The City of Greater Geelong will consider adopting Amendment C194 at Tuesday night's meeting (28 September 2010). Details of the amendment are documented and extracted from the Council Agenda published today in pdf format. The document is more than 9.5mb in size! More information, maps and diagrams is available within the pdf document - however the bulk of the information is reproduced below:
AMENDMENT C194 DRYSDALE CLIFTON SPRINGS STRUCTURE PLAN – CONSIDERATION OF PANEL REPORT AND ADOPTION
Portfolio: Planning – Cr Katos
Source: Economic Development, Planning & Tourism
Strategic Implementation
General Manager: Peter Bettess
Index Reference: Project: C194 - Reports Council & Other
Subject: Council Reports 2010
Summary
- Amendment C194 is a Council-initiated amendment to give effect to the Drysdale Clifton Springs Structure Plan adopted by Council in April 2009.
- The Amendment introduces a new clause into the Municipal Strategic Statement to reflect the new Structure Plan and proposes zoning and overlay changes.
- Exhibition of Amendment C194 between 19 November 2009 and 18 January 2010 resulted in receipt of 29 submissions including: 2 submissions in support of the amendment, 24 objections and 3 submissions from government agencies.
- Key issues raised in objecting submissions included: concerns with the proposed rezoning of Council owned land at Springs Street; zoning changes and concept plans for the Drysdale town centre; and concern at proposed urban consolidation and urban growth of rural residential and farming areas on the fringes of Drysdale.
- The Council considered the submissions at its meeting on 23 March 2010. It resolved to not proceed with the Residential 1 zoning of the Council land at Springs St and to remove the "protect rural land for future urban growth" designation from a large area of land around the Potato Shed. This decision was due to the ample lot supply in the Jetty Rd growth area and the pressure for rezoning that this designation would create.
- At its meeting on 23 March 2010 Council resolved to refer the submissions to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning. The Panel Hearing was held on 12, 13 and 14 May 2010 at City Hall, Geelong.
- The Panel has formed the view that the Structure Plan will set a sound strategic framework for the future development of Drysdale and Clifton Springs. The Panel has therefore recommended that Amendment C194 be adopted, subject to the recommendations set out at the conclusion of its Report.
- Changes recommended by the Panel include: retention of rural living land around Drakes Road; support for Council's previous decision to remove the long term growth designation from around the Potato Shed; changing the proposed extension of the Business 4 zone along Murradoc Road to urban consolidation; and changes to a proposed urban consolidation area around Huntingdon Road.
- Council officers generally concur with the Panel's recommendation except for some modifications as outlined in this report.
- It is therefore recommended that Council adopt Amendment C194 generally as recommended by the Panel and submit the amendment to the Minister for Planning for approval.
Recommendation
That Council:
1) Adopt Amendment C194 as contained in Appendix 2-4 to this report;
2) Submit the adopted Amendment together with the prescribed information to the Minister for Planning requesting approval;
3) Re-adopt the Drysdale Clifton Springs Structure Plan (September 2010), amended as described in this report.
4) Sign and Seal the Section 173 Agreement relating to 13A Princess Street, Drysdale. Report
Background
Amendment C194 is a Council-initiated amendment to give effect to the recommendations of the Drysdale – Clifton Springs Structure Plan April 2009. The new Structure Plan was developed for the townships of Drysdale Clifton Springs as part of a review of the 1992 Drysdale Clifton Springs Structure Plan. The Structure Plan was developed in house with some additional specialist inputs relating to urban design (Hansen Partnership), traffic (Hyder) and economic analysis (Tim Nott). The Structure Plan was adopted by Council at its meeting on 14 April 2009 when it also resolved to prepare and exhibit a planning scheme amendment C194.
The exhibited Amendment proposed to:
- Replace the existing Municipal Strategic Statement with an updated clause that will include the land use directions and policies identified in the adopted Drysdale – Clifton Springs Structure Plan April 2010.
- Rezone the triangular parcel of land bound by High, Eversley and Princess Streets, Drysdale, to Business 1 Zone.
- Delete the existing Design and Development Overlay (DDO14) from the triangular parcel of land to be rezoned to Business 1 Zone.
- Rezone the Regional Community and Cultural Hub site to Special Use Zone, exempting educational and community uses from permit requirements.
- Introduce a new Schedule to the Special Use Zone to reflect the rezoning of the Regional Community and Cultural Hub site.
- Amend the Schedule to the Mixed Use Zone by deleting reference to the Bellarine Sub-Regional site.
- Delete the existing Design and Development Overlay (DDO14) from the regional community and cultural hub.
- Rezone 13A Princess Street, Drysdale, to Residential 1 Zone.
- Rezone Council owned land at 9-15 and 17-29 Springs Street, Clifton Springs, to Residential 1 Zone.
The exhibited Drysdale – Clifton Springs Structure Plan map is in Appendix 2-1. The amended Structure Plan map now recommended for adoption and including changes recommended in this Council report and the Council report of 23 March 2010 is in Appendix 2-2.
Amendment C194 was exhibited in accordance with the provisions of the Planning & Environment Act between 19 November 2009 and 18 January 2010.
A notice of the preparation of the Amendment appeared in the Victorian Government Gazette on 19 November 2009. Notices appeared in relevant newspapers and letters and notices were sent to relevant Government Departments, statutory authorities, community groups and to all landowners directly affected by any zoning or overlay changes, areas identified for long term urban consolidation and to properties surrounding areas proposed for rezoning on 12 November 2009.
A total of 29 submissions were received as a result of the exhibition of Amendment C194.
A more detailed breakdown of the submissions indicates:
- 2 submissions support the Structure Plan;
- 24 submissions objecting to the Amendment;
- 3 submissions offering comment but neither supporting nor objecting to the Amendment.
Key issues raised in objecting submissions include: community concerns with the proposed rezoning of Council owned land at Springs Street, Clifton Springs; objections to zoning changes and concept plans for the town centre; concern at future urban consolidation and growth areas on the fringes of the town; and criticism of Council's public consultation. Due to the strong community opposition to the proposed rezoning of Council land at Springs Street and comments from Council's Engineering and Recreation and Open Space Units, it was decided to no longer proceed with the Residential 1 zoning of this land. Instead Council resolved at its 23 March 2010 meeting to retain the land as Business 1 Zone and undertake further investigation as to the development potential of the site.
The Council considered the submissions at its meeting on 23 March 2010 and resolved to refer them to an Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning. A three day hearing was held at City Hall between 12 and 14 May 2010.
Discussion
The Panel has now presented its report to the Council and indicates it "supports Amendment C194 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme and is satisfied that the Amendment should be adopted with relatively minor modifications".
An electronic copy of the full Panel report has been provided to all Councillors and on Council's website. Letters were sent to submitters on 4 August 2010 advising of the release of the Panel Report. The key conclusions and recommendations are shown in Appendix 2-3.
The next section of the report outlines the Panel's response to the major issues raised in the submissions and provides an officer response.
Inclusion of the Drysdale - Clifton Springs Structure Plan 2009 in the MSS
The amendment proposes to amend the MSS (Clause 21.14) to include reference to the Drysdale - Clifton Springs Structure Plan April 2009. The Panel considers that the review of the existing Structure Plan is not only consistent with the State and Local Planning Policy framework, but also is responsible planning given the existing Structure Plan is 18 years old and out of date with the advances in policy development that have occurred since 1992.
Officer Response
Council officers support the Panel's findings and a full copy of the updated MSS Clause 21-14 for adoption by Council is in Appendix 2-4.
Residential land supply
The Structure Plan identifies areas within the township boundary where future growth should be accommodated. These are identified as infill sites which are to be rezoned to Residential 1, areas identified for medium to long term urban consolidation and the Jetty Road Urban Growth Area. These areas are expected to provide around a 20 year lot supply. A number of submissions questioned the population forecasts and proposed lot supply referred to in the Structure Plan. The Panel considers that the Structure Plan adequately provides for the future growth of the township, and accepts that whilst a 20 year supply of land is in excess of the recommended 10 year planning period, it is likely that this supply will be less when detailed investigations are undertaken for each site.
Officer Response
Council officers support the Panel's findings.
Farming zoned land south town boundary
The exhibited C194 Structure Plan identified a large area of land to the south of the town boundary (surrounding the Potato Shed community hub) as "Protect Rural Land for future urban consolidation." In response to submissions, the Council resolved to remove this reference from the Structure Plan.
The owner of 1402-1500 Portarlington Road, Drysdale submitted to the Panel that the designation should remain and the land should be available for future residential development.
The Panel also heard from several submitters from the Farming Zone land bordered by Basin Rd, Belchers Rd, Princess Street and Grubb Rd who were of the view that the size of their lots supported their rezoning to Rural Living.
In relation to the removal of the designation "Protect Rural Land for future urban consolidation" the Panel states:
"…. there may be some merit in the long term for this area to develop as residential. However, given the Structure Plan currently identifies a 20 years supply of land, the identification of additional land outside the town boundary for future such development, either directly (in the Structure Plan) or indirectly (through 'other actions') is considered premature and could result in increased pressure for this area to be rezoned before it is required." (p.27 Panel Report)
The Panel found that the rezoning of Farming Zoned land to Rural Living is contrary to the directions contained in both the State and Local Planning Policy frameworks as well as in Council's Rural Land Use Strategy. The Panel concludes that the rezoning of Farming Zone land outside the township boundary to Rural Living is inappropriate and is not supported.
Officer Response
Council officers support the Panel's recommendation and the updated Structure Plan map no longer shows the area to the south as "Protect Rural Land for future urban consolidation". It is recommended that this land remain in the Farming Zone.
Princess Street land
The Panel concludes that the identified rezoning of the land bounded by Princess Street, Woodville Street, Clarendon Road and rear of properties in Murradoc Road to Residential 1 is appropriate and should be retained on the Structure Plan.
Officer Response
This area is proposed for rezoning by Amendment C103 which is recommended for adoption in a separate Council report.
Land on the corner of Huntingdon and Princess Streets
The Structure Plan identifies this land for medium–long term urban consolidation. A submission from Ms Bell (and her representative Mr Fadgyas) stated the proposed designation of this area for medium-long term urban consolidation is inappropriate and that immediate rezoning to Low Density Residential would be more appropriate Council's original stance was that, if this land is considered for rezoning in the medium to long term, the Residential 1 zone is the preferred zone. However, at the Panel Council officers acknowledged that moving from Rural Living Zone to Low Density Residential Zone is a form of urban consolidation.
The Panel considers there are issues associated with this area which need to be considered before determining its most appropriate future use. The Panel states:
"Whilst the submitters believe the railway line provides a logical settlement boundary and the rezoning should only apply to the area north of the railway line, this line services a tourist railway and is used infrequently. In addition, given the topography of the land, the nature of existing development and the limited use of the railway line, the Panel considers that it is not a strong physical boundary. On this basis, the Panel considers that the future use of this area should not be considered in isolation, but rather in the context of the surrounding land uses and its relationship to other existing Rural Living zoned land along the southern edge of the township zone." (p.30 Panel Report).
The Panel concludes that the request to rezone the land to Low Density Residential cannot be supported and it should remain in the Rural Living Zone at this time.
The Panel also does not support the Structure Plan's designation of the site for medium to long term consolidation as it would "create an isolated pocket for conventional residential development, with no clear connections to similar nearby areas or the town centre. It is therefore considered that the future of this area needs to be considered in the context of the future of the adjoining Rural Living land to the south and west" (p.31 Panel Report ).
The Panel therefore makes the following recommendation:
"The Council should amend the Structure Plan Map to identify the Rural Living zoned land within the southern township boundary, including the land south of Huntingdon Street, and east of Jetty Road, as either "Long term urban consolidation" or "Protect Rural Living land for future urban growth" to ensure that developments and subdivisions do not occur which may prejudice future development opportunities as set out in the text of the Structure Plan" (p32-33 Panel Report).
Officer Response
Council's officers do not support the Panel's recommendation to identify to all the Rural Living zoned land within the southern township boundary east of Jetty Road, as either "Long term urban consolidation" or "Protect Rural Living land for future urban growth". This is a substantial change from the exhibited Structure Plan which showed the bulk of this area as "Maintain Rural Residential Character". It is likely that landowners in this area would have made submissions opposing such a change.
In relation to the specific area proposed for urban consolidation south of Huntingdon Street, Council officers recommend that the exhibited designation of "medium to long term consolidation" is retained on the Structure Plan Map. It is further recommended that the text of the Structure Plan report is expanded to include discussion of this land being considered for either Residential 1 zoning or Low Density Zoning depending on the zone that can best achieve a good subdivision layout and integration with surrounding zones and potential future urban expansion to the south.
Area in the vicinity of the south-east corner of Drakes Road and Collins Street
The Structure Plan identifies this area, which is currently zoned Rural Living, for future medium-long term urban consolidation. Submissions were received from several landholders in this area objecting to its identification for 'medium-long term urban consolidation' on the basis that the area has environmental values with high vegetation cover, it creates a soft edge between the town and the proposed by-pass and protects the historical rural landscape of Drysdale.
The Panel inspected the area and found it to be undulating, well vegetated and with high rural landscape value. The Panel is of the opinion that it would be inappropriate to allow residential development that would either directly or indirectly impact on the vegetation. The Panel is also concerned about the plan for future higher density residential development of this land, given its relationship with the Cemetery Road low density residential area. The Panel concludes that:
"The Structure Plan should be amended to show the area east of Portarlington Road to the proposed by-pass and south to the southern boundary of lots fronting Kooroui Court, included in the designation "Maintain rural residential character."
Officer Response
Council officers have reconsidered this area in response to the Panel Report and landowner opposition. It is acknowledged that this area was not investigated in detail during preparation of the Structure Plan. Additional information on the topography, environmental and scenic values of the area emerged through the panel process.
Council officers support the Panel recommendation to remove the urban consolidation designation as far south as the southern boundary of the Kooroui Court allotments. The area further south to Murradoc Rd should remain as an area for future urban consolidation. The Structure Plan map in Appendix 2-2 has been amended to reflect this change in position.
Easterly expansion of the Business 4 Zone along Murradoc Road
The Structure Plan proposes an extension of the Business 4 zone (industrial activity area) on the south side of Murradoc Road towards Clarendon Road. A submission was received from Mr Hoyer who lives opposite the area strongly opposing the extension on the basis that it is neither warranted nor appropriate.
The Panel believes that it would not be desirable to allow additional industrial development which would separate future residential areas to the north and the south. The Panel also questions whether peripheral sales/industrial development is the most appropriate use of land at this key entry point to the town.
The Panel has formed the view that: "it would be premature to designate Murradoc Road for such expansion until all other options, including the possible future use of the Council depot are more fully investigated. If, following such investigation it is found that Murradoc Road is the most appropriate option, it may be that both sides of the road to the by-pass should be set aside for this expansion. The Panel concludes the Structure Plan should be amended to remove reference to the "Future Business 4 expansion" pending completion of an Urban Design Framework and examination of any future expansion of the Business 4 Zone. The Panel recommends that this land be designated 'Medium – long term urban consolidation' in the Structure Plan.
Officer Response
Council officers support the Panel Recommendation and accordingly the designation "Future Business 4 expansion" is recommended to be changed to "Medium – long term urban consolidation' as shown on the Structure Plan map in Appendix 2-2.
It is further recommended that the Structure Plan report include further discussion on the need for an Urban Design Framework to confirm the appropriate urban zoning for the subject land and the Rural Living zoned land on the opposite (northern) side of Murradoc Road. In the interim it is appropriate that this land is designed for urban consolidation.
Proposed Supermarket site in Murradoc Road
The Panel concludes that reference to the proposed ALDI site on Murradoc Road as an "alternative supermarket site" should be retained. The Panel recommends that the Structure Plan should be amended to clearly reflect the inclusion of land at 6 to 26 in the Business 1 Zone rather than its present designation as part of the land for "Peripheral Sales/Industrial Activity."
Officer Response
The Panel's recommendation is supported and the updated Structure Plan map has been amended to remove the "Peripheral Sales/Industrial Activity" designation from south side of Murradoc Road as up to the and including the proposed ALDI supermarket. This land is likely to be rezoned by a Ministerial Amendment C208 which was subject to an Advisory Committee hearing on 19 May 2010 and is awaiting a Ministerial decision.
Senior Citizens Centre and Village Green
Three submissions commented on the Structure Plan's concept plan for the Drysdale Town Centre which show a potential relocation of the Senior Citizens building. The submissions are also concerned at a possible through road from High St to Palmerston St which would involve the reduction in size of the Village Green and relocation of the existing Senior Citizens building.
The Panel supports the Structure Plan's treatment of the Drysdale town centre noting that it will undergo further investigation through the preparation of an Urban Design Framework which will be subject of further community involvement and consultation.
Officer Response
The Panel's comments are noted and no changes are required.
Gillies Road
The Structure Plan identifies that Gillies Road will be sealed to Basin Road and will contain footpaths and bicycle lanes. The Panel has no issue with the Council proposal to delete reference to "Gillies Road – seal to Basin Road and include footpaths and bicycle lanes to improve access to schools and potato Shed" from the Structure Plan.
Officer Response
As per Council's previous resolution on 23 March 2010, the reference to sealing of Gillies Rd will be deleted from the Structure Plan report.
2 to 22 Oakden Road
The land located at 2-22 Oakden Road is currently zoned Public Use (5) – Cemetery Use. The Panel supports the Structure Plan notation for this land that it be rezoned to Residential 1.
Officer Response
Council officers support the Panel's recommendation and no changes are required
Proposed Rezoning of Land bounded by High, Eversley and Princess Streets
The amendment proposes to rezone a triangular parcel of land bounded by High, Eversley and Princess Streets, Drysdale from Residential 1 to Business 1 and to delete the Design and Development Overlay 14 that presently applies to the land. With the exception of two properties, land within this triangle is used for non-residential uses, including a café, neighbourhood centre, police station and kindergarten. Submissions raised concern about the potential impact of the proposed rezoning on the security and well being of local residents within the triangle due to increased property rates.
The Panel considers the rezoning is appropriate for land adjoining the Town Centre.
Officer Response
Council officers note the Panel's support for Council's position and no changes are required.
Proposed Rezoning Regional Community and Cultural Hub
The Panel concludes that the proposed inclusion of the Regional Community and Cultural Hub in the Special Use Zone is a better reflection of the use of the land than is the existing Mixed Use Zone.
Officer Response
Council officers note the Panel's support for Council's position and no changes are required.
Proposed Rezoning 13A Princess Street, Clifton Springs
The Panel concludes that the proposal to rezone the land at 13A Princess Street Drysdale from Business 4 to Residential 1, subject to a Section 173 Agreement to remove the existing buildings is appropriate and supported. Given the existing zoning and possible previous use of the site for industrial purposes, the Panel alerts the Council to the possible need for an environmental audit of the land before it is used for residential purposes.
Officer Response
Council officers will discuss the history of the site with the owner to determine if any environmental testing is required. In the event it is necessary this can be included in the S173 Agreement.
Proposed Rezoning of Council owned land in Springs Street
When C194 was exhibited the proposal to rezone Council owned land at 9-15 and 17-29 Springs Street, Clifton Springs from Business 1 zone to Residential 1 zone received the highest number of submissions (11 in total) accompanied by 2 petitions with a total of approximately 180 signatures from local people residing close to the subject land.
As a result of the strong community opposition to the proposal and comments from Council's Engineering Services and Recreation and Open Space Units Council at its meeting on 23 March 2010 resolved to no longer proceed with the Residential 1 zoning as exhibited with Amendment C194.
Council resolved to retain the land as a Business 1 zone and pursue further investigation into the development potential and drainage catchment issues associated with the site.
The Panel was advised by Council at the hearing that although it does not intend proceeding with the rezoning under this Amendment, reference to it is to be retained in the Structure Plan. The Panel supports the Council position in relation to this matter.
Submissions were made to the Panel that it should recommend that the land not be sold and that it be used for the purpose of open space. The Panel states: "…these are not matters associated with this Amendment and therefore the Panel does not have the power to make such recommendations to the Council" (p46 Panel Report).
Officer Response
As per the resolution of 23 March 2010 it is recommended that the exhibited rezoning to Residential 1 is abandoned and that the discussion regarding this land within the Structure Plan report is updated. It is recommended that the notation on the Structure Plan map "short term accommodation opportunity" is retained.
It is further recommended that the future of this land be investigated by the relevant Council departments and Councillors in consultation with the community.
Environmental Implications
The development of the Structure Plan had regard to environmental issues and constraints. The Panel hearing process brought forward further information on the environmental constraints on land in the proposed urban consolidation area around Drakes Rd. As a result this area is now recommended to remain as rural residential.
The Structure Plan identifies a settlement boundary which will see population increases accommodated within the existing urban area reducing urban sprawl and protecting surrounding coastal and rural land.
The Structure Plan has a number of recommendations relating to the environment. Broader sustainability outcomes have been considered for new urban areas (such as waste water reuse, WSUD principles, energy conservation, improving walking/bicycle opportunities to reduce vehicle reliance) and directions relating to native vegetation protection/revegetation and support for the implementation of the Clifton Springs.
Financial Implications
Adoption of this Amendment as recommended will result in no financial implications for Council. Council is being required to meet the full Panel costs because this is a Council initiated amendment.
Policy/Legal/Statutory Implications
This Amendment is consistent with all relevant State and Council planning policies which have been described and discussed in detail in the adopted Drysdale – Clifton Springs Structure Plan.
Officer Direct or Indirect Interest
No Council officers have any direct or indirect interest, in accordance with Section 80(C) of the Local Government Act to which this Amendment relates.
Risk Assessment
The development of the Structure Plan, upon which this Amendment is based, involved input from key agencies and groups and review of relevant legislation to ensure appropriate management of constraints and risks.Social Considerations
The development of the Structure Plan had due regard to social and community issues with contributions from Council's social and recreation planners and from a range of other agencies.
The Structure Plan included input from community service providers and groups and examined directions and recommendations of the Bellarine Peninsula Strategic Plan. The Plan makes recommendations around walkability/accessibility, recreation needs; future social and community facilities and services and affordable housing.
Communication
The amendment was subject to a public notification process in accordance with the Planning & Environment Act. Similarly, the Drysdale – Clifton Springs Structure Plan has been subject to an extensive public consultation process. All submitters to the Amendment were invited to appear and those wishing have been heard by the Independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning.
No comments:
Post a Comment