Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence
State Significant Development Assessment SSD 10354
August 2020
NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment | dpie.nsw.gov.au
Published by the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment dpie.nsw.gov.au Title: Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence Subtitle: State Significant Development Assessment (SSD 10354) Cover image: Visualisation of proposal from north-west of the site (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
© State of New South Wales through Department of Planning, Industry and Environment 2020. You may copy, distribute, display, download and otherwise freely deal with this publication for any purpose, provided that you attribute the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment as the owner. However, you must obtain permission if you wish to charge others for access to the publication (other than at cost); include the publication in advertising or a product for sale; modify the publication; or republish the publication on a website. You may freely link to the publication on a departmental website.
Disclaimer: The information contained in this publication is based on knowledge and understanding at the time of writing (August 2020) and may not be accurate, current or complete. The State of New South Wales (including the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment), the author and the publisher take no responsibility, and will accept no liability, for the accuracy, currency, reliability or correctness of any information included in the document (including material provided by third parties). Readers should make their own inquiries and rely on their own advice when making decisions related to material contained in this publication.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report ii
Glossary
Abbreviation Definition
AHD Australian Height Datum
Applicant Cricket NSW
Application SSD 10354
CIV Capital Investment Value
Consent Development consent
Council Parramatta City Council
Department Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
EESG Environment, Energy and Science Group
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EPA Environment Protection Authority
EP&A Act Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
EP&A Regulation Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000
EPI Environmental Planning Instrument
ESD Ecologically Sustainable Development
Heritage NSW Heritage NSW, Department of Premier and Cabinet
LEP Local Environmental Plan
Minister Minister for Planning and Public Spaces
RtS Response to Submissions
SEARs Planning Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements
Planning Secretary Secretary of the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
SDRP State Design Review Panel
SEPP State Environmental Planning Policy
SOPA Sydney Olympic Park Authority, or its successor
SRD SEPP State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011
SSD State Significant Development
TfNSW Transport for NSW
TfNSW (RMS) Transport for NSW, Roads and Maritime Services Division
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report iii
Executive Summary
Introduction
This report provides an assessment of a proposal seeking approval for a new cricket centre of excellence at Wilson Park, Sydney Olympic Park (SSD 10354). The proposal would replace Cricket NSW’s previous facilities at Moore Park which is required to be relocated as part of the NSW Government’s Stadia Strategy.
The proposal would provide a state-of-the-art cricket, training and administration facility that services all levels of the sport, from club level to the State representative team level. The new cricket centre of excellence building would include offices, sports science facilities, gymnasium, community facilities and an indoor training facility with 15 wickets.
The proposal also includes an International Cricket Council compliant cricket oval and associated seating, a second oval for training and community uses, outdoor practice nets with 73 wickets, associated maintenance and storage facilities, car parking, landscaping and public domain works.
The Applicant is Cricket NSW and the site is located within the Parramatta local government area. The Minister for Planning and Public Spaces is the consent authority for the application.
Engagement
The Department publicly exhibited the application for 28 days from Thursday 21 November to Wednesday 18 December 2019. In response to the public exhibition, the Department received 51 submissions, comprising seven submissions from government agencies, a submission making comments from Council, 10 public submissions of objection, four providing comment and 29 in support.
Key issues raised in submissions included concerns about the design and layout of the proposal, impacts associated with the loss of the current open space and displacement of existing users. Submissions in support stated the proposal would offset the loss of the previous facilities at Moore Park with a more centrally located facility, improve cricket development, provide open space for community use, and have broader public health benefits.
The Applicant amended the design of the proposal in its Response to Submissions (RtS) and provided further justification for the proposed layout. The Applicant also provided further clarification on the loss of the existing sporting fields, community access to the facility, tree removal, and contributions.
Council acknowledged that further consideration is required prior to any determination regarding the removal of publicly accessible community fields and integration of the proposal with the public domain.
Sydney Olympic Park Authority stated that amendments to the proposal have improved its design, visual impact and pedestrian connectivity through the site, and recommended conditions to address matters including landscaping, biodiversity and stormwater management. No other government agencies raised concerns.
The State Design Review Panel (SDRP) initially raised a number of concerns about the proposal, including its overall layout, the need to incorporate public amenities, improvement of integration with the surrounding public access network, and reducing the massing of the main building. Following its
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report iv
review of the amended proposal, the SDRP raised no concerns about the proposal achieving design excellence.
Assessment
The Department has undertaken a detailed assessment of the proposal and has carefully considered the issues raised in submissions. The Department considers the proposal is acceptable for the following reasons:
• it provides an important, purpose-built piece of sporting infrastructure and associated administration facility that is consistent with the long-term strategic vision for Sydney Olympic Park (SOP) • it is consistent with strategic planning documents, including the NSW Stadia Strategy 2012 which seeks to relocate Cricket NSW from its previous facilities at Moore Park • it exhibits design excellence as it provides a high standard of architectural design, materials and detailing, and the built form sensitively integrates with the public domain and foreshore • it would improve connectivity to and from the surrounding public open space network through the provision of two new pathways to the Parramatta River foreshore • it would provide community benefit through the community facilities, new amenities and community use of Oval 2 and cricket nets • operational impacts would not affect the functioning of major event infrastructure in the SOP area, and the site is generally well located away from sensitive receivers • the site is accessible and adequately serviced by public transport, provides adequate parking and would not impact significantly on the functioning of the surrounding road network • the proposal is centrally located within Sydney, providing better access for NSW cricketers and the public, reinforcing the SOP precinct as the Central City’s premier major sporting destination and increasing visitation to SOP and attracting more events to Western Sydney • it would deliver significant benefits to the NSW community through direct and indirect economic activity and employment, including 143 operational jobs and 110-120 construction jobs
A number of conditions are recommended to appropriately mitigate and manage potential impacts associated with the proposal, including requirements for a detailed Landscape Plan and Public Domain Plan, to secure additional connections for pedestrians and cyclists through the site, and an Operational Plan of Management, to secure the level of community use of the facility.
Conclusion
The Department considers the proposal is acceptable as it would provide a state-of-the-art facility providing a year-round cricket, training and administration facility that would service all levels of the sport, from club level to the State representative team level within Western Sydney.
The proposal is consistent with government policy, it exhibits design excellence, would improve connectivity to and from the surrounding public open space network, and would not have adverse impacts on the environment or on the amenity of surrounding occupiers.
The Department’s assessment therefore concludes the proposal is in the public interest and it is recommended the application be approved, subject to conditions.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report v
Contents
1 Introduction ········································································································· 1 1.1 Site context ...... 1 1.2 The site (Wilson Park) ...... 2 1.3 Surrounding Site Context ...... 4 1.4 Need and Justification ...... 5
2 Project ················································································································· 7 2.1 Description of proposal ...... 7 2.2 Timing ...... 9
3 Strategic context·································································································· 10 3.1 Greater Sydney Region Plan and Central City District Plan ...... 10 3.2 NSW Stadia Strategy 2012 ...... 10 3.3 NSW State Infrastructure Strategy 2018-2038 ...... 10 3.4 Sydney Olympic Park Master Plan 2030 (2018 Review) ...... 11
4 Statutory Context ································································································· 12 4.1 State Significant Development ...... 12 4.2 Permissibility ...... 12 4.3 Mandatory Matters for Consideration ...... 12 4.4 Biodiversity Development Assessment Report ...... 13
5 Engagement ········································································································ 14 5.1 Department’s engagement ...... 14 5.2 Summary of submissions ...... 14 5.3 Key issues – Government Agencies ...... 14 5.4 Key issues – Council and Community...... 16 5.5 Response to submissions ...... 18 5.6 Revised Response to Submissions...... 20
6 Assessment ········································································································ 21 6.1 Key issues ...... 21 6.2 Design excellence ...... 21 6.3 Built form and visual impact ...... 24 6.4 Site Layout ...... 29 6.5 Public domain ...... 30 6.6 Traffic, parking and access ...... 34 6.7 Existing use of the site ...... 37 6.8 Contributions ...... 38 6.9 Biodiversity ...... 39 6.10 Public amenities...... 40
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report vi
6.11 Other issues ...... 41
7 Evaluation ··········································································································· 48
8 Recommendation ································································································· 49
9 Determination ······································································································ 50
Appendices ················································································································· 51 Appendix A – List of referenced documents ...... 51 Appendix B – Community Views for Draft Notice of Decision ...... 52 Appendix C – Statutory Considerations ...... 56 Appendix D – Recommended Instrument of Consent ...... 70
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report vii
1 Introduction
Cricket NSW (the Applicant) seeks approval for the construction and operation of a new centre of excellence at Wilson Park, within Sydney Olympic Park (SOP). The facility would be the home of cricket in NSW and includes:
• a two-storey cricket centre, including offices, sports science facilities, gymnasium, community facilities and indoor training facility with 15 wickets • an International Cricket Council compliant cricket oval and associated seating, and second oval available for community use • outdoor practice nets with 73 wickets • a single storey machinery and storage shed, associated car parking, landscaping and public domain works.
1.1 Site context
The site is located within the far north-western corner of SOP and owned by the Sydney Olympic Park Authority (SOPA) (Figure 1). SOP extends from the Parramatta River in the north to the M4 Motorway and Parramatta Road to the south. The SOP area covers 640 hectares, comprising 430 hectares of greenspaces/parkland and a 210-hectare town centre. The Olympic Park railway station, ANZ Stadium and other facilities at SOP are located approximately 2.5 km to the south-east of the site. Therefore, whilst the site is located on SOP land, its character is more similar to the surrounding area of Silverwater.
Parramatta CBD
Parramatta River
Figure 1 | Regional Context Map, showing the site outlined in red (within the SOP boundary) (Base source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 1
1.2 The site (Wilson Park)
The site is known as Wilson Park and is located in SOP, within the City of Parramatta local government area (LGA), approximately 20 km west of the Sydney Central Business District (CBD) and 6 km east of the Parramatta CBD. The site is primarily accessed from Clyde Street on its western side, however is also accessible from Newington Road on its eastern side. Wilson Park is irregular in shape and comprises an area of 121,082 m2 and the development site is a leased area of 65,767 m2 (shown as the blue area on Figure 2).
Wilson Park is a former gasworks site and currently used predominantly as playing fields and is fenced off to the general public. The site has a landfill leachate treatment plant located to its north-east, which is excluded from the development site (Figure 2).
The site is relatively flat but falls northward toward Parramatta River, with an overland flow path in its south-eastern corner. Original vegetation has largely been removed, however replanting has developed into mature woodlands across the site. The site is shown at Figures 3 to 5.
Riverfront path Remediated area
Landfill leachate treatment area Silverwater Correctional Complex
Clyde Street Bus corridor Newington Road
Figure 2 | Local Context Map (Base source: Applicant’s EIS)
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 2
Figure 3 | View of main field from the foreshore (Source: Department photograph)
Figure 4 | Fields in the south-western area of the site (Source: Department photograph)
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 3
Figure 5 | Fields and overland flow path area in the south-eastern corner of the site (Source: Department photograph)
1.3 Surrounding Site Context
The immediate site context (Figure 6) is summarised as:
• Parramatta River to the north, with the site connecting to an 11 km riverfront path network which links Silverwater Park through to SOP ferry wharf via Blaxland Riverside Park and Newington Nature Reserve • Silverwater Correctional Complex to the east (listed as a State heritage item) • a busway and beyond this, industrial uses to the south • Silverwater Road to the west, and beyond this, predominantly industrial uses, Silverwater Park and the Clyde Street car park, having a capacity of 89 spaces.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 4
Figure 6 | Surrounding site context plan (Base source: Applicant’s EIS)
1.4 Need and Justification
The development would replace Cricket NSW’s previous facilities at Moore Park, which are required to be relocated as part of the NSW Government’s Stadia Strategy (Section 3.2). Cricket NSW is currently under a temporary lease within SOP at 6 Herb Elliot Drive, which expires in January 2022, and intends to occupy the new facility in February 2022.
The Applicant contends the proposal is needed as it would:
• provide a purpose built, dedicated, year-round cricket, training and administration facility to service both regional and metropolitan cricketers, to be the home of cricket in NSW • address deficiencies in existing infrastructure and improve facilities in line with contemporary Australian sports venue standards, to deliver a modern venue that is globally competitive • cater for elite level training and coaching needs, particularly for female cricketers • host clinics, camps, including facilities for junior cricketers to support sport, social, health and educational programs • provide for future growth in population and the sport.
The Applicant contends the proposal is justified strategically as it would:
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 5
• provide a facility that would improve cricket in NSW, the importance of which is reflected in the allocation of government funding, including $30 million from SOPA and the NSW Government and $5 million from the Federal Government (the remaining costs (approximately $19 million) would be paid by Cricket NSW and Cricket Australia) – note not all allocated funding falls within the project’s Capital Investment Value (CIV) of $49.6 million. • provide a more central Sydney location that can strategically serve cricket in NSW, which is consistent with and will also reinforce the SOP precinct as the Central City’s premier major sporting destination, increasing visitation to SOP and attracting more events to Western Sydney • deliver a facility that is integrated with its surroundings, including the Parramatta River and SOP • deliver significant benefits to the NSW community through direct and indirect economic activity and employment, including 143 operational jobs and 110-120 construction jobs • provide social and cultural benefits through community use of the facility and connection to the foreshore.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 6
2 Project
2.1 Description of proposal
The proposal seeks approval for construction and operation of a new centre of excellence for Cricket NSW, which would co-locate a high-performance centre with administration facilities for training, matches, workshops and fan days. The key components of the application are outlined in Table 1. The proposal is depicted in Figures 7 to 9.
Table 1 | Main Components of the proposal
Aspect Description
Preparatory • Demolition of existing single-storey grandstand and removal of fencing. works • Relocation of existing light poles. • Earthworks, including excavation up to 1 m and filling of up to 1 m.
Built form • Two-storey building with a maximum height of 12 m (RL 17.3) and GFA of 7252 m2. • Single-storey machinery and storage shed with GFA of 665 m2. • Main cricket oval with white picket fencing, scoreboard and informal grassed seating. • Second oval (Oval 2) and informal grassed seating. • Outdoor practice nets.
Uses • Two-storey cricket centre including offices, gymnasium, indoor training facility with 15 wickets, and facilities for sports science, media and the community, linked with a single-storey café/library, and single-storey community facilities building, including meeting rooms and amenities. • Outdoor practice nets with 73 wickets, consisting of 43 wickets to the north of the main building, and 30 wickets to the north of Oval 2.
Gross Floor • A total GFA of 8019 m2, comprising: Area (GFA) o Ground floor main building (gymnasium, indoor training facility, sports science facilities, café and community facilities) – 5748 m2 o First floor main building (offices, meeting/media rooms and outdoor terrace) – 1504 m2 o Machinery and storage shed – 665 m2 o Scoreboard – 102 m2.
Operational • Operating hours: details o Indoor facilities, including café and community centre: 6 am to 10 pm o Outdoor facilities: 7 am to 10 pm, however, operation until 10 pm is daylight permitting, as outdoor facilities will not be lit o Occasional activities may be carried out outside these hours for match day events. • Capacity: up to 1500 persons for a fan day or match day.
Public domain • Landscaping and public domain works, including fencing around the perimeter of the cricket nets. • Removal of 304 trees and replacement with 310 trees, with 238 existing trees to be retained. • Two pathways connecting the foreshore and adjoining network of public spaces to the site, including the proposed public amenities.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 7
Car parking and • 221 car spaces, comprised of 111 spaces in the western car park and 110 access spaces in the eastern car park.
Signage • Two signage zones on the main building, measuring 13.5 m x 3 m (40.5 m2) on the western elevation and 16 m x 3 m (48 m2) on the northern elevation. • Wayfinding signage associated with new pedestrian pathways.
CIV/Employment • CIV of $49.6 million. • 143 operational jobs and 110-120 construction jobs.
Car park
Indoor nets High performance/ administration Main building Maintenance/ storage building
Community facility
Car park Main oval
Scoreboard
Oval 2
Figure 7 | Site Layout (Base source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 8
Figure 8 | The proposal viewed from the north-west (Base source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Figure 9 | View of main oval from the south (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
2.2 Timing
Construction of the proposal is anticipated to commence in September 2020 and be completed by April 2022, with operations commencing in May 2022.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 9
3 Strategic context
3.1 Greater Sydney Region Plan and Central City District Plan
The Greater Sydney Region Plan (GSRP) supports a 40-year vision for a metropolis of three cities that will rebalance growth and deliver its benefits more equally and equitably to residents across Greater Sydney. The site is located in the Central City, within the Greater Parramatta and the Olympic Peninsula (GPOP) Economic Corridor.
The GSRP outlines how Greater Sydney will manage growth and guide infrastructure delivery. It sets the vision and strategy for Greater Sydney, to be implemented at local level through District Plans. The site is located within the Central City District.
The proposal is consistent with the GSRP and Central City District Plan as it would:
• provide an important piece of sporting infrastructure and associated administration facility that is consistent with the long-term strategic vision for SOP as a world-class recreation, sporting and entertainment precinct • provide an ecologically sustainable facility that is accessible and inclusive, including provision of access to the foreshore and an oval for use by the cricket and broader community • provide measures to maintain the existing urban tree canopy by replacing all trees required to be removed • generate employment benefits for the NSW economy.
3.2 NSW Stadia Strategy 2012
The need for the project is driven by the NSW Stadia Strategy 2012, which covers seven Government- owned or leased stadia and provides a vision for the future of stadia within NSW, prioritising investment to achieve the optimal mix of venues to meet community needs and ensure a vibrant sports and event environment in NSW. A key action of the strategy includes developing Tier 1 stadia and their precincts.
A new Tier 1 stadium at Moore Park is currently under construction, which has resulted in the displacement of Cricket NSW from its base at Moore Park, due to the demolition of the previous Cricket NSW facilities. These facilities are not proposed to be replaced as part of the Master Plan for the Moore Park precinct. Cricket NSW is temporarily operating within SOP at 6 Herb Elliot Drive, however the proposal the subject of this application would provide for a permanent home.
The permanent relocation of the Cricket NSW facilities from Moore Park to the proposed site would therefore facilitate the Moore Park stadium upgrade.
3.3 NSW State Infrastructure Strategy 2018-2038
The State Infrastructure Strategy identifies the role of the NSW Government investment in its stadia network, with the aim of attracting high-value international and national events to NSW. Upgrading major stadia, including at Moore Park, is identified as a critical component for investment in cultural, sporting and tourism infrastructure compared to other states and global cities. The permanent relocation
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 10
of Cricket NSW’s facilities will assist in facilitating the Moore Park stadium upgrade and will itself deliver a modern facility to meet the needs of a growing population and economy.
3.4 Sydney Olympic Park Master Plan 2030 (2018 Review)
The Master Plan was reviewed in 2016 and was updated in August 2018 (the 2018 Review) to incorporate the updated planning strategy for the area arising from the Greater Sydney Region Plan and Central District Plan. It also reflects changes to traffic and access conditions from the WestConnex project.
The 2018 Review provides for an overall capacity of up to 1.96 million m2 of GFA and a projected daily population of 34,000 workers, 20,000 visitors, 23,500 residents and 5000 students.
Whilst the 2018 Review applies to the site, the planning provisions for the site are contained in the Parklands Plan of Management (PoM) (2010). The proposal is consistent with the 2018 Review planning controls (where relevant) and Parklands PoM (Appendix C) and satisfies design excellence requirements (Section 6.2).
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 11
4 Statutory Context
4.1 State Significant Development
The proposal is classified as State significant development (SSD) under section 4.36 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act), as it comprises development on land within SOP and has a CIV in excess of $10 million ($49.6 million) under clause 2(f) of Schedule 2 of State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011 (SRD SEPP).
Therefore, the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces is the consent authority for the project.
The application can be determined by the Executive Director, Regions, Industry and Key Sites under delegation as:
• a political disclosure statement has not been made • there are less than 50 public submissions (other than Council) in the nature of objections • the Council of the area in which the development is to be carried out has not made an objection under the mandatory requirements for community participation in Schedule 1 of the Act.
4.2 Permissibility
The site is zoned RE1 Public Recreation and partly zoned SP2 Infrastructure under State Environmental Planning Policy (State Significant Precincts) 2005. The proposed development is permissible within these zones, as indoor recreation and outdoor recreation is permitted with consent within the RE1 zone, and roads (the only portion of the development where the SP2 zone applies) are permissible with consent in this zone.
4.3 Mandatory Matters for Consideration
Section 4.15 of the EP&A Act outlines the matters that a consent authority must take into consideration when determining development applications. These matters are summarised as:
• the provisions of environmental planning instruments (including draft instruments), development control plans, planning agreements, and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (EP&A Regulation) • the environmental, social and economic impacts of the development • the suitability of the site • any submissions, and • the public interest, including the objects in the EP&A Act and the encouragement of ecologically sustainable development (ESD).
The Department has considered all of these matters in its assessment of the project, as well as the Applicant’s consideration of environmental planning instruments in its EIS, as summarised in Section 6 of this report. The Department has also given consideration to the relevant provisions of the EP&A Act, including environmental planning instruments in Appendix C.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 12
4.4 Biodiversity Development Assessment Report
Section 7.9(2) of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act) requires all applications for SSD to be accompanied by a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) unless the Planning Agency Head and the Environment Agency Head determine that the proposed development is not likely to have any significant impact on biodiversity values.
As part of its application, the Applicant prepared a BDAR, which concluded that the proposed development is not likely to have any significant impact on biodiversity values, subject to mitigation and management measures and the purchase of biodiversity credits.
The Department has assessed biodiversity impacts in Section 6.9.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 13
5 Engagement
5.1 Department’s engagement
In accordance with Schedule 1 of the EP&A Act, the Department publicly exhibited the application from Thursday 21 November until Wednesday 18 December 2019 (28 days). The application was made publicly available on the Department’s website, at Service Centre NSW, and exhibited at Parramatta City Council.
The Department placed a public exhibition notice in the Sydney Morning Herald and Daily Telegraph on Wednesday 20 November 2019, and notified adjoining landholders, Council and relevant government agencies in writing.
The Department has considered the comments raised in Council, government agencies and public submissions during the assessment of the application (Section 6 and Appendix B) and by recommended conditions in the consent at Appendix D.
5.2 Summary of submissions
The Department received 51 submissions in response to the application. The submissions comprised of:
• seven submissions from government agencies • one submission from Council (providing comments) • 28 submissions from special interest groups • 15 submissions from the public.
Of the 51 submissions received, 12 provided comment, 29 were in support and 10 submissions objected to the proposal.
A link to the full copy of the submissions is provided in Appendix A.
5.3 Key issues – Government Agencies
The key issues raised by Government agencies are summarised in Table 2 below.
Table 2 | Summary of government agency submissions
Government Agency Comments
Sydney Olympic Park SOPA supported the proposal but provided the following comments: Authority (SOPA) • Oval 2 should be used by the public and connected with the adjoining network of public spaces along the foreshore • the existing boundary fence should be removed, and new fencing should be kept to a minimum
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 14
• the proposal should achieve a high design standard due to its prominent riverfront location and address sustainable design principles • the proposal must address SOPA’s Biodiversity Management Policy regarding purchasing of off-site credits, tree loss, and removal of weed species • further information is required regarding water quality, including addressing SOPA’s Stormwater and Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy regarding harvesting and re-use of roof water, and providing measures to capture and treat run-off potential pesticides on the playing surfaces • further information is required regarding car parking, including consideration of cumulative impacts associated with existing users of the surrounding area, and any proposed alterations to boat trailer parking spaces • SOPA’s Parklands PoM must be addressed with regards to safety, minimising environmental impact, and lighting of Oval 2 • the proposal is mostly adequate to maintain the integrity of the remediated lands, and manage risk associated with contamination and soil vapour/hazardous ground gases, however requires some amendments for further consideration • confirmation must be provided as to whether works outside the lease boundary, including an upgrade of the public amenities block adjacent the Parramatta River, are proposed as part of this application • the proposal should address SOPA’s Parklands Future Directions Statement 2030.
Environment EPA made the following comments: Protection Authority • the acoustic assessment must address the specific characteristics of (EPA) potential noise impacts, such as the repeated intermittent impulsive noise caused by striking a ball, and a Noise Management Plan should be submitted as part of the RtS • contamination can be adequately managed in accordance with the relevant requirements, however a Hazardous Materials Survey should be provided as part of the RtS • conditions of consent should ensure the site is suitable for the proposed use and appropriately managed in the long term, and also ensure compliance with standard requirements for management of waste, water, and air quality.
Environment, Energy EESG made the following comments: and Science Group • the Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) requires (EESG) further consideration of the Green and Golden Bell Frog, Large Bent- wing Bats, and Wilsonia backhousei plants • the conditions recommended in the Applicant’s Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment should be included in any determination • no concerns are raised regarding flood risk management issues.
Heritage NSW Heritage NSW considers there will be no impacts to the State listed Silverwater Prison Complex on the adjoining site, and no impacts on historical archaeology, with any potential historical archaeological finds able to be managed by conditions.
Transport for NSW TfNSW stated amended SIDRA modelling should be provided to TfNSW, (TfNSW) and conditions of consent should require provision of bicycle parking and end-of-trip facilities for staff and visitors, and preparation of a Travel Plan.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 15
Department of DCJ did not raise objection to the proposal, and made the following Communities and comments: Justice (DCJ) • perimeter fencing along the shared boundary with the adjacent Silverwater Correctional Complex should be endorsed by DCJ, to maintain privacy and security • further consideration should be given to the hours of evening use of the outdoor facilities and other noise/light generating activities on the adjacent prison inmate accommodation • construction and operational vehicular access should be limited primarily to Silverwater Road/Clyde Street, to reduce conflict with prison inmate movements and security operations • further consideration should be given to impacts of recording and televising of cricket matches on security for the Silverwater Correctional Complex.
Sydney Water Sydney Water stated an application would be required following issue of any consent to confirm requirements for drinking water and wastewater servicing.
5.4 Key issues – Council and Community
5.4.1 Council Key Issues
Parramatta City Council (Council) provided comments as summarised in Table 3 below.
Table 3 | Summary of Council submission to the exhibition of the application
Parramatta City Council
Council supported the proposal subject to the following issues being addressed: • public open space, including the implications of removing publicly accessible community fields, further consultation with key community users, accommodation of the Newington Gunners Soccer Club at the site or an alternate location, community and club access to the indoor and outdoor nets and Oval 2, and allocation by SOPA of other available land for community uses, rather than elite sporting uses • pedestrian and cycle access, including locating the path on the western boundary adjacent to the road for lighting and safety, accessibility to the foreshore path, retention of the pedestrian/bicycle connection between the Silverwater Bridge and foreshore, clarification regarding impacts on bicycle lanes to the south of the site, and pedestrian/cycle access at the end of Newington Road • design, including integration of the built form with the surrounding area and that the existing foreshore public amenities building should be replaced • provision of floodlighting to Oval 2 and nets, to maximise local usage • biodiversity, including either retaining trees of medium-high value and hollow-bearing trees or offsetting them with endemic replacements and nest boxes, and integration of the Landscape Plan with the arborist, ecological and stormwater reports • earthworks, including clarification regarding the amount of cut/fill, and associated impacts • car parking, including minimising reliance on the adjacent Council car park during events with 1000 attendees or more, and preparation of an Event Traffic Management Plan to address this • stormwater, including addressing SOPA’s Stormwater and Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy, providing consideration of harvesting and re-use of roof water and management of runoff • flooding, including revision of the Flood Impact Assessment to consider potential increases in flood velocities and hazard, and address flood risk
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 16
• contributions, including confirmation these are payable to Council under the Auburn Contribution Plan 2007 (Amendment 1).
5.4.2 Community Key Issues
The Department received 15 public submissions, comprising nine objections, two submissions supporting and four submissions commenting on the proposal.
The majority (73 per cent) of community members who made a submission live within 5 km of the site, with the remaining 27 per cent living within 5-100 km from the proposal.
The key issues raised in objections included:
• the proposal will not benefit the local community, and will impact on health by reducing the amount of publicly available recreation space • no suitable alternative venue has been proposed for teams currently using the grounds, and further consultation should be undertaken with the Newington Gunners Soccer Club and residents of Newington • the Newington Gunners Soccer Club should be given access to the new facility during the cricket off-season until SOPA provides additional fields envisaged in its Master Plan, and adequate lighting should be provided to allow for winter training • if the proposal were to be approved, a condition of consent should require SOPA to bring forward the delivery of the new field at the Archery Centre that is proposed in its Master Plan, within five years of the date of any consent.
Public comments raised issues consistent with those raised in objections, including further consultation, access to the facility for the Newington Gunners Soccer Club, and SOPA delivering the new sporting fields proposed in its Master Plan.
The key issue raised in submissions of support noted the proposal would offset the loss of the previous facilities at Moore Park with a more centrally located facility that would improve cricket development through co-location of high-performance and other facilities.
5.4.3 Special interest groups
The Department received 28 unique submissions from special interest groups, comprising one objection and 27 submissions supporting the proposal.
The key issues raised in objections were consistent with those raised in public objections from the community, with the addition of the following:
• the Social Impact Assessment does not properly assess impacts on the existing and future SOP, and is inconsistent with the active recreation space planning undertaken by SOPA in its Master Plan, as the facility is identified as being required to meet demands associated with the increased density identified in the Master Plan • the proposed new facility to house the Newington Gunners Soccer Club at Eric Primrose Reserve represents a decrease in the number of available fields and does not have adequate car parking spaces.
The key issues raised in submissions of support were consistent with those raised in community submissions.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 17
5.5 Response to submissions
Following exhibition of the application, the Department placed copies of all submissions received on its website and requested the Applicant provide a response to the issues raised in the submissions.
On 16 April 2020, the Applicant provided a Response to Submissions (RtS) on the comments raised during the exhibition of the proposal. In conjunction with the RtS report, the Applicant made amendments to the project design, including alterations to building articulation and massing, minor changes to building materials, and realignment of the community and café building.
The Applicant also provided further justification for the proposed layout, advertising and signage, access to the community cricket oval and permeability with the surrounding parklands, and construction noise and vibration. The RtS was made publicly available on the Department’s website.
The Department received six submissions on the proposal, comprising a submission making comments from Council and five submissions making comments from government agencies.
A summary of issues raised by government agencies is provided at Table 4 and by Council in Table 5. A link to all submissions is provided at Appendix A.
No public submissions were received.
Table 4 | Summary of government agency submissions to the RtS
Sydney Olympic Park Authority (SOPA)
SOPA provided comments in relation to: • there should be no net tree canopy loss within five years of replacement planting, and that fencing should be resolved through a condition requiring a Public Domain Plan • compensatory habitats, including that these should be located within SOP, to be resolved by a condition requiring re-standing of hollow trees and provision of fauna habitat boxes • design, including that changes made in response to submissions on the proposal have improved the design, built form, visual impact and pedestrian connectivity through the site, and recommended a condition stating any modification that needs consent and proposes amendments to the building design, fencing strategy or access points to the site should be reviewed by the State Design Review Panel, or alternatively, SOPA’s Design Review Panel • conditions requiring the proposal to address the SOPA Stormwater Management and Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy, assess the adequacy of the existing drainage infrastructure, and ensure there is adequate water irrigation supply. SOPA recommended a number of conditions to manage further matters, including contamination, lighting and construction management.
Environment Protection Authority (EPA)
EPA made the following comments: • the proposal is likely to have the best possible noise outcomes given the proximity to nearby receivers, however, the acoustic assessment should be amended to include details of the exact predicted levels at receivers and modification factors for impulsive noise. The EPA later clarified this advice, stating that it does not require any further assessment to be undertaken, however noted that operational noise will need to be carefully managed, including through consultation with the surrounding community • no concerns are raised regarding the proposed Operational Noise Management Plan
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 18
• no concerns are raised regarding contamination, subject to recommended conditions, including the engagement of a site auditor for the duration of works, and the provision of a Hazardous Materials Survey of all existing structures and infrastructure prior to commencement of works.
Transport for NSW (TfNSW)
TfNSW made the following comments: • the proposal is satisfactory with regards to traffic generation, and no mitigation measures are required on the surrounding road network • conditions should require provision of bicycle parking and end-of-trip facilities for staff and visitors, preparation of a Travel Plan and Construction Pedestrian and Traffic Management Plan.
Environment, Energy and Science Group (EESG)
EESG stated the Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) requires amendments regarding the mapping of water bodies and grass species, information on where the Green and Golden Bell Frog (GGBF) has been recorded, and offsets required for the GGBF and exotic grassland.
Foreshores and Waterways Planning and Development Advisory Committee (The Committee)
The Committee raised no specific issues in relation to the proposal.
Table 5 | Summary of Council submission to the RtS
Parramatta City Council
Council acknowledged that the Applicant addressed a number of issues previously raised, however stated that further consideration is required prior to any determination regarding the following (although noted the Department may wish to impose conditions regarding these matters): • removal of publicly accessible community fields, including that this has not been adequately offset and would therefore increase demand on Council’s facilities. A reasonable level of community and local cricket club access to the indoor and outdoor nets and ovals should be secured through a Memorandum of Understanding, amended PoM or condition • urban design and amenity matters, including the integration of the existing foreshore amenities block with the proposal and ensuring the proposal is sympathetic to the existing and future foreshore edge. Council stated the following matters could be addressed by conditions of consent: • developer contributions, with objection raised should a condition not be imposed requiring contributions, which are required due to employment generation • provision of a foreshore path encompassing the full width of the foreshore for the site (including the frontage of the EPA site) and an off-road shared pedestrian/cycle connection between Clyde Street and the foreshore, and demonstration that public transport can adequately service the site • preparation of a Biodiversity Management Sub-Plan that addresses protection measures, pre- clearance surveys, and offsetting of the removal of hollow-bearing trees • landscaping, including clarification of total tree removal, retention of medium-high value trees where possible, and an integrated approach with the arborist, ecological and stormwater reports • stormwater, including a Stormwater Management Plan that addresses SOPA’s Stormwater and Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy, and details of works proposed with the drainage easement • flooding, including provision of a Flood Risk Management Plan • traffic, including preparation of a Green Travel Plan and Event Traffic Management Plan for events with 1000 attendees or more
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 19
• contamination, in accordance with Council’s previously recommended conditions.
5.6 Revised Response to Submissions
Following consultation on the RtS, the Department placed copies of all submissions received on its website and requested the Applicant provide a response to the issues raised in the submissions.
On 3 June 2020, the Applicant provided a Revised Response to Submissions (RRtS) (Appendix A). The RRtS made several clarifications on the proposal, including regarding:
• the loss of the existing sporting fields and community access to the proposal facility • tree removal and required offsets, including an updated BDAR, Landscape Statement and Tree Management Plan, and Arboricultural Statement and Tree Protection Concept Plan • development contributions, including a detailed request that these not be imposed • other matters, including signage, construction timing, and operational details • a response to conditions recommended by Council and government agencies on other matters, including public domain works, contamination, signage and stormwater.
The RRtS was made publicly available on the Department’s website and referred to the Environment, Energy and Science Group (EESG), which stated that the previously identified biodiversity issues have been addressed, and the updated BDAR has adequately assessed the additional impacts.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 20
6 Assessment
6.1 Key issues
The Department has considered the proposal, the issues raised in submissions and the Applicant’s RtS, RRtS and further information in the assessment of the application. The Department considers the key issues associated with the proposal are:
• design excellence • built form and visual impact • site layout • public domain • traffic, parking and access • existing use of the site • contributions • biodiversity • public amenities.
Each of these key issues is discussed in the following sections of the report. The Department’s consideration regarding other issues relating to this application are addressed in Section 6.11 of this report.
6.2 Design excellence
Clause 30 of Appendix 11 of the State Significant Precincts SEPP (SSP SEPP) contains a number of matters that the consent authority must consider when deciding if a development exhibits design excellence. In summary, these matters comprise urban design, amenity, landscape and sustainability considerations.
The Applicant submitted a Design Excellence Strategy documenting the design process leading to the proposal and outlining how design excellence would be achieved.
Prior to lodgement, the design was reviewed by the State Design Review Panel (SDRP), who initially raised a number of concerns with the proposal, including:
• the overall layout of the proposal • the need to reduce the massing of the main building to improve its engagement with the public domain • the need to incorporate public amenities into the proposal • excessive fencing and improvement of integration with the surrounding public access network.
In response, the Applicant provided further justification for the proposed layout and made amendments to the project design, including:
• reducing the massing of the main building by providing greater articulation, using more lightweight materials, and realigning the community and café building to better engage with the surrounding public domain
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 21
• incorporating public amenities into the proposal in a location accessible from the surrounding public open space network • clarifying that new fencing is only proposed around the perimeter of the two outdoor cricket net areas.
Following its review of the amended proposal, the SDRP raised no concerns regarding it achieving design excellence, subject to resolving the following matters in the RtS:
• excessive use of transparent and lightweight materials • fencing • visual impact • external shading along the western walls • provision of a detailed Landscape Plan.
SOPA stated the Applicant had made improvements to the built form and visual impact of the proposal through the SDRP process, and recommended a condition stating that any modification that requires consent and proposes amendments to the building design, fencing strategy or access points to the site may need to be reviewed by the SDRP, or alternatively, SOPA’s Design Review Panel. Council did not raise concerns with the proposed built form design.
The Department has considered the advice from the SDRP and the matters to be considered under clause 30 of Appendix 11 of the SSP SEPP and is satisfied the development exhibits design excellence as:
• the main building has been improved through a reduction of its bulk and massing by providing greater articulation (Figure 10), particularly at the entrance and community building (Figure 11) • the proposed design, materials and detailing are appropriate for the building type and location, and the use of transparent materials such as translucent cladding, glass, reinforced concrete cladding and sandstone panels softens the built form (Figure 11) • the proposed materials would provide a contemporary finish to the building, whilst integrating with the materials used in the surrounding industrial areas • fencing has been limited by the use of main building as the western site boundary where possible, and where proposed, is necessary for functionality and its visual impact reduced through the use of transparent mesh and removable poles for the cricket nets (Figure 12) • the proposal would enhance the quality and amenity of the public domain by sensitively integrating with it and providing additional connections to the foreshore walkway • the proposed landscaping would retain existing vegetation around the edges of the parkland, replant all trees on site, and is consistent with SOPA parklands planting requirements • it is consistent with Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles, through the provision of clear sightlines, adequate lighting and wayfinding signage • passive solar design such as external shading along the western walls is provided by the overhanging fascia (Figure 11) and high-performance glazing limits resource and energy requirements.
Overall, the Department is satisfied that the design excellence process has provided a rigorous and robust assessment that has improved the design of the proposal, resulting in it achieving design excellence. The Department also recommends a condition, consistent with that requested by SOPA, to ensure the design integrity of the proposal is maintained throughout the life of the project.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 22
Figure 10 | Proposed main building before (top) and after (bottom) design amendments (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 23
Figure 11 | Main entrance on western side of facility, forming the western boundary of the site (in part), indicating the main building (left), entrance, café and community building (far right) (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Figure 12 | View of practice nets and northern facade of main building (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report) Note: works in the foreground are not part of the proposal
6.3 Built form and visual impact
Built form
The key built form elements of the proposal include:
• the two-storey cricket centre (Figure 13) • indoor training facility (linked to the single storey café and community building (Figure 14)) • 73 outdoor practice cricket wickets.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 24
The two-storey cricket centre would have a maximum height of 12 m (RL 17.3) and a GFA of 7252 m2 (5748 m2 on the ground floor and 1504 m2 on the first floor). The single-storey machinery and storage shed would have a height of 3.7 m and GFA of 665 m2.
The outdoor nets would have an approximate length of 50 m, including the run up, and would have a height of between 3 m and 4 m. The FSR for the site is approximately 0.122:1.
As part of its RtS, the Applicant provided articulated areas to the northern and southern facades of the main building, and at the entrance point between the indoor training/high performance facility, café and community facilities building (Figures 11 and 13).
Figure 13 | Main cricket centre building and outdoor practice nets viewed from the north of the site (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Figure 14 | Community building (left) and café (right) viewed from covered main entry (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 25
The Department notes that no height or floor space ratio controls apply to the site. As such, the Department has undertaken a merit assessment of the proposed built form, and considers it acceptable because:
• the large floorplate and 12 m building height are consistent with the built form found within the surrounding industrial area • the massing of the proposal has improved through the design excellence process, including amendments to provide greater articulation to the building and better address the surrounding public domain (Figure 11) • the appearance of the buildings would be softened by the use of high-quality materials, including transparent materials such as translucent cladding and glass reinforced concrete cladding (Section 6.2) • the built form of the proposal would be appropriately screened and softened by the retained and proposed landscaping, including white picket fencing to the main oval, and informal grassed seating • the main building is appropriately setback 50 m from the Parramatta River and therefore would have an acceptable visual impact on the foreshore • the proposed form of the facility is necessary for it to function effectively (for example, the requirement for 15 indoor nets adjacent to each other occupies half the floorplate of the main building) • the proposal would not result in any significant overshadowing, view loss or any other amenity impacts on the surrounding area (Section 6.11).
The Department concludes the built form of the proposal is acceptable as it would sensitively integrate with the surrounding area, whilst providing for adequate functionality.
Visual impact
The Applicant submitted a Visual Impact Assessment (VIA), to consider the potential view impacts of the proposal from four key public locations around the site.
The VIA found that the proposal would have a high visual impact when viewed from the existing north- western car park (circled red in Figure 15) and a moderate impact from Silverwater Bridge and the foreshore opposite the site to the north (circled orange in Figure 15). Figures 16 to 18 illustrate the existing and proposed views from these three locations.
The VIA concludes that while the proposal would result in some significant visual impacts, on balance the proposal would have an acceptable visual impact because the impact of the change is low, will not obstruct or fundamentally alter the nature of views obtained from key vantage points as identified in the SOPA Master Plan 2030 (2018 Review), and will not result in view loss from locations in the public domain.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 26
Figure 15 | Viewpoint location map - medium impact locations shown circled orange red and high impact circled red (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Figure 16 | Viewpoint 4: North-western car park (left: existing; right: proposed) (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 27
Figure 17 | Viewpoint 2: From across the Parramatta River (top: existing; bottom: proposed) (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Figure 18 | Viewpoint 1: From Silverwater Bridge (top: existing; bottom: proposed) (Source: Department photograph)
The Department has assessed the VIA and considers that although there would be some visual impacts, these are acceptable because:
• the built form remains consistent with the character of the surrounding area and would therefore sit comfortably within the surrounding parkland setting • the trees within this setting would screen and soften the proposed built form • views from the car park (Figure 16) are subject to a short viewing time • the proposal would not detract from the scenic quality of the Parramatta River and foreshore, or views to and from these areas, aided by the appropriate building height and setback (Figure 17)
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 28
• the visual impact of the cricket nets is reduced by the use of transparent mesh and removable poles which allows the nets to be stacked when not in use • the magnitude of change in the view from the Silverwater Road bridge (Figure 18) would be moderate due to its elevated position, and the view has a short viewing time due to its low sensitivity • the proposal is generally consistent with the current recreational use of the site • the proposed signage zones would integrate sensitively with the proposed building and surrounding setting (Section 6.11 and Appendix C).
The Department therefore concludes that the proposal would have an acceptable level of visual impact as there is no view loss from key locations in the public domain and it will not obstruct or fundamentally alter the nature of views obtained from key vantage points as identified in the SOPA Master Plan 2030 (2018 Review).
6.4 Site Layout
The proposed site layout is shown at Figure 19 and demonstrates the proposed public domain areas within the site. The Applicant states this is the only layout that could satisfy the facility’s operational requirements whilst also addressing the site’s environmental constraints.
Community facility
Scoreboard
Oval 2
Figure 19 | Proposed site layout, showing site constraints (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
The SDRP initially raised concerns with the proposed layout, suggesting Oval 2 should be relocated closer to the foreshore (where the outdoor practice nets and main building are located). However, the SDRP accepted the Applicant’s rationale and stated the chosen layout has demonstrated rigorous
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 29
options testing of the numerous constraints affecting the site. The layout is also supported by SOPA and the EPA, and Council did not raise concerns.
The Department has reviewed the proposed site layout and considers it is acceptable because: • it is supported by the Applicant’s contamination consultant, the site auditor, the EPA, SOPA and Council with regards to contamination impacts, and the buildings and facilities have been included in a part of the site deemed able to be made suitable for the use • the overland flow path running south-north through the site that drains into the SOPA controlled contamination area would not be impacted by additional runoff from hardstand areas • the vehicular access into the controlled contamination area (required by SOPA) would be maintained • all buildings can be located above the 1 in 100-year flood level • the location of the main building would provide for level access and is adjacent to the main car parking area off Clyde Street in the north-western part of the site • it would enable the facility to operate effectively by co-locating facilities in one building that is close to the outdoor facilities and would provide ovals that meet the minimum size requirements.
The Department therefore concludes the proposed layout is acceptable as it would ensure the facility operatives effectively, without adverse environmental impacts.
6.5 Public domain
Public domain works
The key public domain works include the proposed pathways, the main oval and Oval 2. Two pedestrian pathways are proposed through the site to the foreshore (Figures 20 and 21), along with a perimeter running track around the main oval (Figure 10).
The main cricket oval measures 136 m long x 144 m wide, having a total area of 16,040 m2 and surrounded by white picket fencing and informal grassed seating. Oval 2 would have a minimum diameter of 100 m, and a total area of 6,365 m2.
Council raised concerns regarding the proposal public domain works, including the suitability of their integration with the foreshore and the level of public access to the facility. Council stated that conditions should ensure the following is provided:
• a path the full width of the foreshore past the site (including the frontage of the EPA controlled landfill and leachate treatment area (Figure 2)) • an off-road shared pedestrian/cycle connection between Clyde Street and the foreshore.
The Applicant has provided further clarification on the proposed level of public access to the facility, stating that Oval 2 will be available for public use for passive recreation when not used for high- performance programs, pathway programs, school and community cricket programs. The Applicant expects this would provide limited capacity for use by the general public.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 30
Figure 20 | Proposed public circulation (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Figure 21 | Proposed path connecting to foreshore walkway in the north-east area of the site (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 31
The Department has reviewed the proposed public domain areas and pedestrian pathways and considers they are acceptable because:
• the two pathways connecting the foreshore and adjoining network of public spaces (Figure 20) would enhance public access to the site, aided by wayfinding signage and lighting • the proposal includes a new pedestrian link along the southern site boundary (Figure 20) • the proposed café and amenities would further activate the public domain • access to the foreshore 24-hours-a-day, seven-days-a-week cannot be provided given the existing foreshore path and proposed facility are only open during daylight hours • the proposal would be consistent with CPTED principles, providing adequate sightlines to and from the ovals, lighting and signage, and therefore a low rating for opportunities for crime.
The Department notes Council’s request that the foreshore path be upgraded to separate pedestrians and cyclists. However, the Department considers the foreshore path is outside the development site and therefore beyond the scope of works of this application, although these works could be considered within the scope of a potential future application for this area.
The Applicant has agreed to conditions being imposed to provide further connections, which the Department proposes to secure through a Public Domain Plan, including:
• an off-road bicycle facility or shared cyclist and pedestrian facilities between Clyde Street and the foreshore to enhance safety, given that this is currently traversed through the car park • a path on the western boundary adjacent to the road that would be safe and adequately lit.
The Department therefore concludes the proposed public domain areas and pedestrian pathways are acceptable as they would improve connectivity to and from the surrounding public open space network, and would ensure the facility operatives effectively, without adverse environmental impacts.
Landscaping
The proposal includes landscaping works, fencing (Figure 22) and soft landscape planting. Fencing is proposed around the perimeter of the two cricket net areas made of transparent mesh, and also includes removable poles which allow them to be stacked when not in use. The fencing would provide for security of the site, and protection for users and the public by preventing impact from cricket balls.
The proposed landscaping includes the removal of existing weed species and the planting of species indigenous to the local area, such as the Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest community. The planting includes 770 trees of varying sizes, including species with the potential to become large canopy trees, to ensure a sufficient density of planting to maintain the existing urban tree canopy coverage of approximately 40% after five years.
SOPA stated that fencing detail should be resolved through a condition requiring Public Domain Plan.
No public submissions raised concerns about landscaping.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 32
Figure 22 | Proposed fencing locations (Source: Applicant’s Architectural and Urban Design Report)
The Department has reviewed the proposed landscaping works and carefully considered the issues raised in submissions, and considers the works are acceptable because:
• it would retain existing vegetation around the edges of the parkland and integrate sensitively with the foreshore edge through the use of appropriate materials, planting and level access • the proposed plant species will be indigenous to the local area, being predominantly derived from the pre-existing Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest, and would restore the diversity of flora where possible • plant species are considerate of soil type, consistent with SOPA parklands planting requirements, and existing weed species will be removed • new trees would be re-planted on a two-for-one basis and would ensure a sufficient density of planting to maintain the existing urban tree canopy coverage of approximately 40 per cent after five
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 33
years, which would assist in softening the appearance of the development from key public viewpoints including Silverwater Road and the Parramatta River • detailed fencing design, including style, materiality and measures to keep fencing to a minimum can be provided in a Fencing Strategy, to be secured by condition • adequate security would be provided through the proposed fencing, closure of the site between dusk and dawn, and passive surveillance from staff and players using the facility.
The Department recommends a condition requiring the preparation of a detailed Landscape Plan, to be integrated with ecological, stormwater and arborist requirements.
The Department therefore concludes that subject to the recommended conditions, the proposed landscaping would provide appropriate planting to complement the proposed built form.
6.6 Traffic, parking and access
The facility would employ up to 170 staff and 80 contracted athletes. At peak times this would result in up to 120 people arriving and leaving the facility simultaneously. The proposal includes the following types of events:
• fan/event days associated with professional cricket teams, accommodating up to 1500 people and expected to occur approximately once or twice per year • match days, including big bash fan days and “non fan-facing” match days (such as Sheffield Shield, women’s national league and Second XI matches) with attendances of up to 1500 people • community cricket programs involving over 200 activities and 10,000 participants, in addition to the Cricket Performance Programs featuring over 3,500 activities and catering for 25,000 participants. The indoor cricket centre is proposed to have 50,000 visitors per year. This includes other events such as coaching workshops and courses, holiday clinics and school gala days (with up to 600 children arriving by bus for some events).
The Applicant submitted a Transport Impact Assessment (TIA) with the proposal, which assessed potential traffic, parking and access impacts. The Department has assessed these impacts separately below.
Traffic generation
To assess the potential traffic impacts associated with the proposal, the Applicant’s TIA assessed three scenarios representative of typical and extraordinary peak conditions, including: normal weekday core operations, normal weekend peak demands, and occasional special event peak demands.
The TIA finds that the proposal would generate:
• 72 vehicle trips per hour during the AM peak period and 106 vehicles trips during the PM peak period on a typical weekday • 156 vehicles trips during the PM peak period during the worst-case weekday scenario, which incorporates a community cricket event during the evening • 650 trips per hour during the weekend peak period of 11 am – 1 pm, for special events.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 34
TfNSW stated the proposal is satisfactory with regards to traffic generation and no mitigation measures are required for the surrounding road network, and recommended a condition requiring the preparation of a Travel Plan. Council requested a condition requiring the preparation of a Green Travel Plan.
The Department has reviewed the traffic generation associated with the proposal, and considers it would not adversely impact on the existing road network because:
• during weekdays the proposal would only result in minor delays of up to 7.6 seconds in the PM peak, noting the Level of Service (LoS) at the Silverwater Road/Clyde Street intersection is already at level F (the lowest LoS) • on weekdays the intersection of Holker Street and Newington Road would continue to operate at LoS A, with minor delays of up to 0.8 seconds in the PM peak • for special events during the weekend peak, although the LoS at the Silverwater Road/Clyde Street intersection would reduce from LoS B to D, and from LoS A to B at Holker Street/Newington Road, the delays of up to 17.3 and 7.1 seconds respectively are considered relatively minor and overall would not prevent the surrounding traffic network from operating effectively • normal weekend activity (i.e. non-special event days) would generate a maximum of 75 trips per hour, significantly less than the 650 trips generated by special weekend events, and is therefore acceptable by virtue of its substantially reduced impact.
Despite some intersections performing at poor LOS in some instances, the Department does not consider that upgrades are required to the traffic network because:
• typical weekday operations will have minimal impact on the traffic network • the events that cause the impact would not be of a significant size (up to a maximum of 1500 people) and would be infrequent, at maximum of a few times per year for Sheffield Shield match days and one to two times per year for fan days • the site is located within walking distance (approximately 400 m) of bus services on Silverwater Road and Holker Street, which provide a direct connection to Olympic Park Station • the site has access to the shared pedestrian path/cycleway along the Parramatta River foreshore, which would be further enhanced by the proposed additional connections • Council and government agencies did not raise concerns regarding traffic generation.
The Department proposes a condition of consent requiring a Travel Plan to encourage the use of public transport and discourage single-use trips.
The Department concludes there is sufficient capacity in the transport network to accommodate the additional traffic movements generated by facility, and that the recommended conditions will manage any potential residual impacts.
Parking
The proposal includes 221 car spaces, comprised of 111 spaces in the foreshore car park in the north- western corner of the site and 110 spaces in the car park accessed off Newington Road in the south- eastern corner of the site (Figure 7). These car parks are on land owned by SOPA and within the site boundaries. During special events, the Applicant proposes to use Oval 2 and the Clyde Street car park to provide informal parking for 250 and 89 vehicles respectively. The Clyde Street car park is adjacent to the site on the western side of the Silverwater Bridge and is owned by Council.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 35
Council stated that the reliance on the adjacent Clyde Street car park during special events is not acceptable, and therefore an Event Traffic Management Plan should be prepared for events with 1000 attendees or more, to minimise its use.
The Applicant’s TIA assumes an 80 per cent mode share of people arriving by car and occupancy rate of 2.5 patrons per car for special events. The Department considers this is acceptable, given that these are typically social occasions and family orientated. The Department considers the TIA has suitably assessed car parking provision, which is outlined in Table 6.
Table 6 | Proposed car parking provision
Operational use parking Total spaces required Total spaces proposed Spare capacity
Weekday Core 175 221 46 Operations (typical business day)
Weekend peak 118 221 103 demand (junior game days)
Occasional special event 500 560* 60 (fan days/match days)
*Achieved by the additional use of 250 spaces on Oval 2 and 89 spaces in the Clyde Street public car park
The Department considers the Applicant’s approach to car parking acceptable because:
• there would be no reliance on on-street parking • weekday core and weekend peak demand can be accommodated with spare capacity, and therefore so could other proposed events such as stakeholder meetings and community matches • parking associated with community use of the facility could be accommodated by the spare capacity, assuming a ratio of 1.5 persons per car • special event demand can be accommodated through the use of Oval 2 and Clyde Street public car park, however a condition requiring an Event Traffic Management Plan would ensure the use of the Clyde Street car park is carefully managed and minimised where possible • cumulative parking impacts are acceptable, as sufficient car parking would be available for other users of the surrounding parklands, including foreshore path users, through the spare capacity within the site and the Clyde Street Council car park • six accessible spaces would be provided, which exceeds the four spaces required under typical business day operations • the proposed 20 bicycle parking spaces and end-of-trip facilities would assist in reducing the demand for car parking.
The Department recommends conditions requiring 221 car parking spaces, including six accessible spaces, and to ensure the existing 22 boat trailer parking spaces are retained as proposed. The Department also recommends a condition requiring an Event Traffic Management Plan, to ensure car parking is appropriately provided and managed during events and fan days.
The Department therefore concludes the proposed car parking is adequate as sufficient spaces are provided and would not result in adverse traffic generation impacts on the surrounding road network.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 36
6.7 Existing use of the site
The Department has assessed the potential impacts associated with the replacement of the existing three playing fields, 450-seat covered grandstand and associated car park.
Council stated the removal of publicly accessible fields would increase demand on Council’s facilities, and provision should be made to secure public access to the facility through the PoM or a Memorandum of Understanding.
SOPA raised concerns in its comments on the EIS regarding public access, including that Oval 2 should be used by the public and connected with the adjoining network of public spaces along the foreshore. However, the Department notes that SOPA did not raise these concerns in its RtS comments.
Public objections raised concerns about the loss of the public open space and displacement of current users, including the Newington Gunners Soccer Club. Public submissions also stated SOPA should address the replacement of this facility in its future planning for sporting fields.
Public submissions of support stated the proposal would offset the loss of the previous facilities at Moore Park with a more centrally located facility, improve cricket development, provide open space for community use, and have broader public health benefits.
As part of its RtS and RRtS, the Applicant provided further clarification on the current/previous use of the facilities, stating that in addition to use by the Newington Gunners Soccer Club, the main playing field was used for 312 hours in 2019, predominantly by elite participants from Football Federation Australia, Wellington Phoenix and Milan Academy. The Applicant stated the other two fields were used three nights per week by the Newington Gunners Soccer Club, and two nights per week by a dog training organisation.
The Applicant also provided further clarification on the proposed level of public access to the facility, stating that Oval 2 will be available for public use for passive recreation when not used for high- performance programs, pathway programs, school and community cricket programs. The Applicant expects this would provide limited capacity for use by the general public.
The Applicant states the public could also use the indoor facilities (subject to availability) through a paid booking system, managed internally by the Applicant. The hours of public use (daylight hours) would be in accordance with the current access hours for the Parramatta river foreshore walk.
The Department has reviewed the proposal and carefully considered the issues raised in submissions, and considers the replacement of the existing facilities is acceptable because:
• the site will remain as a sporting facility and therefore retains its recreation use, and a condition can secure a level of community use of Oval 2 and nets (both the indoor nets, and the outdoor nets located in the south-eastern area of the site) • the facility allows for broader public use, through community cricket programs (such as carnivals, presentations and coaching education) and cricket performance programs (such as umpire development and youth representative training) • the existing site is not currently available for general community use • SOPA and Council are working with users of the existing grounds, including the Newington Gunners Soccer Club to find alternative facilities
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 37
• the use of the site for a dedicated high-performance sporting facility is consistent with similar uses within SOP • it is consistent with the NSW Government’s Stadia Strategy 2012 (Section 3.2) and SOPA Master Plan (Appendix C).
The Department recommends a condition to ensure Oval 2 is completed within twelve months of occupation of the development, to ensure the intended community benefit is realised.
The Department also recommends a condition requiring the Operational Management Plan to be updated to provide further details regarding the management of public access to the facility, including specifying a minimum number of cricket nets and minimum number of hours for Oval 2 to be allocated to local cricket clubs and the wider community.
The Department therefore concludes that, subject to the recommended conditions, the replacement of the existing facilities with this proposal is acceptable.
6.8 Contributions
Auburn Contribution Plan 2007 (Amendment No.1) applies to the site and requires a potential contribution of $496,000.00.
Council stated that whilst administration and maintenance over Wilson Park was transferred to SOPA in July 2019, the site is still subject to the Contributions Plan. Council also stated that Wilson Park is not included in the SOP Local Infrastructure Framework (ICF), as it was amended in 2017, which covers the majority of the SOP area. Council stated that this development is the first of its nature since the implementation of the ICF.
Council requested that contributions be paid as the proposal constitutes employment generating development and to address the loss of open space at Wilson Park.
The Applicant contends that contributions are not applicable because:
• the Contributions Plan does not apply to the site as it is not within the plan’s mapped area • the Contributions Plan does not apply to this proposal because it makes reference to employment generating development within industrial and business zones, and the site is zoned RE1 Public Recreation and SP2 Infrastructure.
The Applicant further contends that even if contributions were applicable, they should not be payable in this instance because:
• the proposal is moving existing jobs from one part of SOP (at the existing Cricket NSW temporary facilities) to another • Cricket NSW employees would be limited to administration areas of the building, which are a small portion of the overall building and CIV • the majority of the CIV is associated with recreation uses (two ovals and cricket nets) • the proposal includes community facilities and has an element of community access to the indoor centre, Oval 2, outdoor cricket nets, meeting rooms, café and amenities • Cricket NSW is a not-for-profit organisation • Cricket NSW and Cricket Australia are providing significant funding of approximately $19 million to the project
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 38
• there is no precedent where Council (or the former Auburn Council) has levied contributions for residential or employment generating lands within the SOP area as delineated under the Sydney Olympic Park Authority Act 2001 (SOPA Act).
The Department has carefully reviewed Council’s submission and the Applicant’s justification, and considers contributions should not be payable because:
• development within the SOP area does not normally attract contributions and therefore contributions have not historically been levied by Council or the Department, including for the Rugby League Centre of Excellence and Stadium Australia upgrade. Therefore, requiring contributions for this proposal would be inconsistent with other SOPA sites • contributions planning for the site has not been updated to reflect the transfer of its administration and maintenance to SOPA. The Department considers it would therefore be unreasonable to seek contributions for this proposal based on an outdated Contributions Plan that applied to the site when it was under the control of Council rather than SOPA • the proposal would provide significant community benefits through the community facilities, new amenities, community use of Oval 2 and cricket nets, enhanced public access to the facility and an off-road shared pedestrian/cycle connection between Clyde Street and the foreshore.
The Department therefore concludes contributions are not payable for the proposal.
6.9 Biodiversity
The Applicant prepared a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) to assess the biodiversity impacts associated with the proposal, in accordance with the Biodiversity Assessment Method established under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.
The BDAR found that the site contains habitat for the Green and Golden Bell Frog and Southern Myotis bat, which are both listed as threatened species. The native vegetation within the development site comprises Narrow-leaved Ironbark-Broad-leaved Ironbark-Grey Gum open forest and Smooth-barked Apple-Sydney Turpentine heathy open forest. The proposal seeks to remove 382 of the former (1.62 ha) and two of the latter (0.02 ha). The BDAR concluded the proposed development is not likely to have any significant impact on biodiversity values, subject to a range of mitigation measures including:
• retaining 257 existing trees on the site • replacing 384 removed trees with 770 trees • installation of nest boxes in retained vegetation and re-standing of hollow-bearing trees • the purchase of biodiversity credits (21 ecosystem and 35 species credits) to offset unavoidable impacts.
EESG raised no concerns, requesting only minor amendments to the BDAR regarding mapping, recording locations of the Green and Golden Bell Frog and offsets. These have since been addressed by the Applicant. SOPA and Council supported the proposal in principle in relation to biodiversity and recommended conditions of consent to manage impacts.
The Department notes the Applicant has attempted to avoid biodiversity impacts through the positioning of the development envelope over an area of the site containing the lowest biodiversity values, in particular avoiding known breeding habitat for the Green and Golden Bell Frog and retaining 257 existing trees. The Applicant has also attempted to mitigate the impacts by two-for-one re-planting of
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 39
trees to provide sufficient canopy size and site coverage, including the use of indigenous species, construction mitigation measures, weed management and pre-clearance surveys. Additionally, medium-high retention value trees providing fauna habitat would be off-set by the installation of nest boxes in the vegetation that is being retained, and hollow-bearing trees would be re-stood.
However, the Department notes the proposal would result in some unavoidable impacts on the Grey Gum open forest vegetation, the Green and Golden Bell Frog and Southern Myotis bat. To offset these impacts, it is proposed to purchase and retire 21 ecosystem and 35 species credits prior to the commencement of construction.
Overall, the Department is satisfied the Applicant has appropriately sought to avoid impacts to native flora and fauna, and where unavoidable impacts would occur the Applicant would purchase and retire biodiversity offset credits in accordance with the Biodiversity Offset Scheme, having been assessed using the Biodiversity Assessment Method established under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016. The Department also considers replacing 384 removed trees with 770 trees would result in a positive biodiversity and landscape outcome for the site. The Department therefore concludes the proposal is acceptable with regards to biodiversity impacts, subject to the recommended conditions.
6.10 Public amenities
Council and the SDRP raised concern about SOPA’s future plans to replace an amenities building containing public toilets located to the north of the site adjacent to the Parramatta River foreshore. The SDRP requested that public amenities be provided within the proposed development.
In response, the Applicant amended the proposal to provided public amenities within the community facility component of the proposal. Public access to the amenities (and the entire facility) would be available during the opening hours of the facility and would be accessible from the foreshore path, which is open to the public during daylight hours. The two new primary pedestrian pathways (Figure 20) would facilitate this access to and from the foreshore.
Council and the SDRP were satisfied with the Applicant’s response. However, Council raised concerns regarding accessibility to the amenities within the proposed facility, suggesting access should be secured through a condition requiring an easement.
The Department notes Council’s suggestion, however, the Department is satisfied that an easement is not necessary as public access can be secured by the Public Domain Plan required by condition, which would require the Applicant to ensure the proposed new public toilets in the community building would be visible and universally accessible from the foreshore path.
The Department therefore concludes the proposed public amenities satisfy concerns previously raised and access to these will be secured through the proposed Public Domain Plan required by condition.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 40
6.11 Other issues
The Department’s consideration of other issues is provided at Table 7.
Table 7 | Summary of other issues raised
Issue Findings Recommendations
Contamination • The EIS included a Preliminary Site Investigation • Comply with site Report (PSIR), which found that the site has a history remediation of contamination due to its former use as a gasworks, notice and RLMP however it concluded that the site can be made • Prepare a Site suitable for the proposed use. Audit Statement • The SPIR also states the proposed works would be accompanied by consistent with the notice for post-remediation an management of the site (no. 28040), and SOPA’s Environmental Remediated Lands Management Plan (RLMP). Management • The EPA, SOPA and Council raised no concerns Plan regarding contamination, subject to recommended • Prepare a conditions. Hazardous • The Department considers the proposal is acceptable Materials as the site can be made suitable for the proposed use Management and the known contaminated areas of the site would Plan and not be disturbed. Unexpected Finds Protocol • The Department recommends a number of conditions to manage any potential contamination impacts, • Provide annual including a requirements for preparation of a Site Interim Site Audit Audit Statement, compliance with the remediation Advice letters for notice and RLMP, and provision of annual Interim Site three years Audit Advice letters for three years following following construction. construction, followed by a • The Department considers the proposal is acceptable Section B Site with regards to contamination, subject to the Audit Statement. recommended conditions.
Flooding • The Applicant prepared a Flood Impact Assessment • Prepare a Flood (FIA) which concluded there would be no flooding Risk impacts associated with the proposal. The FIA also Management considered the impacts of climate change in its Plan and Flood assessment. Response Plan • EESG and Council raised no concerns, subject to recommended conditions, including the preparation of a Flood Risk Management Plan and Flood Response Plan. • The Department considers the proposal is acceptable with regards to flooding because all buildings (having a Finished Floor Level of 5.25m AHD) would be located above the 1 in 100-year flood level (3.31m AHD) and PMF level (5.2m AHD). Further, occupants could shelter on site if needed, as the main two-storey building would provide adequate refuge. • The Department recommends a condition requiring the preparation of a Flood Risk Management Plan and Flood Response Plan.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 41
• The Department therefore concludes there would be no flooding impacts associated with the proposal.
Stormwater • The Applicant’s Stormwater Management Plan • Update the SMP (SMP) concluded there would be no changes to the in accordance overall stormwater runoff from the site, that the site is with SOPA’s accessible in minor and major rainfall events, and is Policy operational in extreme rainfall events. • Demonstrate • Council and SOPA raised no concerns regarding adequate water stormwater impacts in principle, however supply for recommended conditions to ensure stormwater irrigation impacts are adequately managed during detailed • Demonstrate design development. run-off can be • The Department considers the proposal would not captured and result in any significant stormwater impacts as: treated on site o it would cater for 1 in 100-year storm events • Provide details of o stormwater discharges from the site are not works proposed altered or detrimental to the surrounding areas with the drainage o water quality would be managed through the easement. proposed treatment system. • The Department recommends conditions for the management of stormwater, including requiring the SMP to be updated to address SOPA’s Stormwater Management and Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy. • The Department concludes the proposal would not result in any significant stormwater impacts, subject to the recommended conditions.
Facility • The proposal seeks to operate from 6 am to 10 pm • Restrict operations Monday to Sunday (indoor facilities) and 7 am to 10 operating hours pm Monday to Sunday (outdoor facilities), seven- and capacity of days-a-week, with occasional activities to be carried the facility to outside these hours for match day events, including those proposed preparing pitches and the ovals, and preparing café by the Applicant food for sale. • Update the PoM • In addition to the day-to-day operations, the proposal to address seeks approval for (including the administration, further details training and sports science facilities), the events such as event proposed at the facility including fan days and match scheduling and days with a capacity of up to 1500 persons, management of community cricket programs and cricket performance public access to programs involving over 10,000 and 25,000 the foreshore participants per year respectively. and Oval 2. • The Applicant has prepared a PoM which sets out the management principles involved in the operation of the facility, including the types and forms of events and capacity, and the provision of security during events to manage patrons and minimise impacts on amenity. • The Department has reviewed the proposed operational impacts associated with the facility and is satisfied these would not be significant because: o it would not impact on major events given it is located approximately 2.5 km away from the SOP town centre
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 42
o the site is generally well located away from sensitive receivers o public access would be provided from the Parramatta River foreshore and there would not be unacceptable impacts on the surrounding transport network o fan days and match days could be adequately managed in accordance with the PoM. • The Department recommends conditions restricting the operating hours and capacity of the facility to those proposed by the Applicant, and requiring the PoM to be updated, approved and implemented prior to the commencement of operations, to address further details such as event scheduling and management of public access to the foreshore and Oval 2, in order to confirm a suitable level of public access as discussed in Section 6.10. • The Department’s assessment therefore concludes that subject to the proposed conditions, the proposal would not result in any significant operational impacts.
Amenity • The Department considers noise impacts would be • Comply with impacts acceptable because noise levels are below the standard criteria at all receivers, and notes the EPA raised no conditions concerns regarding this. regarding noise • However, to ensure operational noise is effectively emissions managed, the Department recommends a condition • Update the as per EPA’s recommendation requiring updating of ONVMP. the Operational Noise and Vibration Management Plan (ONVMP) to address community engagement, complaints management procedures, monitoring and half-yearly reporting. • The Department does not consider the proposal would result in any external overshadowing impacts as shadows on the winter solstice would not extend onto neighbouring sites or surrounding public domain or waterfront areas. • The Department considers that overshadowing impacts on internal areas of the site are acceptable as the only area to be overshadowed for more than three hours on the winter solstice is a relatively small northern portion of the main oval and area to the south of the main building (Figure 10), which is otherwise primarily a thoroughfare (the secondary internal pathway in Figure 20) that is partially covered by an awning (Figure 14) and does not include key public circulation or public domain areas. • The Department considers any other impacts on amenity would be negligible. • The Department concludes the proposal would not have adverse impacts on amenity, subject to the recommended conditions.
Department of • DCJ did not object to the proposal, however stated • Any drone use Communities that further consideration should be given to security must not impacts associated with filming, the hours of evening compromise
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 43
and Justice use and other noise generating activities on the security at concerns complex. Silverwater • The Department does not anticipate security impacts Correctional resulting from the televising or recording of matches Complex. on the Silverwater Correctional Complex, as filming would occur at the main oval, located approximately 150 m from the site boundary with the complex. To ensure this, the Department recommends a condition requiring that drones not compromise security for the complex. • DCJ also requested that it endorse the perimeter fencing along the shared boundary with the adjacent Silverwater Correctional Complex, to ensure privacy and security operations are not compromised. • The Department notes no fencing is proposed at the boundary with the Silverwater Correctional Complex and concludes there will be no impact in this regard. • DCJ also stated that operational vehicular access should be limited primarily to Silverwater Road/Clyde Street, rather than Newington Road, in order to reduce conflict with prison inmate movements and security operations. • In response, the Applicant confirmed that vehicular access will be primarily limited to Silverwater Road/Clyde Street. • Overall, the Department is satisfied the proposal would not result in any impacts on the operation or management of the Silverwater Correctional Complex.
Lighting • The Applicant seeks approval for lighting of buildings, • Prepare a impacts the western car park, site perimeter and pedestrian Detailed Lighting pathways. No lighting of the ovals is proposed. Strategy that
• The Applicant submitted a Lighting Strategy that addresses concludes that light spill impacts would be negligible, SOPA’s and includes measures to limit lighting impacts, such Parklands PoM as glare shields and dimmers. and confirms compliance with • DCJ stated lighting could impact on the Silverwater the relevant Correctional Complex. Australian • SOPA did not raise concerns regarding lighting Standards, and impacts, subject to conditions to manage impacts. to be prepared in • The Department considers the proposed lighting consultation with, would not have an adverse impact on the public and approved by, domain and surrounding areas, as it would comply SOPA. with the relevant Australian Standards. • The Department anticipates lighting would not adversely impact on the Silverwater Correctional Complex, because the majority of lighting would be to the indoor facility and western car park, located on the opposite side of the site to the complex. • The Department recommends a condition requiring preparation of a detailed Lighting Plan, to ensure impacts are minimised without reducing safety. • The Department concludes lighting impacts would be acceptable, subject to the recommended conditions.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 44
Demolition and • Site preparation works include the demolition of • Update the construction existing single-storey grandstand, removal of fencing, CEMP, CNVMP, impacts relocation of existing light poles and earthworks, CPTMP and including excavation up to 1 m and filling of up to 1 m. Construction • The Department notes the proposed demolition and Waste construction works would take approximately 19 Management months to complete. Plan • TfNSW and TfNSW (RMS) did not object, subject to • Prepare plans to preparation of a Construction Pedestrian and Traffic manage Management Plan (CPTMP). construction air • Council and other government agencies did not raise quality and concerns regarding construction impacts, subject to odour, and recommended management conditions. stormwater • The Department considers there would be limited • Obtain all construction noise impacts, as noise levels would be relevant under the Noise Management Level for all receivers. approvals from the relevant road • The Applicant proposes construction hours of 6 am to authority, 6 pm Monday to Friday and 8 am to 5 pm Saturday, including a road with occasional activity outside this for special occupancy deliveries, hoarding removal and services cutovers, licence including deliveries to and from the site from 6 am to 5 pm Saturday. • Restrict construction to • However, the Department considers standard the Department’s construction hours of 7 am to 6 pm Monday to Friday recommended and 7.30 am and 3 pm Saturday are more appropriate hours. to ensure there are no adverse impacts on amenity, and notes these are consistent with other approvals in SOP. • The Department considers construction vehicle traffic impacts on key intersections would be limited, as sole access would be from Silverwater Road/Clyde Street, which can sufficiently accommodate the planned vehicles. Further, no more than 60 truck movements are expected per day during any construction period, which can be absorbed by the surrounding road network. Additionally, all loading and unloading can take place within the site. • The Department recommends standard conditions to ensure all other construction impacts, such as air and water quality, are effectively managed. • The Department concludes the construction of the facility would not have adverse impacts, subject to the recommended conditions.
Signage • The proposal seeks approval for two signage zones • Separate on the main building, measuring 13.5 m x 3 m approval to be (40.5 m2) on the western elevation and 16 m x 3 m obtained for the (48 m2) on the northern elevation. erection of • The proposal also includes wayfinding signage advertising associated with new pedestrian pathways. signage • The Applicant submitted a SEPP 64 compliance • Details of schedule that indicates the proposed signage zones wayfinding are consistent with the SEPP 64 design and siting signage to be criteria. provided in accordance with SOPA’s
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 45
• No concerns were raised by Council or government Parklands agencies. Elements Design • The Department has considered the proposal in detail Manual, as part against the requirements of SEPP 64 at Appendix C. of the Public In summary, the Department considers the proposed Domain Plan. signage zones are acceptable as: o they would not result in visual clutter or have a detrimental impact on the architectural design of the building, given the size of the sign would comprise only 5% of the building façade area o they do not detract from the amenity or visual quality of any environmentally sensitive areas, heritage areas, open space or residential areas as they are integrated within the building envelope and would therefore not compromise any important views, including sightlines to or from public areas, and would be partially screened from public views by trees o they do not have an adverse impact on vehicle or pedestrian safety given they would not result in advertising clutter, and any future illumination can be ensured to not result in unacceptable glare or safety impacts, can be adjustable and subject to a curfew. • The Department considers details of wayfinding signage can be provided in accordance with SOPA’s Parklands Elements Design Manual, as part of the Public Domain Plan required by condition.
Geotechnical • The Applicant submitted a Preliminary Geotechnical • Prepare a impacts Investigation (PGI), which concluded the proposal is detailed suitable from a geotechnical perspective, subject to Geotechnical management measures and further testing during the Investigation. detailed design phase. • No concerns were raised by Council or government agencies. • The Department considers the proposal is suitable from a geotechnical perspective, because suitable methods to manage this matter are in place, in conjunction with contamination management measures. These include further detailed testing to confirm the foundation materials are suitable, an assessment of the required platform capacity to be made once piling equipment is selected, a methodology to be prepared for new capping works if required, and all works to comply with the RLMP. • The Department recommends a condition requiring preparation of a detailed Geotechnical Investigation that is consistent with the PGI, with all recommendations to be implemented throughout the course of the works. • The Department concludes the proposal is suitable with regards to geotechnical issues, subject to the recommended condition.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 46
Heritage • The proposal is located immediately to the west of the • No conditions State-listed Silverwater Correctional Complex and in recommended. the vicinity of heritage items on the Parramatta River foreshore. • The Applicant submitted a Heritage Impact Statement (HIS) to assess the potential heritage impacts associated with the proposal, which found there would be no impacts on the correctional complex. • The Department considers the proposal would not have adverse heritage impacts because it is sufficiently set back from the complex (with the main building being located approximately 200 m to the west of the boundary), would not increase the height of the boundary fence to the complex, would be partially screened by vegetation and would not interrupt views of any surrounding heritage items. • The Department also notes Heritage NSW raised no concerns about the potential heritage impacts associated with the proposal. • The Department therefore concludes the proposal would not have adverse heritage impacts.
Archaeological • The proposed earthworks include excavation up to 1 • Require reporting heritage m and filling of up to 1 m to create a desired surface in relation to (Historical and level for the development. unexpected Aboriginal) • To assess the potential archaeological heritage finds. impacts associated with the proposal, the Applicant submitted an Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment (ACHAR) and HIS, which both stated that archaeological relics are unlikely to be present at the site due to its high disturbance. • The Heritage NSW concurred with the HIS findings, and EESG recommended the proposed conditions in the ACHAR be included in the consent to manage any residual impact. • The Department concludes that the archaeological and Aboriginal heritage potential of the site is low and proposes conditions to ensure any potential impacts are appropriately managed.
Waste • The EIS included a Waste Management Plan (WMP) • WMP to be management which outlines the proposed updated provisions and implemented. procedures for operational waste management. This includes measures to ensure as much waste as possible is recycled. • The Department has assessed the WMP and is satisfied it would appropriately manage the handling and disposal of waste from the site.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 47
7 Evaluation
The Department has reviewed the EIS, RtS, RRtS and all additional information, and assessed the merits of the proposal, taking into consideration advice from Council and government agencies. Issues raised in public submissions have been considered (as outlined in Appendix B) and all environmental issues associated with the proposal have been thoroughly addressed.
The Department has considered all relevant matters under section 4.15 of the EP&A Act, the objects of the EP&A Act and the principles of ecologically sustainable development (as outlined in Appendix C).
The Department has carefully considered the impacts associated with the proposal, and considers it should be approved for following reasons:
• it provides a purpose-built piece of sporting infrastructure and associated administration facility that is consistent with the long-term strategic vision for SOP and the NSW Stadia Strategy 2012 • it exhibits design excellence and sensitively integrates with the public domain and foreshore, including improved connectivity to and from the surrounding public open space network • it would provide community benefit through the community facilities, café, new amenities and community use of Oval 2 and cricket nets • operational impacts would not affect the functioning of major event infrastructure in the SOP area, and the site is generally well located away from sensitive receivers • it would not result in any adverse traffic or car parking impacts • a number of conditions are recommended to appropriately mitigate and manage potential impacts associated with the proposal, including requirements for a detailed Landscape Plan, Public Domain Plan, and Operational Plan of Management, to secure the level of community use of the facility • all other issues associated with the proposal have been assessed, and appropriate conditions recommended, where necessary, to ensure the impacts of the development are appropriately mitigated and/or managed.
The Department’s assessment therefore concludes the proposal is in the public interest and recommends the application be approved, subject to the recommended conditions.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 48
8 Recommendation
It is recommended that the Executive Director, Regions, Industry & Key Sites, as delegate of the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces:
• considers the findings and recommendations of this report • accepts and adopts all of the findings and recommendations in this report as the reasons for making the decision to grant consent to the application • agrees with the key reasons for approval listed in the notice of decision • grants consent for the application in respect of SSD 10354, subject to the conditions in the attached development consent • signs the attached development consent and recommended conditions of consent (see Appendix D).
Prepared by: Karl Fetterplace Senior Planning Officer Key Sites Assessments
Recommended by: Recommended by:
Cameron Sargent Anthony Witherdin Team Leader Director Key Sites Assessments Key Sites Assessments
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 49
9 Determination
The recommendation is adopted / not adopted by:
13/08/2020
Anthea Sargeant Executive Director Regions, Industry & Key Sites
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 50
Appendices
Appendix A – List of referenced documents
The following supporting documents and supporting information to this assessment report can be found on the Department’s website as follows:
Environmental Impact Statement https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/project/14951
Submissions https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/project/14951
Applicant’s Response to Submissions https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/project/14951
Submissions on Response to Submissions https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/project/14951
Revised Response to Submissions https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/project/14951
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 51
Appendix B – Community Views for Draft Notice of Decision
Issue Consideration
Loss of public open space Assessment (Council and public issue) • The site will remain as a sporting facility and therefore essentially • inadequate retains its public recreation use, which by its nature allows for broader consultation with public use, through cricket performance programs and community existing users cricket programs. • existing users should • The facility would provide community benefit through the community be accommodated on facilities, café, new amenities and community use of Oval 2 and the the subject site or at outdoor cricket nets. an alternate location • The proposed public domain works would improve connectivity to and • inconsistent with the from the surrounding public open space network. active recreation • Plans are in place to provide alternative facilities for displaced users, space planning including the Newington Gunners Soccer Club. undertaken by SOPA • The proposal is consistent with the SOPA Master Plan (Appendix C). in its Master Plan • The Department considers adequate consultation has been • a reasonable level of undertaken with existing users of the site, and the Department has community and local carefully considered all the issues raised, as follows: cricket club access to o notification of adjoining landholders the indoor and o making the application publicly available on its website outdoor nets and o placing a public notice in the Sydney Morning Herald and Daily ovals should be Telegraph and exhibiting the application at Council’s offices secured. o requesting the Applicant prepare a Response to Submissions (RtS) to address the issues raised during consultation o making the RtS and Revised RtS publicly available on its website. • This matter is discussed further in Section 6. Recommended Conditions/Response • Conditions include requirement for an Operational PoM, to secure the level of community use of Oval 2 and the outdoor cricket nets.
Biodiversity and tree Assessment removal (Council issue) • SOPA, Council and EESG raised no concerns, subject to conditions. • existing trees of • The Department considers the proposed tree removal is acceptable medium-high because: retention value should o existing vegetation at the site has been identified as being highly be retained where disturbed and of poor retention and limited habitat value possible or offset by o 257 existing trees would be retained, and the 384 removed trees endemic would be replaced with 770 trees replacements o the proposal would maintain the existing urban tree canopy of • the Landscape Plan approximately 40 per cent, meeting the minimum target for the should be integrated Greater Sydney Region. with the project • The Department considers the removal and modification of areas of arborist and native vegetation is acceptable because credits would be purchased ecological reports, to offset this, for Grey Gum open forest vegetation, the Green and and consider Golden Bell Frog and Southern Myotis bat. stormwater • This matter is discussed further in Section 6. requirements • a Biodiversity Recommended Conditions/Response Management Sub- • Conditions include requirements for the preparation of a Biodiversity Plan that addresses Management Sub-Plan, providing fauna habitat boxes, offsetting the protection measures removal of hollow-bearing trees, purchasing credits to offset the during construction. removal and modification of areas of native vegetation, and
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 52
integration of the Landscape Plan with the arborist, ecological and stormwater reports.
Transport and Assessment accessibility (Council • The proposal includes additional connections to the Parramatta River issue) foreshore path, which would increase the accessibility of the site by • the adequacy of pedestrians and cyclists. pedestrian and cycle • 24-hours-a-day, seven-days-a-week access to the foreshore cannot paths be provided given the existing foreshore path is only open during • the foreshore should daylight hours (in accordance with SOPA management be publicly accessible requirements), and would not be warranted given the facility would 24-hours-a-day, only open during daylight hours. seven-days-a-week, • The Department considers any works to the foreshore area are with a minimum 20 m outside the development site and therefore beyond the scope of works wide easement for of this application, and that these works could be considered within public use. the scope of a potential future application for this area. • This matter is discussed further in Section 6. Recommended Conditions/Response • Conditions include requirements for further design detail of the proposed connections to be considered in a Public Domain Plan, including shared cyclist and pedestrian facilities between Clyde Street and the foreshore, and further investigation of the safe integration of pedestrians and cyclists into the existing network.
Urban design and amenity Assessment (Council issue) • The Department notes that the existing amenities building adjacent to • the existing foreshore the foreshore walkway is being considered for either refurbishment or amenities block replacement, however this block is outside the development site and should be integrated therefore beyond the scope of works of this application. with the proposal • The proposed public domain works would improve connectivity to and • the proposal should from the surrounding public open space network. be sympathetic to the • The built form of the proposal would have an acceptable level of visual existing and future impact as it is consistent with, and would sensitively integrate with, foreshore edge. the surrounding parkland, foreshore and industrial area. • This matter is discussed further in Section 6. Recommended Conditions/Response • Preparation of a Public Domain Plan, to address the detailed design of the proposal’s integration with the foreshore.
Car parking (Council Assessment issue) • The Department considers the proposed vehicular parking is • an Event Traffic adequate as there would be no reliance on on-street parking, Management Plan sufficient spaces are provided and would not result in adverse traffic should be prepared generation impacts on the surrounding road network. for events with 1000 • Special event demand can be accommodated, with the use of Oval 2 attendees or more, to and Clyde Street public car park, however a condition requiring an minimise use of the Event Traffic Management Plan would ensure the use of the Clyde adjacent Council car Street car park is minimised. park during special • This matter is discussed further in Section 6. events Recommended Conditions/Response • a Green Travel Plan should be prepared • Conditions include requirements for the preparation of an Event Traffic Management Plan and Green Travel Plan.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 53
Stormwater (Council Assessment issue) • Council and SOPA raised no concerns regarding stormwater impacts, • the proposal must subject to conditions. address SOPA’s • The Department considers the proposal would not result in any Stormwater and significant stormwater impacts as: Water Sensitive o it would cater for 1 in 100-year storm events Urban Design Policy, o stormwater discharges from the site are not changed or and provide details of detrimental to the surrounding areas works proposed with o water quality would be managed through the proposed treatment the drainage system. easement. • This matter is discussed further in Section 6. Recommended Conditions/Response • Conditions include requirements for the preparation of a Stormwater Management Plan in accordance with SOPA’s Policy, demonstration of an adequate water supply for irrigation, demonstration that run-off can be captured and treated on site, and provision of details of works proposed with the drainage easement.
Flooding (Council issue) Assessment • a Flood Risk • EESG and Council raised no concerns, subject to conditions. Management Plan • The Department considers the proposal is acceptable because all should be prepared buildings (having a Finished Floor Level of 5.25m Australian Height Datum (AHD)) can be located above the 1 in 100-year flood level (3.31m AHD) and Probable Maximum Flood level (5.2m AHD). Further, occupants could shelter on site if needed, as the two-storey building would provide adequate refuge. • The Department considers climate change impacts have been adequately taken into account, noting EESG stated the same. • This matter is discussed further in Section 6. Recommended Conditions/Response • Conditions include requirements for the preparation of a Flood Risk Management Plan and Flood Response Plan.
Development Assessment contributions (Council • The Department considers contributions should not be payable issue) because: • objection is raised o development within the SOP area does not normally attract should a condition not contributions and therefore contributions have not historically be imposed requiring been levied by Council or the Department. Therefore, requiring contributions, which contributions for this proposal would be inconsistent with the are payable due to Department’s approach on other SOPA sites the employment the proposal would o Contributions planning for the site has not been updated to reflect generate, under the the transfer of its administration and maintenance to SOPA. Auburn Contribution o the proposal would provide community benefit through the Plan 2007 community facilities, café, new amenities, community use of Oval (Amendment 1). 2 and cricket nets, enhanced public access to the facility and an off-road shared pedestrian/cycle connection between Clyde Street and the foreshore. • This matter is discussed further in Section 6. Recommended Conditions/Response • No conditions recommended.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 54
Contamination (Council Assessment issue) • The EPA, SOPA and Council raised no concerns regarding • should be managed in contamination, subject to recommended conditions. accordance with • The Department considers the proposal is acceptable as the site can Council’s be made suitable for the proposed use and the known contaminated recommended areas of the site would not be disturbed, consistent with the notice for conditions. post-remediation management of the site (no. 28040), and SOPA’s Remediated Lands Management Plan (RLMP). • This matter is discussed further in Section 6. Recommended Conditions/Response • Conditions include requirements for preparation of a Site Audit Statement, Hazardous Materials Survey, compliance with the remediation notice and RLMP, and provision of annual Interim Site Audit Advice letters for three years following construction, followed by a Site Audit Statement to address ongoing monitoring and reporting.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 55
Appendix C – Statutory Considerations
In line with the requirements of section 4.15 of the EP&A Act, the Department’s assessment of the project has provided detailed consideration of a number of statutory requirements. These include: • the objects found in section 1.3 of the EP&A Act • the matters listed under section 4.15(1) of the EP&A Act, including applicable environmental planning instruments and regulations.
The Department has considered all of these matters in its assessment of the proposal and has provided a summary of this assessment in Tables 1 and 2.
Table 1 | Consideration of objects of the EP&A Act
Objects of the EP&A Act Summary
(a) to promote the social and economic The proposal promotes the social and economic welfare of the community and a better welfare of the community by providing a new high- environment by the proper performance sporting facility for use by the cricketing management, development and and broader community, with public access to the conservation of the State’s natural and foreshore. other resources The proposed works would not result in adverse impacts on natural or other resources, and includes the proposed replanting of all removed trees.
(b) to facilitate ecologically sustainable The principles of ecologically sustainable development by integrating relevant development are considered following Table 2. economic, environmental and social considerations in decision-making about environmental planning and assessment
(c) to promote the orderly and economic The proposal promotes the orderly and economic use use and development of land of land through the upgrading of existing sporting fields to provide a new high-performance facility, which would also generate employment benefits for the NSW economy. The merits of the proposal are considered in Section 6 of this report.
(d) to promote the delivery and The provision/maintenance of affordable housing is maintenance of affordable housing not relevant to the proposal.
(e) to protect the environment, including The proposed development would not have an the conservation of threatened and adverse impact on the natural environment (Section other species of native animals and 6). plants, ecological communities and their habitats
(f) to promote the sustainable The Department consulted Heritage NSW and EESG, management of built and cultural who raised no objection to the proposal, subject to heritage (including Aboriginal cultural conditions. The Department considers the proposal heritage) would not have an adverse impact on heritage. Heritage issues are considered in detail in Section 6.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 56
(g) to promote good design and amenity of The Department considers the proposal would exhibit the built environment good design quality and amenity. The proposed design and amenity impacts on the surrounding environment are considered in Section 6.
(h) to promote the proper construction and Recommended conditions would ensure the maintenance of buildings, including the proposed development would be constructed in protection of the health and safety of compliance with all relevant building codes and health their occupants and safety requirements.
(i) to promote the sharing of the The proposal is SSD and therefore the Minister is the responsibility for environmental consent authority. The Department consulted with planning and assessment between the Council and relevant government agencies on the different levels of government in the proposal. State
(j) to provide increased opportunity for Section 5 of this report sets out details of the community participation in Department’s engagement on the proposal. environmental planning and assessment.
Table 2 | Consideration of section 4.15(1) of the EP&A Act
Section 4.15(1) Evaluation Summary
(a)(i) any environmental planning The proposed development complies with the relevant instrument legislation, as addressed in Section 4 of this report and the consideration of other relevant EPIs provided below this table.
(a)(ii) any proposed instrument See below.
(a)(iii) any development control plan Under clause 11 of the SRD SEPP, development control plans (DCPs) do not apply to SSD. Notwithstanding, consideration has been given to the Sydney Harbour Foreshores and Waterways Area Development Control Plan 2005 where relevant.
(a)(iiia) any planning agreement Not applicable.
(a)(iv) the regulations The application satisfactorily meets the relevant Refer Division 8 of the EP&A Regulation requirements of the Regulation, including the procedures relating to applications (Part 6), fees (Part 15), public participation procedures for SSD and Schedule 2 of the EP&A Regulation relating to the EIS.
(a)(v) any coastal zone management plan Not applicable.
(b) the likely impacts of that development The Department has assessed the likely impacts of the including environmental impacts on both development and considers they are acceptable and/or have been appropriately managed by recommended
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 57
the natural and built environments, and conditions (refer to Section 6 and Appendix D of this social and economic impacts in the locality, report).
(c) the suitability of the site for the The site is suitable for the development as discussed in development Sections 4 and 6 of this report.
(d) any submissions The Department has considered all submissions received. See Sections 5 and 6 and Appendix B.
(e) the public interest Refer to Section 6 of this report.
Biodiversity values exempt if: Not applicable. (a) On biodiversity certified land (b) Biobanking Statement exists
The likely impact of the proposed The Department has consulted EESG and considers development on biodiversity values as the proposal would not have any adverse impact on assessed in the biodiversity development biodiversity values. Refer to Sections 4 and 6 of this assessment report (section 7.14 of the report. Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016)
Ecologically Sustainable Development
The Act adopts the definition of ESD found in the Protection of the Environment Administration Act 1991. Section 1.3(b) of that Act states that ESD requires the effective integration of economic, environmental and social considerations in decision-making processes and that ESD can be achieved through the implementation of:
(a) the precautionary principle (b) inter-generational equity (c) conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity (d) improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms.
The Department has assessed the proposed development in relation to the ESD principles and has made the following conclusions:
• Precautionary Principle – the works would not result in any serious or irreversible environmental damage. • Inter-Generational Equity – the proposal would provide a high-performance sporting facility for use by future generations of cricketers, coupled with a second oval for use by the broader community. • Biodiversity Principle – the proposal would not have any adverse impacts on biodiversity, as discussed in Sections 4 and 6. • Valuation Principle – the proposal includes a number of measures to limit the ongoing cost, resource and energy requirements of the development. These include high-performance glazing, passive solar design, use of water efficient fixtures, high-efficiency LED lighting and rainwater capture.
The Department concludes the proposal is generally consistent with ESD principles and is satisfied the proposed sustainability initiatives will encourage ESD, in accordance with the objects of the EP&A Act.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 58
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS
Controls considered as part of the assessment of the proposal are: • State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011 • State Environmental Planning Policy (State Significant Precincts) 2005 • State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 • State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land • Draft State Environmental Planning Policy for the Remediation of Land • State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage • Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 • Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment) • State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018 • Other Plans and Policies: o Sydney Harbour Foreshores and Waterways Area DCP 2005 o Sydney Olympic Park Master Plan (2018 review) o Sydney Olympic Park Parklands Plan of Management 2010.
State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011 (SRD SEPP)
The SRD SEPP aims to identify development that is of State significance due to its size, economic value or potential impact.
The project is State significant development (SSD) under section 4.36 of the EP&A Act, as it comprises development on land within SOP and has a CIV in excess of $10 million ($49.6 million) under clause 2(f) of Schedule 2 of State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011 (SRD SEPP). Therefore, the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces is the consent authority.
State Environmental Planning Policy (State Significant Precincts) 2005 (SSP SEPP)
The SSP SEPP seeks to facilitate the development, redevelopment or protection of important urban, coastal and regional sites of economic, environmental or social significance to the State (State Significant Precincts) for the benefit of the State. The SSP SEPP is the relevant EPI for the site and contains applicable zoning, development standards and other controls.
The site is located within the SOP site, listed as a State Significant Precinct in accordance with Clause 7 and Appendix 11 of the SSP SEPP. An assessment of the proposal against the controls is contained in Table 3 below and within Sections 4 and 6 of this report.
Table 3 | Consideration of the relevant sections of the SSP SEPP
Relevant Sections Department’s Consideration
2 Aims of Policy Appendix 11 of the SSP SEPP sets out provisions relating to the orderly use, The relevant aim of this policy is (c) to facilitate the development or conservation of development, redevelopment or protection of important development within SOP (considered urban, coastal and regional sites of economic, below). environmental or social significance to the State so as to facilitate the orderly use, development or conservation of those State significant precincts for the benefit of the State.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 59
7 Land use zones The proposed development is permissible within these zones, as indoor recreation (a) The majority of the site is zoned RE1 Public and outdoor recreation is permitted with Recreation, but an area in the north-east of the site of consent within the RE1 zone, and roads 2 approximately 1300 m is also zoned SP2 are permissible with consent in the SP2 Infrastructure zone. (b) The consent authority must have regard to the objectives for development in a zone when determining Consideration of the proposal against the applications. objectives of the zone is provided below.
10 Zone SP2 Infrastructure The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the SP2 Infrastructure zone Zone SP2 Infrastructure as the proposed road in the SP2 zoned area of the site is infrastructure. This would not detract from the provision of other infrastructure.
11 Zone RE1 Public Recreation The proposal is consistent with the following relevant objectives of the RE1 RE1 Public Recreation Public Recreation zone as it: • enables land to be used for recreational purposes • provides for a setting for recreational activities and compatible land uses • protects and enhances the natural environment for recreational purposes • supports SOP as a premium destination for major events.
16A Demolition requires consent The Department considers the demolition of the existing single-storey grandstand that is required to facilitate the proposal is acceptable because this can be undertaken safely and without adverse impacts.
23 Public utility infrastructure The Department is satisfied the site is serviced by all the necessary public utility The consent authority must be satisfied that any public infrastructure. utility infrastructure (water, electricity, gas and sewage) that is essential for the proposed development is available or that adequate arrangements have been made to make that infrastructure available when required.
24 Major events capability The proposal would not: • adversely impact on the existing road The consent authority must consider impacts of the network (Section 6) proposal during major events at the SOP, including: • prevent the effective management of (a) traffic generation on the local and regional road crowd movement and transport network services (b) management of crowd movement and transport • compromise the effective functioning (c) functioning of major event infrastructure of major event infrastructure (Section (d) emergency evacuation plans. 6) • have an adverse impact on emergency evacuation plans for the SOP area.
25 Transport The site is located within walking distance of bus services, and the Parramatta River
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 60
The consent authority must be satisfied that the foreshore path. Further, the proposal development includes measures to promote public includes additional connections to the transport use, cycling and walking. foreshore path. The Department recommends conditions be imposed requiring a detailed Travel Plan, including a Travel Access Guide, be implemented prior to the commencement of the use.
26 Master Plan Detailed consideration of the relevant provisions of the 2018 Review is provided Development consent must not be granted for in Table 5 below. development on land within the SOP to which a Master Plan applies unless the consent authority has considered that Master Plan.
29 Development within an environmental The north-eastern portion of the Wilson conservation area Park site, which is not part of the area where development will occur, is partially The following development may only be carried out identified as an Environmental with development consent on land within an Conservation Area. The proposal would environmental conservation area: therefore not have an impact on this (a) filling, clearing, draining or dredging the land conservation area. (b) constructing a levee on the land The Department considers the proposal (c) removing or destroying any vegetation on the land. would not adversely impact on ecological Before granting development consent to development values (Section 6). on land within an environmental conservation area, the consent authority must consider the likely effect of the proposed development on that environmental conservation area. Development consent must not be granted for development on land to which this clause applies if the development would reduce significantly the ecological value of that environmental conservation area.
30 Design excellence The Department considers the proposed development exhibits design excellence Development consent must not be granted for a new (see Section 6). building unless the consent authority has considered
whether the proposed development exhibits design excellence. In considering whether proposed development exhibits design excellence, the consent authority must have regard to the following matters: (a) whether a high standard of architectural design, materials and detailing appropriate to the building type and location will be achieved; (b) whether the form and external appearance of the building will improve the quality and amenity of the public domain; (c) whether the building meets sustainable design principles in terms of sunlight, natural ventilation, wind, reflectivity, visual and acoustic privacy, safety and security and resource, energy and water efficiency; and (d) if a competition is held in relation to the development, the results of the competition.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 61
31 Heritage conservation The Department referred the proposal to Heritage NSW, who raised no concerns in The consent authority may, before granting consent to relation to built or archaeological heritage any development on land within the vicinity of a (Section 5). EESG raised no concerns heritage item or heritage conservation area, require a regarding Aboriginal heritage. heritage impact statement to be prepared to assess the impact on the item or conservation area. The proposal would not adversely impact upon the heritage value of the Silverwater
Correctional Complex because the proposal is sufficiently set back from it, and of an appropriate height and scale. The proposal would not have unacceptable impacts to any items of environmental heritage in the locality under the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 (see below), including the Shell Oil Refinery Wharf, Former Spurway Street Wharf, and Former McDonald Farm Wharf. Heritage is discussed further in Section 6.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP)
The ISEPP aims to facilitate the effective delivery of infrastructure across the State by improving regulatory certainty and efficiency, identifying matters to be considered in the assessment of development adjacent to particular types of infrastructure development, and providing for consultation with relevant public authorities about certain development during the assessment process.
The proposal constitutes a traffic generating development in accordance with Clause 104 of the ISEPP as it seeks approval for a public recreation facility (indoor and outdoor) that has access to a classified road and comprises 50 or more car parking spaces.
The proposal was referred to Transport for NSW (TfNSW) and TfNSW (RMS) and no concerns were raised (Section 5). The Department considers the proposed development to be consistent with the ISEPP given the consultation and consideration of transport, access, traffic and parking issues in Section 6.
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)
SEPP 55 aims to ensure that potential contamination issues are considered in the determination of a development application. SEPP 55 requires the consent authority to consider whether the land is contaminated, and if so, whether the land is suitable for the purpose for the proposed development.
The site has a history of contamination due to its former use as a gasworks. However, the Department considers site can be made suitable for the proposed use and contamination impacts can be appropriately managed, as discussed in Section 6. The Department therefore concludes the proposal is consistent with the requirements of SEPP 55.
Draft Remediation of Land State Environmental Planning Policy (draft Remediation SEPP)
The Explanation of Intended Effect for a new Remediation of Land SEPP was exhibited until 13 April 2018. The draft Remediation SEPP proposes to better manage remediation works by aligning the need for development consent with the scale, complexity and risks associated with the proposed works.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 62
The key operational framework of SEPP 55 is to be maintained in the new SEPP and new provisions are unlikely to significantly affect this application. As such, the Department considers the proposed development would be consistent with the intent of the draft Remediation SEPP.
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage (SEPP 64)
SEPP 64 applies to all signage that can be displayed with or without development consent and is visible from any public place or public reserve.
The proposal seeks approval for two signage zones, measuring 13.5 m x 3 m (40.5 m2) on the western elevation and 16 m x 3 m (48 m2) on the northern elevation of the main building. It is envisaged that these zones would contain future signage displaying the logos of Cricket NSW, the Sydney 6ers and Sydney Thunder cricket teams, and commercial and naming rights signage. However, any future advertising signage within these zones would be subject to a separate application.
Under clause 8 of SEPP 64, consent must not be granted for any signage application unless the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the SEPP. The Department considers the proposed signage zones are consistent with the objectives of SEPP 64 as:
• the zones are situated in suitable locations, including on the western edge of the development, near the main car park and at the northern edge, fronting the foreshore • the zones would be consistent with the desired amenity and visual character of the SOP sporting precinct as they would not exceed five per cent of the building area.
The Department also considers the signage zones acceptable because they comprise only five per cent of the building façade area, therefore minimising their visual impact.
The proposal also includes approval for wayfinding signage associated with new pedestrian pathways. The Department considers details of this can be provided in accordance with SOPA’s Parklands Elements Design Manual, as part of the Public Domain Plan required by condition.
The Department also considers the signage is consistent with the assessment criteria contained in Schedule 1 of SEPP 64 (see Table 4 below).
Table 4 | Consideration of objects of SEPP 64
Assessment criteria Department’s consideration Consistent?
1 Character of the area The zones are consistent with the desired amenity and visual character Is the proposal compatible with the of the SOP sporting precinct and existing or desired future character of the nearby industrial area as they have area or locality in which it is proposed to been designed to be integrated Yes be located? within the building façade, and are compatible with the design and architecture of the building and the surrounding context.
The proposal is consistent as the Is the proposal consistent with a particular signage zones are for a sporting theme for outdoor advertising in the area Yes facility, consistent with signage for or locality? other such facilities in SOP.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 63
2 Special areas The signage zones integrate
Does the proposal detract from the sensitively with the proposed building and surroundings, and are amenity or visual quality of any Yes environmentally sensitive areas, heritage consistent with the desired amenity areas, natural or other conservation and visual character of the SOP areas, open space areas, waterways, sporting precinct, including these rural landscapes or residential areas? environmentally sensitive areas.
3 Views and vistas The signage zones are integrated Does the proposal: into the proposed building and • obscure or compromise important contained within the building Yes views? envelope. They would therefore not • dominate the skyline and reduce the compromise any important views, quality of vistas? the skyline or interfere with other • respect the viewing rights of other advertisers. advertisers?
4 Streetscape, setting or landscape The scale, proportion and form of the proposed signage zones is Is the scale, proportion and form of the appropriate for the streetscape and Yes proposal appropriate for the streetscape, setting of the proposed setting or landscape? development, given the dimensions of the proposed main building.
Does the proposal contribute to the visual The proposed signage zones would interest of the streetscape, setting or contribute to the visual interest of the landscape? building by providing identification Yes and recognition of the site.
Does the proposal reduce clutter by There is no existing advertising simplifying existing advertising? where the proposed signage zones are located. Future signs within the N/A proposed zones would be subject to separate future planning applications.
Does the proposal screen unsightliness? The zones would not screen Yes unsightliness.
Does the proposal protrude above The proposed signage zones would Yes buildings, structures or tree canopies in not protrude beyond the building the area or locality? envelope or tree canopies.
Does the proposal require ongoing The proposed zones do not contain, vegetation management? or impact upon any vegetation. N/A
5 Site and building The proposed signs have been designed to be integrated within the Is the proposal compatible with the scale, Yes proportion and other characteristics of the building façade, compatible with the site or building, or both, on which the design and architecture of the proposed signage is to be located? building, and the surrounding context.
Does the proposal respect important The proposed signage zones would features of the site or building, or both? not detract from the important Yes features of the site as they are appropriately integrated into the main building.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 64
Does the proposal show innovation and The proposed signage zones have imagination in its relationship to the site or been fully integrated with the site and Yes building, or both? building.
6 Associated devices and logos with advertisements and advertising This detail would need to be structures Not assessed as part of future inconsistent Have any safety devices, platforms, applications for signs within the lighting devices or logos been designed proposed zones. as an integral part of the signage or structure on which it is to be displayed?
7 Illumination
Would illumination: Details of illumination would be • result in unacceptable glare? subject to the assessment of future • affect safety for pedestrians, vehicles applications. Any future illumination, or aircraft? however, can be ensured to not result Yes • detract from the amenity of any in unacceptable glare, safety residence or other form of impacts, or adverse impacts on accommodation. residences or accommodation, could Can the intensity of the illumination be be adjustable and subject to a curfew. adjusted? Is the illumination subject to a curfew?
8 Safety
Would the proposal reduce safety for: The location of the signage zones • any public road? would not obscure sightlines to or Yes • pedestrians or bicyclists? from public areas or reduce safety • pedestrians, particularly children, by from public roads. obscuring sightlines from public areas?
Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 (SHC SREP)
The SHC SREP provides planning principles for development within the Sydney Harbour catchment. The site is located within the Sydney Harbour Catchment area and is within the foreshores and waterways area.
Aims of the plan The proposal is consistent with the aims of the plan as it would: • enhance public access to, and use of, the foreshore • not adversely affect the catchment, foreshores and waterways of Sydney Harbour • not have adverse environmental impacts, including on wetlands or riparian lands, subject to the Department’s recommended conditions • contribute to the culture and vibrancy of the area.
Matters for consideration The proposal is consistent with the relevant matters for consideration for land within the foreshores and waterways area as it would improve public access to, and use of, the foreshore, and would not:
• have any adverse impacts on the biodiversity or ecology of the area • reduce the capacity of Sydney Harbour to function as a working harbour
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 65
• have adverse impacts on the use of the waterways • detract from the scenic quality of the foreshore and waterway, or views to and from these areas.
Foreshores and Waterways Planning and Development Advisory Committee The proposal is a type (recreational or club facilities, including advertisements and demolition) referred to in Schedule 2 of the SHC SREP and therefore the Department referred the application to the Committee under clause 29 of the SHC SREP. The Committee raised no specific issues in relation to the proposal.
Heritage provisions The Department has considered the proposal in relation to heritage impacts in accordance with Part 5 of the SHC SREP, and finds the proposal would not have unacceptable impacts in relation to any items of environmental heritage in the locality, including the Shell Oil Refinery Wharf, Former Spurway Street Wharf, and Former McDonald Farm Wharf. The Department referred the proposal to Heritage NSW, who raised no concerns (Section 5). Heritage impacts are further discussed in Section 6 of this report.
Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (draft Environment SEPP)
The Explanation of Intended Effect for the Environment SEPP was exhibited until 31 January 2018. The Environment SEPP proposes to simplify the planning rules for the protection and management of the natural environment by consolidating seven existing SEPPs, including the SHC SREP.
The relevant matters for consideration and the general provisions relating to the Sydney Harbour catchment are proposed to remain in accordance with those in the current SEPP and therefore the proposed development would be consistent with the intended effect of the draft Environment SEPP.
The Sydney Harbour Foreshores and Waterway Area DCP 2005 is proposed to be transitioned into one or more guidelines that would cover the current content and provide updated guidance to consent authorities based on design principles and landscape character, however these guidelines are not currently in draft form.
Sydney Harbour Foreshores and Waterways Area DCP 2005
The Sydney Harbour Foreshore and Waterways Area Development Control Plan (the DCP) complements the SHC SREP and provides more detailed design parameters for development within the foreshore area of Sydney Harbour.
The site is within the defined Foreshores and Waterways Area under the SHC SREP and is therefore subject to the controls in the DCP. The DCP includes aims and performance criteria in relation to ecological assessment, landscape assessment, and design guidelines for development within the area.
The site is identified as grassland on Map 2 of the Ecological Communities and Landscape Characters, having a low conservation status. The Department is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the performance criteria for grassland communities, as the proposal:
• preserves trees where feasible • protects the natural watercourse through the site • will minimise soil erosion during and after construction and implement controls to prevent pollutants from entering the waterway.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 66
The site adjoins landscape character area No. 15, which applies to Parramatta River west of Abbotsford and Mortlake. The proposal is consistent with the statement of character and intent and performance criteria for this landscape character area because it would:
• establish open space and recreational opportunities through linkages to the foreshore, without impacting on foreshore natural elements and vegetation screening • integrate vegetation within the development to minimise the contrast between natural and built elements • not result in adverse noise and amenity impacts.
The Department is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with relevant provisions regarding land- based development because:
• the built form of the proposal and its visual impacts are acceptable and address the waterway, as discussed in Section 6 • the proposed signage would not result in adverse visual impacts, as discussed in Section 6 • the proposal would enhance public access to the foreshore by providing through-site links • the Foreshores and Waterways Planning and Development Advisory Committee raised no concerns with the proposal.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018 (Coastal SEPP)
The Coastal SEPP consolidates and replaces SEPP 14 (Coastal Wetlands), SEPP 26 (Littoral Rainforests) and SEPP 71 (Coastal Protection).
The Coastal Management SEPP gives effect to the objectives of the Coastal Management Act 2016 (NSW) from a land use planning perspective. It defines four coastal management areas and provides assessment criteria tailored for each coastal management area. The consent authority must apply those criteria when assessing proposals for development that fall within one or more of the mapped areas.
The Coastal SEPP identifies the site as being located within the Coastal environment area and Coastal use area. Land within these areas are subject to clause 13 and 14, however as the site is located on land within the Foreshores and Waterways Area of the SHC SREP, clauses 13 and 14 of the Coastal SEPP do not apply.
Sydney Olympic Park Master Plan 2030 (2018 review) The 2018 Review provides specific design controls regarding sustainability, public domain, event controls, land use and density, building form and amenity, access and parking, transport strategies and infrastructure, landscaping and community infrastructure.
Whilst the 2018 Review applies to the site, the planning provisions for the site are contained in the Parklands Plan of Management (2010). The relevant controls in the 2018 Review are addressed in Table 5 below.
Table 5 | Consideration of the relevant provisions of 2018 Review
General 2018 Review Requirements Consideration controls and guidelines
4.2 • Engage an Ecologically Sustainable Design consultant Meets requirements. Sustainability as a core member of the project team.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 67
• Connect all new development to SOP’s recycled water system. • Prioritise use of sustainable materials. • All developments must consider and address the impacts from climate change.
4.3 Public Building heights and setbacks should be configured to Meets requirements Domain ensure that the urban domain affected by the proposed (see Section 6). development receives a daily minimum of two hours of direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm on 30 June. Public parks should receive a minimum of two hours of direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm on 30 June for at least 30% of the park.
4.4 Event The proposal would not impact on access and closures Meets requirements. access and during major events. Closures
4.5 Land Uses Land uses are to comply with permitted land uses for the Meets requirements. and Density relevant precinct.
4.6 Building Each application is to include a Disability Access Meets requirements. Form and Strategy. Amenity To ensure the highest quality design for key sites in SOP, Site not identified for a design competition is required for sites identified in the a design Design Competition Sites Plan. competition.
Applicants for a new development must prepare a report Meets requirements by a suitably qualified acoustic consultant assessing the (Section 6). possibility of land use conflicts as a result of the development.
Submit a Waste Management Plan with all Development Meets requirements Applications to the satisfaction of SOPA. (Section 6).
Sydney Olympic Park Parklands Plan of Management (2010) The site is located in the subject to the provisions contained in the Sydney Olympic Park Parklands Plan of Management 2010. The relevant controls are addressed in Table 6 below.
Table 6 | Consideration of the relevant provisions of the Sydney Olympic Park Parklands Plan of Management (2010)
Sydney Olympic Park Parklands Plan of Management (2010)
General control Parklands Plan of Management Criteria Consideration and guidelines
2.10 Objectives The management objectives for precincts or the The proposal is consistent for Sports & parts of precincts within areas of land categorised with these objectives as it Recreation as Sports & Recreation Parks are as follows: would: Parks (a) provide sporting areas that present high • provide high standards standards of health, safety, experience and of health, safety, amenity; experience and amenity
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 68
(b) improve, develop and maintain the land in • provide the public with ways that facilitates public use and enjoyment booking access to a of the land for sporting purposes; high-quality cricket oval (c) promote management and use of the land in a • provide public access to manner that protects and enhances the sports the foreshore and recreational quality of the land; • enhance the sport and (d) manage uses and activities having regard to recreational quality of any adverse impact on other people and the land places, the integrity of the underlying • not have an adverse remediated land systems and minimising impact on remediated conflicts between user groups and interests; land or surrounding and uses (e) conserve, protect, interpret, adapt and/or • preserve the site’s enhance the significant ecological, scenic and ecological, scenic and heritage elements for present or future heritage values. generations.
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 69
Appendix D – Recommended Instrument of Consent
The recommended conditions of consent can be found on the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment’s website at: https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/project/14951
Cricket NSW Centre of Excellence (SSD 10354) | Assessment Report 70