2007_06_01 - Illawarra Escarpment Land Use Review Strategy Pt 1

7/31/2019 2007_06_01 - Illawarra Escarpment Land Use Review Strategy Pt 1

1/104

Illawarra Escarpment Land Use Review Strategy1 June 2007

Prepared for:

Wollongong City Council


2/104

Illawarra Escarpment Land Use Review Strategy

DISTRIBUTION


1 June 2007

Copies Recipient Copies Recipient3 Ms Lisa Miller

Project ManagerWollongong Council41 Burrelli Street

Wollongong 2500

This document was prepared for the sole use of Wollongong City Council and the regulatory agencies that are directly involved in

this project, the only intended beneficiaries of our work. No other party should rely on the information contained herein without theprior written consent of HLA-Envirosciences Pty Limited and Wollongong City Council.

By

HLA-Envirosciences Pty Limited

ABN: 34 060 204 702Level 5, 828 Pacific Highway Gordon NSW 2072

PO Box 726 Pymble NSW 2073


3/104


CONTENTS

GLOSSARY OF TERMS..............................................................................................................IV1 BACKGROUND............................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Introduction..................................................................................................... 11.2 Commission of Inquiry.................................................................................... 11.3 Illawarra Escarpment Strategic Management Plan........................................ 2

1.3.1 Land Classification.......................................................................... 31.3.2 Areas of Special Interest................................................................. 4

1.4 Land Use Review Strategy............................................................................. 41.5 Parallel Studies............................................................................................... 61.6 Existing Planning Framework......................................................................... 61.7 How to Use this Document ............................................................................. 6

2 OVERALL APPROACH................................................................................................ 72.1 Sustainable Environment................................................................................ 72.2 Spatial Analysis .............................................................................................. 7

3 APPROACH TO LAND USE REVIEW.......................................................................... 93.1 Overview......................................................................................................... 93.2 Land Use Review ......................................................................................... 11

3.2.1 Approach....................................................................................... 113.3 Precincts....................................................................................................... 13

3.3.1 Precinct Definition ......................................................................... 133.3.2 Precincts........................................................................................ 143.3.3 Precinct 1: Marshall Mount............................................................ 173.3.4 Precinct 2: West Dapto Bowl......................................................... 193.3.5 Precinct 3: The Heights................................................................. 233.3.6 Precinct 4: Mt Kembla................................................................... 263.3.7 Precinct 5: Mt Keira....................................................................... 283.3.8 Precinct 6: Balgownie Valley......................................................... 313.3.9 Precinct 7: Coastal Ridges............................................................ 323.3.10 Precinct 8: Cliff Coast.................................................................... 35


4/104


4.4.1 Principles....................................................................................... 434.4.2 Issues............................................................................................ 44

4.5 Landscape .................................................................................................... 444.5.1 Principles....................................................................................... 444.5.2 Issues............................................................................................ 44

4.6 Rural Landscape .......................................................................................... 444.6.1 Principles....................................................................................... 444.6.2 Issues............................................................................................ 45

4.7 Water Resource............................................................................................ 454.7.1 Principles....................................................................................... 454.7.2 Issues............................................................................................ 45

5 STATUTORY CONTEXT............................................................................................. 465.1 Review of Wollongong DRAFT WLEP 2007 ................................................ 465.2 Land Use Zones ........................................................................................... 46

5.2.1 Wollongong DRAFT WLEP 2007.................................................. 465.2.2 West Dapto LEP 2006................................................................... 475.2.3 Commentary.................................................................................. 48

5.3 Landscape Support for Core/ Escarpment Interface.................................... 495.3.1 Biophysical Support for Core - Areas of Special Interest.............. 50

6 REVIEW OF DRAFT WOLLONGONG DRAFT WLEP 2007 PLANNINGINSTRUMENT.............................................................................................................. 526.1 LEP Text....................................................................................................... 526.2 Part 1 - Preliminary....................................................................................... 526.3 Part 2 Permitted or Prohibited Development............................................. 52

6.3.1 Land Use Zones............................................................................ 526.3.2 Zone Objectives ............................................................................ 536.3.3 Additional Permitted/ Prohibited Uses .......................................... 546.3.4

Subdivision Consent Requirements........................................... 54

6.4 Part 3 Exempt and Complying Development ............................................... 55

6.4.1 Exempt Development.................................................................... 556.4.2 Complying Development ............................................................... 55

6.5 Part 4 Principal Development Standards ..................................................... 566 5 1 L t Si 56


5/104


8 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL FRAMEWORK ............................................................. 668.1 Introduction................................................................................................... 668.2 Escarpment Modification Threats................................................................. 668.3 Characterisation of Land .............................................................................. 68

8.3.1 Environmental Envelope............................................................... 698.4 Proposed Amendments to DCP No 49......................................................... 70

9 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................. 71

TABLESTable 1: Attribute Values............................................................................................................. 41Table 2: Comparison of Zoning...................................................................................................47FIGURESFigure 1: Study Area

Figure 2: Methodology

Figure 3: Precincts

Figure 4: Areas of Special Interest

Figure 5: Landscape for Core Escarpment Interface Site Analysis - Index (Appendix A)

APPENDICESAppendix A : Review of Land Use Zones Draft WLEP 2007


6/104


GLOSSARY OF TERMS

APZ Asset Protection Zone

COI Commission of Inquiry

DECC Department of Environment and ClimateChange

DOE Development Opportunity Envelope

DoP Department of Planning

ECC Endangered Ecological Community

FTP Fair Trading Policy

GIS Geographical Information System

IESMP Illawarra Escarpment Strategic ManagementPlan

IEWP Illawarra Escarpment Working PartyIREP Illawarra Regional Environmental Plan

LEP Local Environmental Plan

DRAFT WLEP 2007 Draft Wollongong DRAFT WLEP 2007

LGA Local Government Area

PCT Project Coordination Team

RRP Rural Residential Policy

VAC Visual Absorption Capacity

WCC Wollongong City Council

WDLEP Draft Wollongong LEP 2006 West Dapto


7/104


8/104


1.3 Illawarra Escarpment Strategic Management Plan

The Illawarra Escarpment Strategic Management Plan (IESMP) was prepared in 2005 to

address the long term planning and sustainable management of the escarpment.

Prepared by WCC with input from the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (now

Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC)), Department of Infrastructure

Planning and Natural Resources (now Department of Planning (DoP)), the Illawarra Escarpment

Community Reference Group, local Aboriginal representatives, CSIRO, University of

Wollongong and a number of heritage consultants, the primary objective of the plan was to:

identify important environmentally significant areas of the escarpment andfoothills;

assess the existing land use zones within the escarpment and identifychanges to the zoning regime to align conservation requirements and land

use zones;

provide a framework for consistency in applying WCC land use planning

policies to current and future public and private land use;

identify voluntary land management options for all land tenures consistentwith the conservation values;

outline potential implementation strategies to facilitate partnerships betweenpublic and private land holdings with respect to voluntary management

options; and

discuss possible conservation incentives to encourage conservationoutcomes.

The IESMP defined a study area boundary which is a composite of a number of features as

follows.

In the north the boundary is the line used by the Illawarra Escarpment Working

Party (IEWP). The western boundary adopted the escarpment watershed line

determined by DEC, with a 150 m buffer. The southern study area boundary is the

Local Government Area (LGA) boundary. To the east, the boundary is a

combination of the IEWP line and the 50 m RL (contiguous land at 50 m elevation

or higher above sea level but excluding land that is zoned residential (2 zoning),

commercial (3 zoning) or industrial (4a and 4b zoning). Whichever line is the

furthest east was adopted.


9/104


10/104


lands are shown in Figure 4.1 of the IESMP and referred to in this report as the Areas of Special

Interest (see Section 1.3.2 and 5.4).

The Escarpment Interface areas given their proximity to existing urban areas also require

careful attention. The IESMP considered that these areas provided an important buffer to the

integrity of lands of higher ecological value and therefore needed to be planned to ensure that

the buffer status is maintained and enhanced, while at the same time provide for, where

appropriate, residential development.

1.3.2 Areas of Special Interest

The Biophysical Support for Core areas identified in Figure 4.1 of the IESMP are located in the

southern extent of the Wollongong LGA. Of the seven sites identified for further consideration,

four are located in the sensitive Marshall Mount area off North Marshall Mount Road, two are

former mine sites at Avondale and Huntley and land at Dombarton sits at high elevation to the

north east of Wongawilli.

The IESMP considered that limited development may be possible on these lands having regardto the environmental sensitivity of the receiving environment and provided there were

mechanisms in place to drive rehabilitation and restoration of the land and its surrounds. The

Areas of Special Interest are addressed separately in the Section 5.4 of this report.

1.4 Land Use Review Strategy

The COI and IESMP identified the need to carry out a Land Use Review Strategy

(Masterplanning for developable land) to replace the RRP and FTP. It envisaged that the LandUse Review Strategy would provide clear development and conservation parameters for the

proposed environmental conservation and management zones which would apply to the

Escarpment area following a comprehensive review of LEP 1990.

HLA was commissioned by WCC in May 2006 to undertake the Land Use Review Strategy.

Essentially the Strategy provides a framework to guide any future development or

redevelopment within the Escarpment Area (Study Area) as defined by the IESMP and shown in

Figure 1. It identifies potential development areas where environmentally appropriateresidential development may occur, as well as areas where the existing planning controls will

need to be strengthened, to allow the protection or enhancement of conservation values. The

Strategy has addressed national, regional and local planning guidance and provided input to the

review of detailed land use policies currently being undertaken by WCC as discussed in 1.6

below.


11/104


12/104


Asset Protection Zones (APZ) are contained within already cleared areasand that no native vegetation be removed for development of an APZ;

no overt increase in the density of development so as to retain ruralatmosphere (for instance dwellings need to be hidden or clustered);

development needs to contribute to the improved management of adjoininghigh conservation value lands through for example, ecological restoration

where possible;

environmental controls, such as effluent management, can be incorporatedand contained within the site;

there are sufficient water resources for domestic and fire fighting purposes;

provision of vegetated buffers to adjoining high conservation value land;

identification of appropriate sites, to be managed under an agreedenvironmental management plan; and

identification of appropriate sites to be managed under a voluntaryconservation agreement. (IESMP).

1.5 Parallel Studies

The extensive volume of data commissioned by WCC, DoP and DECC since the COI informed

the Strategy. WCC also commissioned dsb Landscape Architects and Mayne Wilson and

Associates Heritage Consultants in mid 2006 to prepare a visual analysis and heritageassessment to inform the strategy. The reports Visual Quality Analysis of Escarpment Scenic

Values(dsb Landscape Architects 2006) and Illawarra Escarpment Heritage Assessment(

Mayne Wilson and Associates 2007) have been referenced throughout preparation of the

Strategy. In addition HLA and its subconsultants prepared a number of reports to supplement

the information available addressing built form, stormwater, water, traffic and geotechnical

matters, riparian corridors and bushfire.

1.6 Existing Planning FrameworkIn tandem with the preparation of the Land Use Review Strategy, WCC has been undertaking a

comprehensive review of LEP 1990, Wollongong DRAFT WLEP 2007(DRAFT WDRAFT WLEP

2007), and finalising studies to enable the West Dapto LEP 2006 (WDLEP 2006) to be placed

on public exhibition. Draft WLEP 2007applies to the majority of land within the Study Area, and


13/104


2 OVERALL APPROACH

2.1 Sustainable Environment

The principles of sustainability as defined by the Town and Country Planning Association UK in

its report Planning for a Sustainable Environment, have underpinned the approach taken by

HLA in developing this Land Use Review Strategy. The report states that:

Sustainable development is development that enhances the natural and built

environmental in ways that are compatible with:

The requirement to conserve the stock of natural assets, wherever possible,

offsetting any avoidable reduction by a compensating increase so that the

total itself is left undiminished.

The need to avoid damaging the vegetative capacity of the worlds

ecosystems.

The lack of attention to the principles of sustainability has resulted in development in a number

of areas on the Escarpment which detracts from, and in some instances diminishes, the value of

this important environment. While the COI sought to address the appropriateness of

development in certain areas, and the IESMP identified areas under threat from development

(Core and Biophysical Support for Core areas), there is still a perception in the wider community

that there is potential for residential or other development in most areas on the Escarpment,

regardless of zoning. The Land Use Review Strategy has sought to redress this, by identifying

areas with potential development opportunity and recommending appropriate zoning across the

Escarpment area with reference to dwelling entitlements.

In relation to the built environment, HLA considers that the development and use of the built

environment should respect and be in harmony with the natural environment, and the

relationship between the two should be designed to be one of balance and mutual

enhancement.

2.2 Spatial AnalysisTo fully understand what is happening in the area identified for further study, HLA adopted a

spatial approach to land use planning. Using the wealth of background information

encapsulated in Councils Geographical Information System (GIS), a holistic review of all land in

the study area was carried out. The study team, comprising environmental planners, engineers,


14/104


to environmental information derived from studies commissioned as a result of the COI and

contained in the GIS, enabled the study team to provide a spatial understanding of what landwould likely be severely constrained or unconstrained, by reference to various environmental

criteria.

These criteria included:

vegetation;

fauna habitat;

areas of conservation significance or endangered ecological communities(ECC);

landslip risk high, medium, low;

contours;

slope analysis;

riparian corridors;

heritage (Indigenous and Non - Indigenous);

bushfire; and

flood data.

The data used to inform the constraints analysis was derived from a number of sources

including Councils GIS:

vegetation mapping; fauna habitat surrogates;

area of conservation significance or ECC;

land use zoning (existing and proposed);

landslip risk;

contours;

slope analysis;

riparian corridors;

heritage (Indigenous and Non - Indigenous);

bushfire (APZ definition);


15/104


3 APPROACH TO LAND USE REVIEW

3.1 Overview

Extensive fieldwork, workshops with Statutory Authorities (DoP and DECC), internal workshops

within WCC, close examination of the WCC GIS and various sub consultant studies addressing

built form, water management, riparian corridor, visual, heritage and bushfire matters, all

informed the development of the Strategy. Review of LEP 1990, the Draft WDLEP 2006 and

Draft WLEP 2007 illustrated the intricate nature of land use planning in the Escarpment Area.

Key threatening processes and the complex ecological and visual structure of the area, all

influenced recommendations for amendments to the current planning framework as discussed

later (see Sections 6 and 7).

The Methodology and approach to development of the Strategy is discussed in the

accompanying explanatory document and illustrated in Figure 2.


16/104


Figure 2 Approach

VISUAL ANALYSIS

VISUAL

ASSESSMENT

Recommended Amendments to

Draft WLEP 2007 and Draft

WDLEP 2006

Workshop 1

Issues Identification

Familiarisation with Area

Site Visits Fly Over

Workshop 2

Precinct Definition

PRECINCT

DEFINITION

Review of Zonings in Study Area

Landscape Support for Core/Escarpment

Interface areas

Workshop 3

Visual Quality Analysis

Land Use Review

Review of Development

Standards

Identification of Potential

Development Areas

INPUT FROM

IESMP

INTERFACE AREAS

MINE SITES

RURAL POCKETS

Definition of EnvironmentalEnvelope

Carrying Capacity of Land

(Constraints Analysis)

Layering of Environmental Values

Prepare Issues BasedControls for Land above

50m on Escarpment

Site Specific Controls

Areas of Special Interest

Vegetation

Key Element

Councillor Briefing

Recommended

Amendments

Draft WLEP 2006

Draft WLEP 2007

Internal

Mapping

Workshops

WCC


17/104


3.2 Land Use Review

3.2.1 Approach

The approach taken throughout the Land Use Review was to address issues at a strategic level

focusing on the conservation of biodiversity while allowing for site sensitive development that

responds to individual parts of the Escarpment. It is acknowledged that large areas of the

Escarpment by virtue of proximity to lands zoned National Park will be afforded a higher level of

conservation.

The visual, ecological, geophysical and heritage characteristics of the land have been well

documented. HLA has taken this information and determined the degree of planning flexibility

needed to enable a range of development types which respond to these attributes. The Team

has also addressed the longer term development window, acknowledging there will be changed

environmental and other expectations as to the form and extent of development that will be

permissible over time. This is particularly relevant in the southern parts of the Study Area within

the WD LEP 2006 boundary, earmarked for development as part of Stage 4 of the West Dapto

Release area.

As discussed earlier, preparation of a Land Use Review Strategy was one of the key

recommendations of the IESMP. As a consequence it is fundamental that the Land Use Review

Strategy draws on the findings and key outcomes of the IESMP, provides a clear path forward

and addresses key issues arising from the IESMP and indeed the COI. This approach was

endorsed by DoP at an early workshop in the Strategy preparation process.

The IESMP determined there may be some development potential on land classified asLandscape Support for Core, Escarpment Interface and to a limited extent Biophysical Support

for Core. In order to understand the issues likely to determine whether development may occur

in these areas, HLA investigated the potential to develop lands zoned (1) Non Urban, 4(c)

Extractive Industry, 7(b) Environmental Protection Conservation, 7(c) Environmental Protection

Residential, 7 (c1) Environmental Protection Rural Residential and 7(d) Environmental

Protection Port Hacking River, from south to north. Later HLA widened the investigation to

consider all lands zoned 1 Non Urban, 7(b) and 7(c) regardless of landscape classification

within the Escarpment.

Land which was considered to be visually prominent, encumbered by various environmental

constraints or which did not provide a logical fit with adjoining zoning, were selected for more

rigorous review. It is noted that while attention was directed to specific sites, review was carried

out in a strategic manner covering a broad area to form an understanding of the environmental


18/104


Instability

- suspected landslip areas; and

- recorded areas of landslip (geotechnical series maps).

Bushfire hazard

- APZ Priority Areas.

Riparian corridors

- riparian corridors for category 1-3 Creeks and appropriate buffers.

Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Heritage.

Buildings and services

- existing infrastructure.

Ridgelines

- significant from an Indigenous Heritage and visual perspective.

Visual Amenity

- visual quality analysis.

Slope.

The key principles which informed development of the strategy are discussed in Section4.

Where relevant, reference was made to the Locality and Site Specific Submissions section of

the COI report to provide an understanding of the Commissions view on development inspecific areas.

The Review indicated that there are a number of sites which could facilitate a different form of

development (following a potential rezoning) given the environmental characteristics of the land.

These sites would require more rigorous environmental analysis should a proposal be submitted

to develop the land in the future.

The capability and limitations of the Escarpment were examined to determine to what extent itcould sustain new development and how future activities must be managed (i.e. permitted,

modified) drawing on the extensive environmental, visual and engineering and built form

experience of the study team, to achieve the intended outcomes.

The analysis provided the necessary input to the development of an appropriate set of


19/104


development area does not extend beyond the top third of the screening

foreground forest canopy, there will be negligible adverse impact on the

visual character.

Large clearings in the Escarpment forest are least capable of acceptingdevelopmentwithout creating a significant change in visual character, as the

view of the gap in the forest canopy across the large clearing varies

depending on the length of the clearing up the slope. As the length of the

clearing up the slope increases the view of the Escarpment clearing

exponentially changes.

3.3 Precincts

3.3.1 Precinct Definition

Early in the Land Use Review process, HLA and its visual analysis consultant dsb Landscape

Architects, carried out extensive site surveys of the land above the 50m contour and all key

visual vantage points and flew the length of the Escarpment area.

Specifically the team looked at:

The development pattern and how it fits within the landscape.

Riparian corridors and other significant topographic elements.

Areas where environmentally appropriate development could occur withoutcomprising suitability principals and land capability controls in the IESMP.

Priority areas form the maintenance, enhancements and/or restoration of thelandscape character.

HLA and dsb Landscape Architects held internal workshops to more fully understand what were

the key factors affecting development within the Study Area. Although there may be significant

non-visual constraints determining the nature of development in key areas, criticism of

development at the interface and within Core Escarpment areas is often levelled by the

community, where development is visually prominent or out of character with its surrounds.

HLA and dsb were tasked with determining which factors led to this often emotive response.

It became clear that vegetation was the key variable and that in many instances it was not the

vegetation in the Core area which was significant but that in the foreground. This clearly

validates Councils approach of no clearing of native vegetation but draws attention to


20/104


From south to north ten precincts were determined based on characteristics that separate each

precinct from adjacent precincts and having regard to local conditions as a component of the

whole Escarpment.

The Precincts illustrated in Figure 3 include,

Marshall Mount

West Dapto Bowl

The Heights

Mt Kembla

Mt Keira

Balgownie Valley

Coastal Ridges

Cliff Coast

Stanwell, and Maddens Plains.

3.3.2 Precincts

Each of the ten precincts within the Study area has its own distinct characteristics and has clear

environmental variables which demarcate the precinct. The descriptions of the precincts below

are an abridged version of those in the Visual Quality Analysis of Escarpment Scenic Values

(dsb 2006) in Appendix B of the Explanatory Document.

Each precinct is discussed in terms of its:

Visual Absorption Capacity (VAC) which is an estimation of the capacity of aparticular area to absorb development without creating a significant change

in visual character or a reduction in the scenic quality of an area. The

capacity to visually absorb development is primarily dependant on landform,

vegetation and existing development; and Development Opportunity Envelope (DOE) which identifies the limits of

development form that may enable the satisfaction of the objective - net gain

in the scenic and aesthetic valuesobjective.

As discussed earlier in Section 3 2 1 small clearings in the escarpment forest are most capable


21/104


Key viewpoints which offer views of development within the precinct (eitherof a local or regional nature).

Inclusion of Precinct Character Statements within the DCP will provide a guide to potential

developers when addressing visual quality issues as part of the overall environmental

assessment to accompany any DA, for development in the Study Area (see Section8.4).


22/104

31052007www

.hla

-env

iro

.com

.au


23/104


A brief description of each precinct is provided below.

3.3.3 Precinct 1: Marshall Mount

The Marshall Mount precinct includes the western return of the Escarpment towards the WCC

LGA Boundary near Macquarie Pass. The landscape includes steep sided valleys below the

Escarpment with a rural/rural residential patchwork mosaic of cleared valley floors and remnant

vegetation on side slopes and ridgelines. The precinct valleys are Marshall Mount/Calderwood,

North Marshall Mount and Avondale. Elevated ridges, running eastwards from the Escarpment,dominate the landform. The precinct edge is the end of the ridges. The Cedars rural residential

development is located on the end of the Avondale ridgeline overlooking the adjacent precinct

to the north- the West Dapto Bowl.

The elevated clearings on the 220m contour are highly visible from a distance. The steep slope

angle and visible grass surface limits identification of DOE within these cleared areas. North

Marshall Mount valley is a contained landscape with a high VAC and DOE potential. Ridgelines

adjacent to Huntley Colliery provide landform screening and a high VAC and DOE potential.

Bong Bong pass mine stockpile site provides the opportunity for siting development at the rear

of landform benches and installation of foreground screening forest on bench fronts. This is a

highly visible site capable of modification for a high VAC and DOE potential.


24/104


25/104


Aerial view south across Bong Bong Pass and Avondale ridgeline to Albion Park.

View west from F6 Freeway at Penrose to Cedars on end of Avondale ridgeline.

Remnant vegetation of valley foreground and ridgetops extends illusion of escarpment vegetationto valley floor.

Grass clearing on 220m contour evident in escarpment.


26/104


character is one of existing vegetation interrupted with cleared vegetation/development

mosaics. The interruptions in the Escarpment include, the revegetated mine dump adjacent to

the end of Bong Bong Road, isolated individual rural residential development on ridgetops and

prominent locations, Wongawilli Mine, and Dombarton area rural residential areas adjacent to

Smiths Lane/ Sheaffes Road, Paynes Road and Redalls Road.

Bong Bong Pass to WongawilliClearings extending up to the escarpment are highly visible

from a distance. The steep slope angle and visible grass surface limits identification of DOE.

WongawilliClearings within the escarpment associated with colliery development are indistinct

in the landscape with a high VAC and DOE potential.

Wongawilli through Dombarton to Redalls RoadClearings within the escarpment associated

with rural residential development have long slope lengths on less steep slopes and are highly

visible from a distance. The slope angle and visible grass surface limits identification of DOE.

Clearings within the escarpment associated with rural residential development with foreground

screening forest are less highly visible from a distance. Potential exists following revegetation

works for a high VAC and DOE potential.

Redalls Road to Farmborough HeightsClearings within the landscape associated with urban

infrastructure development are well screened by siting behind landform or landscape screening.

Clearings above the urban infrastructure development have long slope lengths on less steep

slopes and are highly visible from a distance. The slope angle and visible grass surface limits

identification of DOE.


27/104


Bong Bong Pass to Wongawilli.


28/104


Dombarton to Precinct edge with The Heights.

Mt Kembla to Horsley across Dombarton and Mullet Creek valley.


29/104


View west to escarpment from Bong Bong Road.

View of rural residential development north of Wongawilli .

View across Kembla Grange from F6 Freeway to Mt Kembla and Farmborough Heights r idgeline.

View across valley and Horsley to Dapto and Lake Illawarra.

3 3 5 Precinct 3: The Heights


30/104


Aerial view over precinct.


31/104


Cordeaux Heights Ridgeline.

View north from Farmborough Heights to Mt Nebo and Mt Keira.

View northwest from Farmborough Heights to Mt Kembla.


32/104


Detail of Cobblers Hill viewed from F6 Freeway at Five Islands Road.

View west from Five Islands Road Cringila.

View west from Five Islands Road to Mt Nebo and escarpment beyond. The Heights precinct is tothe south of Mt Nebo.

3.3.6 Precinct 4: Mt Kembla

This precinct includes the elevated, closed and contained landform of the suburbs of Mt Kembla

and Kembla Heights. The escarpment is behind and Cordeaux Heights is to the east. The

elevated vegetated landforms of Mt Kembla and Mt Keira dominate to the north and south.

Mt Kembla precinct is a contained landscape with a high VAC and DOE potential.


33/104


Aerial view of escarpment with Mt Kembla to left and Mt Nebo to right and escarpment beyond.


34/104


Composite view of precinct looking east from above the escarpment. Mt Nebo and Kemira Collieryto left.

Composite view of Mt Kembla village from above the escarpment.

3.3.7 Precinct 5: Mt Keira

Mt Keira covers the elevated footslopes of Mt Keira extending from the OBriens Road ridgeline,

Figtree, in the south, through the Mt Keira Road ridgeline, West Wollongong, to the

Keiraville/University of Wollongong ridgeline in the north. The landform is of a concave

landscape elevated above the surrounding Wollongong urban areas to the north and south, and

Wollongong City to the east The precinct is urban in character with elevated vegetated


35/104



36/104


Aerial view of northern portion of precinct. Wollongong University and Mt Keira below Mt Keira.

Aerial view of precinct from above the escarpment. View between Mt Keira and Mt Nebo withFigtree beyond.


37/104


View west from Five Islands Road to Mt Nebo and escarpment beyond. The Mt Keira precinct is tothe north of Mt Nebo.

3.3.8 Precinct 6: Balgownie Valley

This Balgownie Valley precinct is a contained concave distinct valley extending further backfrom the coastal plain to the Escarpment between the prominent landforms of Mt Keira and

Brokers Nose. The precinct edges are the Keiraville/University of Wollongong ridgeline to the

south and the vegetated ridgeline and Towradgi Creek below Brokers Nose in the north. The

precinct is urban in character with elevated vegetated landforms and Escarpment behind. A

remnant vegetation/urban development mosaic dominates the landscape character on the

urban edge. The urban edge contains a mix of development types including very large

block/large house rural residential, older standard urban development, and recent urban

development of large block/very large house. This mix of development type contributes to avariable quality landscape and visual quality escarpment/development edge.

Clearings within the escarpment associated with the Corrimal colliery development are indistinct

in the landscape with a high VAC and DOE potential.


38/104


Aerial view of Balgownie Valley Precinct with Mt Keira to the south.

Aerial view of Balgownie Valley from above the escarpment.

View to escarpment from within Balgownie.

3.3.9 Precinct 7: Coastal Ridges

The Coastal Ridges precinct extends from Brokers Nose in the south to the vegetated ridgeline


39/104


highly visible from a distance. Potential exists following revegetation works for a high VAC and

DOE potential.

Clearings within the escarpment associated with rural residential development on escarpment

benches on Bulli Pass when viewed from below are indistinct in the landscape with a high VAC

and DOE potential.


40/104


Aerial view Russell Vale to Bulli.

Aerial view Bulli to Thirroul.

Aerial view from above the escarpment, Thirroul to Bull i.


41/104


Aerial view from above the escarpment, Russell Vale to Corrimal.

Aerial view from above the escarpment, Corrimal to Tarrawanna.

3.3.10 Precinct 8: Cliff Coast

This precinct extends from the vegetated elevated ridgeline adjacent to Mountain Road Thirroul,

in the south, to the end of the Escarpment at the School of Arts at Clifton in the north. The

landscape form consists of Escarpment / vegetated Escarpment footslopes / urban development

edge above beaches and cliffs. The precinct is tightly located between the Escarpment and the

ocean, with a landscape treed canopy extending down to a tight urban form located below the

railway line and above the beaches and cliffs. A linear strip of dwellings extends along a natural

bench within the foothills landform from Austinmer to Wombarra along Buttenshaw Drive and

Morrison Avenue. Extensive vegetation provides few opportunities to view this developmentfrom Lawrence Hargrave Drive and beaches. There are however a number of natural benches

further up into the Escarpment above Buttenshaw/Morrison Avenue in the Coledale/ Wombarra

area which owing to breaks in vegetation in gullies and on ridges, afford extensive views of the

coast and if inappropriately developed may be viewed from some distance.

Ill E t L d U R i St t


42/104


Aerial view of Austinmer to Wombarra.


43/104



44/104


vegetation on prominent headlands adjacent to Stanwell Park, contrasting with eucalypt forest

behind the beaches.

Development within the Stanwell precinct should be complimentary with the existing landscape /

urban character.

Aerial view Seacliff Bridge to Stanwell Park.



45/104


View south from Bald Hill over Stanwell Park and Coalcliff.

View north from Seacliff Bridge to Coalcli ff and Bald Hill.



46/104

a a a sca p e t a d Use e e St ategy

Aerial view of Maddens Plains looking south over escarpment to ocean.

3.3.13 Attribute Values



47/104

p gy

dsb (2007) evaluated the landform, vegetation and the built environment to determine the value

which could be allocated to each attribute by precinct. Table 1 illustrates the attribute values

and clearly shows that the majority of precincts have medium to high landform scarcity,indicating a unique landform and are rated as being aesthetically important. The Mount Keira

precinct is considered to provide the best fit between built form elements and the environment.

It is noted that the Heights precinct faired poorly against all variables.

Table 1: Attribute Values

Precinct Landform Scarcity1 VegetationSignificance2

Built EnvironmentFeatures3

Marshall Mount H H M-H

West Dapto Bowl M-H H L - M

The Heights L L L

Mt Kembla M-H H M-H

Mt Keira H H H

Balgownie H H M-LCoastal Ridges M H M

Cliff Coast H H M-H

Stanwell H H M-H

Maddens Plains H H M-L

Note1 H-Unique landform

M- repetitive landform

L common landform2

H- aesthetically important3

H modification blends with landscape character

M-H modification sympathetic with landscape character

L- urban infrastructure detracts from built landscape


48/104



49/104

4.3 Biodiversity

4.3.1 Principle

No clearing of native vegetation in Core and Biophysical Support for Coreareas as set out in the IESMP.

Protect, maintain and enhance flora and fauna species and habitats ofimportance.

Maintenance and enhancement of the biodiversity resources.

Conservation of the natural character and biodiversity of the widerenvironment to complement the high level of protection afforded to area

within National Parks and Reserves.

Proximity to EEC and limitation of potential for direct impact on EEC.

Restoration and expansion of depleted and vulnerable biodiversityresources, particularly where habitats are currently fragmented refer to

Bioregional Assessment Study (National Parks and Wildlife Service 2002).

Consideration of the web of wildlife habitat such as riparian corridors, greenwedges.

Ensuring the conservation of protected species in the location ofdevelopment.

Preserving the strategic landscape and wildlife links between the rural areasand urban spaces (ie Marshall Mount/Calderwood Valley).

4.3.2 Issues

Issues addressed included: the potential to create new habitats/identification of areas for habitat

restoration, maintenance of the diversity of habitats, Threatened Species, EEC, buffer areas to

areas of high conservation significance (Core areas), interface areas, no clearing of native

vegetation in Core and Biophysical Support for Core areas (as set out in the IESMP), creation of

green wedges/corridors, implementation mechanisms to further the conservation and

enhancement of native vegetation on Biophysical Support for Core land in the Areas of Special

Interest.

4.4 Built Environment



50/104

Identification of an environmental envelope on Biophysical Support for Coreland in Areas of Special Interest.

Location of development with full consideration of its visual context within aprecinct.

4.4.2 Issues

Issues addressed included the need to develop clear policies and guidance that establish the

key principles and criteria for new development. Study Team review of DCP No. 49: Residential

Developmentwith a focus on encouraging good and innovative design and layout which

embraces local character and distinctiveness and the significant local and wider ecological

environment within which a development will sit (See Section 8). Review of landowner

entitlements, existing use rights and Amendments to LEP 1990 (whether entitlements were

taken up). Visual context of Escarpment lands (Visual Quality Analysis of Escarpment Values

dsb 2007). Appropriate built form principles - Built Form Principles Architectus 2007(see

Appendix C of the Explanatory Document). Review of geotechnical history of the Escarpment

Area and documented slip sites. Staging of future development (West Dapto as it affects

interface areas and the lower slope of the Study Area). Density of development from east to

west. Bushfire and location of APZ. Accessibility and transport.

4.5 Landscape

4.5.1 Principles

Conservation of the natural beauty of the landscape acknowledging itsinherent contribution to the quality of life of residents of the area.

Consideration of interface area with National Parks/Reserves or otherenvironmentally significant land.

Protection of existing open space and green wedges/corridors as asignificant contribution to the visual landscape.

Achieve net gain in the scenic and aesthetic values of the Escarpment .

Promotion of a pattern of landuse sympathetic to the valuable Escarpmentlandscape.

4.5.2 Issues



51/104

Built development should not adversely affect the appearance and characterof the landscape and be designed and sited to incorporate landscaping to

minimise visual impact.

4.6.2 Issues

Issues addressed include: the need to maintain agricultural land immediately adjacent to

suburban areas, changing agricultural practices, diversification to new crops such as vines,

market gardens/orchards which use polytunnels and netting to protect crops but with significant

visual impact.

4.7 Water Resource

4.7.1 Principles

Limited development within the riparian corridor and its buffers.

Protection of the quality of water resources.

Limitations on development which has the potential to increase the risk offlooding elsewhere to an unacceptable level.

Establishment of buffers to protect the natural and cultural assets of ripariancorridors.

4.7.2 Issues

Issues considered included: the need to protect and enhance the quality and quantity of water

resources, establishment of buffers to protect the natural and cultural assets of the riparian zone

(width of riparian zone and buffer as defined by DIPNR 2004), consideration of the use of

sustainable drainage schemes (see recommended amendments to DCP No. 49 in Section 8

and Appendix D Illawarra Escarpment Water, Traffic and Geotechnical issues(Cardno 2007) of

the Explanatory Document, effluent management, impact of site runoff on downstream receiving

environment and implications for flooding.



52/104

5 STATUTORY CONTEXT

The statutory context which governs all development within the Escarpment area is discussedbriefly below. Appendix E of the Explanatory Document provides background information on

local and regional planning policies considered during preparation of the Strategy including the

Illawarra Regional strategy 2006 31.

5.1 Review of Wollongong DRAFT WLEP 2007

The protection of the Illawarra Escarpment values requires the implementation of appropriate

land use zones including objectives and permissible uses within an LEP. In addition, special

provisions may need to be introduced into the LEP, to ensure there is a regulatory basis for

decisions to be made.

A comprehensive review of proposed zones for areas above 50 m contained in the Draft

Wollongong and West Dapto LEPs was undertaken to assess whether the recommended zones

fit well with the objectives of the IESMP for those areas and whether development rights,

perceived or not, will be impacted by the new zone provisions. The review was based on plans

currently available in the public arena and which have been submitted to DoP for review.

The approach was to consider whether the proposed zones provide an adequate fit given the

overall intent of enabling a conservation outcome for the Escarpment, while allowing some

limited development opportunities. As a consequence, a number of recommendations were

made which would require amendment of the proposed zoning maps following due

consideration by Council.

The analysis highlighted a number of matters to be considered in relation to the proposed

zonings not least of which is further consideration of the sensitive environments to which a

number of zones apply, and the significant constraints posed to development. These

constraints would merit in some instances stricter zoning provisions to achieve an adequate

conservation outcome for the most sensitive Escarpment lands. In other areas which do not

have significant environmental attributes, a greater development outcome may be achieved.

Although the IESMP identified the Landscape Support for Core and Escarpment Interface Areas

as offering some potential following consideration for development, HLA did not limit the review

of Draft WLEP 2007to these areas. Rather the approach taken was to secure the most

appropriate development in the most appropriate locations while taking account of the principles

outlined in Section 4.



53/104

SP2 Infrastructure

Table 2 below provides a summary of the proposed new zone and where possible itscorresponding existing zone under LEP 1990. It is noted that there is no direct correlation in

most instances between the zones as on close examination of the zoning provisions, there are

often significant differences between permissibility of landuses under LEP 1990 and both the

WLEP 2007 and Draft West Dapto LEP 2006 (see Appendix E of the Explanatory Document).

Table 2: Comparison of Zoning

Wollongong LEP 1990 Draft DRAFT WDRAFT WLEP 2007

1 Non Urban RU2 Rural Landscape

4(c) Extractive Industrial Zone RU1 Primary Production

7(a) Special Environmental Protection E2 Environmental Conservation

7(b) Environmental ProtectionConservation

E2 Environmental Conservation

E3 Environmental Management

7(c) Environmental ProtectionResidential

E4 Environmental Living

7(c1) Environmental Protection RuralResidential

E4 Environmental Living

7(d) Environmental Protection PortHacking River


8(a) National Park E1 National Parks and Nature Reserves

Note: The same zones apply to both WLEP 2007 and Draft WD LEP 2006 with the exception of the E1 zone

The statutory provisions contained in the Draft WLEP 2007are further considered in Section 6

of this report.

5.2.2 West Dapto LEP 2006

The western extent of the proposed West Dapto Release area is delineated on the Land ZoningMap attached to the Draft LEP. A significant proportion of land currently defined as Landscape

Support for Core and Escarpment Interface within the Study Area boundary has been included

within the proposed release area. A variety of zonings has been applied to the lands as follows:




54/104

developed for consideration by Council. These matter will be discussed when the WDLEP maps

are further considered at the final stage of the West Dapto planning process.

5.2.3 Commentary

All land which was previously zoned 1 Non Urban, 4(c), 7(b), 7(c), 7(c1) and 7(d) under LEP

1990 was considered. At all times reference was made to the vegetation mapping in the IESMP

to identify areas where significant vegetation communities and habitats are located. This

enabled HLA to identify interface areas with National Parks/Reserves, EEC, green

wedges/green corridors and riparian corridors, all critical to maintaining the complex biodiversity

of the areas.

Early discussion at internal workshops highlighted the need to provide a zone which recognised

the high conservation significance of in particular, Core vegetation, and provided a further level

of protection for escarpment vegetation not contained in National Parks and Reserves. The E2

Environmental Conservation zone was selected as the best fit, and to further highlight the

importance of this zone in conserving the biodiversity of the Escarpment Area, dwellings were

removed as a land use permissible with consent.

This presented a number of issues not least of which was dwelling entitlement and as a

consequence a split zoning approach was adopted which sought to place areas of Core

vegetation particularly at higher altitudes within the E2 Environmental Conservation zone, while

enabling limited development on E3 Environmental Management zoned land. The

accompanying A0 maps show that land zoned 7(b) Environmental Protection has been included

in both the E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management zones. This

inclusion does not alter the original intent of the 7(b) zone but ensures a high level of protection

is afforded to areas of the highest quality in terms of landscape, diversity of wildlife, specialbeauty and to land of cultural and heritage significance.

Particular attention was paid to benched areas within the Escarpment associated with

decommissioned mine sites and mines still in operation and bench areas in the Cliff Coast

precinct from Coledale to Wombarra. The COI recommended that residential development

should not extend up into the Escarpment in the Cliff Coast precinct and dwellings should not be

located beyond the western boundary of existing development in the area. The visual quality

analysis carried out by dsb supports this contention and the 140m contour was determined asan appropriate zone boundary, given the visual significance and other constraints, including

bushfire, to development in the area.

The western boundary of properties on Rixon Pass Road and Bulli Pass were also selected to

id l b d b E E i l C i d E E i l


55/104


56/104


57/104

cdr

31052007www

.hla

-env

iro

.com

.au



58/104

6 REVIEW OF DRAFT WOLLONGONG DRAFT WLEP

2007 PLANNING INSTRUMENT6.1 LEP Text

The written document accompanying the LEP maps provides the statutory framework within

which development is considered. This text was reviewed together with all Schedules to the

text and recommendations workshopped with WCC staff. In addition mechanisms to enable

development in Areas of Special Interest were developed and recommended for inclusion in the

Draft WLEP 2007(see Section 7).

6.2 Part 1 - Preliminary

For ease of reference Draft WLEP 2007has been subdivided into five Parts, six Schedules and

a dictionary. Part 1 refers to the aims of the Plan, various instruments which have been

repealed in the preparation of the Plan and the State and regional environmental policies which

may/ may not apply.

6.3 Part 2 Permitted or Prohibited Development

6.3.1 Land Use Zones

Part 2 of the Draft WLEP 2007 refers to Permitted or Prohibited Development. It addresses

matters such as zone objectives, permitted and prohibited uses, subdivision requirements and

works permissible without consent.

Table E2 in Appendix E of the Explanatory Document provides a summary of the landuses

permissible with/without consent which were previously in LEP 1990 but have now been

included or excluded as the case may be, in the current review of planning instruments. The

range of permissible uses within the nominated land use zones is in the main consistent across

all draft LEPs in the LGA, and as a consequence Draft WLEP 2007 is referenced for

comparison with LEP 1990.

As the WLEP 2007 has not been subject to the formal public consultation process, the

information provided is indicative only and will be subject to review at a later date.

HLA recommends that the Land Use Table be amended as follows:


D l t t d l t f d l t ith t t


59/104

- Delete exempt development from development without consent.

- Insert in permitted with consent ecotourism.

Zone E4 Environmental Living

- Insert bed and breakfast accommodation and ecotourism as

permissible with development consent.

6.3.2 Zone Objectives

Each of the zones within the WLEP 2007 contains a set of objectives specific to the desired

outcomes for the zone. At the time of the preparation of this report, the objectives were stillbeing considered internally by Council staff. However it is clear that the objectives for the key

zones within the Escarpment Area namely E2, E3, E4 and RU2 do not reflect the desired

outcomes of the IESMP. While the E3 Environmental Management Zone contains an objective

relating to the location of development only on lands cleared of vegetation, this is not reflected

in the other nominated zones. Nor is the overall conservation objective which underpins the

IESMP given adequate recognition.

To ensure there is a clear link between the IESMP and the statutory framework controllingdevelopment in the Escarpment Area, the objectives outlined in Section 4 of the IESMP must be

embodied in the new objectives being considered as part of WLEP 2007. This will ensure that

the findings of the considerable volume of work which has preceded the drafting of the LEP, will

be recognised as providing a sound basis on which to develop the statutory framework

necessary to ensure implementation of the IESMP in the Escarpment Area.

In summary initial review of WLEP 2007 indicates:

Objectives relating to clearing of vegetation in E3 should be in E2.

An objective in E4 relates to providing for low impact residentialdevelopment in areas with limited ecological, scientific or aesthetic values.

However the second objective is to ensure that residential development

does not have an adverse effect on those values. The use of the words

adverse impact on limited values, seems contradictory. (Note: These are

template requirements for the Draft LEP derived by DoP).

There needs to be a clear definition of ecological values. For instance in E2and E3 what is the difference between high ecologicaland special

ecologicalvalues and in E4 limited ecologicalvalues. . (Note: These are

template requirements to the Draft LEP derived by DoP).


The above matters were workshopped internally with WCC planning staff and the following


60/104

The above matters were workshopped internally with WCC planning staff and the following

amendments recommended for inclusion in Draft WLEP 2007.

Amendments to Zone Objectives insert the following:

Zone RU2 Rural Landscape

- To retain, manage or restore native vegetation.

Zone E2 Environmental Conservation

- To retain and enhance the visual and scenic qualities of the Illawarra

Escarpment.

- To prevent clearing of native vegetation.

Zone E3 Environmental Management

- To retain and enhance the visual and scenic qualities of the Illawarra

Escarpment.

- To ensure that the form and siting of structures, the colours and

materials of the structures and its landscaping, are appropriate for and

harmonise with the bushland character of the locality.

- To ensure development is designed sited and managed to avoid or

mitigate any adverse environmental impact on any significant

vegetation community and the ecological buffer required to protect

that significant vegetation community.

Zone E4 Environmental Living

- To ensure that the form and siting of structures, the colours andmaterials of the structure and its landscaping are appropriate for and

harmonise with the bushland character of the locality.

- To ensure development is designed, sited and managed to avoid or

mitigate any adverse environmental impact on any significant

vegetation community and the ecological buffer required to protect

that significant vegetation community.

6.3.3 Additional Permitted/ Prohibited Uses

Clause 14 of the Draft WLEP 2007refers to development listed in Schedule 1 to the Draft WLEP

2007 which may be carried out with consent or if the schedule provides without consent, on

nominated parcels of land It is noted that this clause overrides the Land Use Table or other


It is recommended that the provision of this clause be expanded to include specific provisions


61/104

It is recommended that the provision of this clause be expanded to include specific provisions

which relate to the subdivision of land within the E3 Environmental Management zone. For

example the provision may state:

(3) Council may when considering the subdivision of land within the E3

Environmental Management zone, require the amalgamation of a contiguous

lot/s or certificates of title held by the owner/s of the land which is the subject

of the application.

6.4 Part 3 Exempt and Complying Development

6.4.1 Exempt Development

Part 3 of the WLEP 2007 relates to exempt and complying development. For the purposes of

the Draft LEP, Clause 16 identifies exempt development as development which may be carried

out without the need for development consent, provided it has a minimal environmental impact

and is not carried out in critical habitat or in wilderness area. Clause 18 of the WLEP 2007

states that exempt or complying development must not be carried out on any environmentally

sensitive areas for exempt or complying development. Of relevance are the following:

f) land identified in this or any other environmental planning instrument as being

of high Aboriginal cultural significance or high biodiversity significance; or

g) land reserved as a state conservation area under theNational Parks and

Wildlife Act 1974; or

h) land reserved or dedicated under the Crown Lands Act 1989 for the

preservation of flora, fauna, geological formation on for other environmentalprotection purposes; or

i) land identified as being critical habitat under theThreatened Species

Conservation Act 1995 or Part 7A of theFisheries Management Act 1994.

It is noted that exempt development is permitted without consent in the E3 Environmental

Management zone. As discussed above, Clause 18(i) states that exempt development must not

be carried out on any environmentally sensitive areas including land identified as critical habitat

under the TSC Act 1995. Inclusion of exempt development as a use permissible without consentin this zone places the onus on the potential developer to ensure compliance with clause 18(i).

It is recommended that the provisions of clause 18(i) be strengthened and the potential

developer be directed to a map or document such as the Bioregional Assessment (NSW 2002)

which highlights vulnerable ecosystems, species and their habitats. This is critical given the high


be further expanded to include a number of the built form development standards


62/104

be further expanded to include a number of the built form development standards

recommended in the proposed amendment to DCP No. 49 (see Section 8).

6.5 Part 4 Principal Development Standards

6.5.1 Lot Size

The minimum lot size for a dwelling is clearly set out in the Table attached to clause 20A(1). It

provides that land in environmentally sensitive and rural areas in the Study area maintain the

existing 40 ha minimum size. Land which was previously 7(c) did not have a minimum lot size

under LEP 1990. The WLEP 2007 provides that this land, in the main, has an E4 Environmental

Living zone which enables a minimum lot size of 1000m2

for land generally north of Cordeaux

Heights (with the exception of Figtree), compared with 2 ha to the south. This is considered

reasonable given the predominantly rural nature of land to the south and the expansive views,

particularly from the West Dapto Bowl, afforded of proposed E4 areas.

6.6 Part 5 Miscellaneous Provisions

It is recommended that special provisions are included in the new zoning document which would

give statutory effect to some of the initiatives designed to provide the mechanisms which deliver

the vision in the IESMP. Adoption of these discretionary provisions in Part 5 Miscellaneous

Provisions will provide greater strength to their implementation than having these matters dealt

with through a DCP or Policy.

Special provisions may relate to land which has a particular hazard, environmental and design

constraints such as flood, significant vegetation, riparian corridors, bushfire risk, geotechnical,water catchments and the like, and which are consistent with relevant State and Regional

policies.

6.6.1 Relevant Provisions

Part 5 of WLEP 2007details miscellaneous provisions which must be addressed where relevant

for any development in the LGA. The Miscellaneous Provisions clauses of relevance to the

Study Area include:

24. Exceptions to Development Standards.

24(6) consent must not be granted under this clause for subdivision of land

in Zone RU1, RU2, RU3, RU4, R5, E2, E3 and E4 if:


Recommendation: None


63/104


31 Development within Proximity of a Rail Corridor The objective of this

clause is to ensure that development for the purpose of residentialaccommodation or other noise sensitive buildings within 60 m of an

operating rail corridor are not adversely affected by rail noise or vibration.

Consent will not be granted for a development unless all practical mitigation

measures for rail noise or vibration recommended by the Rail Corporation of

NSW are incorporated into the development proposal.


32. Development within the Coastal Zone The objectives of this clause are toprovide for the protection of the coastal environment and to implement

the principles of the NSW Coastal Policy.

Recommendation:None

34. Preservation of Trees or Vegetation This clause seeks to preserve the

amenity of the area through the preservation of trees and other vegetation. It

applies to species or kinds of trees or other vegetation that are prescribed by

a DCP.Recommendation: What is at issue here is how will this provision be

applied as Council does not have a DCP outlining trees to be protected?

This Clause needs to be tightened to underpin the objective of no clearing of

native vegetation in Escarpment Areas. If clearing is required for some

reason: eg removal of noxious vegetation/declared weeds etc, there is a

need to specify whether consent is required in these instances.

35. Heritage Conservation The objectives of this clause are to conserve theenvironmental heritage of the City of Wollongong. It clearly sets out

requirements (or not) for consent to be obtained, when a heritage impact

assessment or heritage conservation management plan must be submitted,

notification requirements and conservation incentives.


36. Bush Fire Hazard Reduction Under Clause 36 bushfire hazard reduction

work authorised by the Rural Fires Act 1997may be carried out on any land

without consent. It also notes that the Rural Fires Act 1997makes provision

relating to the carrying out of development on bush fire prone land.


37 Development for Group Homes This clause enables the establishment of


lists development which requires consent and matters to be considered,


64/104

p q ,

together with development which does not require consent.


40 Temporary Use of Land This clause enables development on land within

any zone for a temporary purpose for a maximum period of 12 days.


41 Services- This clause states that consent will not be granted unless

adequate water supply and facilities for the removal or disposal of sewage

and facilities for drainage are available to that land, or adequate local and

regional infrastructure is available to service the development and future

residents. It is noted that subclause (2) states that the clause does not apply

where adequate arrangements satisfactory to the consent authority have

been made for the supply of the service and facilities and infrastructure

above.


42 Development on Flood Prone Lands This clause applies to land shown as

flood prone land on the Draft WLEP 2007 Flood Prone Land map.


44 Excavation and Filling of Land Development consent is required for

earthworks or to excavate or fill land, except if the proposed works are

considered by the consent authority to be of a minor nature.

Recommendation: Define of a minor nature.

46 Riparian Corridor This clause applies to riparian land identified in theRiparian Corridor Management Study (DIPNR 2004). It lists a number of

matters to be considered by the consent authority, prior to granting consent

to development on riparian land.

Recommendation: The Land Use Review Strategy recommends that there

should be no development for residential purposes within a riparian corridor

or its buffer zone. Clause 46 should be amended to include this provision

for all land within the Escarpment Area and reference made to the Riparian

Corridor DCP currently being prepared by Council which addresses matters

such as buffer widths and development/activities permissible in riparian

corridors. The provisions above must be supported by an accurate GIS

generated map of the waterways in the Escarpment area and illustrate the

recommended buffers


6.7.1 Land Management Agreement (LMA)


65/104

6 a d a age e t g ee e t ( )

Land Management Agreement Areas of Special Interest

This clause would require Council to grant consent to certain nominated types of development

only if there was a LMA in place for the subject land. This could be done by way of a deferred

commencement consent. It would be supported by a Schedule to the amending LEP containing

a pro-forma LMA and would identify the purpose, objective and general principles of the LMA .

This clause would be particularly relevant for development in the Areas of Special Interest.

For other lands within the Escarpment Area the following could apply:

Land Management Agreement - Development of Other Land within the Escarpment Lands

1 In deciding whether to grant consent to any application to carry out

development of land within the escarpment lands, the Council shall take into

account the provisions of any Land Management Agreement.

2 Where no Land Management Agreement is in place for land which is the

subject of any application to carry out development of land within the

escarpment lands, the Council must consider whether it is desirable, having

regard to the identified outcomes for the escarpment lands as nominated in

the Illawarra Escarpment Strategic Management Plan, for there to be a Land

Management Agreement for the land which is the subject of the application

for development.

3 If the Council is of the opinion that it is desirable for there to be a Land

Management Agreement in respect of the land that is the subject of any

application to carry out development, it may impose a condition on any

consent it grants which requires that a Land Management Agreement beestablished and executed before development of the land may occur.

6.7.2 Restrictions on Granting Certain Consents

This clause would identify a number of specific matters requiring consideration by Council when

determining an application for development within the Illawarra Escarpment as defined in the

IESMP. These matters might include access, provision of water and sewer services, water cycle

management, water quality, land stability, visual effects and bushfire hazard, as well asadditional matters such as the advertising of the proposal, the delivery of conservation

outcomes, the need for clearing, concurrence from (or referral to) regulatory authorities,

justification of the proposal, built form appearance, siting, scale, and bulk of buildings.


d) the development will have a neutral or beneficial effect on bushland


66/104

and the environment; and

e) the development will not be adversely affected by bushfire, landslip orother natural hazards; and

f) the allotment on which the development is proposed has adequate

services (water, sewer, access and the like) available to meet the

need generated for these services by the proposed development; and

g) the development is ecologically sustainable; and

h) the development is not visually intrusive; and

i) the development and the environment of the allotment on which it is

located will be so managed as not to have any long term detrimental

impact on biodiversity; and

j) it has taken into consideration any submissions made by the DoP and

the DCC concerning the application.

Dwelling-houses in Zone No. E3 Environmental Management

14A The Council may consent to the erection of a dwelling-house on an allotment

of land within the Zone No. E3 Environmental Management provided that:

(a) there is no dwelling-house on the allotment; and

(b) the allotment existed on commencement of this Plan or was

created by this Plan; and

(c) the rights for a dwelling-house on the allotment have not been

transferred to another allotment; and

(d) the erection of the proposed dwelling-house and associated

activities on the allotment will not detract from the environment

by way of visual intrusion, vegetation clearance or drainage

pollution; and

(e) the erection of the proposed dwelling house, ancillary structures

and access does not involve clearing of native vegetation; and

(f) the allotment on which the dwelling-house is proposed is

adequately serviced with water and sewer facilities for the

purposes of a dwelling-house; and

(g) the proposed dwelling-house will not be located on bushfire


67/104


Definition to include reference to no clearing of native vegetation to provide access.


68/104

Land Management Agreement;

means a formally executed deed of agreement between the Council and a

land owner or owners for the cooperative conservation and management of

the biodiversity values of the escarpment lands.


7 IMPLEMENTATION MECHANISMS


69/104

7.1 IntroductionThe IESMP recommended a number of methods to conserve and manage the Illawarra

Escarpment as part of its implementation strategy. These included traditional land use planning

mechanisms (i.e. land use zoning) and a range of mechanisms for converting land into public

ownership and encouraging conservation of privately owned land.

Whilst not all of the mechanisms identified in the IESMP would fall under the umbrella of

strategic planning, the interrelationship and integration of these measures is important toachieving a successful outcome in terms of preservation of the Escarpment values.

What must also be considered is the mechanism by which the objective of net gain in the

scenic and aesthetic values can be achieved especially on areas within the Biophysical and

Landscape Support for Core areas which could be in multiple ownership. This may be through

site amalgamation and various incentives or creation of a Community title over the land.

Draft WLEP 2007 and the revised DCP No. 49 must include a well resolved implementationstrategy to be applied to land especially in the more environmentally sensitive areas of the

Escarpment. Various implementation mechanisms which have been considered as part of this

study including:

Incentives;

Existing Use;

Tradeable Development Rights;

Transferable Development Rights;

Entitlement Transfer Scheme;

Green Offsets;

Rate Rebates; and

Land Management Agreements.

These strategies are discussed in detail in AppendixG of the Explanatory Document and the

recommended implementation strategy is set out below.

7 2 Recommended Implementation Strategy


to the LEP, the level of protection required for the Escarpment, while allowing limited

development will be achievable


70/104

development, will be achievable.

In the Areas of Special Interest and in a limited number of areas with Landscape Support for

Core and Escarpment Interface classification, landowners could get together and make a single

application to Council to develop land within a predetermined environment envelopewhich

takes account of the environmental constraints to developing the land. The environmental

envelopewould sit on land previously cleared and outside of riparian zones (see Section 8.3.1).

Prior to consent being issued, a LMA would need to be prepared for adjoining Core land which

would remain in private ownership but with clear management outcomes. The LMA would cover

matters such as weed management, feral animal control, riparian corridor management and so

on. The introduction of a LMA then affords protection to remnant vegetation, vulnerable

ecosystems, core habitat, wildlife corridors and riparian zones.

This process would involve a number of clear steps as follows:

1 Property owners discuss potential to amalgamate holdings into one single lot

under a single title Community Title or the like.

2 In the Areas of Special Interest it would be possible following a series of

studies to determine an environmental envelopefor the land. The

advantage of this process is that it enables landowners whose land offers

some development potential, to negotiate with adjoining landowners for

access across properties, inclusion of additional cleared land and so on.

3 The remainder of the land is set aside and managed for conservation. It is

then the subject of a mutually agreed LMA which is the subj

2007_06_01 - Illawarra Escarpment Land Use Review Strategy Pt 1

Documents

Transcript of 2007_06_01 - Illawarra Escarpment Land Use Review Strategy Pt 1