The Report
735 The Commissioner did not recommend that the land be rezoned from Environment Protection Hacking River 7(d) to Residential Low Density 2(a) to allow for residential development, as sought by the joint venture.
736 Instead the Commissioner recommended that 'there be no change in the current LEP or current zonings until further studies are undertaken primarily aimed at identifying existing and potential impacts from various landuses, then setting of appropriate environmental objectives/standards, followed by identification of cost-effective, strategic catchment management plan to control existing catchment pollution sources and determine appropriate landuse controls capable of meeting these objectives' [19/010: Letter to the Minister December 1994].
737 It is clearly not appropriate to set out in full the Commissioner's report, being near 300 pages in length including appendices.
738 However, it is convenient to set out the Executive Summary, which serves as a useful synopsis of the conduct of the Commission of Inquiry and the findings and recommendations of the Commissioner. [I note that the section appearing at the end of the 'Executive Summary' and entitled 'Recommendations', appears at first sight to be , but is not, identical to the section entitled 'Recommendations' to be found at the end of the report.]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Hon Robert Webster MP, Minister for Planning and Minister for Housing, established this Commission of Inquiry into appropriate landuse and zonings in the vicinity of Helensburgh, in accordance with terms of reference. The relevant issues are addressed below including a summary of findings and recommendations.
Helensburgh is located at the headwaters of the Hacking River which drains through, and largely serves the Royal National Park. The Royal National Park comprises a large proportion of the Hacking River catchment, while Helensburgh occupies a relatively small area.
Helensburgh owes its origin to the nearby coal mine (still operating) and it is interesting to note that both the Royal National Park and Helensburgh (and coal mining) occurred at around the same time (mining slightly earlier in fact, and one can speculate that if vice versa, then coal mining and Helensburgh development may not have occurred).
A number of issues raised are outside the terms of reference. These issues include Council's previous actions, landowner's expectations, community surveys/circulars, etc. Other actions, including Court actions, requests for investigation by ICAC and the Ombudsman, and an abandoned attempt at mediation are also noted as being outside the terms of reference. However, these and other issues illustrate the long and complex range of concerns related to Helensburgh, which in part have resulted in this Inquiry and also caused the Inquiry to be relatively long and complex.
In particular, certain actions of parties are criticised by others, and both development proponents and opponents agree that certain actions or steps may have assisted or avoided delays either leading up to the Inquiry or at the Inquiry's hearings. Substantial delays to the Inquiry's public hearing sessions arose through Wollongong Council's refusal to exhibit Inquiry submissions, Council's late venue re-arrangements, subsequent venue availability problems and delays (two venues were required), deferment requests by Sutherland Council, late landowner changes to important proposals and requests for time needed to supply requested information by parties including Government Departments, landowners and Council. Action was taken to enable parties to participate at the Inquiry without fear of Court action (by the seeking and obtaining of undertakings).
All of these and other matters made for a difficult, sometimes emotional and complex Inquiry, and thankfully most parties exhibited helpful assistance.
Approximately 700 submissions were made to the Inquiry by 244 parties and around 7,000 submissions (mainly proforma letters made in response to the exhibited draft Local Environmental Plan) were also considered. In total over 25,000 pages of documents, (including background material), and over 50 consultant reports have been considered during this Inquiry. Nearly five weeks of public hearings, including three days of site inspections and three Round Table Sessions were undertaken between 5th July and 15th November 1994.
A number of studies specifically relating to the subject lands or issues have been conducted for or by Wollongong Council. Reference is made to these in the report, but specific reference is made to the 1990 Draft Helensburgh Plan, which is an Environmental Study and Strategy undertaken in preparation of a Local Environment Plan. This Draft Plan undertaken by Council, with input from a number of Government Departments, consultants, committees and other involved parties, includes detailed and thorough assessment of many of the previous studies and issues also raised at the Inquiry. The issues assessment, and the findings and recommendations of Council's Draft Helensburgh Plan are largely consistent with the issues assessment and findings and recommendations of this Inquiry.
It is noted that important information (eg Catchment Management Strategies and other information) were submitted late in the Inquiry public hearings, and that a number of other requests for information were not fully complied with or were partly satisfied. A number of initiatives are current or about to proceed. However, Council and a number of Government Departments considered that the Inquiry had been supplied with all relevant information.
In respect of the Terms of Reference for this Inquiry, the following brief outline of findings and recommendations is given. More complete information, findings and recommendations are to be found in relevant sections of this report. The overriding Term of Reference is:
"To assess the capability of land in the general vicinity of Helensburgh, as identified on the attached map, to sustain various landuse options without causing significant environmental degradation."
Previous and detailed studies indicate that there are extensive areas with environmental protection attributes, and smaller areas with identified urban and industrial development potential. However, the land capability is affected by highly erosive soils, moderate to steep slopes and very intensive rainfalls (amongst the highest in the state), leading to, a high erosion hazard for much of the soils of the region . Care is required in the management of not only the areas with urban or industrial development potential, but to the upper Hacking catchment and Royal National Park and areas identified as requiring conservation and protection. A range of controls and safeguards are essential if the quality of the environment is not to be despoiled by urban development .
There is some agreement with previous studies conducted by or for Council as to areas with urban development potential, but there is also some disagreement (numerous parties request Environmental Protection for all subject land). The greatest risk of erosion and sediment loss is during the construction stage when extreme caution is required and a staged rate or release is needed to minimise the area of land disturbed at any one time.
Given the potential for impacts on the downstream sensitive and significant areas, a conservative approach is suggested by many consultants, specialists and responsible authorities. Hence, land of less than 12% slope constitutes land favoured should any land be considered for urban rezoning, subject to the soil type. Land with a slope above 20% should not be developed.
In regard to soil type and site characteristics or limitations, it appears that "Csd" soil class is the limiting soil class, but due to the potential for impacts and the value and significance of downstream areas, the precautionary approach would mitigate against development on this soil type, at least until there is sufficient evidence that sediment and erosion can be controlled. Given the concerns and the poor urban development industry performance surveyed by the EPA, then current practice does not satisfy the high standards required.
Extensive vegetated areas have environmental protection attributes and should be conserved. These are the eastern, northern and southern peripheral areas which are generally not suitable for urban landuse due to steeper slopes, related moderate to high erosion hazard, and/or the need to conserve or protect the natural vegetation and soils of these areas. These areas should be considered for Environmental Protection zoning.
Generally the flatter, cleared and previously disturbed or developed western most and south-western areas (being limited Gills Creek and Lady Carrington (south) lands), are assessed to have potential urban capability (subject to further studies, including existing catchment impacts, identification of necessary standards and determination of appropriate landuse controls). Performance of water quality controls is required to be proven and trialing would be necessary. Such trials are integral to previously mentioned studies. Should these studies and assessment not find that sensitive areas would be protected or water quality or impacts would not be improved for the catchment, then Environmental Protection zoning is recommended.
Basically previously disturbed and cleared areas of Gills Creek areas and a smaller cleared and filled area of Lady Carrington Estate have potential for urban capability, but further studies are required to more accurately define such areas as well as to define the necessary controls, limits (to development), or other requirements.
As to other subject lands, the concurrent studies as to catchment management standards, fauna habitat studies and potential impacts, success or otherwise of water quality control pond trial/s, then possible rezoning and development of selected area/s of Gills Creek and cleared areas of Lady Carrington Estate (south) lands, all precede consideration of Land Pooling land, Landcom land (the tip site) or Lady Carrington Estate land (also near the tip - the northern site). These latter subject lands have limited potential urban capability, but equally there is concern and uncertainty as to water quality, downstream impacts, flora, and fauna potential impacts and other matters. In total, there are greater potential impacts from urban development proposals or rezoning these other subject lands than for the Gills Creek and Lady Carrington Estate (south) cleared and disturbed areas identified as having potential urban capability.
As to the other terms of reference:
To make recommendations on appropriate landuses and zonings based on the assessment of capability taking into account:
1. water quality impacts on the Hacking River and whether or not urban development provides opportunities to improve water quality;
Existing urban and rural landuse and zonings are impacting the Hacking River to an unacceptable degree, based on the limited studies undertaken. The extent of impact and necessary controls requires further assessment on a catchment wide basis. Standards, objectives and other matters would then follow from such assessment (including landuse controls).
There is the potential for improvement in water quality with existing landuse or urban development, although the degree of improvement is uncertain. Predictions are limited by insufficient monitoring, inaccuracies or uncertainties (noting that Gills Creek predictions are based on some site monitored data). Experience with urban runoff controls elsewhere is doubtful or of limited use given site specific constraints. Urban runoff controls proposed with development are potentially the highest level of stormwater treatment in Australia but uncertainty remains as to location, long term viability, performance, maintenance and funding.
As well as further studies involving a catchment management approach, trialing of water quality ponds is required (subject to success or failure of such trial not being critical or affecting the area's values). Wollongong Council is currently undertaking detailed water quality pond studies and assessment in the sensitive West Dapto area, involving joint Federal, State, Council and land developers co-operation and funding.
There is uncertainty whether other landuses for disturbed and cleared land are more appropriate in respect of water quality in the short and long term. Environmental Protection zoning is claimed to be similar to existing landuses and hence may simply continue the existing unacceptable downstream impacts and degradation for disturbed and cleared land. There is limited opportunity for other landuses to improve current unacceptable impacts (without considerable funding and actions, which have not been detailed or proven to the Inquiry).
Environmental Protection zoning is proposed for extensive vegetated, steeper or sensitive land and is the most appropriate zoning as to controlling water impacts. Fringe areas or partially cleared or disturbed land require further detailed study.
Council, the NPWS, the EPA and a number of other parties agree that protection of the sensitive National Park and Hacking River is of paramount importance; that experimentation or risks should not be allowed for such an important and sensitive area. A catchment based approach is suggested by the EPA in that a recommended strategy is required (including urban development) in view of setting appropriate environmental objectives (including water quality). This is supported by involved Government Departments, and the Hacking River Catchment Management Committee. This includes further study and assessment of existing pollution sources and impacts, development of a strategy and standards and then consideration of landuse and controls to meet these aims.
2. potential environmental impacts from alternative landuses on the Royal National Park;
Existing developments have reduced the Royal National Park's conservation and recreation values and placed a financial burden on the NPWS, who do not support additional development which further diminishes these values.
There are potential environmental impacts from alternative landuses (mainly being urban or rural landuse) on the Royal National Park which include, loss of fauna habitat, a reduced wildlife corridor (and arguably reduced wildlife use or increased predation), increased domestic animal predation into the National Park, increased weed invasion, and increased nutrient/algal problems in National Park waters.
With urban development there is the potential for loss of habitat which supports wildlife in the nearby National Park or Recreation reserve areas especially during certain seasons or circumstances (including bushfires). The preservation of as many trees as possible is a recognised goal to preserve habitat with landowners arguing that there will be little or no impact to the habitat of significant species. However the surrounding areas, including the National Park, have high value habitat areas, which are potentially susceptible to impacts of upstream areas.
There is potential with urban zoning to secure and allow management of a substantial area of Lady Carrington Estate (LCE), which includes high value habitat land and wildlife corridor vital to the National Park's fauna. The existing landuse and zoning does not ensure appropriate protection and management of this land. Other landuses have had limited assessment, but Environmental Protection zoning is claimed to be similar to the existing landuse in terms of National Park impacts and degree of controls.
Preservtion and conservation of as much natural vegetation and habitat areas as possible, as well as certainty with water quality controls proposed with developments including urban landuse, and thorough understanding of other existing and potential impacts is required to ensure the National Park's conservation and recreational values are protected both in the short and long term. Decisions should not be made which may have long term consequences or impacts, which may then be difficult or impossible to reverse.
Further studies are required before an assessment of potential impacts can be made. Such further studies include the:
· wildlife corridor potential impacts as to habitat loss,
· existing ridge fauna habitat and potential impact of its loss or partial clearing,
· impacts to rare and endangered species, particularly the Sooty Owl,
· sources and control of other impacts.
3. "the conservation value of the land including flora, fauna and places of Aboriginal and early European heritage;"
A significant number of rare and endangered flora or flora communities of conservation significance are located on subject land, but are generally not in areas proposed for urban development (further study is required for Lady Carrington Estate (south) as to two significant species which may regenerate following recent fires).
Certain areas have high conservation significance and are identified or capable of being protected with urban landuse proposals. Other naturally vegetated areas have limited conservation value, in that no rare or uncommon flora of habitat are likely to be substantially impacted, but involved flora/fauna parties and I accept the NPWS position for retention of as much natural vegetated areas as possible. Loss or modification of these vegetated areas raise the risk or threat of impacts to nearby significant flora, habitat for fauna and wildlife corridor viability. Each of these are highly important issues and further study is required as to potential impacts or threats.
Certain areas are cleared and disturbed (73ha in Gills Creek area and 13 ha for Lady Carrington Estate) and have little or no conservation value in their present state. Revegetation of cleared areas may be possible but unlikely under any of the potential landuse or zonings considered without significant funding (which has not been identified) or without discontinuation of any landuse (which may not be appropriate management of this land). An area on Lady Carrington Estate is filled with railway ballast and other material and it is unlikely to be revegetated or rehabilitated without significant funding or management.
The eastern valley and slopes of the Lady Carrington Estate (south) subject lands have high conservation, habitat and wildlife corridor value and parties generally agree that these areas should be under the control of the NPWS and/or under their management (rather than the current unmanaged and unprotected situation). Two rare species may regenerate after recent fires and further study is required as they are in the area proposed or affected by urban development (location is uncertain).
The Lady Carrington Estate (northern site), Land Pooling and Landcom sites are all generally naturally vegetated. The Land Pooling site has disturbed areas around tracks, and no species of conservation significance are identified, except communities along the central stream, which are proposed for conservation with any urban development. Closed forest communities on the Lady Carrington Estate (north) site have national significance , and are intended for conservation with any urban rezoning (being downstream of proposed development areas).
Similarly closed forest communities on the Landcom site have regional and state significance, and are intended for conservation with any urban rezoning. One uncommon species (Eucalyptus scias, subs callistmastha) is located in the area proposed for urban development but loss of several specimens would not threaten the species according to the flora consultant.
There is uncertainty as to flora community's fauna habitat and wildlife corridor values of areas on or near the Lady Carrington Estate (north and south sites), and further studies are required.
Rare or endangered fauna or their habitat have not been identified as being on the subject lands, however further study is required as to general loss of habitat near high value conservation areas and potential impacts. Eastern areas particularly of the Lady Carrington Estate subject lands have high conservation value and are to be conserved. Adjacent areas have potential significance in being part of or buffering an important wildlife corridor to the Royal National Park.
There is a difference of professional opinion as to conservation value of ridge vegetation on the Lady Carrington Estate (south) land, and the likely impacts or potential changes that could result to its conservation value with development, (even with tree retention strategies) and to what cumulative or long term effects may result to fauna, fauna habitat and fauna of conservation significance. The risk or threat to a number of rare and endangered fauna, such as the Sooty Owl (which is claimed to be one of the rarest birds in Australia), indicates that considerable care is required. Accordingly, there is insufficient information to make conclusive recommendations on the value of the ridgetop fauna habitat and fauna value, and further detailed studies are required to assess this. Given the sensitivity of the area and the above claimed threats to rare fauna, a Fauna Impact Statement, including consideration of selected rare and endangered species recovery plan/s may be appropriate, noting that this would normally be required at Development Application stage.
While a number of archaeological and heritage items occur in the Helensburgh area, none are located on the lands under investigation for urban expansion. The only currently identified archaeological constraint to development within the study area is site 9, which is located within an area which would be inundated if a major stormwater control structure for Gills Creek Catchment was constructed. The subject proposed water control structure can be relocated to avoid such impact and further study is considered appropriate with any development application.
4. economic costs and benefits of alternative landuses, including the financial costs to Wollongong City Council and the State Government with respect to the provisions and maintenance of public utilities and community services relating to:
(a) the lands specified on the attached map; and
(b) Helensburgh urban area;
(a) the lands specified on the attached map:
In summary, on the basis of user pays which is now widespread in both State and Local Government, there are limited costs to State and Local Government. However with urban development proposal, there are a number of likely additional costs to State Government and possibly to Local Government where infrastructure (such as electricity or community services) do not recover full costs. These costs are relatively small based on the evidence to the Inquiry. There are equally a number of benefits with urban development, mostly to the local Helensburgh community, as well as to Council in that certain infrastructure, community facilities and, not the least, the potential to clean up and control certain urban runoff. Council's Draft Plan (Environmental Study-Strategy) came to this conclusion after detailed assessment and liaison with Government agencies (including 30 service providers), consultants and the community (involving at least one survey).
There are similar (or possibly lesser) costs to Council and State Government with existing zoning or Environmental Protection zoning as there are with urban development proposals based on identified service needs, and potential water and sewerage amplification for infill type development of existing Helensburgh.
Most service providers supply infrastructure on a needs basis (subject to adequate lead times and planning/funding programmes of up to five years). Water and sewerage may require significant additional infrastructure (at developer cost), but this would be required in any case due to urban consolidation aims for Helensburgh (up to 40% population increase). Water and sewerage and other infrastructure requirements or funding would not detract from other areas, as provision has been made to accommodate such potential development. Community facilities could be improved if additional development around Helensburgh proceeds, again through developer contributions. In particular some parties consider that an increased population is desirable to justify such community facilities, including a potential high school and major retail store. The school or shop provision would normally be determined after a threshold population is reached and there is no certainty or assurance that development will enable such facilities to be provided.
Relevant sections of Council's Draft Helensburgh Plan should be updated, to assist in determination of Section 94 developer contributions, for both any development of the subject areas as well as development of urban infill areas with existing Helensburgh (after other studies and assessment).
(b) Helensburgh urban area:
There is limited information submitted on cost and benefits for existing Helensburgh. The Draft Helensburgh Plan is again referred to as it notes that studies have revealed the need for certain services and community facilities. Wollongong Council have not indicated how such facilities and services are to be provided, and presumably without certain initiatives, these would be implemented in competition with other of Council's identified needs for this community at Council (and certain Government) cost.
The Water Board states that the existing water supply cannot support a 40% increase in the existing population of Helensburgh (by urban infill - dual occupancies, etc). The system is operating near capacity and any significant development in Helensburgh will require augmentation of the system.
Any significant development in Helensburgh requires additional infrastructure. This includes re-zoning of subject areas to urban or Council's proposed 40% increase in existing Helensburgh by urban consolidation. In particular, water and sewerage infrastructure will require upgrading unless minimal (100 lots or so) development is intended for existing Helensburgh. This can be accommodated, at developer cost and without detriment or reallocation of funds or priorities to other development areas in Sydney, according to the Water Board.
The major trade-offs proposed by Lady Carrington Estate include, dedication of substantial lands to the National Parks and Wildlife Service at no cost (thus conserving significant habitat and important wildlife corridor), options involving land and/or construction of stormwater controls serving existing Helensburgh and offers to cease polluting activities on lands outside the terms of reference (eg Otford Valley Farm).
The evidence to the Inquiry, whilst limited with respect to trade-offs indicates that there are benefits or potential benefits (unquantified) with a number of trade-offs. However the overriding consideration is the protection of the National Park and Hacking River from unacceptable impacts. Nevertheless Council's Draft Helensburgh Plan notes that the involvement of the State Government or its Departments is required for such trade-off negotiations. Subject to the further studies and assessments required, and subject to urban capability being found for Lady Carrington Estate land, it would appear that negotiations could be explored similar to and concurrent with other arrangements or negotiations for infrastructure provision, staging, etc.
The benefit of land transfer to the NPWS is not disputed however and irrespective of monetary valuations (the landowner claims a $3-10 million valuation for the transfer land), the NPWS considers the benefits in obtaining such land as invaluable.
5. the role of Helensburgh in providing housing and employment opportunities for Southern Sydney and the Illawarra;
The town's geographical location makes it a convenient location to take extra housing. It is well situated between the centres of Wollongong and Sydney, with good rail and road links. It has a desirable location near coastal recreational areas and the National Park, yet it retains a rural town character with regard to the isolation of the township, and pursuits such as horseriding and bushwalking.
Helensburgh's role in the provision of housing is not significant in terms of Sydney's growth or Wollongong's growth, however, further residential development in the town would have some benefit in relieving pressure on housing in these areas. There are also additional local or locational benefits. Environmental protection, efficient use of infrastructure/services and other matters are interrelated to housing provision.
Overall it appears that Helensburgh's role in providing employment is currently fairly small, and would increase to some extent if some development was permitted. However, with the current high use of the car, Helensburgh would be likely to remain more of a dormitory town, that is, the situation where most residents commute to either Wollongong or Sydney for employment and some business or shopping trips, would be expected to continue. Industrial zonings within the Gills Creek subject lands has the greatest potential for longer term local employment. However the Gills Creek landowners proposal is unclear as to industrial landuse and appears to favour greater residential landuse.
6. the implications for the character of Helensburgh; and
Submissions to the Inquiry span the range of community feeling, from "increasing development enables better shops, facilities and infrastructure", to increasing development means greater traffic, bushland loss or pollution". Similar development has occurred and is proposed with infill development of existing Helensburgh (40% increase in population) and arguably the resulting impact is not and has not been substantial. However, the diverse, yet village character of Helensburgh has been changing in recent times and with urban development of subject lands there would be an impact on the character of Helensburgh according to certain submissions. Certain submissions disagree. Other terms of reference especially water quality and impacts on the National Park are related and if it is found that there will be impacts on the National Park, then this would affect the character of Helensburgh including its bushland setting.
Village atmosphere would be lost to some degree. It would also be lost with 40% population increase (with infill development but possibly to a lesser degree).
7. bushfire risks.
The subject areas of land have (or are located in areas of) moderate to high bushfire hazard. The exceptions are cleared areas especially in the Gills Creek area and a smaller cleared area in Lady Carrington Estate which have low to moderate fire hazard status. Concerns exist that the slope, vegetation and aspect of subject areas (virtually on the edges of the plateau except Gills Creek land) lead to a high bushfire hazard for most subject lands (except the above cleared Gills Creek and Lady Carrington Estate lands. Bushfire hazard reduction has potential impacts such as fauna habitat and flora loss as well as erosion, sedimentation, and funding-practicality concerns. Consultants for landowners argue that urban development would reduce the high hazard ranking (due to loss of vegetation).
After assessing bushfire hazard potential, Council's Draft Helensburgh Plan also considers that there are no major bushfire constraints except for the ridge areas of Lady Carrington Estate which would need to comply with bush fire standards. The proposal presented is designed to comply. In this and other areas, bushfire hazard reduction zones, minimum lot depths for various slopes and aspects of certain urban development would require certain measures. I refer to fuel reduction and impacts on flora or habitat under the flora and fauna sections of this report. However there is some question as to fuel reduction practicability and funding especially in the long term. Both these aspects require more detailed examination, and the Department of Bushfire Services would appear to prefer Menai type development with peripheral roads, setbacks and acceptable building design. The incorporation of fuel reduction zones in private lands as proposed by Council's Draft Helensburgh Plan, may be more cost effective, but has long term policing and effectiveness problems, highlighted by the Como example raised by the Department of Bushfire Services.
Council's submission to the Inquiry suggests that proposed residential development along ridgelines causes particular risks in the area along Undola and Lilyvale Road ridges, and that if adequate bushfire protection is to be achieved in the Lady Carrington Estates proposal, it may be at the expense of downslope vegetation which Council suggests includes the good quality forests in the gullies. Council also comments that the retention of tree canopies throughout the development conflicts with bushfire hazard reduction requirements although it is noted that the Draft Helensburgh Plan suggests a balance between satisfying bushfire hazard reduction and maximising quality tree cover should be an objective to be achieved in the event that state government decision allows development there to proceed.
Reference is made to the section of this report on conservation significance, which concludes that further study and assessment is required on loss or disturbance of LCE habitat (with development of bushfire hazard reduction) and the impacts or potential impacts. Reference is also made to the potential visual impact of bushfire hazard reduction measures which may require increased bushfire fuel reduction zone width to allow for the potential reduced screening effect when viewed from nearby vantage points.
Rezoning of all subject lands to Environmental Protection would not allow urban development to further approach bushland areas (noting that considerable areas of Gills Creek and a lesser area of Lady Carrington Estate are already cleared). Conservation groups argue that revegetation of these areas is possible. In this respect, certain controlled development would reduce fire hazard or exposure of some older areas of Helensburgh which have little or no buffers to bushland, have no peripheral fire tracks or escape routes and have other risk problems such as slope, vegetation or construction material problems according to the Department of Bushfire Services.
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that there be no change in the current Local Environment Plan or current zonings until further studies are undertaken primarily aimed at identifying existing and potential impacts from various landuses, then setting of appropriate environmental objectives, followed by identification of a cost-effective strategic catchment management plan to control existing catchment pollution sources and identify landuse controls capable of meeting these objectives.
It is recommended that studies be conducted in an independent fashion involving:
· set-up, overview, supervision and final assessment plus funding allocation of further studies by the Hacking River Catchment Management Committee (and particularly a nominated sub-committee),
· final considerations (re catchment management approach, strategies, standards, controls, and success of failure of water quality control trials or other studies) are to be by the future Catchment Assessment Commission (or the above-mentioned Hacking River Catchment Management Committee Sub Committee in the interim), with recommendations to Council for action.
Given the regional, state and national issues or potential impacts then dependent on the outcomes of further studies and subject to any Catchment Management Strategies or Catchment Assessment Commission recommendations (regarding landuse controls) then Council and the State Government will need to liaise (and perhaps negotiate with certain landowners) to achieve the environmental protection and landuse or control appropriate to this area's current and future values or objectives.
Arrangements for setting up and funding such studies should be similar to as occurred at West Dapto with joint Council, Government and developer co-operation. Some studies are specific to certain land and these studies will involve funding by that landowner. Other studies are catchment based and therefore involve joint Council, Government and landowner joint funding.
Studies include:
· immediate or short term studies as well as long term studies,
· existing water quality, water quality impacts and environmental impacts,
· cumulative impacts,
· flora and fauna habitat loss impacts,
· testing and proving water quality pond/wetland proposals.
· rare and endangered fauna impacts (or a Fauna Impact Statement) particularly assessing potential impacts on the Sooty Owl, [by LCE and Landcom],
· wildlife corridor impacts from various landuses and buffer areas (especially urban development and bushfire hazard reduction areas), [by LCE],
It is noted that Council's Draft Helensburgh Plan concluded that the Gills Creek area has urban landuse capability subject to appropriate environmental controls (including water quality control ponds), but that urban development in Camp Creek could not proceed until there is an identified and acceptable pond location serving existing developed areas in Helensburgh. The evidence to this Inquiry leads to the same conclusion, based on the objective of treating runoff from existing and new development.
The above listed studies relate generally to all lands but in respect of water quality control, trials are warranted in the Gills Creek area, and concurrently or following such trials, then in Camp Creek depending on other factors such as locational constraints and the objective of treating existing uncontrolled runoff from upstream developed areas and improvement in overall water quality and impacts.
In total however, given the current concerns and numbers of overlapping constraints which may or may not be satisfied with substantial and detailed further studies, and given the limited urban capability, lot yields and consequent viability uncertainty, it would appear that Gills Creek has reasonable capability (re urban development and controls and resulting environmental improvement), LCE (cleared and filled area) a lower capability (subject to further detailed studies and rigorous assessment), that vegetated areas of Gills Creek have the next lowest capability, that Land Pooling has a lower capability again (catchment improvements are unlikely) and that catchment improvements are also unlikely with the Landcom (northern site) or with the LCE (northern site) (ranked last) unless one or both sites can be linked with landfill rehabilitation works which can demonstrate overall improvement for the catchment or sensitive downstream waters (again requiring detailed studies, and perhaps delay until the landfill closure is imminent). The vegetated ridge areas of LCE (south) would sit around second last in overall urban capability based on the large numbers of concerns and studies required.
It is regrettable, but appropriate that other actions and lands have higher priority or earlier trialing or staging. This is the nature of planning and especially where irreversible environmental impacts are possible, the precautionary principle dictates such an approach.
Other smaller and separate Landcom subject land (two sites) and Lady Carrington Estate land (near the landfill but south of Landcom's major land proposal) have identified environmental attributes and should be considered for Environmental Protection zoning, based on the limited information provided to the Inquiry on these areas. It is noted that Council previously proposed that the larger of the two Landcom sites be rezoned to 7(c) Environmental Protection (Residential). Landcom have not indicated whether this is acceptable or not.
Accordingly zoning should not change at this time, but remain unchanged which requires appropriate landuse controls to be fully assessed prior to final landuse extent, density or options being determined, to provide protection of sensitive areas, as is the intent of much of the current zoning.
Subject to these further trials, studies, Catchment Management Committee considerations and conclusions (re landuse controls, study findings and assessment), then I recommend that Council amend and determine the Draft Local Environmental Plan for submissions to the Minister pursuant to Section 68 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act in accordance with the comments, findings and recommendations outlined in this report.'
[19/270-275]
739 The report is organised into two primary sections.
740 The first section provides relevant background to and detail of the Inquiry. Here, the Commissioner sets out the terms of reference and the time frame for the Inquiry; the history of Helensburgh, the Royal National Park and the Hacking River; a summary of events leading to the Inquiry; previous reports undertaken in the area; the planning background of the lands subject to the Inquiry and a summary of submissions received both by the Inquiry and in response the earlier exhibition of the 1992 Draft LEP (which were treated as background documents to the Inquiry).
741 The second section is entitled the 'Commissioner's Comments and Findings'. The Commissioner first sets out the relevant provisions of planning instruments, policies and other matters. He then examines the following in detail: land capability; water quality; potential environmental impacts from alternative landuses on the Royal National Park; the conservation value of the land; economic costs and benefits of alternative landuses; the socio-economic role of Helensburgh; impact of development on the character of Helensburgh; and bushfire risk of the lands subject to the Inquiry.
742 At page 41 of the report, the Commissioner noted that 243 parties were involved in the Inquiry, including:
· Wollongong and Sutherland Councils;
· Government Departments and Agencies