PA Submissions on draft City Plan 2011 8th March 2011

8 March, 2011

The Chief Executive Officer,
City Plan Development Unit,
City of Sydney,
GPO Box 1591,
SYDNEY NSW 2001

Ref: S081001

Dear Monica,

We appreciate the opportunity provided by Franscesca O’Brien and her team to brief some of us on the draft City Plan.

We understand that the City is required to prepare the City Plan in accordance with the template provided by the NSW Government whose instructions are to “generally aim to maximize the range of appropriate uses” for each zone across the LGA. The Plan is primarily a land use regulation document which, under current legislation and Government policy, can be ignored when plans are being assessed under Part 3A provisions. Nevertheless, it provides clarity for those developments which are the responsibility of the City of Sydney. We further understand that Council and CSPC have reduced the number of zones from 31 to 15 in the City Plan 2008. This may have resulted in administrative efficiencies, but it has also resulted in inappropriate uses being made to fit into what we consider inappropriate zones. Council has instructed its officers to prepare lists that keep land uses as they are under existing controls, rather than review and update the lists of permissible and prohibited uses in order to look at what is appropriate for future land use.

It is our view that the number of zones should be further reviewed, given the current detailed clarification of what can and can’t be permitted in each of the (now) reduced number of zones.

We refer specifically to the Locality Statements that apply to Pyrmont and Ultimo, the Land Zoning Maps and the Land Use Table which outlines permissible and prohibited uses in the various zones.

Land Use Table – LEP 2011

Zone R1 - General Residential – We note that the City has added the following to the list of uses “Permitted with Consent”: Bed and breakfast accommodation, Food and drink premises; Home-based child care; Home industries; Home occupations (sex services); Jetties; Markets, Roads, Roadside stalls etc. “Home-based child care” could be accommodated under the “Child care centre” usage rather than have its own category. We recommend that these uses more appropriately belong under Zone B4 Mixed Use or Zone B3 Commercial Core as the uses listed in black appear to cover most situations. In particular we urge the removal of permissibility of sex services and bed and breakfast accommodation from this zoning. We already have real problems with some apartment buildings zoned residential setting up backpacker accommodation arrangements for the owners, resulting in loss of amenity to the owner/occupiers and we’re sure most residents in buildings in a residential zone would be horrified to learn that “Home Occupations (sex services)” could operate from their buildings.

Zone B4 – Mixed Use – As noted above, a number of uses listed under General Residential are more appropriate for Mixed Use zone. We support the addition of the objective “to encourage uses that generate employment opportunities and provide facilities and services to the community”.

Zone RE1 - Public Recreation - We are appalled at the range of activities proposed by Council which could be allowed on sites zoned Public Recreation. Almost anything goes, yet these precious green areas, even along the waterfront, can be approved for activities ranging from Charter and tourism boating facilities; electricity generating works; Marinas, Registered clubs; signage, waste or resource management facilities or boat sheds etc etc. It is completely unacceptable that our public parkland be alienated in the ways outlined. Whilst it is accepted that some large sites are currently used for intensive active recreation and have substantial structures on them, activities such as Marinas and Charter and tourism boating facilities more appropriately belong in land zoned industrial or commercial, most likely owned by NSW Maritime or Sydney Ports, in the case of Pyrmont and Glebe. By raising the possibility that such inappropriate development, involving substantial structures could be approved on land zoned Public Recreation, Council is creating a situation where proponents will have an expectation that their DAs will be approved. If it’s on the list, it will be difficult to knock back. We recommend that the “Permitted with consent” section for Zone RE1 include ONLY Kiosks, Recreation Areas and Public Parks. By keeping the list broad, Council will be better able to reject DAs for inappropriate developments. Alternatively, we ask that Council consider creating a new Zone – Public Parks - covering those areas currently zoned RE1 which should be protected from alienation – in particular foreshore parks. Such a zone would prohibit most of the uses outlined in Zone RE1.

As proposed by Council, the only prohibited uses seem to be mining and logging (Resource recovery facilities) or garbage dumps (Waste or resource transfer stations). This list needs to be expanded to include all uses which involve substantial structures and alienation of parks and open space. The City really needs as much green open space as possible – not hectares of concrete. There are still substantial Council-owned sites, eg the Fig/Wattle Street depot, which could accommodate active recreational facilities requiring structures within the Mixed Use Zone.

Whilst many parks under Council control operate under approved Management Plans which may preclude inappropriate activities, these could be changed at any time by a future Council, with the numbers to do so.

Land Zoning - As a general comment, we ask Council to note that most of Pyrmont, and parts of Ultimo have only recently been redeveloped with a mix of medium to high-density residential apartments, integrated with commercial premises and mixed use buildings. It is inconceivable that there will be any demolition or rebuilding within our suburb in the medium to long term. It is therefore important that the zoning is depicted accurately to reflect the reality of this redevelopment and not provide opportunities for property owners to apply for consent for inappropriate uses such as provision of sex services or back packer hostels in residential buildings.

Pyrmont Point – Land Zoning Map – Sheet LZN_007

• We note the extensive areas designated B4 (Mixed Use) associated with development that has already occurred in this area. As the final two residential buildings at Jacksons Landing are now under construction, we ask that the map be amended to reflect reality. The Rum Store and The Elizabeth in Mount St Walk are residential buildings with restaurants on the ground floor; John Street Square bounded by Harris, John and Harvey Streets is also largely residential, with some small scale commercial/retail at street/square level; similarly, the Affordable Housing on the corner of John and Harris Sts is primarily residential with street level restaurant/small business premises; the Promontory at Pirrama Road and Point Street is almost entirely residential apart from a “public:” carpark; The Distillery, Stonecutters, the Quarry, Sugardock, Silk and Antias (under construction) and located in Bowman Street, Distillery Drive and Tambua Street are all residential buildings as is Fleetview in Bowman Street. Given the long list of uses proposed to be “permitted with consent” under this zoning, including boarding houses, business premises, educational establishments, entertainment facilities, function centres, office premises, passenger transport facilities, registered clubs, roads, etc., we urge the amendment of the Map of areas shown as Mixed Use to Residential, where that is currently the reality and the use for which development approval has been given.
• 1 Distillery Drive – We note that the whole of this site is designated B4, but point out that a strip of land along the top of the Bank Street escarpment is designated “urban bushland” which, we understand, will be transferred to Council. It has already been extensively planted with natives, with further planting following completion of the building. We ask that this land be rezoned RE1 Public Recreation.
• 21 Harris Street is currently zoned B3 Commercial. Whilst we appreciate the desire to achieve a mix of “small scale retail and café uses with large scale commercial uses in certain areas” we are of the view that as there are large areas of vacant office/commercial space in and around Pyrmont north of Pyrmont Bridge Road, and noting the failure of Lend Lease to sell this site (with an approved DA for commercial development), it would be more appropriate to rezone this site B4 Mixed Use to provide flexibility. Residents do not want this site to remain undeveloped but wish to see it developed in such a way as to provide much-needed additional community amenities, including a childcare centre, as well as a mixture of residential and commercial space, as demand is identified. It is essential that the currently approved height and building envelope restriction remains in place.
• Bank Street – We strongly support the retention of the Public Recreation zoning on the sites currently owned by NSW Maritime and SHFA. However, we have strong objection to its use for any activity other than those approved in the Master Plan governing the site – for passive (non-motorised) boating, community recreational facilities, and a public park. As currently listed as “permitted with consent”, there is a large range of possible uses which we consider totally unacceptable including Charter and tourism boating facilities, electricity generating works, emergency services facilities, marinas, research stations, waste or resource management facilities, water treatment facilities. We seek assurance from Council that this site will not be used for any of these purposes.
• Land linking Quarry Master Drive with Bank Street – We note the strip of land zoned RE1 which runs between 1 Distillery Drive and 120-122 Saunders Street and note its future use is unclear. At present it is not publicly accessible and is in a poor state. As the construction of the adjoining 1 Distillery Drive is underway we ask that Council make a decision on this site’s future.
• We note areas marked SHC SREP Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005 which shows wharf areas which don’t exist, including a long jetty near the end of Harris Street. In addition, the configuration of the shoreline around Pyrmont Point (now Pirrama Park) does not reflect reality. We ask (a) that Council clarify the implications of the depicted jetty, noting that the LEP 2005 Ultimo-Pyrmont Zoning Map does not show it, and (b) that the map be amended to reflect the current shoreline. To leave the jetty would lead to uncertainty with regards to future marinas, etc. We also recommend that you add the Glebe Island Bridge abutment to the map (RTA owned) and clarify its zoning.

Pyrmont – Land Zoning Map – Sheet LZN_008

• We strongly support the zoning of the Council-owned site bounded by Fig and Wattle Streets as Mixed Use. We note that the objectives of this zoning include the integration of “suitable business, office, residential, retail and other development in accessible locations so as to maximize public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling”. We particularly support community facilities as one of the uses of this site and note its proximity to Wentworth Park sports fields and Wentworth Park light rail station. We further urge consideration of access links to Jones Street, above the site, retention of views to the walls of the old Hell Hole Quarry, and linkage across Wattle Street to Wentworth Park. We also particularly support the principle outlined in the Locality Statement for this precinct to “adaptively re-use the historical buildings providing a mix of land uses in the distinctive built forms”.
• We are unclear as to the status of the sites shown white on the map running between the East side of Harris Street and West side of Pyrmont St from Allen Street to William Henry Street. The old Goldsborough Mort building has now been converted to residential and sits adjacent the new M Central residential development. The Global Switch building on the South side of Fig Street is Commercial; there is a private residential development (Bullecourt) between the Global Switch building and the Council-owned Ian Thorpe Aquatic Centre which would be more appropriately zoned Public Recreation, and the Powerhouse Museum site is zoned Mixed Development. We ask that the status of these sites be clarified.
• We support the zoning of the Neighbourhood Centre in Harris Street near William Henry Street to serve the Ultimo community whilst recognizing that this would involve a gradual transition from its current usage.
• The sites shown as B4 Mixed Development running to the west of Pyrmont Street between Allen St and Bunn Street, and including the Mirage building to the East of Pyrmont Street are all residential buildings and should be shown as R1.

Locality Statements – Pyrmont Point. There appears to be no reference to the waterfront, despite this being a locality surrounded on three sides by water. A principle should be to retain and enhance public access to the foreshore, especially at Bank Street; and protection of foreshore public recreation areas from inappropriate development such as marinas and Charter and tourism boating facilities. We do however, support low key, kiosk-type facilities that enhance the activation of the waterfront.

Pyrmont – We would recommend that a principle be added: Require owners to either use and maintain buildings in their ownership or have their properties subject to compulsory acquisition following due notice of five years by the relevant Council or Government authority. Pyrmont has a large number of buildings and unused land zoned commercial/residential which are neglected and falling into disrepair, including several heritage buildings. The full activation of Harris Street cannot be achieved because of this failure to develop or utilize these properties. In addition, a valuable vacant site located next to the Pyrmont Community Centre is currently used as a carpark. This site could be acquired by the City of Sydney to enable expansion of the Pyrmont Community Centre to provide much-needed community facilities. We believe that legislation should be enacted that enables Government/Council to acquire such properties within a vibrant and growing suburb, rather than continuing and exacerbating what is now urban blight.

Summary

• Land use tables should be amended to look to the future, rather than reflect the past
• The zoning maps need to be updated to show accurately, current developments on land and water;
• The Land Use Table relating to Zone RE1 Public Recreation should not be amended to include the uses added by Council under Section 3 - “Permitted with consent” or a new zoning should be created to ensure protection of green open spaces from alienation by large-scale structures and other inappropriate uses.
• The Land Use Table relating to Zone R1 should not include the uses added by Council under Section 3 – “Permitted with consent” but these should be included under Zone B4 or Zone B3. These uses may be the current reality in some suburbs, but the Plan should look at what is appropriate in a residential zone for the future – and that does not include provision of sex services
• Include a reference to access to the waterfront in the Locality Statement – Pyrmont Point
• Include an additional principle which enables the compulsory acquisition of neglected and un-used property, particularly those with heritage listing/values.

Yours sincerely,


Elizabeth Elenius
Convenor