Summary of LEP meeting presentations

• Transcript of video

Overview of LEP and DCP

What is the Draft Plan?

• LEP – Local “Environmental” Plan
• DCP – Development Control Plan
• LEP – primary legal document
• DCP – council wishlist
• Draft LEP: 124 pages + maps
• Draft DCP: 1016 pages

More planning controls

• REPP – Regional Environmental Planning Policy: 60 pages
• SEPPs – State Environmental Planning Policies: around 100, each many pages
• plus Metro plan; Planning department practice notes & guidelines, etc, etc...
• Countless thousands of pages of rules and regulations restricting what we can do with our own land.

LEP – major restrictions

• Minimum lot sizes ...
• Uses: “Permitted”, “with consent”...
• Tree preservation – maximum fine $1.1 million
• Heritage & archaeological controls
• “Everything requires permission”

DCP – major restrictions

• Site coverage: 2,500 – 5,000 sq.m.

DCP – more restrictions

• Building platforms - close to neighbours; slope less than 11°; setback up to 30m;
• No solid or masonry fences;
• Colours and finishes scrutinised;
• Fill & clearing demonised as deadly sins;
• + much, much more ...
• Adds up to 13 mandatory plans/reports/studies + 7 additional “possible requirements” for a DA.

A Regulation Tsunami

• A world leader in regulation.
• More controls over land than in many countries derided as undemocratic
• Who benefits?
• Ties up resources that could be used much more productively in other ways
• If we don’t express our concerns now, where will this all end?

Key points in the draft LEP

Key points in the draft LEP

• Brings back the environmental overlay—only the name has changed.
• Now referred to as ‘Biodiversity’ and ‘Natural resource – Biodiversity map’.
• Minimum lot size has been reduced only in the former rural 1(a) area.
• Community title/cluster subdivision elsewhere, but many conditions.

What needs to change?

• Get rid of the environmental overlay.
• Apply R5 large-lot residential zone instead of agricultural zones.
• Extend 5 acre zone to cover areas identified in prior rural land studies.
• Amend cluster subdivision to make it similar to existing rural 1(d) zone.

 Get rid of environmental zone

• Unanimous landowner opposition.
• Another unwanted restriction on land use – bound to be tied to DCP.
• Not needed in a country with so much bush and so few people.
• Tramples upon property rights to pander to emotive values.

Apply R5 large lot zone

• ‘To provide residential housing in a rural setting while preserving, and minimising impacts on, environmentally sensitive locations and scenic quality.’
• Around 70% of the so-called ‘rural’ area is already being used for residential.
• Very little land is suitable for agriculture.
• Proposed RU2 zone: objectives are completely contrary to actual land use.
• Recent LEC decision against sub-division, as it “was likely to reduce any potential .... agricultural use”.
• Lot sizes in the R5 zone could vary from 1-5 acres.

Extend 5 acre zone

• Extend 5 acre minimum lot size to areas identified in prior land studies.
• Mainly ridges in Glenorie & Kenthurst.
• Take account of existing patterns of development and lot sizes.

Amend cluster subdivision

• Remove references to biodiversity.
• Remove community title.
• Remove minimum qualifying lot size.
• Remove maximum lot size.
• Consider dual zone RU2 + E4 instead.
• End result: similar to existing rural 1(d)—what’s wrong with that?

Obstacles to progress

• Early feedback: environmental over-lay & community title must remain.
• R5 zone possible, but ‘no cluster subdivision’.
• R5 zone + smaller lot sizes ‘would require another rural land study’.
• Insufficient submissions received by the council: ‘Send in your submission’.