on final alignments. While this might not seem a high number over the length of the OSO, it nevertheless would cause higher vehicle operating costs through extra vehicle-hours and extra vehicle-kilometres. With presumably high future usage of the OSO, including road freight traffic, this is an extra cost that will occur over the long life of the OSO. Road and Rail Geometry As discussed in Section 4.0, the eastern route will have greater changes in grade compared with the western route, and tighter turn radii, at least on the sweep over the Nepean River. This will lead to higher operating costs, although this is hard to quantify. Noise The eastern route will have greater noise impacts over more areas compared with the western route, with impacts on Ellis Lane residential properties and impacts on the eastern end of Cobbitty, particularly if an interchange is located in this location. In addition, noise impacts could occur within the future Mater Dei Precinct residential area, due to the bridge over the river and any interchange on Cobbitty Road. The western route would not go close to concentrations of dwellings. Land Use Development Potential Current planning will see the Oran Park West residential area stop at the creek line just east residential development, plus a motorway. While clearly subject to planning scrutiny, if the motorway was changed to the western route there would be the opportunity for the Oran Park urban area to be expanded to include the whole valley. The escarpment and hills around the Cobbitty Valley would provide a natural boundary, and barrier, around an expanded urban area. The east-west link road from the extension of Peter Brock Drive through to an interchange on the OSO western route would provide a spine road for the residential development, in a similar way to Peter Brock Drive within the existing Oran Park Precinct. 7

43 6.0 Conclusions 1. There is not enough information on the altered, proposed OSO alignment to enable a meaningful consultation with the public. The absence of an overlay of the route on a proper map is a deficiency in the public consultation process. A typical landowner would not be able to determine if the proposed OSO corridor affects them or not. While I have prepared an overlayed map showing my understanding of the proposal, this level of information would not be available to most landowners. 2. Further traffic/transport planning, ideally with strategic modelling, is required to better determine the best corridor route and to best identify the interchange locations. 3. In my assessment of what I have assumed to be the proposed OSO route, there are substantial topographic and other constraints on the construction of the proposed route, herein called the eastern route. An alternative western route has been proposed by the Tidapa Landowner Group. It is shorter, has fewer topographic constraints, has less impact on amenity, noise and the scenic landscape and could be constructed with a straighter alignment, all with resulting benefits in construction and operating costs. 4. I recommend that Transport for NSW critically review both OSO alignments and undertake appropriate modelling and assessment to decide on the best alignment. At that stage, a further public consultation step is recommended, prior to any legal caveats being placed on land titles. Christopher Hallam BE, MEngSc 30 th November

44 ANNEXURE Name: CHRISTOPHER HALLAM Qualifications: BE (Univ. of Sydney) 1971 MEng Sc (Traffic and Transport - Univ. of NSW) 1977 Fellow Institution of Engineers, Australia, Chartered Professional Engineer Experience: Christopher Hallam & Associates Pty. Ltd. Director ( )(1995 to 2017) Stapleton & Hallam Partnership Travers Morgan Pty. Ltd. Manager - Traffic Planning ( ) Department of Main Roads, NSW ( ) District Traffic Engineer (South) at Division Office Traffic Authority of NSW ( ) Engineer in Traffic Authority's Secretariat. Department of Motor Transport, NSW ( ) Traffic Engineer in Traffic Planning & Management Br Land & Environment Court * Expert witness, for Councils and applicants, since 1981, and as Court-appointed expert, since 2004 * Member, LEC Users Group, representing Engineers Australia * Author of papers to National Judicial College Conference, EPLA Conference, Law Society and NEERG Seminars on traffic evidence in LEC Projects & Studies: * Land Use Traffic Generation: major research project covering 13 land uses, in particular, shopping centres, plus traffic impact studies. Preparation of Traffic Authority `Policies, Guidelines and Procedures for Traffic Generating Developments' with reviews in 1987,

45 and 1993; preparation of draft 2nd edition in 1993; Metrop.Parking Policy; park policy, Sydney City Ccl;South Sydney City Council transport/parking DCP * Urban centre studies in Sydney, Coffs Harbour, Chatswood, Blacktown, The Entrance, Newport, Dubbo, North Sydney, Mittagong, St Leonards, Mount Druitt, Campbelltown, Windsor, Richmond, Bondi Junction, Rozelle * Urban and regional development in Darling Harbour, Springwood, Menai, Fremantle, Gore Hill, Bunbury, Dapto, Shellharbour, Windsor, Kensington, Scheyville, Balmain, Luna Park/Lavender Bay, Camden-Narellan, Baulkham Hills, Leichhardt LATM Study, Defence site planning studies, Neutral Bay, Regents Park, Ingleburn, Holsworthy, Padstow, Glebe; Sydney Harbour Federation Trust lands. * Marinas at Rose Bay, Double Bay, Gladesville, Dolans Bay, Careel Bay, research for Boating Industry Association, paper to International Marinas Conference * Quarries at Karuah, Tweed Valley, Nerriga, Bungonia * Residential subdivision planning in Cecil Hills, Harrington Park, Bligh Park, Currans Hill, Mount Annan, East Bowral * Road Planning studies: - City West Road EIS; Rutledge St EIS; Lane Cove West Link Road - Johnsons Creek route assessment; State Highway 23 traffic design. - County Road 5030; Phillip Parkway EIS. - F4: toll/travel demand studies; F2 EIS and traffic design. - Princes Highway Relocation Study and EIS. - F4 Access Study, of ramp options; Bells Line of Road Assessment. - Stewart Ave Extension, Newcastle: assessment of impacts. - M2 Motorway service centre design - Cityrail commuter carpark study * Section 94 studies in Blacktown, Bowral, Mittagong, Moss Vale, St Leonards, Balmain and Newcastle, and development of S.94 Guidelines for WESROC.. Appeals to Court on S94 plans in Wollondilly, Hornsby 10

46 Dotted line is approximate route for access to Interchange on OCO 11

47 Structure Plan showing Peter Brock Drive route between Camden Valley Way and Cobbitty Road West 12

48 on proposed (Eastern) Outer Sydney Orbital Route Views of Cobbitty Hills 13

49 SCALE 1:2000 (A3) Draft Framework Plan Chittick Lane, Cobbitty ATTACHMENT C PROJECT_DRG NO _D REV 07 DRWN SP CHKD GC APPROV JR DATE