The Plan is organised around a small set of recurring legal and planning workstreams that practitioners must map to a proposal: zoning, permitted use, development consent regime, mapped development standards, environmental and heritage overlay protections, and procedural requirements for certain risk areas.

Zoning and land‑use matrices: The Plan adopts a standard zone‑based framework (cl 2.1-2.3). Each zone has stated objectives and a Land Use Table that specifies uses permitted without consent, uses permitted with consent and prohibited uses. The Land Use Table is authoritative for permissible activity on a parcel (cl 2.3(1)-(2)).

Maps and site identification: The Plan relies heavily on named maps for application of controls (cl 1.7). The Land Application Map identifies the land to which the Plan applies (cl 1.3). Specific constraints or exceptions (Lot Size Map, Height of Buildings Map, Floor Space Ratio Map, Foreshore Building Line Map, Riparian Lands and Waterways Map, Activity Hazard Risk Map, etc.) are applied via those maps (see cl 4.1, cl 4.3, cl 4.4, cl 6.4-6.6, cl 6.16).

Development consent and exemptions: The Plan distinguishes development that is exempt (Schedule 2) or complying development (Schedule 3 / SEPP Codes) from development requiring consent (Part 3, cl 3.1-3.2). It also specifies that environmentally sensitive areas are excluded from exempt or complying pathways (cl 3.3).

Quantitative development standards: Principal, mapped controls include minimum subdivision lot sizes and lot configuration rules (cl 4.1, 4.1A, 4.1B), building height limits tied to the Height of Buildings Map (cl 4.3), and floor space ratio caps and exceptions set by the Floor Space Ratio Map and clauses 4.4-4.5. The Plan also prescribes calculation rules for FSR and site area to prevent “double dipping” and to exclude particular land from site area calculations (cl 4.5).

Flexibility and exceptions: The Plan contains an exceptions mechanism allowing consent to depart from development standards where the applicant demonstrates environmental planning grounds (cl 4.6). The clause implements the established LEP flexibility model: the consent authority must be satisfied the applicant has shown compliance with the “unreasonable or unnecessary” test and must record its assessment (cl 4.6(3)-(4)). The clause also lists standards that cannot be varied under it (cl 4.6(8)).

Environment, heritage and hazard overlays: The Plan layers a range of local provisions dealing with heritage conservation and archaeological sites (cl 5.10; Schedule 5), acid sulfate soils (cl 6.1), earthworks and stormwater management (cl 6.2-6.3), public bushland protections (cl 5.23), foreshore and coastal hazard rules (cl 6.4), flood planning and special flood considerations including guidance referenced for climate change (cl 5.21-5.22), riparian land (cl 6.5), and foreshore scenic protection areas with additional lot rules for dual occupancies (cl 6.6; cl 4.1A and 4.1B). These overlay clauses specify mandatory information requirements, design constraints and tests the consent authority must apply.

Local economic and social controls: The Plan contains measures that shape the mix of uses in centres and mixed‑use zones. Notably, non‑residential FSR floorspace minima apply in local centre and mixed‑use areas to ensure a minimum non‑residential quantum (cl 4.4B(3)-(5)). Clause 6.13 further prevents ground floor street frontages in E1, E2 and MU1 being used for residential or tourist accommodation in defined areas, and imposes a 500 m2 ground floor limit on larger ground‑floor areas unless 500 m2 is non‑residential (cl 6.13(3)-(5)). Clause 5.20 prohibits refusal of consent on a set of grounds relating to playing and performing music at licensed premises, unless noise cannot be managed to an acceptable level (cl 5.20).

Site‑specific exceptions and incentives: Schedule 1 lists additional permitted uses for particular lots (Schedule 1). Clause 6.17 and 6.18 create bespoke controls for specific sites in Hurstville with explicit FSR and use breakdowns, public open space and sunlight performance requirements (cl 6.17; cl 6.18).

Decision‑makers and consultation: The consent authority is the Council (cl 1.6), but the Plan requires statutory consultation in particular circumstances: Heritage Council notification for some archaeological matters (cl 5.10(7)), notification of local Aboriginal communities for Aboriginal heritage (cl 5.10(8)), consultation with the Planning Secretary about development in high pressure gas pipeline risk areas (cl 6.16(3)-(4)), and consultation with relevant Commonwealth bodies in relation to airspace operations (cl 6.7(2)). The Plan also recognises the primacy of certain State environmental planning policies (cl 1.9).

Interplay with covenants and private instruments: Clause 1.9A suspends private agreements and covenants to the extent necessary to enable development in accordance with the Plan, with an explicit list of exceptions for a range of conservation instruments and instruments imposing requirements on the Council. The clause was approved by the Governor under section 3.16 of the Act (cl 1.9A(4)).

Together these elements make the Plan a map‑driven, locally administered instrument that balances mapped development entitlements with overlay constraints and procedural requirements intended to direct the mix and form of development in Georges River.

Primary decision‑maker: The Council is the consent authority for the Plan (cl 1.6). That places local elected or delegated Council officers (and consultants acting for them) at the centre of zoning decisions, consent assessments and imposition of conditions under the Plan.

Landowners and developers: Every owner or prospective purchaser of land within the Plan area is affected because the Plan defines permitted uses, development standards (lot size, height, FSR), and overlays that constrain redevelopment rights (cl 2.2; cl 4.1-4.5). Site‑specific permissions in Schedule 1 (for example certain additional permitted uses at defined lots) affect the portfolio value and highest and best use of individual holdings (Schedule 1).

Applicants with pending development applications: Clause 1.8A specifies that development applications made before commencement and not finally determined must be determined as if the Plan had not commenced. That preserves the applicable rights for such applicants but creates a timing risk for those intending to rely on the new Plan (cl 1.8A).

Private covenant holders and landowners bound by agreements: Clause 1.9A suspends covenants, agreements and similar instruments to the extent necessary to permit development under the Plan, except for an enumerated list of instruments (cl 1.9A(1)-(2), (3)). The clause therefore directly affects parties who rely on private land covenants as ongoing restrictions: some private restrictions will be overridden where inconsistent with the Plan, but a set of public and conservation instruments are preserved.

Heritage and Aboriginal stakeholders: The Plan lists heritage items and conservation areas in Schedule 5 and requires consent for works affecting listed items and Aboriginal heritage (cl 5.10(2)). It requires the consent authority to seek Heritage Council responses for archaeological sites and to notify Aboriginal communities for Aboriginal places of heritage significance (cl 5.10(7)-(8)). Heritage owners, local Aboriginal communities and heritage consultants will be engaged in assessment processes.

Licence holders such as licensed premises: Clause 5.20 expressly limits the grounds on which consent may be refused in relation to licensed premises with respect to music, dancing and related features (cl 5.20(1)-(2)), affecting entertainers, hospitality operators and venue owners.

Infrastructure and State agencies: The Plan identifies relevant State acquisition authorities for certain land types (cl 5.1). It preserves rights for public authorities to carry out development permitted under State SEPPs (cl 5.12), and requires consultation with Commonwealth airspace bodies for development that might penetrate airport obstacle surfaces (cl 6.7). State agencies and utilities are therefore participants in the process for particular classes of development.

Environmental and community groups: Provisions for public bushland protection (cl 5.23), riparian land (cl 6.5), foreshore scenic protection (cl 6.6), and flood/coastal hazard management (cl 5.21-5.22) implicate community groups, environmental NGOs and local recreational users, who may both challenge proposals at consultation stages and be consultees for management plans or mitigation strategies required by consent.

Consultants and specialists: Multiple clauses require technical reports or management plans: acid sulfate soils management plans (cl 6.1(3)), heritage management documents and heritage conservation management plans where the consent authority requires them (cl 5.10(5)-(6)), stormwater measures consistent with the Georges River Stormwater Management Policy (cl 6.3(2)(b)), flood risk considerations consistent with the Considering Flooding guideline and the NSW Flood Risk Management Manual (cl 5.21(4)-(5); cl 5.22(4)-(5)). This creates demand for environmental consultants, heritage consultants, hydrologists, acousticians (aircraft noise clause 6.8) and planning consultants.

Owners of certain existing uses: For some site‑specific approvals in Schedule 1 owners gain rights (for example registered club uses at particular sites, Schedule 1 items 1-2). Conversely, owners of land that might have previously been permissible uses under older LEPs must reassess under the new Land Use Table; the Plan repealed prior LEPs applying solely to the land (cl 1.8).

Financial implications: Developers and owners bear the cost of producing required technical documents, meeting design excellence and sustainability expectations (cl 6.10-6.11), providing public open space and civic plaza conditions where applicable (cl 6.18), and satisfying non‑residential FSR minima in centres (cl 4.4B). The Plan permits conditions such as covenants to prevent “double dipping” of FSR between lots (cl 4.5(9)-(10)), which can affect site consolidation strategies and the distribution of development value between lots.

In short, the Plan alters the bundle of development rights and administrative steps for a wide range of actors: Council and State bodies, landowners and developers, heritage and environmental stakeholders, licenced operators, consultants, and private covenant parties. Each will face new or clarified substantive controls, map‑driven constraints, and defined procedural inputs that must be satisfied before development proceeds.

Consent authority duties and discretions: The Council is explicitly the consent authority (cl 1.6). The Plan repeatedly requires the consent authority to have regard to zone objectives (cl 2.3(2)), to be satisfied of specified matters before granting consent (for example acid sulfate soil management plans (cl 6.1(3)); compliance with site location and operational requirements for aquaculture (cl 5.19(2)); flood‑compatibility tests (cl 5.21(2)); riparian protection outcomes (cl 6.5(4))). The consent authority must keep a record of assessments where development contravenes a development standard and is approved under the exceptions clause (cl 4.6(4)).

Applicant duties to supply information: Applicants are required to provide particular documents to secure consent in many circumstances: acid sulfate soils management plans if works fall in identified classes (cl 6.1(3)-(4)); heritage management documents or heritage conservation management plans where required (cl 5.10(5)-(6)); compliance with the Building Code of Australia for exempt and complying development (cl 3.1(3)(a), cl 3.2(3)(b)); information to the Planning Secretary for pipeline risk areas (cl 6.16(4)(a)-(b)); technical evidence that noise from music can be managed to an acceptable level when considering licensed premises (cl 5.20(2)). Clause 4.6 specifically notes the Regulations require an applicant to provide a written justification document for any proposed contravention of a development standard.

Rights to development where permitted: The Land Use Table and Schedule 1 create positive rights to carry out development where uses are permitted without consent, subject to other statutory obligations (cl 2.3(1)(b)). Where the Plan allows development without consent (permitted without consent items or exempt development under Part 3), that does not remove other statutory approvals that may be required under separate Acts (cl 3.1(5) note).

Covenant and private instrument suspension: Clause 1.9A grants a limited right to carry out development notwithstanding some private covenants and agreements, “to the extent necessary” to enable development under the Plan (cl 1.9A(1)). The clause preserves specified public and conservation instruments in a detailed exclusion list (cl 1.9A(2)), and preserves public authority rights under registered instruments (cl 1.9A(3)). The Governor approved the clause under the Act (cl 1.9A(4)).

Standards that cannot be used to refuse consent: Clause 5.20 creates a narrow right for licensed premises applicants insofar as the consent authority is prohibited from refusing consent on certain grounds related to music, performance, dancing and stage orientation unless noise cannot be managed to an acceptable level (cl 5.20(1)-(2)). Practitioners should read that as a constraint on typical amenity grounds being used against licensed venues.

Heritage protection duties: The Plan makes demolition, alteration and excavation affecting listed heritage items or Aboriginal places conditional on consent (cl 5.10(2)). The consent authority must consider heritage significance before granting consent (cl 5.10(4)) and may require heritage management or conservation management plans (cl 5.10(5)-(6)). For archaeological sites not on the State Heritage Register the consent authority must notify the Heritage Council and consider any response (cl 5.10(7)).

Flood and coastal duties: The consent authority must not grant consent to development in the flood planning area unless it is satisfied the development is compatible with flood function and will not adversely affect flood behaviour or safe evacuation (cl 5.21(2)). Special flood considerations apply to land between flood planning area and probable maximum flood for sensitive and hazardous uses (cl 5.22).

Design excellence and sustainability duties: The consent authority must be satisfied that development exhibits design excellence where clause 6.10 applies (largely for taller buildings and foreshore land) and must ensure adequate consideration of environmental sustainability for larger buildings (cl 6.11(3)). The Plan lists matters the consent authority must have regard to when assessing design excellence (cl 6.10(5)).

Developer liabilities and conditions: The Plan contemplates that the consent authority may impose conditions including covenants to prevent creation of floor area on particular lots to manage FSR allocation (cl 4.5(9)-(10)). Conditions can mandate conservation works where the consent authority grants consent to otherwise prohibited development for conservation purposes (cl 5.10(10)).

Procedural duties to third parties: The Plan imposes notification duties in specified contexts (Heritage Council, Aboriginal communities) and requires the consent authority to consult external bodies in some risk contexts (Planning Secretary for pipeline areas (cl 6.16(3)-(4)); relevant Commonwealth body for airspace matters (cl 6.7(2))). Those duties create timeframes and referral obligations in the assessment process.

Right to exemption or complying pathways: The Plan identifies exempt and complying development mechanisms (Part 3). Exempt development requires compliance with the Building Code of Australia and other stated criteria (cl 3.1(2)-(5)). The actual State SEPPs (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) also operate across the Plan (cl 3.1 note, cl 3.2 note).

Records and transparency duties: The consent authority must record assessments of departures from development standards (cl 4.6(4)). Maps adopted by the Plan are to be kept and made publicly available in accordance with arrangements approved by the Minister (cl 1.7(3)-(4)), supporting transparency about applicable controls.

In sum, the Plan sets out a matrix of duties (applicants must provide technical documents and satisfy overlay tests; consent authority must apply zone objectives and particular satisfactions; referral and notification duties apply in specified contexts) and rights (mapped permitted uses, suspension of some covenants, exemptions for certain low‑impact development, and an exceptions mechanism for standards where environmental planning grounds exist).

The Plan itself sets the framework of permissions, prohibitions and requirements but does not, within its text, specify monetary penalties or an enforcement tariff. It repeatedly frames authorisation and prohibition in terms of the need for development consent and defers to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (“the Act”) for the statutory consent regime and related enforcement mechanisms (see pervasive references to “the Act” across the instrument, cf. cl 1.6; cl 2.7; cl 3.1 and many others). Therefore the Plan’s enforcement consequences for non‑compliance are to be found in the Act and the regulations made under it, rather than within the LEP’s text.

What the Plan makes enforceable and the pathways for enforcement

• Mandatory consent triggers. The Plan repeatedly designates that particular activities may be carried out “only with development consent” (for example demolition (cl 2.7), subdivision (cl 2.6), works on mapped acid sulfate soils (cl 6.1(2)) and works below mean high water mark (cl 5.7(2))). Carrying out those activities without the requisite consent would fall outside the Plan’s permissions; enforcement consequences (injunctions, penalty notices, orders to remediate, orders under the Act) therefore arise under the Act’s enforcement machinery rather than the LEP.
• Conditions and covenants. The Plan contemplates conditions of consent including registration of covenants to prevent “double dipping” of floor area between lots (cl 4.5(9)-(10)). Non‑compliance with conditions of consent typically exposes applicants/owners to enforcement under the Act and can lead to orders or prosecution under relevant provisions of the Act and regulations; the Plan itself does not set penalty quantum.
• Record‑keeping and assessment obligations on the consent authority. The Plan requires the consent authority to keep a record of its assessment where development contravenes a development standard and consent is nonetheless granted (cl 4.6(4)). This is a procedural duty whose breach could evidence administrative error or be material to judicial review claims, but the Plan does not set pecuniary penalties for such procedural failures.
• Referral and notification processes. The Plan mandates referrals (e.g. to the Heritage Council (cl 5.10(7)), the Planning Secretary (cl 6.16(3)-(4)) and relevant Commonwealth bodies for airspace (cl 6.7(2))). Failure to follow required referral steps may affect the lawfulness of a consent decision, potentially exposing the council decision to challenge in the Land and Environment Court under the Act.
• Exempt/compliant development safeguards. The Plan excludes environmentally sensitive areas from exempt or complying development pathways (cl 3.3). Where an applicant improperly relies on an exemption or complying certificate to avoid consent, enforcement again follows the Act and the SEPP regime.

Practical implication for practitioners

• To know the enforcement regime, practitioners must consult the Act and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 for offences, penalty notices and enforcement powers; the Plan has no standalone penalty schedules.
• The Plan identifies where consent is required and prescribes documentary and procedural pre‑conditions (e.g. management plans, consultation steps, minimum non‑residential FSR). Failure to produce or satisfy those conditions will typically make a proposal incapable of lawful approval; remedies and penalties for unlawful development will be applied under the Act.
• Administrative remedies arising from non‑compliance by the consent authority are procedural: the Plan requires records and particular assessments (cl 4.6(4); cl 4.5(9)). Such requirements create potential grounds for merits or judicial review if the council fails to perform them, but again the Plan does not itself prescribe financial sanctions against the council.

In short, the LEP defines the planning permission architecture and the conditions and obligations that govern lawful development. Enforcement, penalties and sanctions for non‑compliance are implemented through the Act and its regulations; the Plan creates the substantive triggers and process obligations that will be enforced under that broader statutory framework.

The Plan is written to operate within the established New South Wales planning system; it explicitly defers to and cross‑references numerous State instruments and other statutes.

Priority of State environmental planning policies and the Act

• State policies prevail where specified. Clause 1.9 confirms the Plan is subject to State environmental planning policy (SEPP) provisions that prevail over an LEP under section 3.28 of the Act. That requires practitioners to check the interplay between this LEP and applicable SEPPs before relying on a local permission (cl 1.9(1)).
• The Plan repeatedly frames consent and procedural matters “subject to the Act” (cl 1.6 and elsewhere), signalling that the Act’s consent pathways, public notification rules, enforcement powers and appeal rights will apply.

Links to sectoral statutes and State regulatory instruments

• Heritage and Aboriginal matters: The Plan cross‑references the Heritage Act 1977 for State Heritage Register items and interim heritage orders, and requires notification to the Heritage Council for archaeological sites not on the State register (cl 3.1(3)(d); cl 5.10(7)-(9)). For Aboriginal objects and places it requires investigation and local Aboriginal community notification (cl 5.10(8)).
• Biodiversity and land services: Clause 1.9A excludes suspension of instruments such as biodiversity certification under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016, private land conservation agreements, property vegetation plans and conservation agreements preserved by transitional regulations (cl 1.9A(2)). Clause 5.23 cross‑references the Local Land Services Act 2013 for clearing authorisations (cl 5.23(6)).
• Fisheries and aquaculture: The Plan cross‑references the Fisheries Management Act 1994 and the Fisheries Management (Aquaculture) Regulation for aquaculture planning, and requires consistency with aquaculture industry development plans and the NSW Oyster Industry Sustainable Aquaculture Strategy (cl 5.19).
• Crown land and trust instruments: Clause 1.9A preserves relevant instruments within the meaning of section 13.4 of the Crown Land Management Act 2016 and other Crown land reservations (cl 1.9A(2)(d) and elsewhere). Clause 5.2 uses section 30(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 regarding discharge of trusts when classifying public land (cl 5.2 Note and cl 5.2(5)).
• Building code and BASIX: Exempt and complying development provisions require compliance with the Building Code of Australia and BASIX commitments are preserved (cl 3.1(3)(a); cl 4.6(8)(b)).
• Plumbing/sewerage/effluent: Complying development certificates must meet any approval required by the Local Government Act 1993 for on‑site effluent disposal on unsewered land (cl 3.2(3)(c)).
• Flood, coastal and climate guidance: The Plan requires assessment consistent with the Considering Flooding in Land Use Planning Guideline and the Flood Risk Management Manual (cl 5.21(4)-(5); cl 5.22(4)-(5)). Foreshore controls reference coastal management concepts in the Coastal Management Act 2016 (cl 3.3(2)(c) and cl 6.4).
• Transport and airspace: Development that may affect airport surfaces requires consultation with the relevant Commonwealth body (cl 6.7(2)-(3)), and some State SEPPs on Transport and Infrastructure are noted as relevant (Land Use Table notes).

Interaction with other planning instruments

• Repeal and savings: The Plan repeals prior local environmental plans that applied only to the Plan area (cl 1.8). It contains a savings provision for pending development applications (cl 1.8A) so that earlier statutory entitlements survive where applicable.
• Maps and State technical requirements: Clause 1.7 and related notes require the Plan’s maps to be kept and made available in accordance with Minister‑approved arrangements and the Department’s technical requirements for LEP maps; this ties Plan administration to State mapping standards and GIS requirements.
• SEPP Exempt and Complying Codes: Schedules 2 and 3 are placeholders and the Plan acknowledges the statewide SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) continues to govern the bulk of exempt and complying development (cl 3.1 note; cl 3.2 note).
• Referral pathways: For certain risk areas (high pressure gas pipeline, airspace), the Plan mandates specific external referrals (cl 6.16; cl 6.7). Those referrals create gatekeeping roles for State and Commonwealth bodies beyond the Council’s discretion.

Limits on overriding other instruments

• Clause 1.9A does provide a suspension mechanism for private covenants “to the extent necessary” to enable development under the Plan, but the clause expressly preserves a list of conservation instruments, trust agreements and interests of public authorities (cl 1.9A(2)-(3)). That defines the boundary between the Plan’s ability to change the legal effect of private instruments and the statutory protections given to conservation and public interest instruments.

In short, the Plan is an LEP operating within and often in reliance on other laws and State instruments. Practitioners must therefore map a proposed development against the Plan and the Act, relevant SEPPs and the other statutes specifically cross‑referenced by the Plan (Heritage Act, Biodiversity Act, Fisheries Act, Local Government Act, Coastal Management Act and the Building Code/BASIX rules) to understand the full legal matrix of obligations and referral steps.

The Plan text carried a number of internal amendment citations and insertions; those in‑text amendment notes identify the chronology of specified changes to particular clauses and Schedules. The Plan also identifies that it repealed earlier Hurstville and Kogarah LEPs that applied to parts of the Georges River area (cl 1.8). Key amendment signposts in the Plan itself include:

• 2021 , base instrument title: the Plan is identified as Georges River Local Environmental Plan 2021 (cl 1.1).
• 2022 amendments: multiple clauses cite 2022 amendment instruments in the notes attached to clauses. Examples include, but are not limited to:
  • Clause 2.1 (Land use zones) amended: note “cl 2.1: Am 2022 (829), Sch 1.8[1]”.
  • Clause 4.4A (exceptions to FSR , certain residential accommodation) indicates amendments in 2022 and 2024: “cl 4.4A: Am 2022 (95), cl 4(1) (2); 2024 (564), Sch 1[1] [2]”.
  • Clause 4.4B (non‑residential FSR minima and bonus floor allowance) annotated “cl 4.4B: Am 2022 (829), Sch 1.8[3] [4]”.
  • Clause 5.1 (Relevant acquisition authority) updated “cl 5.1: Am 2022 (829), Sch 1.8[5]”.
  • Clause 6.10 (Design excellence) amended “cl 6.10: Am 2022 (829), Sch 1.8[6]”.
  • Clause 6.11 (Environmental sustainability) amended “cl 6.11: Am 2022 (829), Sch 1.8[7]”.
  • Clause 6.12 (Landscaped areas) shows multiple 2022 and later amendments: “cl 6.12: Am 2022 (829), Sch 1.8[8] [9]; 2023 (664), Sch 3.5; 2024 (564), Sch 1[7]-[12]”.
  • Clause 6.13 (Development in Zones E1, E2 and MU1) shows amendments across 2022-2024 and also 2023 and 2024: “cl 6.13: Am 2022 (717), cl 4(1); 2022 (829), Sch 1.8[10]-[12]; 2023 (589), Sch 1[1]; 2024 (564), Sch 1[13]-[15]”.
  • Clause 6.14, 6.15 and others show 2022 amendment notes.
• 2023 amendments:
  • Schedule 4 amended in 2023: “sch 4: Am 2023 (589), Sch 1[4]”.
  • Clause 6.18 (Hurstville Civic Precinct) was inserted in 2023: “cl 6.18: Ins 2023 (589), Sch 1[2]”.
  • Other Schedule changes and site‑specific insertions were made in 2023 (for instance Schedule 1 notes multiple 2022-2023 amendments).
• 2024 amendments:
  • Several clauses were substituted or updated in 2024, including technical references to the NSW Flood Risk Management Manual and other policy updates (cl 5.21 and cl 5.22 show substitution and insertion notes: cl 5.22 subst 2024 (564), Sch 1[3]; cl 5.21 cites Flood Risk Manual 2023).
  • Clause 6.11 includes 2024 amendment note (cl 6.11: Am 2022 (829), Sch 1.8[7]; 2024 (564), Sch 1[6]).
• 2025 entries:
  • Schedule 1 (Additional permitted uses) footnote records amendments as recent as 2025: “sch 1: Am 2022 (717), cl 4(2); 2022 (829), Sch 1.8[15]; 2023 (589), Sch 1[3]; 2024 (564), Sch 1[16]-[19]; 2025 (116), Sch 1; 2025 (191), Sch 1; 2025 (360), Sch 1[1] [2]”.

Specific clause insertions and repeals:

• The Plan records several “Not adopted” or “Not applicable” entries where model clauses in the standard template were intentionally not taken up (for example cl 4.1AA not adopted, cl 5.3 not adopted, cl 5.5, cl 5.9). That history shows selective adoption of model clauses in the standard LEP template.
• The Plan explicitly repealed Hurstville LEP 2012 and Kogarah LEP 2012 in respect of the land to which the Plan applies (cl 1.8(1) and the notes), while preserving Hurstville LEP 1994 for land identified as “Deferred matter” (cl 1.8 note).

How to read the amendment notes

• The Plan’s in‑text amendment annotations (for example “Am 2022 (829), Sch 1.8[1]”) identify the amending instrument, the year and the schedule/paragraph. To trace the legislative amending instruments precisely, practitioners must consult the NSW legislation database for the amending instrument numbers cited in the Plan’s margins and schedule notes.

Practical consequence of the amendment history

• The Plan has been subject to iterative change, including changes that adjust quantitative controls (FSR rules, design and sustainability clauses), site‑specific permissions and mapping. Any project assessment requires checking the version and amendment history to identify which clauses and map versions apply to the site at the time of lodgement.

The Plan’s own notes and amendment tags therefore constitute the starting point for reconstructing the LEP’s evolution; for definitive amendment texts practitioners must follow the cited amending instruments and the NSW legislation website where those instruments and consolidated versions are published.

The LEP text provided contains no citations to case law and does not include any reported litigation history. The instrument references administrative and statutory decision frameworks (the Act, referral obligations, consultation steps), but it does not record judicial interpretation or decisions. Consequently:

• There are no cases named or described in the Plan text; Schedule, clause and note annotations do not reference judicial authorities.
• Any litigation arising under the Plan (for example judicial review of Council decisions, merits appeals to the Land and Environment Court, enforcement proceedings under the Act) is not recorded in the LEP text. Determining the body of case law interpreting particular clauses , for example the operation of cl 4.6 (exceptions to development standards), heritage provisions (cl 5.10), or the use of cl 1.9A (suspension of covenants) , requires searching Land and Environment Court decisions and appellate authorities external to the Plan.

What practitioners need to do

• Because the Plan does not supply a litigation history, practitioners must check Land and Environment Court databases and relevant planning law publications for judicial treatment of:
  • the operation of LEP exceptions clauses and the weight to be given to an applicant’s written justification for contravening a development standard (cl 4.6);
  • the limits on Council discretion under local design and heritage clauses (cl 5.10; cl 6.10);
  • the operation and lawful scope of an LEP clause that purports to suspend private covenants (cl 1.9A), noting that such clauses may raise questions about rights under private property law and the interplay with other statutes.
• If a particular clause has attracted litigation, that body of authority will be determinative in advice and risk assessment. Because the Plan does not cite any such cases, a separate targeted search is required.

In short, the Plan contains no internal litigation history; practitioners should not assume precedent from the Plan text itself and must consult external case law databases to identify any judicial interpretations relevant to the Plan’s provisions.

The Plan contains several provisions that can produce unexpected legal or transactional outcomes if not closely checked. The following list focuses on mechanics and specific clauses that commonly catch owners, developers and advisors unaware.

1. Savings for pre‑commencement applications (cl 1.8A)

• If a development application was lodged prior to the Plan’s commencement and remains undetermined at commencement, it must be determined as if the Plan had not commenced (cl 1.8A). That preserves old rights but creates a timing trap: applicants seeking to rely on the new Plan must ensure their application is not already extant; conversely, opponents must check whether the old instrument is the operative test for a pending DA.

2. Broad but exception‑laden covenant suspension (cl 1.9A)

• Clause 1.9A gives the Plan an operational capacity to displace private covenants to the extent necessary for Plan‑consistent development (cl 1.9A(1)). However, it lists many exceptions including Council‑imposed covenants, biodiversity certification, private land conservation agreements, trust agreements, conservation agreements and planning agreements (cl 1.9A(2)). Practitioners should not assume a covenant will be overridden; they must check whether it is one of the preserved instruments.

3. Exempt/complying exclusions for environmentally sensitive areas (cl 3.3)

• The Plan removes exempt and complying development pathways from a wide set of environmentally sensitive areas, including land within 100 m of certain coastal wetlands, Ramsar sites, declared areas of outstanding biodiversity value, and land identified in any LEP as high Aboriginal cultural or biodiversity significance (cl 3.3(1)-(2)). This converts otherwise fast‑tracked exempt/compliant proposals into consent pathways requiring full Council assessment.

4. Calculation of site area and “double dipping” (cl 4.5)

• The Plan provides specific rules that exclude access handles and certain public land from site area and floor space calculations (cl 4.5(3A), (4), (7)). It also gives the consent authority the ability to require registered covenants to prevent creation of floor area on a restricted lot if that area would otherwise enable equivalent floor area to be created elsewhere (cl 4.5(9)-(10)). These provisions can materially affect FSR calculations, and registrable covenants can lock in a distribution of development rights.

5. Non‑residential FSR minima and bonus floor allowance (cl 4.4B)

• In certain centre and mixed‑use areas, the consent authority must not grant consent unless the non‑residential FSR reaches specified minima (cl 4.4B(3)-(5)). There is a one‑off “bonus floor allowance” of 7,023 m2 for “Area 6” but only if part of the building with that area is used for hotel or motel accommodation (cl 4.4B(6)). Developers who plan to deliver predominantly residential development in these zones must either provide the stipulated non‑residential floorspace or justify departure under cl 4.6.

6. Site‑specific controls with strict distribution requirements (cl 6.18)

• The Hurstville Civic Precinct clause requires that no more than 55% of the permitted gross floor area be residential and at least 25% be for community/entertainment uses; it also mandates at least 50% ground level as public open space and a civic plaza of at least 2,400 m2 with specified solar access (cl 6.18(3)(a)-(f)). These prescriptive ratios affect commercial viability and financing models , proposals that do not meet them risk refusal.

7. Playing music protections for licensed premises (cl 5.20)

• The consent authority is barred from refusing consent to licensed premises on a number of artistic/entertainment grounds (cl 5.20(1)) and on noise grounds provided the authority is satisfied the noise can be managed (cl 5.20(2)). This limits amenity arguments against musical venues and shifts the focus to demonstrable acoustic mitigation; opponents must present evidence that noise cannot be managed to an acceptable level.

8. Heritage procedural traps and conservation incentives (cl 5.10)

• The Plan requires consent for demolishing or altering heritage items and for disturbance of archaeological sites and Aboriginal places (cl 5.10(2)). The consent authority can require heritage management documents and conservation management plans (cl 5.10(5)-(6)), and may condition consents to require conservation works (cl 5.10(10)). Developers should expect additional time and potentially onerous conservation conditions where heritage significance is engaged.

9. Flood, coastal hazard and special flood considerations (cl 5.21-5.22)

• The Plan requires the consent authority to be satisfied of compatibility with flood function, non‑adverse impact on flood behaviour and safe evacuation in flood planning areas (cl 5.21(2)). Special flood considerations apply for sensitive and hazardous development up to the probable maximum flood (cl 5.22). These clauses require specific assessments and can constrain intensification on land subject to flood risk or coastal hazards.

10. Design excellence and sustainability thresholds (cl 6.10-6.11)

• Design excellence review applies to buildings of 3+ storeys or 12 m in specified zones and in foreshore areas for particular uses (cl 6.10(2)-(3)). Environmental sustainability obligations apply to buildings 1,500 m2 gross floor area or greater in specified zones (cl 6.11(3)). These thresholds create a step change in required design and technical inputs for larger projects, with attendant cost and approval complexity.

11. Restricted uses in particular zones and ground‑floor non‑residential requirements (cl 6.13)

• Ground floor activation rules in Zones E1, E2 and MU1 prevent the consent authority from allowing ground floor street frontages to be used for residential accommodation in many areas (cl 6.13(3)). Larger ground floor areas in identified “Area A” are capped unless 500 m2 is non‑residential (cl 6.13(5)). Mixing residential at ground level against these rules risks refusal.

12. Particular local uses strictly regulated in Schedule 1

• Schedule 1 contains granular, parcel‑level permissions and constraints (e.g., permitted registered club uses at specific addresses, limits to shop FSR at 916-918 King Georges Road) that change the rights in particular transactions. Practitioners must check Schedule 1 entries for site‑specific rights or constraints.

The common theme: the Plan uses maps, thresholds and site‑specific clauses to fine‑tune development rights. The “gotchas” are often timing (pending DAs vs new Plan), map readings (excluded areas for exempt development, FSR and height maps), procedural requirements and registered covenant hooks that can materially change development feasibility. Always check the applicable map layers, Schedule 1 entries, and overlay clauses before concluding a project is permissible or financially viable.

The Plan sets out a mix of pre‑conditions, documentary requirements and mapped quantitative controls. This compliance checklist is procedural and technical, grounded in the Plan’s clauses.

1. Identify the applicable site controls and maps

• Start with the Land Application Map and Land Zoning Map to confirm the land to which the Plan applies and the zone (cl 1.3; cl 2.2).
• Check the Lot Size Map, Height of Buildings Map and Floor Space Ratio Map for parcel‑level numeric controls (cl 4.1; cl 4.3; cl 4.4).
• Review overlay maps: Foreshore Building Line Map, Foreshore Scenic Protection Area Map, Riparian Lands and Waterways Map, Activity Hazard Risk Map, Acid Sulfate Soils Map and any Additional Local Provisions or Key Sites maps referenced against the site (cl 6.4; cl 6.6; cl 6.5; cl 6.16; cl 6.1; cl 6.17-6.18). Maps are to be accessed via the NSW Planning Portal as the Plan requires (cl 1.7).

2. Zone and Land Use Table analysis

• Determine whether the proposed use is permitted without consent, permitted with consent, or is prohibited in the applicable zone (cl 2.3; Land Use Table). If the use is permitted without consent, verify whether additional approvals or approvals under other Acts are still required (cl 3.1 note).

3. Check exempt and complying criteria

• For low‑impact works, check Schedule 2 (exempt) and Schedule 3 (complying) and the statewide SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) referenced by the Plan (cl 3.1-3.2 notes). Exempt/compliant options are not available in environmentally sensitive areas (cl 3.3).

4. Address mapped development standards precisely

• For subdivision and lot size compliance, apply the Lot Size Map and the minimum‑area rules in cl 4.1, cl 4.1A and cl 4.1B. Remember access handles are excluded from lot area calculations (cl 4.1(3A); cl 4.1B(6)).
• For height and FSR, confirm the maximums on the relevant maps and apply the Plan’s calculation rules for site area and gross floor area (cl 4.3; cl 4.4; cl 4.5). Watch for specific FSR exceptions tied to site area (cl 4.4A) and non‑residential FSR minima (cl 4.4B).

5. Prepare required technical documentation

• If the site falls in an Acid Sulfate Soils mapped class and specified works are proposed, prepare and lodge an acid sulfate soils management plan compliant with the Acid Sulfate Soils Manual prior to consent (cl 6.1(2)-(4)).
• For heritage‑affected sites, expect heritage impact assessments, heritage management documents or conservation management plans where required (cl 5.10(4)-(6)); the consent authority can require these prior to determination.
• For flood or coastal hazard contexts, prepare a flood impact assessment consistent with the Considering Flooding in Land Use Planning Guideline and account for climate change projections and evacuation safety (cl 5.21(3)-(5), cl 5.22).
• For stormwater, demonstrate designs that maximise permeable surfaces and, per the Georges River Stormwater Management Policy, include on‑site detention/retention where required (cl 6.3(2)(a)-(b)).
• For aircraft noise areas or where AS 2021,2015 applies, provide acoustic design demonstrating compliance with indoor design sound levels and building siting acceptability tests (cl 6.8(3)(b)-(c)).
• For aquaculture, ensure species and operational plans are consistent with aquaculture industry development plans and the operational rules in Schedule 6 (cl 5.19; Schedule 6).

6. Design excellence and sustainability obligations

• If the development is within the scope of the design excellence clause or the environmental sustainability clause (cl 6.10; cl 6.11), prepare design statements and evidence showing the design achieves the high‑level matters set out in cl 6.10(5) and the sustainability considerations in cl 6.11(3) for buildings >= 1,500 m2.

7. Anticipate covenant and FSR allocation conditions

• Be prepared for the consent authority to impose registered covenants preventing “double dipping” of FSR between lots (cl 4.5(9)-(10)). Where multiple lots form the site, prepare legal strategies for consolidation or for agreeing to covenant terms.

8. Understand referrals, notifications and statutory timing

• Where heritage archaeological matters are engaged, the consent authority must notify the Heritage Council and consider responses (cl 5.10(7)). Where Aboriginal places are involved, notify local Aboriginal communities and allow 28 days for responses (cl 5.10(8)).
• For the High Pressure Gas Pipeline Risk Area, the consent authority must forward the DA to the Planning Secretary within 7 days and consider any submissions (cl 6.16(4)).
• For airspace penetrations, the consent authority must consult the relevant Commonwealth body and act on its advice (cl 6.7(2)-(3)).

9. Use the exceptions process where necessary (cl 4.6)

• If a proposed development contravenes a development standard, prepare the written justification required by the EP&A Regulation to demonstrate why strict compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary and set out sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention (cl 4.6(3) and Regulation note). Expect the consent authority to keep a record of its assessment (cl 4.6(4)).

10. Account for site‑specific provisions in Schedules

• Review Schedule 1 for additional permitted uses or constraints on particular lots (Schedule 1 entries specify permissions conditional on FSR caps or coverage limits).
• Check Schedule 5 for listed heritage items and the Heritage Map for heritage conservation areas and archaeological sites that impose special consents (Schedule 5; cl 5.10).

11. Financial and implementation planning

• Factor in costs and time for preparing technical reports, heritage and environmental management plans, possible design excellence processes, and the potential for registered covenants or public domain works (cl 6.10; cl 5.10; cl 4.5(9)). The Plan anticipates conditions requiring remediation or conservation works where applicable (cl 5.10(10)).

12. Engage Council early

• Given the Plan’s mapping and the number of discretionary satisfactions the consent authority must make, early pre‑lodgement consultation with Council is practical to identify map layers, required studies and likely conditions (cl 1.7; cl 6.9). Where the Plan requires external referral (Heritage Council, Planning Secretary, Commonwealth airspace body), allow the additional referral time when programming assessments (cl 5.10(7); cl 6.16(4); cl 6.7(2)).

13. Keep abreast of amendments

• The Plan has been amended multiple times (see amendment notes across clauses). Confirm which version of the Plan and which map versions apply at lodgement to avoid using superseded controls (cl 1.7 note and amendment notes embedded in clauses).

14. If in doubt, check the Act and SEPPs

• The Plan operates subject to the Act and State environmental planning policies (cl 1.6; cl 1.9). For matters not settled in the LEP (for example penalty and enforcement mechanics, or development standards that the Plan expressly excludes from its exceptions clause), consult the Act, regulations and relevant SEPPs.

This stepwise approach , map → zone/use → standard compliance → required technical documents → referral and notification → application lodgement , aligns with the Plan’s structure and the specific clause obligations it imposes on applicants and the consent authority.