Business Paper
Shire Strategic Planning Committee
Monday, 4 November 2019
6:30pm
Council Chambers,
Level 2, Administration Building,
4-20 Eton Street, Sutherland
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 2
ORDER OF BUSINESS
1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY
2. APOLOGIES
3. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST
4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS
5. PRESENTATIONS
6. REPORTS FROM OFFICERS
PLN037-19 Permissibility of Boarding Houses in the R2 Low Density Zone
Residential Zone, E3 Environmental Management Zone and E4
Environmental Living Zone
PLN038-19 Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) - Submission on
local government reporting, regulation and enforcement responsibilities
7. QUESTIONS
8. CONSIDERATION OF BUSINESS IN CLOSED SESSION
9. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS FROM OFFICERS
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 3
PL
N0
37
-19
PLN037-19 PERMISSIBILITY OF BOARDING HOUSES IN THE R2 LOW DENSITY
ZONE RESIDENTIAL ZONE, E3 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ZONE AND E4 ENVIRONMENTAL LIVING ZONE
Attachments: Nil
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Boarding houses are a permissible use in the R2 Low Density Residential zone under both the
Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 and the State Environmental Planning Policy
(Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.
A boarding house development in the R2 zone under SSLEP2015 is subject to the development
controls applicable to other forms of development in the zone e.g. landscaped area, floor space
ratio, and building height.
Boarding houses are permissible in the R2 zone under ARHSEPP, but is limited in size to 12
boarding rooms. The AHRSEPP contains standards that ‘cannot be used to refuse consent,’
including standards for density, building height, front setback landscaping, solar access, private
open space, parking, and accommodation size.
Boarding houses are not permissible in the E3 Environmental Management Zone and E4
Environmental Living Zone.
REPORT RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
The report on Permissibility of Boarding Houses in R2, E3 and E4 zones be received and noted.
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 4
PL
N0
37
-19
PURPOSE
This report outlines the permissibility of boarding houses in the R2 Low Density Residential, E3
Environmental Management Zone, and E4 Environmental Living Zone in response to a request for
information from Council.
BACKGROUND
On 16 September 2016, Council considered a report on DCP controls for boarding houses (PLN028-
19, 16 September 2019). As part of the deliberations, Council requested a report on the permissibility
of boarding houses in the R2 Low Density Residential Zone and the low density residential zones
generally. The E3 Environmental Management Zone and E4 Environmental Living Zone are
considered the low density residential zones in Sutherland Shire.
DISCUSSION
The permissibly of boarding houses in Sutherland Shire is determined through two legislative
instruments. These are the Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 and the State
Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (ARHSEPP). These instruments use
the same definition of boarding houses:
Boarding house means a building that:
(a) is wholly or partly let in lodgings, and
(b) provides lodgers with a principal place of residence for 3 months or more, and
(c) may have shared facilities, such as a communal living room, bathroom, kitchen or
laundry, and
(d) has rooms, some or all of which may have private kitchen and bathroom facilities,
that accommodate one or more lodgers,
but does not include backpackers’ accommodation, a group home, hotel or motel
accommodation, seniors housing or a serviced apartment.
Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 (SSLEP2015)
Under SSLEP2015, boarding houses are a mandatory use permissible with consent in the R2 Low
Density Residential Zone, in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Instrument – Principle
Local Environmental Plan. Boarding house proposals in the R2 zone are subject to the development
controls in the LEP applicable for the relevant land. These include landscaped area, floor space ratio,
and building height. Notably, there is currently no minimum lot size requirement in the SSLEP2015 for
boarding houses.
Boarding houses approved under SSLEP2019 are subject to the requirements of the Sutherland Shire
Development Control Plan 2015. Recent amendments, which came into effect on 9 October 2019,
apply to boarding houses and compliment the standards contained in the ARHSEPP to ensure
proposals more specifically relate to the character and built form of the Sutherland Shire.
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 5
PL
N0
37
-19
Under SSLEP2015 boarding houses are not permissible in the E3 Environmental Management Zone
or E4 Environmental Living Zone. These zones are generally more distant from the centres where
services and public transport connections are more frequent, or are areas identified as bush fire prone
land where increased population density is not appropriate.
Affordable Rental Housing State Environmental Planning Policy (AHRSEPP)
The objective of the ARHSEPP is increasing the supply and diversity of affordable rental and social
housing in NSW. Boarding houses are identified as a permissible use in the R2 Low Density
Residential Zone, but are limited to a maximum of 12 boarding rooms. This size restriction came into
effect on the 8 February 2019, meaning that boarding houses in the R2 Zone approved before this
date were not subject to this limitation. The boarding house provisions of the AHRSEPP do not apply
to the E3 Environmental Management and E4 Environmental Living zones.
The AHRSEPP contains standards that ‘cannot be used to refuse consent,’ including standards for
density, building height, front setback landscaping, solar access, private open space, parking, and
accommodation size. Some of these standards are linked to council’s LEP controls on the subject land
(e.g. height of buildings and floor space ratio). Other matters are left to the discretion of councils
through Development Control Plans (DCPs). If there is an inconsistency between the ARHSEPP and
SSLEP2015, the provisions of the ARHSEPP apply.
Past applications
In the past seven years there have been 17 individual applications for boarding house developments
across Sutherland Shire. The majority have been focussed around the centres of Sutherland, Kirrawee
and Miranda. There have been five boarding house proposals in the R2 Low Density Residential
Zone. Two of these have been approved, two have been refused, and one is currently under
assessment.
RESOURCING STRATEGY IMPLICATIONS
The preparation of this report has been undertaken by the Strategic Planning Unit utilising existing
resources.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
No community engagement has been undertaken during the preparation of this report.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
Boarding houses provide a form of residential accommodation which contributes to the Community
Strategic Plan Outcome 6: A Liveable Place with a High Quality of Life. The links to the strategies and
deliverables are set out below.
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 6
PL
N0
37
-19
Community Strategic Plan Strategy Delivery Program (2017-2021) Deliverables
6.2 Facilitate a diverse housing mix that
provides choice and meets the needs of all
community members
6B. Manage new and existing development
within a robust and effective framework.
6C. Support enhanced housing diversity,
accessibility and affordability to meet the diverse
needs of the community.
POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS
The permissibility of boarding houses is governed by State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable
Rental Housing) 2009 (ARHSEPP) and Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015.
CONCLUSION
Boarding Houses are not permissible in the E3 Environmental Management Zone or the E4
Environmental Living Zones under SSLEP2015 or under the State Environmental Planning Policy
(Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (ARHSEPP).
Boarding houses are a mandatory permissible form of development in the R2 Low Density Residential
Zone through both the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009
(ARHSEPP) and Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015. Council has no discretion to
remove this permissibility.
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER
The officer responsible for the preparation of this report is the Manager Strategic Planning, Mark
Carlon, who can be contacted on 9710 0523.
File Number: 2015/87442
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 7
PL
N0
38
-19
PLN038-19 INDEPENDENT PRICING AND REGULATORY TRIBUNAL (IPART) -
SUBMISSION ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORTING, REGULATION
AND ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES
Attachments: Appendix A⇩ and Appendix B⇩
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 2014 and 2016 the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART), on behalf of the
Office of Local Government, undertook a series of reviews covering the rating system, reporting
and compliance burdens on local government, and local government compliance and
enforcement. These reports have now been made public.
The Government is now consulting on the finalisation of these reports. The recommendations of
the IPART reports are generally supported.
Many of the recommendations require legislative reform, the drafting of guidelines, and new
online systems. It is essential that reforms clearly identify and delineate State and local
government responsibilities, and consider the regulatory burdens and financial ramifications for
local government.
Feedback was due 25 October 2019. A preliminary submission has been made given time
constraints. A final submission will be made following Council’s resolution on this report.
REPORT RECOMMENDATION
THAT:
The draft Submission to the Office of Local Government (attached as Appendix A and B) be
endorsed as Council’s submission.
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 8
PL
N0
38
-19
PURPOSE
This report informs Council of current Office of Local Government consultation on legislative and
process changes recommended by IPART, and seeks Council’s endorsement of the preliminary
submission prepared by Council officers.
BACKGROUND
In 2014 and 2016 the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART), on behalf of the Office of
Local Government, undertook a series of reviews which covered the rating system, reporting and
compliance burdens on local government and local government compliance and enforcement
functions. Three reports were produced:
IPART’s first report relates to the rating system. This report proposed 42 recommendations
including the introduction of a new improved valuation method for council rates and charges.
The Government has not endorsed the IPART recommendations for changes to the current
rates exemption framework and a rates deferral scheme for pensioners. Consultation on this
report is now closed.
IPART’s second report relates to the reporting and compliance burdens on local government.
This report makes 10 recommendations including the clarification of state-made council
regulations, the reduction of the regulatory burden on councils, and that councils be reimbursed
for certain shortfalls in state statutory fees. Comments on the ‘reporting and compliance
burdens’ recommendations close 25 October (addressed in this report).
IPART’s third report relates to Council’s compliance and enforcement role. This report makes 42
recommendations including key amendments to various council forms, the development of a
partnership model with councils and state agencies and state guides for developing council
regulations. Comments on ‘compliance and enforcement’ recommendations close 15 November
(addressed in this report).
The three reports are nearly 1,000 pages long and contain many detailed recommendations. Some
recommendations have already been ruled out by the State Government as they would impact on
vulnerable members of the community, affect jobs, and cost taxpayers – this includes IPART
recommendations to remove restrictions on fees and capping of fees below cost recovery.
The State Government’s interim response to the three reviews is available via the following link:
https://www.olg.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/LGAT/Government%E2%80%99s%20Interim%20Respo
nse%20to%20Reports.pdf
The State Government is now consulting on the finalisation of the final two reports. It is noted that
some reforms recommended by IPART are marked 'Not for consultation' on the Office of Local
Government feedback form, thus barring the opportunity to comment. Feedback may only be given
on-line in a pre-set feedback form. As the time frame for submissions has passed, a preliminary
submission has been made based on officer feedback. A final Council endorsed submission will be
made following the Council meeting.
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 9
PL
N0
38
-19
DISCUSSION
Complete output from the on-line comment form completed by Council officers is contained in the
attachments to this report. Below is a summary of key issues.
Reporting & Compliance Burdens:
The following comments have been made to the IPART recommendations:
Centralised provision of Planning Certificates: These are currently managed differently by each
Council. Provided the IT platform is user friendly (easy and quick to update), centralisation
could work. However, ensuring the information provided on Planning Certificates is legally
correct is very time consuming and requires significant resources - it is important that Council is
renumerated for this expense. Sutherland Shire Council’s use of online services is well in
advance of most councils and Council is one of the first to fully embrace the planning portal.
Council’s use of e-services is well beyond what the Portal could offer in the near future.
However, for those councils that do not have electronic certificates, the Portal offers some
advantages. Councils should be given the option to opt in/opt out of such services.
Joint applications (DAs and CCs): May only work for very few number/type of applications due
to the number of revised plans/modifications submitted or required. It is rare that an application
completely complies. However, this could work for simpler applications – such as project
homes.
One stop shop: Council is currently using the 'one stop shop' for DA, PP, and CC applications
with great success.
Online payment of State government fee: Online direct payment of the Planning Reform Fee to
DPIE is supported as this would reduce ‘double handling’ of funds.
Standardised conditions of consent: As before, standardised conditions of consent are
supported subject to the ability for councils to tailor wording to address local conditions.
Fire compliance reporting: This can be onerous. An online portal for submitting annual fire
safety statements (AFSS) is supported and would negate the need to submit to two
organisations. Fire Brigade/Order reports to Council on minor issues are time consuming – it is
agreed that some of these minor functions should be at the discretion of the General Manager.
Alcohol Free Zones (roads footpath carparks): These are reviewed every four years in line with
current legislation. However, this is done generally to assist police with enforcement. This
should be done by the Office of Liquor and Gaming as its role in licensing is largely to support
licensed shops and venues. Ministerial Guidelines only currently apply to AFZ.
Alcohol Prohibited Areas (APA): These are Council's responsibility (parks beaches) and are
needed to manage public drinking. The reforms are partially supported - it is considered that
APA are best managed by local government.
Alcohol at events: Council has good temporary and event-based alcohol policies, practises,
and guidelines on its website. Events are well managed by Council, in consultation with police.
Local Government does not need to have an additional, duplicated policing role. The licensing
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 10
PL
N0
38
-19
functions of the Office of Liquor and Gaming should be more thorough and vigilant, and should
have greater regard to Council’s comments in response to liquor licensing applications.
Open data: This is supported from both State and Local Government. In particular anonymised
Opal data should be made available to assist in strategic and land use planning. It is imperative
that clear IT parameters are set and that assistance is given to under resourced Councils who
are required to provide data. Council is currently submitting development data
(LDPM/SEPP1(Cl4.6)) electronically. However, there is always a need to validate the data
before submission, and hence this is still requires local government resources.
Integrated Planning & Reporting: The requirements have improved the planning and
accountability functions of Council, facilitating better outcomes. A common set of
measures/performance indicators across Councils is supported. Whilst state wide surveys have
some value it is likely that Council will continue to conduct its own measures and surveys. The
Office of Local Government should continue to work with Councils to streamline IP&R reporting.
Performance indicators should not increase cost burdens for Councils. Limiting engagement on
Plans of Management for Community Land to align with IP&R engagement is not necessary.
Compliance & Enforcement:
The following comments have been made to the IPART recommendations:
Cost recovery: The State Government must work with local government in considering the
impact and cost of its regulatory requirements. Restrictions on fees for statutory approvals and
inspections must be flexible to allow for the recovery of reasonable costs in order to best meet
the needs of growing communities. A quick and easy improvement would be the creation of
standard templates across local government for enforcement action. Cost recovery of
enforcement action is a major inhibitor to meeting community expectations.
Consolidation of regulation: Streamlining and removing duplication in the Local Government
Act, the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act and the Roads Act is supported. However, it
is considered more important that the processes are the same for all local governments. The
enforcement fees should reflect the administration process involved. Council regulatory officers
who have delegated authority under a number of different Acts have different enforcement
powers. Aligning or standardising these powers would be of great benefit.
Development consent conditions: Development across NSW is not significantly different.
Standardised development consent conditions, with the ability to tailor to local circumstances,
are supported. However, IPART approval of additional conditions of consent (National
Construction Code) seems onerous. Similarly, the removal of ‘red tape’ in addressing simpler
public domain (road reserve issues) and section 68 approvals (standard exemptions and
minimum requirements) is supported.
Annual Fire Safety statements: The requirement to submit Annual Fire Safety Statements
(AFFS) to two authorities needs to be streamlined - submitting online to one authority, with
alternate viewing rights, makes sense.
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 11
PL
N0
38
-19
RESOURCING STRATEGY IMPLICATIONS
The reporting, compliance and enforcement functions of Council are resource consuming, often with
little financial resource. Whilst the proposed reforms, such as streamlining of regulatory and
enforcement functions, have the potential to create savings, it is important that the fees still reflect the
actual administration process and costs involved.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
The State Government is seeking to carry out widespread consultation with residents, council staff,
councillors, peak bodies and other key stakeholders as the Government finalises its response to these
complex reports.
STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT
Council’s Long Term Financial Plan advocates for a balanced financial approach through efficient,
effective and economic use of funds. Council’s role in reporting, enforcement, regulation, and
compliance seeks to maintain the quality of both the natural environment and resident lifestyles and at
the same time meet the greater needs of the community.
Community Strategic Plan Strategy Delivery Program (2017-2021) Deliverables
1.4 Ensure community confidence in Sutherland
Shire Council.
1L Advocate and maintain dialogue across all
levels of government and with key stakeholders
around issues impacting our community.
1.4.3 Welcome independent oversight and take
a risk based approach to delivering effective
governance.
6B Manage new and existing development
within a robust and effective framework
1.4.1 Ensure a strong governance framework
that provides transparency, accountability and
sustainability.
2.2.2 Encourage responsible urban planning
which balances growth with environmental
sustainability
3.1.3 Provide emergency, rescue and public
health and safety services which support
community wellbeing.
POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS
These reviews focus on complex areas of government regulation that require detailed consideration,
consultation and review. Arising from this review is likely to be legislative changes to the Local
Government Act and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, and associated Acts and
Regulations. This is a State Government role.
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 12
PL
N0
38
-19
CONCLUSION
The recommendations of the IPART reports are generally supported. Many of the recommendations
require legislative reform, the drafting of guidelines and new online systems. It is essential that any
reforms clearly identify and delineate State and local government responsibilities, and consider the
regulatory burdens and financial ramifications for Local Government.
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER
The officer responsible for the preparation of this report is the Manager Strategic Planning, Mark
Carlon, who can be contacted on 9710 0523.
File Number: 2019/354174
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 13
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 14
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 15
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 16
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 17
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 18
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 19
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 20
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 21
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 22
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 23
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 24
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 25
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix A
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 26
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 27
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 28
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 29
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 30
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 31
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 32
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 33
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 34
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 35
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 36
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 37
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B
Shire Strategic Planning Committee 4 November 2019
Page 38
PL
N0
38-1
9
Ap
pe
nd
ix B