ATTACHMENT 1
CL…….CITY DEVELOPMENT
Attachment 1
Full Discussion of Review of Controls – Mixed Use (10) zone – Woodville Road
BACKGROUND
1.The gazettal of Parramatta LEP 2001 introduced several changes to the zoning of land within the Parramatta Local Government Area. Included in these changes was the rezoning of a large number of properties along Woodville Road from Residential 2(a2) to Mixed Use 10.
2.The Mixed Use 10 zone permits a wide range of land uses. These include commercial premises, light industries, shops, residential flat buildings and mixed use development. The controls for this area are provided by the Parramatta Development Control Plan 2001 (DCP 2001). The DCP 2001 encourages mixed use development by providing a more generous floor space ratio in the case where commercial/retail development is incorporated on the ground floor. The main controls that apply in the case of mixed use development are outlined in the table at attachment 3 and are summarised below:
-Floor Space Ratio of 1.5:1;
-Height of up to 4 storeys at the front of the site;
-Nil front setback with 20% of the setback to 2 metres for landscaping;
-Nil side setback if party wall, otherwise, 1.5 metres. Two metres for levels above ground floor;
-Rear setback 30% length of site; and
-Minimum site frontage of 18 metres.
3.In the case that development does not incorporate commercial/retail development on the ground floor, the controls that are to be applied are those for residential flat buildings. These include a floor space ratio of 0.8:1 and a front setback of 5 to 9 metres.
4.Many development applications have subsequently been received and determined for mixed use developments in this area. During Council’s consideration of the applications, significant community concern has been expressed regarding the impact of the proposed developments. Council subsequently resolved to review the zoning and amend the DCP controls so as to address public concerns relating to height, bulk, streetscape and traffic associated with current development.
IDENTIFYING THE ISSUES
5.In June 2003, Council appointed a planning and urban design consultant to commence a strategic review of the existing controls as they apply to properties zoned Mixed Use 10 along Woodville Road. The consultant was also commissioned to provide comment on development applications received for properties along Woodville Road.
6.A workshop was held in October 2003 with staff from the Development Assessment Team to discuss issues related to the assessment of development applications along Woodville Road.
7.A workshop was held in November 2003 with Councillors to discuss the issues associated with the redevelopment of Woodville Road and to identify Council’s priorities in addressing the issues.
8.The range of issues discussed by Councillors included the following:
-the desire to encourage redevelopment balanced with the need to achieve a high quality urban environment;
-the role of SEPP 65;
-setbacks and the role of landscaping/trees;
-the floor space ratio bonus for providing commercial on the ground floor, the economic viability of this component and the demand for commercial/retail floor space on Woodville Road;
-the difference between corner and mid-block sites; and
-the difficulties in providing vehicular access.
9.Council’s consultant has prepared several images illustrating the type and form of development that is occurring under the current controls. Figure 1 below demonstrates the form of development arising from the current controls in the context of existing development on Woodville Road. This sketch highlights the contrast between existing and future development and the negative impact this is likely to have on streetscape.
Figure 1Form of development achieved under current controls
Source: Brett Newbold Urban Planning
10.In addition to the issue of streetscape, Council’s consultant has identified poor outcomes that are being achieved by development proposals on Woodville Road in relation to overshadowing of neighbouring properties and poor internal amenity in terms of privacy and solar access. The three sketches below in Figures 2 and 3 demonstrate this using a generalised, hypothetical building.
11.Figure 2 below is schematic anddemonstrates a four-storey building proposed on the western side of Woodville Roadand the impact this has on the solar access of properties to the south. The current controls permit a side setback ranging from a nil setback to 1.5m. This combined with the 4 storey height results in significant overshadowing of the property to the south. It can then be assumed that if the property to the south is also developed with these setbacks and height, it will receive little solar access, particularly on the lower levels. Figure 3 overleaf indicates the internal sunlight received in a proposed development on Woodville Road, and identifies several living areas that would not receive any sunlight. This is partly due to design and partly due to the scale of the building and partly due to the sheer width of the building along the north-south axis. It should also be noted, that this level of sunlight would be further reduced in the case that a similar building is adjoining to the north.
Figure 2Overshadowing impacts on adjoining properties.
Source: Brett NewboldUrban Planning
Figure 3Internal amenity - solar access received (units shaded receive no sunlight)
Source: Brett NewboldUrban Planning
Floor Space Ratio Bonus
12.At the time of the preparation of this report, 22 development applications had been received by Council for mixed use developments within the Zone 10 area along Woodville Road. Fifteen of these have been approved. All such applications have incorporated commercial/retail development on the ground floor in order to develop to the floor space ratio of 1.5:1. It is unclear whether there is true demand for commercial/retail development along Woodville Road or whether the floor space bonus is operating as a significant incentive. Anecdotal evidence and the nature of the property market suggests that the latter is the case.
13.As such, it is quite probable that the floor space ratio bonus may be creating a supply of commercial/retail floorspace that does not respond to demand. Further to this, the suitability of Woodville Road for commercial/retail development is questionable. This type of ribbon development is contrary to sound planning principles as it creates vehicular conflicts and results in a commercial area that is dissected by a busy arterial road. The examples of ribbon development in Sydney are largely historic, eg. Parramatta Road, and have been proven over time to be problematic, particularly in terms of visual, pedestrian and retail amenity and the management of traffic and transport.
Receipt of Letters and Petitions
14.During Council’s consideration of development applications on Woodville Road, significant community concern has been raised regarding the impact of the proposed developments on the residents within the side streets. This has been expressed in letters of objection received during the relevant notification periods for the development applications. Further to this, Council has received several letters and petitions regarding the redevelopment of Woodville Road in general.
15.Four petitions have been received from residents in the area requesting that Council rezone the area to Residential 2(a) and/or conduct an Environmental Impact Statement into the impacts of redevelopment in the area. Six individual letters have been received from residents, five of which object to the density of development permitted by the controls and one of which requests Council maintain the current controls.
16.In particular, one of the letters received requests that Council review not only the Mixed Use 10 zone but also the Centre Business 3(a) zone. In this regard, concern was raised regarding the development potential of land on the corner of Woodville Road and Constance Street which is zoned Centre Business 3(a). It is noted that the terms of Council’s original resolution were a review of Zone 10 and the work conducted to date reflects this. The objectives of the Centre Business 3(a) zone under the PLEP 2001 are quite different to that of the Mixed Use (10) zone. They include economic growth, employment opportunities and the promotion of vital commercial centres. In this regard, the terms of a review of zone 3(a) would be different to those undertaken for the Zone 10 and would constitute an additional project.
17.It is assumed that the concerns raised in the letter referred to above, relate to a desire to see any reduction in density within the Mixed Use (10) zone as a result of the current review to also apply to the site zoned 3(a) on the corner of Woodville Road and Constance Street. Currently, the DCP prescribes that development in the Centre Business 3(a) zone be limited to 3 storeys which is a lesser height than that currently permitted in the adjoining Mixed Use 10 zone. The recommended draft controls (discussed further in the report) propose to reduce the height in the Mixed Use 10 zone to 3 storeys which would be consistent with the height permitted in the Centre Business 3A zone. As such, should Council resolve to proceed to exhibit the draft controls recommended, the height of development prescribed by the DCP would be similar for both the Mixed Use (10) and Centre Business 3(a) zones.
Summary of issues of concern
18.The issues of concern raised by Council’s consultant, Councillors, staff and authors of submissions are summarised as follows:
-Little evidence of demand for commercial/retail development within the Mixed Use (10) zone along Woodville Road. Further concern is raised regarding the creation of “ribbon development” and the associated problems of visual amenity and traffic conflicts.
-Dramatic change to the streetscape of Woodville Road proposed by current controls as a result of the height, bulk and scale of developments and the minimal front and side setbacks. In particular, a loss of the landscaped setting as a result of the minimal front and side setbacks.
-Council’s original intent to encourage redevelopment balanced with a need to be sympathetic to the existing character of Woodville Road.
-A lack of a clear vision for Woodville Road.
-Inadequate front setback and landscaping area.
-Concerns raised by residents regarding traffic impacts, particularly on side streets.
-Overshadowing of neighbouring properties.
-Low levels of internal amenity of proposed developments in terms of privacy and solar access.
OPTIONS FOR ADDRESSING THE ISSUES
19.Based on the issues raised above, Council’s consultant and staff identified several options for a response to these issues. A summary of the options is as follows:
-rezoning under the Parramatta LEP 2001;
-maintain the current suite of controls;
-minor revision of the DCP (same fundamental controls with some revision to achieve higher quality outcomes); and
-major revision of the DCP controls as they relate to the Mixed Use (10) zone along Woodville Road.
20.The above options were discussed with Councillors at a further workshop held in June 2004. The purpose of the workshop was to seek Councillors feedback on their preferred outcomes for development within the Mixed Use 10 zone along Woodville Road. The issues discussed at the workshop that were important in determining the preferred form of development can be summarised as follows:
-relationship of development with the existing development in the side streets;
-provision of a garden setting in place of the street wall approach;
-need to minimise impact on neighbouring dwellings;
-ways to address the bonus floor space associated with commercial development; and
-areas where commercial development may be suitable, eg. corner vs. mid-block.
Rezoning Option
21.Council has received representation from residents to rezone Woodville Road to reduce the residential density currently permitted. As advised to Councillors at the workshop, this option is not likely to be supported by the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (DIPNR). The State Government strongly promotes urban consolidation through State Environmental Planning Policy No. 53 and the Residential Development Strategy (RDS) process. Council gained an exemption from SEPP 53 based on the adopted RDS and the current residential zonings across the Local Government Area.
22.Rezoning land is carried out by an amendment to the PLEP 2001. As the Minister is responsible for approving LEP’s, Council cannot rezone the land without State Government support. The recent gazettal of LEP 2001 (Amendment No. 11) which rezoned an area in Old Toongabbie/Wentworthville was followed up by advice from DIPNR that it would not be supporting further rezonings of this nature and rezonings should only be approached in the broader context of Council’s RDS. This is reinforced by DIPNR’s Direction No. G9 which was recently reported to Council in association with the proposed rezoning at Kenelda Street, Guildford. Under this Direction, Council is unable to rezone land to reduce residential density unless such reduction is in accordance with an approved Strategy demonstrating there will be no overall reduction in residential densities within the Local Government Area.
Residential Development Strategy
23.A review of Council’s RDS has commenced. The RDS is the strategic document which underlies residential zonings within the Local Government Area. The review process is a long term project due to the amount of work and consultation involved and it is anticipated that any new zonings emerging from the revised RDS may not be effected until 2006. As such, while, the zoning of Woodville Road will be considered during this process from a broad regional perspective, it would not be timely to rely solely on this process to address Council’s current concerns.
Recommended option
24.The preferredoption is to conduct a major revision of the DCP controls as they relate to the Mixed Use (10) zone along Woodville Road. The advantage of this approach is that Council is able to adopt changes to the DCP without involving the State Government. The detailed controls and guidelines contained in a DCP also have the potential to greatly influence the development outcomes and are an effective tool for establishing a vision for thearea.
25.Staff have developed a draft Desired Future Character statement outlining a broad vision for Woodville Road. (Attachment 2). The concept of a Desired Future Character statement is similar to zone objectives. It is more meaningful, however, in guiding the type, form and nature of development that Council envisages for an area as it specifically applies to Woodville Road, unlike the zone objectives which apply to all land zoned Mixed Use 10 in the Local Government Area. A Desired Future Character statement alsoestablishes an agreed vision with the community for an area that will inform the DCP controls. Such a statement will underpin the numerical controls that follow in the DCP.
26.Staff have also prepared a suite of amended numerical controls that address the issues. Each issue of concern and the current relevant control is listed accompanied by the recommended revised controls to address each issue are summarised in the table at Attachment 3. The recommended revised controls are also further discussed below.
Floor Space Ratio Bonus
27.The deletion of the floor space bonus would remove any artificial demand for commercial/retail floor space and would encourage the market to determine whether commercial/retail uses are incorporated into proposed developments. In this regard, it is proposed that the floor space ratio should be a single control which is not dependent upon land uses.
Proposed Amended Controls
28.The controls as they currently stand, promote a four (4) storey development with minimal setbacks in order to create a solid “street-wall” effect. In contrast, the draft controls proposed in Attachment 2 reflect a built form that is more closely related to a residential flat building in a landscaped setting. This better relates to the character of existing development by continuing the theme of front setbacks with garden settings, rather than attempting to create a significantchange inthe streetscape ofWoodville Road. An additional advantage of providing front setbacks is a reduction in traffic noise levels as a result of the effects of distance attenuation.
29.Further, it should be noted that the areas immediately to the west and east of Woodville Road were rezoned from Residential 2(a) to Residential 2(b) under LEP 2001. This permits development in the form of 2 storey townhouses and villas. It is appropriate that development along Woodville Road, relate well to the form of development that is permitted to the rear. As such, the height is proposed to be reduced to 3 storeys to remove the significant transitionin height currently permitted by the existing controls. A reduction in height will not only reduce the scale of development on Woodville Road, but also contribute to a reduction in privacy and overshadowing impacts on adjoining properties.
30.Floor space ratio influences the bulk and scale of buildings relative to the site on which they are located. As such, reducing the floor space ratio goes a long way to addressing concerns about the bulk and scale of buildings on Woodville Road. Consistent with the reduction in height, it is proposed that the floor space ratio be reduced from 1.5:1 to 0.8:1. This floor space ratio reflects that currently permitted for residential flat buildings and is compatible with the remaining recommended controls that determine the built form including height and setbacks.
31.The bulk and scale of buildings when viewed from the street is also related to the width of building frontages. One of the most confronting characteristics of the proposed developments alongWoodville Road is the sheer length of the building frontages when viewed from Woodville Road and from the neighbouring properties to the rear. Floor space ratio alone does not fully address this issue, particularly in the case where a large number of sites have been consolidated. As such, a maximum building dimension of 25m is recommended, limiting the width of facades to provide a balance in the presentation of built form and landscaping in the streetscape and avoid wide unbroken building facades.
32.It is proposed that the front setback be increased to 9m to facilitate the provision of significant landscaping and a boulevard setting. However, in order to allow flexibility for commercial/retail land uses, it is also proposed that 50% of the building frontage be permitted to encroach to a nil setback where that part of the building is commercial/retail. This setback control will allow sufficient area for landscaping while contributing towards visibilityof businesses in the case that commercial/retail development is incorporated on the ground floor.