Planning Proposal. Council Adopted Version

Transcription

1 Planning Proposal Amendment No.6 to Lake Macquarie Local Environmental Plan 2014 Warners Bay Town Centre Deferred Matter Dept Planning & Environment Reference No. PP_2014_LAKEM_001_00 Council Adopted Version 1

2 Local Government Area: Name of Draft LEP: Subject Land: Owner: Applicant: Lake Macquarie City Council Amendment to Lake Macquarie Local Environmental Plan 2014 Warners Bay Town Centre Deferred Matter As shown on Subject Land and Aerial Photo map (Figure 2) Various Private and Council. Council initiated Maps and Photos: Locality Map (Figure 1) Subject Land and Aerial Photo (Figure 2) Current Zoning Lake Macquarie LEP 2004 (Figure 3) Proposed Zones Lake Macquarie LEP 2014 (Figure 4) Proposed Height of Building Map Lake Macquarie LEP 2014 (Figure 5) Proposed Minimum Lot Size Map Lake Macquarie LEP 2014 (Figure 6) Proposed Acid Sulfate Soils Map Lake Macquarie LEP 2014 (Figure 7) Proposed Flood Planning Map Lake Macquarie LEP 2014 (Figure 8) Proposed Heritage Map Lake Macquarie LEP 2014 (Figure 9) Attachments: Attachment 1 Gateway Determination from Department of Planning and Environment Attachment 2 Statement of Council interest in subject land Attachment 3 Warners Bay Town Centre Planning Framework. 2

3 Part 1 Objective of the Planning Proposal Warners Bay Town Centre was deferred from draft Lake Macquarie Local Environmental Plan 2014 by Council resolution in June 2013, following exhibition of that draft LEP. The Warners Bay Town Centre was zoned 3(1) Commercial Core and 3(2) Commercial (Support) under Lake Macquarie LEP The objective of this Planning Proposal is to amend Lake Macquarie Local Environmental Plan 2014 (LMLEP 2014) to bring the Warners Bay Town Centre Deferred Matter into the operation of LMLEP 2014 by: zoning the Deferred Matter land to B2 Local Centre and B4 Mixed Use, establishing building heights for development in the town centre ranging from 13 metres to 22 metres above ground level and between 13 metres AHD and 33 metres AHD for land between John Street and Postmans Lane, identifying certain land as subject to flood planning controls, identifying certain land as class 3 or class 5 potential acid sulphate soils, and identifying the local heritage item in the subject land. The Planning Proposal also seeks to rezone 30A Charles Street from R3 to B4 to enable a range of business type development on the lot and encourage consolidation with 25 Lake Street to enable a viable commercial development that supports the objectives for a diversity of commercial space in the town centre and an active frontage along Lake Street. A minimum lot size for this lot is also proposed to be removed from the LMLEP 2014 Lot Size Map, which is consistent with other business zoned land in the Local Government Area (LGA). Part 2 Explanation of the Provisions The proposed B2 and B4 zones for the Warners Bay Town Centre is equivalent to the current 3(1) and 3(2) zone applying to the subject land under LMLEP The proposed zones reflect the conversion process undertaken when preparing Lake Macquarie LEP The Planning Proposal would result in the following changes to Lake Macquarie LEP Amendment Applies to: Land Application Map Land Zoning Map Height of Buildings Map Explanation of Provision: Add Warners Bay Town Centre Deferred land to the LMLEP 2014 Land Application Map Rezone land from Deferred and R3 to B2 and B4 as shown on the Land Zoning Map (Figure 4) Establish building heights in the town centre ranging from 13 metres to 22 metres above ground level and between 13 metres AHD and 33 metres AHD for land between John Street and Postmans Lane as shown on the Height of Buildings Map (Figure 5). Metres AHD has been used for the land 3

4 between John Street and Postmans Lane because it provides a more specific height on sloping land that will ensure the development intent is achieved and the proposed plaza in the southern part of the site is not unreasonably overshadowed. Lot Size Map Flood Planning Map Acid Sulfate Soils Map Heritage Map Change the minimum lot size for 30A Charles Street from 900m2 to Not Specified (Figure 6) Part of the subject land is identified as being within a flood planning area. (Figure 7) Parts of the subject land are classified as class 3 or class 5 potential acid sulphate soils as shown on Acid Sulfate Soils Map (Figure 8) Identification of a local heritage item No. 193 within the subject land. (Figure 9) Part 3 Justification for the Provisions A. NEED FOR THE PLANNING PROPOSAL 1. Is the Planning Proposal a result of any strategic study or report? Besides from the need to address the deferred matter and bring Warners Bay Town Centre into the operation of LMLEP 2014, the Planning Proposal reflects Council s Warners Bay Town Centre Planning Framework. The strategic planning framework sets out the desired long term development outcome for the town centre and among other things, identifies the appropriate building heights. 2. Is the planning proposal the best means of achieving the objectives or intended outcomes, or is there a better way? The Planning Proposal is the only way to address the deferred matter and bring the Warners Bay Town Centre into the operation of LMLEP The Planning Proposal is also the only way to rezone 30A Charles Street from R3 to B4 to enable a range of business type development on the lot and encourage consolidation with surrounding lots to enable the orderly and economic redevelopment of these lots. B. RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLANNING FRAMEWORK 1. Is the Planning Proposal consistent with the objectives and actions contained within the applicable regional or sub-regional strategy (including the Sydney Metropolitan Strategy and exhibited draft strategies)? The Planning Proposal is consistent with the Lower Hunter Regional Strategy (LHRS). Warners Bay is identified as a local town centre in the strategy whose function is to be a shopping and business centre for the district, including health and professional services mixed with medium and higher density residential. The LHRS 4

5 identifies the focus of centres to accommodate a high proportion of projected job growth. The LHRS also identifies the target of 36,000 new dwellings by 2031 for Lake Macquarie LGA, 14,000 of those in centres and corridors. The Planning Proposal will contribute to achieving the LHRS job and dwelling targets. Lifestyle Is the Planning Proposal consistent with the local council s Community Strategic plan or other local strategic plan? Lifestyle 2030 identifies Warners Bay as a town centre whose function is to provide a range of retail, commercial, professional and social facilities, have medium density residential within and adjoin the centre, serve the surrounding residential communities and be located on major transport routes, accessed by frequent public transport services. Town Centres are also to be accessible by pedestrians and cyclists and express the character of the area. The Planning Proposal is consistent with the key aims and strategic directions of the LS2030 Strategy, specifically: reinforcing and strengthening centres to provide a wide range of services and facilities, providing local employment opportunities, guiding the development of compact, distinct and diverse urban communities with a range of housing types, integrating land use with the efficient provisions of public and private movement systems, recognising community, commercial and investor needs through accommodating the City s projected population growth, where feasible, within Centres and established areas. 3. Is the Planning Proposal consistent with applicable state environmental planning policies? An assessment has been undertaken to determine the level of consistency the Planning Proposal has with relevant State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs). The assessment is provided below. SEPP Relevance Comment SEPP 14 Coastal Wetlands SEPP 19 Bushland in Urban Areas The aim of this policy is to ensure that the coastal wetlands are preserved and protected in the environmental and economic interests of the State. Aims to prioritise the conservation of bushland in urban areas, and requires consideration of aims in preparing a draft amendment. This Planning Proposal does not affect Coastal Wetlands. This Planning Proposal does not affect Bushland in Urban Areas. 5

6 SEPP Relevance Comment SEPP 32 - Urban Consolidation SEPP 44 - Koala Habitat Protection SEPP 55 Remediation of Land SEPP 71- Coastal Protection SEPP Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries 2007 The aims and objectives of this policy are to promote orderly and economic redevelopment of urban land no longer required for its original use or for redevelopment for multi-unit housing. The policy requires that a draft LEP must give consideration to implementing the aims and objectives of this policy. Aims to encourage the proper conservation and management of areas of natural vegetation that provide koala habitat. Establishes planning controls and provisions for the remediation of contaminated land. This SEPP ensures that development in the NSW coastal zone is appropriate and suitably located to ensure that there is a consistent and strategic approach to coastal planning and management. The aim of this policy is to provide for the proper management and development of mineral, petroleum and extractive material resources. The Planning Proposal is consistent with the aims and objectives of the SEPP. This Planning Proposal does not affect Koala Habitat. The Planning Proposal is consistent with clause 6 of the SEPP. The Planning Proposal is consistent with the aims (clause 2) and matters for consideration (clause 8) of the SEPP. The Planning Proposal does not propose to change zoning that would affect the permissibility of mining on the subject lands. 4. Is the Planning Proposal consistent with applicable Ministerial Directions (s.117 directions)? An assessment has been undertaken to determine the level of consistency the proposal has with Ministerial Directions. The Planning Proposal is consistent with all relevant Ministerial Directions. The assessment is provided below. 6

7 Ministerial Direction Relevance Implications Business and Industrial Zones Aims to encourage employment growth in suitable locations, protect employment land in business and industrial zones, and support the viability of identified strategic centres Consistent the Planning Proposal is consistent with the objectives of this direction and seeks to maintain the current business zones and uses permitted on the subject land Rural Zones Aims to protect the agricultural production value of rural land. Not applicable. 1.3 Mining, Petroleum and Extractive Industries Oyster Aquaculture The direction requires consultation with the Director-General of the Department of Primary Industries where a Planning Proposal will restrict extractive resource operations. Aims to protect Priority Oyster Aquaculture Areas. Consistent the Planning Proposal seeks to address a Deferred Matter by bring the Warners Bay Town Centre into the operation of the Lake Macquarie LEP 2014 and will not affect the winning of extractive materials or restrict the potential development of coal, other minerals, petroleum or extractive materials. Not applicable Rural Lands Aims to protect the agricultural production value of rural land. Not applicable. 2.1 Environmental Protection Zones The direction requires that a Planning Proposal contain provisions to facilitate the protection of environmentally sensitive land Consistent the Planning Proposal does not affect environmentally sensitive areas Coastal Protection This direction aims to implement the principles in the NSW Coastal Policy Consistent the Planning Proposal is amending Lake Macquarie LEP 2014 and will not affect provisions regarding coastal protection contained in Lake Macquarie LEP Heritage Conservation 2.4 Recreation Vehicle Areas The direction requires that a Planning Proposal include provisions to facilitate the protection and conservation of aboriginal and European heritage items. The direction restricts a Planning Proposal from enabling land to be developed for a recreation vehicle area. Consistent the Planning Proposal is maintaining the general heritage item identified in the subject land. The Planning Proposal is not affecting heritage provisions contained in Lake Macquarie LEP Consistent the Planning Proposal is not enabling land to the developed for the purpose of a recreation vehicle area. 7

8 Ministerial Direction Relevance Implications 3.1- Residential Zones The direction requires a Planning Proposal to include provisions that facilitate housing choice, efficient use of infrastructure, and reduce land consumption on the urban fringe. Consistent The Planning Proposal is consistent with the objectives and requirements of this direction. The proposed rezoning of 30A Charles Street from R3 to B4 is also consistent with the objectives and requirements of this direction. 3.2 Caravan Parks and Manufactured Home Estates 3.3 Home Occupations 3.4 Integrating Land Use and Transport 3.5 Development near Licensed Aerodromes The direction requires a draft LEP to maintain provisions and land use zones that allow the establishment of Caravan Parks and Manufactured Home Estates. The direction requires that a draft LEP include provisions to ensure that Home Occupations are permissible without consent. The direction requires consistency with State policy in terms of positioning of urban land use zones. The direction aims to ensure the effective, safe and uncompromised operation of aerodromes. The direction also seeks to ensure the residential development close to aerodromes is not adversely affected by aircraft noise. Consistent the Planning Proposal is not identifying or affecting zones, locations or provisions regarding caravan parks or manufactured home estates. Consistent the Planning Proposal does not affect the carrying out of home occupations in dwelling houses without consent. Consistent the Planning Proposal is consistent with the objectives and requirements of this direction. Not applicable. 3.6 Shooting Ranges The direction aims to maintain public safety and reduce land use conflicts associated with shooting ranges. Not applicable. 8

9 Ministerial Direction Relevance Implications 4.1 Acid Sulfate Soils Aim to avoid significant adverse environmental impacts from the use of land that has a probability of containing acid sulfate soils Inconsistent the Planning Proposal identifies areas within the subject land that are classified as potential Acid Sulfate Soils and proposes to zone those areas for business purposes. The Lake Macquarie LEP 2014 contains provisions that are consistent with the NSW Government Acid Sulfate Soils Guidelines. 4.2 Mine Subsidence and Unstable Land The direction requires consultation with the Mine Subsidence Board where a Planning Proposal is proposed for land within a mine subsidence district. The Department of Planning and Environment in the Gateway Determination advised that the inconsistency with this direction is of minor significance and no further approval is required. Consistent the Planning Proposal affects land within a mine subsidence district. The Mine Subsidence Board has been consulted and advised they have no objection to the Planning Proposal. The MSB advised that future development applications will need to be referred to the MSB for approval. 9

10 Ministerial Direction Relevance Implications Flood Prone Land Aims to ensure that development of flood prone land is consistent with the NSW Government Flood Prone Land Policy and the Principles of the Floodplain Development Manual 2005 and to ensure that the provision of an LEP on flood prone land is commensurate with flood hazard and includes consideration of the potential flood impacts both on and off the subject land. Inconsistent the Planning Proposal includes land that is subject to flood planning controls and seeks to enable a minor increase in the intensity of development on land that is subject to flood planning controls. This minor increase in development intensity refers to the rezoning of 30A Charles Street from R3 Medium Density to B4 Mixed Use and to the additional building height proposed compared to current permitted building heights. It is considered that the inconsistency is of minor significance because: 1. the objectives of the direction is still satisfied, 2. Land uses remain the same as currently permitted, 3. The building heights are proposed to increase from four stories to six stories or up to RL33m in different areas. The additional height may facilitate redevelopment of current flood affected lots that would meet minimum floor level requirements. 4. The rezoning applies to a small 353m2 lot adjacent to an existing B4 zone. Development on this lot would meet minimum floor level requirements. It is considered that the proposed changes will not lead to negative impacts associated with flooding on the subject land or surrounding land. The Planning Proposal is also consistent with LHRS and Council s Lifestyle 2030 Strategy and Lake Macquarie LEP 2014 contains provisions that are consistent with the NSW Flood Prone Land Policy and Principles of the Floodplain Development Manual The concurrence of the Department of Planning and Environment for this inconsistency is required. 10

11 Ministerial Direction Relevance Implications 4.4 Planning for Bushfire Protection 5.1 Implementation of Regional Strategies 6.1 Approval and Referral Requirements 6.2 Reserving Land for Public Purposes Site Specific Provisions The direction applies to land that has been identified as bushfire prone, and requires consultation with the NSW Rural Fire Service, as well as the establishment of Asset Protection Zones. The direction requires a Planning Proposal to be consistent with the relevant State strategy that applies to the Local Government Area. The direction prevents a Planning Proposal from requiring concurrence from, or referral to, the Minister or a public authority. The direction prevents a Planning Proposal from altering available land for public use. Aims to reduce restrictive site-specific planning controls where a Planning Proposal amends another environmental planning instrument in order to allow a particular development proposal to proceed. Planning Proposals are encouraged to use existing zones rather than have site-specific exceptions. Consistent the Planning Proposal subject land includes a small area of land identified as a buffer to bushfire prone land. Consultation with the NSW Rural Fire Service has been undertaken however the RFS has not provided any advice. The Planning Proposal seeks to amend Lake Macquarie LEP 2014, which contains provisions consistent with Planning for Bushfire Protection Consistent the Planning Proposal applies to land within the Lower Hunter Regional Strategy. The Planning Proposal is consistent with the objectives contained in the strategy. The strategy has been considered in detail in Part B of this Planning Proposal. Consistent the Planning Proposal does not include provisions that require the concurrence, consultation or referral of development applications to a Minister or public authority. Consistent the Planning Proposal does not create, alter or reduce zoning or reservations of land for public purposes. Consistent the Planning Proposal does not propose any site specific planning controls that seek to allow a particular development to proceed. C. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT 1. Is there any likelihood that critical habitat or threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats, will be adversely affected as a result of the proposal? There is no likelihood of adverse impact on threatened species, populations, ecological communities or critical habitat as a result of this Planning Proposal. 11

12 2. Are there any other likely environmental effects as a result of the Planning Proposal and how are they proposed to be managed? Part of the subject land is prone to flooding. The Planning Proposal identifies this land as being affected by flood planning controls. Future development will need to consider and address the relevant flood planning controls in Council s LEP and DCP. Specifically, new development will need to meet the minimum floor height requirements to avoid the impacts and risks associated with flooding. There are no other likely environmental effects as a result of this Planning Proposal. 3. How has the Planning Proposal adequately addressed any social and economic effects? The Planning Proposal seeks to resolve a deferred matter. The social and economic effects are covered in the related Warners Bay Town Centre Framework. Social The Planning Proposal identifies the local heritage item within the subject land. The Warners Bay Town Centre currently provides access to a range of social services and facilities, which are adequate to service the needs of the current and anticipated population. Other social impacts may include possible overshadowing from future buildings, and a perceived degradation of the character of the town centre by certain parts of the community. A key feature of the plan is the identification of a Market Square in the centre of the town which will act as a community meeting point, improve accessibility and connectivity through the centre and provide a sunny and sheltered location for outdoor dining and other activities. It is considered that the planning proposal will lead to positive social outcomes such as greater diversity of housing choice, shops, businesses and cultural activity. It is considered there are no other adverse social impacts resulting from the Planning Proposal. Economic The Planning Proposal provides the planning framework for viable economic development within the Town Centre. Specialist Development Feasibility advice was obtained about the proposed planning controls for the Warners Bay Town Centre and their relationship to the feasibility of development in the town centre. The report tests the feasibility of a hypothetical development based on the proposed planning controls in several locations in the town centre. The findings of the report include: The proposed controls are unlikely to encourage redevelopment of land fronting The Esplanade in the short to medium term, primarily due to the high retail value of existing shops and small lots with fragmented ownership. Lot amalgamation along The Esplanade is required to conform to proposed planning controls and SEPP 65 provisions due to orientation and shape of lots. There is no demand for retail and office space outside the core of the town centre and removing the commercial component of development would encourage immediate development. Underground parking is uneconomic except for very large scale projects. Parking is a significant development cost and the parking rate of 1 per 25m 2 for retail and 1/40m2 for office space renders most fringe sites uneconomic to develop. 12

13 The proposed controls and market conditions are suitable for development of large and/or vacant sites to occur now. Extra height (two storeys) for residential units in core areas could make development feasible in the short to medium term. There are no adverse economic impacts resulting from the Planning Proposal. D. STATE AND COMMONWEALTH INTERESTS 1. Is there adequate public infrastructure for the Planning Proposal? As the Planning Proposal seeks to bring the Warners Bay Town Centre within Lake Macquarie LEP 2014 and there is no significant change in land use zones or the types of development permitted from those permitted currently, it is considered there is adequate public infrastructure available to the subject area. 2. What are the views of State and Commonwealth public authorities consulted in accordance with the gateway determination? Gateway Determination was issued on 5 September 2014 and required consultation with the following agencies. Roads and Maritime Service Mine Subsidence Board (under s117 Direction 4.2) Rural Fires Service (under s117 Direction 4.4) Council received submissions from Roads and Maritime Service and Mine Subsidence Board. No submission was received from Rural Fires Service. A summary of the submissions and a planning response are provided below. Roads and Maritime Service (RMS) The RMS provided a detailed submission that included the following comments: Council should investigate staging plans to identify thresholds for intersection upgrades based on traffic projections. RMS maintains that infrastructure upgrades will be attributable to development and not network growth. Recommend setting up funding mechanisms for upgrades. Need more detail on bus services and liaison with Transport for NSW. RMS do not support removal of mid-block pedestrian signals. No objections to Lake St and King St signals on the Esplanade on grounds of pedestrian safety. Concern about warrant for new signals if removing mid-block signals. Do not support signalisation of James Street and The Esplanade. No objections to all turning movements at John and King Streets intersection. Re-alignment of Charles to create 4 leg roundabout not in the interests of traffic efficiency or safety on King Street. RMS wishes to review. Duplication of North Creek Bridge not required in short to medium term. Recommend on-road cycle ways on King Street and The Esplanade. 13

14 Safety for construction and use and maintenance of facilities and landscape areas must be part of the design considerations. Council should develop a Pedestrian Access Mobility Plan (PAMP) for the Town Centre. Planning Response Framework updated to note thresholds required for intersection upgrades. Further analysis of network growth vs traffic generation from development as part of s94 planning. More detail added on bus services. Liaison with Transport for NSW to input land use planning information to assist in service review in James Street signals removed. Further workshopping with RMS regarding threshold and improved turning movements at Charles Street and King Streets. Existing mid-block pedestrian signals reinstated on plan. Plan includes a separated cycle lane on north side of King Street and a cycle safe lane southbound on The Esplanade. Both permit safer cycle access to the Dress Circle shopping strip and The Foreshore via the signalised intersections at Lake St and at King St Plans include all key pedestrian routes and crossing points. More detailed PAMP would be undertaken in response to development demand. Modelling undertaken on the basis of a specified road hierarchy for the town centre including King and The Esplanade network roads/ James, Charles and Lake perimeter streets/ John shopping street/ Howard and Lymington access streets/ Postmans shared zone. Mine Subsidence Board (MSB) No objection to proposal. Town Centre is within a mine subsidence district and the board may impose restrictions and/or design requirements on structures. MSB consideration and approval will be required for applications for improvements at the appropriate time. Planning Response Future development applications will be referred to the MSB for consideration and approval. 14

15 Part 4 Mapping Figure 1 Locality Map 15

16 Figure 2 Subject Land & Aerial Photo 16

17 Figure 3 Current Zones Lake Macquarie LEP

18 Figure 4 - Proposed Zones - Lake Macquarie LEP

19 Figure 5 - Proposed Height of Building Map - Lake Macquarie LEP

20 Figure 6 - Proposed Lot Size Map - Lake Macquarie LEP

21 Figure 7 - Proposed Acid Sulfate Soils Map - Lake Macquarie LEP

22 Figure 8 - Proposed Flood Planning Map - Lake Macquarie LEP

23 Figure 9 - Proposed Heritage Map - Lake Macquarie LEP

24 Part 5 Details of Community Consultation The Gateway Determination advised a minimum public exhibition period of 14 days. The Planning Proposal along with Warners Bay Town Centre Planning Framework, Town Centre Area Plan and Streetscape Master Plan were on public exhibition for 42 days from 8 September 2014 to 20 October A comprehensive consultation program was undertaken for the public exhibition, which included: All documents being available on Council s website, at Council s Customer Service Centre and Speers Point Library. The haveyoursay/warnersbay website was set up for the public to; view the exhibition documents and supporting visual aids, participate in four quick polls that were held, read latest media articles about the exhibition and ask questions and read responses from the Council project team. The website was visited 1740 times (1336 unique visits) with the slideshow viewed 500 times. Three community drop in days; 9 and 25 September 2014 at the performing arts centre, and Sunday 14 September 2014 at the Warners Bay foreshore podium where the public could ask questions and listen to staff explain the key concepts in the plans. Over 100 people attended the drop in days. Delivery of 4200 information brochures to residents of Warners Bay and Lakelands and to businesses within the town centre. Information brochure 2014 Public notice of the exhibition period in the Newcastle Herald, Lakes Mail and The Post newspapers. Letter to 173 landowners in the Warners Bay Town Centre. A meeting with the Warners Bay Chamber of Commerce and its members. An to 246 people who made submissions to or were involved in previous community engagements. 24

25 In response to the notification and consultation activities, Council received 58 public submissions. A summary of the issues raised in submissions from members of the public and a planning response is provided below. Each submission was categorised based on the issues that were raised in the submission. One submission may have raised multiple issues. Issue: Building Height general (raised in 28 submissions) Submissions raised objection to the proposed building heights generally across the town centre. These submissions cited concerns such as the community do not support an increase in building heights, impact on views and overshadowing, preference for taller buildings to be away from foreshore, and the likely change to the current low-scale character of the town centre. Other submissions supported the proposed heights indicating that apartment living in King, Lake and Albert Streets is desirable and that development will stimulate the local economy, and provide opportunities for services and businesses in the town centre. One submission stated that if a plaza were created in John Street they would support building up to eight storeys east of John Street. One submission objected to proposed building heights on 54 Charles Street and 55 King Street due to privacy and overshadowing impacts on villas at 52 Charles Street. 25

26 The submission from the Warners Bay Chamber of Commerce suggested that specialist advice be obtained regarding the relationship between building heights and equitable developer returns. Planning Response Community feedback is one of many issues Council needs to consider and balance when preparing strategic land use plans. The Lower Hunter Regional Strategy (LHRS) and Council s Lifestyle 2030 Strategy (LS2030) identify the following objectives for town centres: Reinforcing and strengthening centres to provide a wide range of services and facilities. Being the focus to accommodate a high proportion of projected job growth, and to provide local employment opportunities. Integrating land use with the efficient provisions of public and private movement systems, and Accommodating the City s projected population growth, where feasible, within centres and established areas. The proposed building heights for Warners Bay town centre are consistent with the principles for height outlined in the Framework, which include: Buildings are lower than the treed ridgeline to the north-east when viewed from the lake. Buildings maintain a human scale where contact between the building occupants and people in the street is possible. Buildings provide a comfortable sense of enclosure in the street as well as an open sky view for pedestrians. Buildings provide a transition of height between lower scale residential development and higher buildings. Building heights make redevelopment potentially feasible. Based on the strategic objectives for town centres outlined in the LHRS and LS2030, consistency with the principles for building height, controls for quality buildings, and forecast growth and demand for residential accommodation and employment (SGS Economics and Planning, 2010) in the town centre, it is considered that the proposed building heights for the Warners Bay Town Centre are appropriate. Proposed building height on 54 Charles Street has been reduced to three storeys to manage privacy and overshadowing issues. Council has obtained specialist advice about development feasibility. This advice has been considered in finalising the Planning Proposal. Issue: Car parking (raised in 18 submissions) The majority of submissions expressed the need to maintain or increase the number of car parks in the town centre. A few submissions stated more parking was not required citing concerns that more parking increases use of vehicles and creates more demand for parking. One submission made a comprehensive case that free parking subsidises vehicle use, inflates the demand for more parking, reduces the potential yield and activity level of buildings in the centre, and undermines the goal 26

27 for more walking and cycling transport. One submissions also suggested removing parking along The Esplanade. Planning Response The Framework now includes ways to manage parking demand, and to make walking, cycling, and use of public transport safer, and more inviting. These include: Improving bus facilities. Improving off-road cycle routes and on-street cycle safe lanes. Providing quality public space, pedestrian laneways and footpaths. Use of parallel parking along The Esplanade to provide a buffer between café trading areas and vehicles travelling along The Esplanade. Introducing more timed on-street parking spaces. Providing off-street parking facilities with short term free parking and longer stay paid parking. The plans also propose that additional off-street spaces are dispersed as follows: Replacement of the existing parking spaces on the John Street car park site, in basement and/or upper levels. Providing additional parking spaces as required to service new floor space within a re-development on the John Street car park site and land fronting The Esplanade. Providing additional parking spaces in the re-development of council sites at King, John, and Charles Streets and Lake, John, and Charles Streets. The amended Area Plan includes simplification and relaxation of the parking generation rates used to determine required spaces in Warners Bay Town Centre and include: Using the same parking generation rate for retail and medical services development as for office space (1 space per 40m2). Using the lowest accepted parking rate for residential apartments within Warners Bay town centre on the basis that it has sufficient transport alternatives to private vehicle transport. Applying the lowest accepted parking rate for residential apartments as a maximum parking generation rate and allowing the market to determine the number of residential parking spaces to be provided. Issue: Building Height on John Street Car Park (raised in 17 submissions) Objections were raised to the proposed building heights stating that the car park should remain as it is now. Submissions proposed that the car park should be converted to an open style plaza with some shops surrounding the plaza. Planning Response It is considered that the current at grade car park is an inefficient use of an important area in the centre of the town centre. The amended plans include a Market Square on the elevated southern part of the John Street car park site. New buildings on the remainder of the site would activate the Market Square with shops and cafes on the 27

28 edges and office and residential uses with balconies above. Proposed building heights would be stepped to retain at solar access to more than 50% of the public space in midwinter. The site is considered suitable for buildings up to six storeys because it is a large centrally located site. Different levels on this site could be used to provide car parking for the town centre. The proposed building heights for this site are consistent with the principles for height outlined in the Framework and as discussed above. Issue: town centre character (raised in 16 submissions) Some submissions state that the plans will destroy or change the village character of the town centre due to proposed building heights, increased population, increased traffic and impact on available parking. Some submissions commented that the plans will revitalise the area and will have positive benefits for the community. Planning Response The character of the town centre has been raised during each community consultation period. The Area Plan contains controls that seek to ensure building appearance addresses the key character elements of the town centre including: awnings on high activity frontages, small scale shop fronts, clear vertical proportions, setback of upper levels, and controls for façade design, balconies, window and door openings. The amended planning documents include provisions to retain and enhance the key character elements of the town centre such as: a Market Square plaza as a sheltered open space community hub and as the pivot point of a pedestrian spine through the town centre linking Charles Street, The Esplanade and foreshore; small sized shops fronting directly onto streets and pedestrian lanes; good pedestrian connection between the town centre and the foreshore; and outdoor dining opportunities overlooking the lake. Issue: Traffic and Intersections (raised in 14 submissions) Comments varied in relation to this issue. Most of the submissions stated support for the proposed traffic and intersection improvements while others objected to removing roundabouts. Some submissions commented that the roads will not be able to handle the additional vehicles that will occur because of new development, and that The Esplanade should be closed and traffic redirected along King and Medcalf Streets. Planning Response The proposed traffic and intersection arrangements are based on detailed traffic modelling and consultation with RMS and Council traffic engineers. Traffic signals are superior to roundabouts in terms of pedestrian and cyclist accessibility. 28

29 Closing The Esplanade and diverting traffic via King and Medcalf Streets was investigated, but determined to be impracticable. The diversion would: extend trip length and travel times; encourage rat-running through the other streets; require support from residents along King and Medcalf Streets; and meet with strong objection from RMS. Issue: Esplanade footpath upgrade (raised in 13 submissions) The majority of submissions supported the proposed improvements to the footpath along The Esplanade and one submission suggested completely removing parking along The Esplanade. One submission objected to the removal of the existing signalised pedestrian crossing and changing the roundabouts to signals, as it would make vehicle travel slower along The Esplanade, contributing to congestion and air pollution. Planning Response The town centre Traffic and Transport study identified that traffic signals at the intersections of King Street and The Esplanade, and Lake Street and The Esplanade are required to manage traffic flow. The traffic signals will provide improved pedestrian and cyclist access to the foreshore, and south of King Street. Parallel parking and footpath upgrades will improve atmosphere and amenity for footpath dining. Parallel parking provides a buffer between diners and moving vehicles travelling along The Esplanade. Issue: Plaza on John Street (raised in 12 submissions) Submissions sought to have the current John Street car park, or part of the car park, turned into an open plaza. Most of the submissions suggested that shops and cafes should face the plaza. Planning Response The amended plans include the provision of a Market Square at the southern end of the John Street car park near the current Post Office. This concept involves closing a section of Postmans Lane to vehicles and will provide a sheltered, sunny location, for community events such as markets, and become the pedestrian spine through the town centre linking Charles Street and The Esplanade. The Market Square would be activated by retail floor space around the edges and office and residential uses above. The amended Framework provides comprehensive principles for the planning, design and use of the Market Square and includes a concept plan for illustration. Issue: Business, Employment and Residential use mix (raised in 11 submissions) Submissions generally identified the need to provide more employment opportunities for the community and supported the introduction of residential living into the town centre. An enhanced shopping choice and café/lifestyle culture was considered desirable. Planning Response 29

30 Warners Bay Town Centre enjoys a high amenity. The planning documents contain provisions to encourage a mixture of business, employment and residential uses to create a vibrant town centre that is consistent with the vision outlined in the Lower Hunter Regional Strategy and Council s Lifestyle 2030 Strategy. Issue: Consultation (raised in nine submissions) It was claimed that the consultation process was not adequate and/or that community views are not being taken on board. A few submissions congratulated Council staff on the comprehensive community consultation process that was undertaken. Planning Response A comprehensive consultation program was undertaken for the public exhibition. See the Consultation section of this report for more information. Community feedback is one of many factors that need to be considered and balanced when preparing strategic land use plans. Issue: Cycling/public transport (raised in eight submissions) Requests made that more emphasis and improvements be made to proposed cycling facilities as Warners Bay is an important node for recreation and commuter cycling. Submissions also requested more attention and detail to public transport. Planning Response Documents have been updated to highlight importance of cycling transport and include changes to proposed cycling lanes and end of trip facilities. Documents updated to include more information on public transport and the desired location of bus stops. Issue: Impacts of construction (raised in seven submissions) Submissions stated that availability of car parking and viability of existing businesses would be impacted during the construction of buildings, especially on the John Street car park site. Planning Response It is acknowledged that there will be impacts during the construction of new development in the town centre. The impacts of construction will be considered and addressed at the development application stage. Recent experience with development at Charlestown and Belmont town centres demonstrates that these impacts can be managed appropriately, and the new development brings more customers. The alternative of not allowing development would mean the ongoing decline of Warners Bay Town Centre. Issue: Building design/appearance (raised in six submissions) Two submissions suggested that buildings need to achieve architectural excellence. One submission objected to the requirement for a 6m rear setback for development on properties along Lake Street that back onto the Hunter Water pumping station. One submission objected to the requirement for development on 478 The Esplanade to be setback from the Bay Arcade laneway to maintain the current 6m wide laneway, noting a good urban outcome could be achieved with 4m wide laneway. The 30

31 submission also objected to the proposed 1.5m setback on Postmans Lane as it is not considered a good urban outcome and reduces development footprint. Another submission supported the increase in building height for land on the southern side of the King Street/The Esplanade intersection. The submission objected to the requirement of a maximum 50% occupied area at the rear of a development and to the requirement for the upper two storeys to be setback. Planning Response The proposed building design controls seek to ensure that all development is well designed and of high quality. Regarding the development controls for properties backing onto the Hunter Water pumping station, the controls are generic for all development in this area and the Hunter Water pumping station is a unique situation specific to a few properties. A merit assessment of a development application may permit a reduced rear setback in this instance. Regarding the submission about 478 The Esplanade, it is proposed to establish a 6m wide Bay Arcade because it is a main visual and pedestrian connection through the centre to the foreshore. The public owned part of the lane is 3.6m wide and the amended Area Plan now includes controls for a minimum 1.5m setback for the lots on each side. This will result in a 6.6m wide lane, which is considered necessary to allow for pedestrian movement and outdoor dining opportunities. The setback for landscape on the western side of Postmans Lane has been removed given the primary purpose will be to access the rear of lots that front The Esplanade. Individual developments may improve amenity with an articulated wall that permits some planting within the private lot. The 2m setback on the eastern side of Postmans Lane ensures all vehicle and pedestrian movements can be accommodated. Regarding the submission about the land on the southern side of the King Street/The Esplanade intersection, it is proposed to remove the requirement for a maximum 50% occupied area as SEPP 65 and the Residential Flat Design Code adequately control building depth, amenity and building separation. It is proposed to maintain setbacks for upper storeys to minimise building bulk. Issue: Foreshore (raised in four submissions) Submissions suggested that improvements be made to the foreshore area including a deep-water jetty, swimming facility/baths, more public toilet facilities, larger entertainment area, and outdoor gym equipment. Planning Response Proposed improvements to the foreshore area are outside the scope of the Warners Bay Town Centre planning documents but are covered in the Warners Bay Foreshore Master Plan and Plan of Management adopted by Council in

32 Part 6 Project Timeline Task Commencement Date Gateway Determination Timeframe 5 September 2014 Government Agency Consultation September 2014 Commencement and Completion Dates for Public Exhibition Period Dates for Public Hearing Timeframe for Consideration of Submissions Timeframe for the consideration of a proposal post exhibition 8 September to 20 October 2014 N/A November 2014 to March May 2015 Submission to DoPI to finalise LEP May 2015 Anticipated date RPA to finalise the plan (if delegated) Anticipated date RPA will forward to DoPI for notification June 2015 June

33 Attachments Attachment 1 Gateway Determination 33

34 Attachment 2 Statement of Council interest in subject land Lake Macquarie City Council owns several sites in the Warners Bay Town Centre as shown with a bold red border on the map below The land has been acquired by Council over several decades to form part of Councils commercial property portfolio and is classified as operational land. Council s Property Department is working on a strategy for Council s operational landholdings 34

35 in the centre which seeks to optimise the use, development, benefit and return to Council. There are currently no development applications for the redevelopment of any Council owned operational land in the town centre. However, the lands are intended to be used for a commercial investment, which may involve a combination of retail, commercial and residential floor space and the provision of car parking. The timing for any further commercial investment on Council land is currently unknown. This Planning Proposal has been prepared to amend Lake Macquarie Local Environmental Plan 2014 (LMLEP 2014) to bring the whole of the Warners Bay Town Centre Deferred Matter into the operation of LMLEP 2014 by: zoning the Deferred Matter land to B2 Local Centre and B4 Mixed Use, establishing building heights for development in the town centre ranging from 13 metres to 22 metres above ground level and between 13 metres AHD and 33 metres AHD for land between John Street and Postmans Lane (Site 2), identifying certain land as subject to flood planning controls, identifying certain land as class 3 or class 5 potential acid sulphate soils, identifying the local heritage item in the subject land. The Planning Proposal also seeks to rezone 30A Charles Street from R3 to B4 to enable a range of business type development on the lot and encourage consolidation with 25 Lake Street to enable a viable commercial development that supports the objectives for a diversity of commercial space in the town centre and an active frontage along Lake Street. The planning proposal is consistent with the State Governments Lower Hunter Regional Strategy and Councils Lifestyle 2030 Strategy as outlined in the planning proposal. The potential financial gain to Council as landowner is similar to that of other landowners in the town centre. The types of uses permitted will largely remain unchanged however, there may be some increase in property value due to a proposed increased in building height as shown below. Site Current Building Height (Storeys) Proposed Building Height (Storeys or RL) No.1 - Lake Street 4/3 5 No.2 - John Street 4 Between RL13m and RL33m No.3 - King Street 4/3 6 Site No. 1 on Lake Street includes a current strata development with the separate strata properties currently leased to a range of tenants. The site also contains public car parking. Site No. 2 on John Street is currently used as the town centre s main public car park and there are no leases or agreements over this land. Site No.3 on King Street includes a child care centre which is currently leased and operated by a non-profit community based child care provider. This site also includes another significant public car park. There is currently no intention for Council to sell any of the land. 35