REPORT TO THE HONOURABLE CRAIG KNOWLES MP ______
MINISTER FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND PLANNING MINISTER FOR NATURAL RESOURCES
LAND USE PLANNING FOR CERTAIN LAND AT SANDON POINT, WOLLONGONG CITY
KEVIN CLELAND, DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON DR MARK CARLETON, COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONERS OF INQUIRY FOR ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING
SEPTEMBER 2003
Cover Photograph: Photograph of the Sandon Point locality from Bulli Lookout
CIR 260 ISBN 1 920717 02 1
September 2003
The Hon Craig Knowles MP Minister for Infrastructure and Planning Minister for Natural Resources
Dear Minister,
Landuse Planning for Certain Land at Sandon Point, Wollongong City
Under Section 119(l)(b) of the Environmental Plannin g and Assessment Act 1979 the former Minister for Planning directed a Commission of Inquiry be held to make recommendations on the preferred land uses, planning outcomes and management options for certain land at Sandon Point, having regard to its values and constraints in the broader context of the surrounding urban and non urban environment. Kevin Cleland, Deputy Chairperson and Dr Mark Carleton, Commissioner were appointed to constitute the Commission of Inquiry.
The Sandon Point land has multiple values and constraints in the broader context of the surrounding urban and non urban environment as canvassed by the Commission under Values and Constraints of the CoI Area and Preferred Land Uses, Planning Outcomes and Future Management (Options) in this report. The Commission has undertaken a thorough consideration of the relevant planning policies together with cultural, ecological, social and developmental factors. The Commission’s terms of reference clearly direct it to consider a wide range of issues. Submissions referred extensively to the importance of the cultural, social, natural and built aspects of the environment, together with the broad range of opportunities the Sandon Point lands provide.
The Commission’s recommendations on the preferred land uses, planning outcomes and management options for the CoI area at Sandon Point are based on an overall consideration of the issues. While the values and constraints relating to one issue may be particularly relevant for part of the subject land, in the majority of cases, the various values and constraints overlap. This overlap reinforces the values and constraints relevant to the land and consequently the Commission’s recommendations for its future uses, planning and management. In weighing and balancing the issues the Commission has adopted an holistic approach based on sustainable environmental planning principles and policies.
The Commission supports additional Aboriginal heritage investigation before any further residential or other approved develo pment occurs on the western section of the CoI area. This must be done with the meaningful involvement of the Aboriginal community which has already commenced. It should continue to be co-ordinated by Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources. However, given the previous agricultural, extractive and industrial activities on much of the western section of the CoI area it is unlikely that significant Aboriginal archaeological material would be found on these disturbed portions. However, artefact finds cannot be ruled out before the further studies. Nevertheless, the Commission is satisfied that based on the extensive Aboriginal heritage evidence presented, strategic planning issues can be progressed while the additional investigation is being conducted without compromising important Aboriginal heritage values.
The subject land’s values and constraints in the broader context of the surrounding urban and non urban environment have been assessed by the Commission. It finds that the follow ing major land uses, planning outcomes and management options are appropriate: § Aboriginal heritage values of the CoI area require further assessment and identified Aboriginal sites in the eastern section of the CoI area require protection; § The eastern section of the land should be zoned for environmental protection, privately owned portions brought into public ownership over time , and management plans prepared and implemented; § The creek corridors should be protected to ensure important riparian and ecological values are enhanced, flood conveyance safely provided, privately owned portions brought into public ownership over time, and management plans prepared and implemented; § Important vegetation communities such as the Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex and the Turpentine forest must be adequately protected; § The Aboriginal heritage value of the western section of the CoI area is unlikely to preclude residential development as much of the area has previously been disturbed; § The western section of the CoI area is suitable for more limited residential development than proposed by either Wollongong City Council or Stockland,; § The area of land between Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks is suitable for residential development with the western portion suitable for 3-storey apartment buildings; § Residential development on the central ridge area of land between Woodlands and Cooksons Creeks should be limited to 2 storeys and set back from the lower lands due to important coastal planning considerations resulting from its significant visual amenity, Aboriginal heritage and ecological values; § The Cookson Plibrico industrial development should remain at this time as the operations overall are not inherently noisy, there is significant potential for mitigation of noise emissions, and the ecological values and constraints of the site restrict its development potential; § Development of the area of land south of Tramway Creek (Lot 235) should not occur until noise issues are resolved between Stockland and Cookson Plibrico; § Development to the north of Hewitts Creek should be limited to the land between the access road from Wrexham Road and the Illawarra railway line and restricted to a maximum of 3 storeys; and § Traffic access to any future residential development could be from Wrexham Road and Beattie/Sturdee Avenues subject to further study.
The Land Use Plan (Figure A) indicates zones appropriate for the future land uses, planning outcomes and management options recommended by the Commission for the CoI area.
The exact location of land use boundaries must have regard to the Commission’s recommendations including the design of riparian corridors, final delineation of conservation areas, and visual amenity set backs in this report as well as the further Aboriginal heritage investigations to be undertaken. Should any dispute arise relating to the location of land use boundaries, the Commission recommends that they be determined by the Director-General of the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources in consultation with Wollongong City Council.
The Commission also recommends that Council commence planning to ensure continuation of an environmental corridor along Woodlands Creek to the west of the Illawarra railway line consistent with the Riparian Corridor Management Study and the Illawarra Escarpment Commission Report. Management plans would need to be prepared for 6(a) Public Recreation and 7(a) Special Environmental Protection zones to ensure their ongoing protection and function. Provided these matters are implemented the Commission supports residential development in the areas shown zoned 2(b) on the Land Use Plan.
These and other issues are appropriately progressed by amending Council’s Local Environmental Plan 1990, finalising the draft DCP, and preparing a site Master Plan before any approval is granted to develop the CoI area. In this regard substantial new information has become available and important coastal planning initiatives put in place since the future use of the land was previously assessed resulting in its rezoning in 1997.
ii Figure A: Land Use Plan
The Commission finds the CoI area has significant inherent cultural, ecological and social values as indicated by the extensive evidence before the Commission. These values are too important to be compromised by the level of development proposed for residential purposes in Council’s draft DCP or Stockland’s draft Master Plan, notwithstanding the limited availability of land and the importance of providing for additional residential development in the northern Illawarra. The Commission also recognises that its recommendations may limit the opportunities for short term restoration of the CoI area.
The findings and recommendations in this report provide a strategic basis to implement sustainable coastal planning principles, protect significant Aboriginal heritage values, conserve and enhance ecological processes, ensure scarce employment opportunities are maintained, and enable an appropriate level of residential develo pment.
KEVIN CLELAND DR MARK CARLETON Deputy Chairperson Commissioner
iii CONTENTS
The Commission of Inquiry 1
The Planning Background 3 w Context of the CoI area 4 - Land Ownership and Zoning 4 - The CoI Area 6
Environmental Planning and Related Legislation and Policy 7 w Legislation 7 - Commonwealth Legislation 7 - NSW Legislation 8 w Environmental Plans and Planning Policies 11 - State Environmental Planning Policies 11 - Regional and Local Environmental Plans 15 - Development Control Plans 17 w Policies, Guidelines and Strategies 21 - Policies 21 - Guidelines 24 - Strategies 25
Draft Development Control Plan and Draft Master Plan 31 w Sandon Point Draft Development Control Plan 31 - Enquiry by Design Workshop 31 - Draft Development Control Plan 32 - Council’s Submission to the Inquiry 36 w Stockland’s Draft Master Plan 37 - Conceptual Design Parameters 37 - Environmental and Social Considerations 42 - Stockland’s Conclusion 43
Summary of Submissions 45 w Council and Government Agencies 45 w Private Landowners 47 w Community and Public Interest Groups 49 w Residents 54
Values and Constraints of the CoI Area 67 w Aboriginal Heritage 67 - Aboriginal Culture 68 - Historical Intentions, Legislative Aspects and Guidelines 69 - Reconciliation and Commitment 71 - Aboriginal Heritage Investigations 72 - The Illawarra Aboriginal Community 76 - Aboriginal Cultural Heritage 76 - Aboriginal Archaeological Heritage 82 - Further Aboriginal Heritage Studies 84 - Draft Development Control Plan 87 - Contemporary Aboriginal Heritage Issues 87 - Commission’s Comments 89
v w Flora and Fauna 93 - Investigations at Sandon Point 95 - Submissions by Parties 103 - Commission’s Comments 110 w Riparian Corridor Function and Planning 115 - Riparian Land Planning 115 - Riparian Land Functions 118 - Coast to Escarpment Corridor 132 - Commission’s Comments 134 w Floodplain Management 137 - Floodplain Planning 138 - Flood Assessment 140 - Commission’s Comments 144 w Cookson Plibrico Operations 145 - Noise Assessment 147 - Commission’s Comments 148 w Visual Amenity 153 - Residential Development 154 - Commission’s Comments 156 w Water Quality Management 158 - Commission’s Comments 159 w Access and Traffic 161 - Public Access 161 - Traffic Access 161 - Commission’s Comments 166 w Land Contamination 169 - Commission’s Comments 171 w Bushfire Management 172 - Commission’s Comments 173 w Non Aboriginal Heritage 174 - Commission’s Comments 175 w Geotechnical Issues 175 - Commission’s Comments 178 w Other Relevant Considerations 178 - Community Service and Infrastructure 178 - Aquatic Resources 179 - Noise Assessment 180 - Employment 181 - Tourism 182 - Private Certification 182 - Community Liaison Committee 184
Preferred Land Uses, Planning Outcomes and Future Management (Options) 185 w Land Uses 186 w Planning Outcomes 188 - Local Environmental Plan (LEP) Approach 187 - Land Use Zones 189 w Future Management (Options) 199 - Land Ownership 199 - Acquisition Cost 200 - Management Options and Requirements 202
Findings and Recommendations 207
vi FIGURES
1. The Commission of Inquiry Area 1 2. Locality Map 3 3. Land Ownership in the CoI Area 4 4. Current Land Zoning in the CoI Area 5 5. Master Plan Housing Density and Forms 40 6. Traditional Aboriginal Land Uses 81 7. Indicative Natural Riparian Corridor Widths 120 8. Floodplain Vegetation along a Meandering Channel 123 9. DIPNR(DLWC) Preferred Conceptual Riparian Corridors 123 10. Cooksons Creek Cross Section 128 11. Woodland Creek Cross-section 129 12. Catchments Upstream of the CoI Area 133 13. Traffic Access Option 01 164 14. Map of Existing Fill Depths 177 15. State Significant Development Area 185 16. Recommended Land Use Zones 192
TABLES
1. Summary of Residential Density Yields 41 2. Minimum Environmental Objectives for Riparian Land 117 3. Proposed Future Dwelling Unit Development 163 4. Maximum Site Coverage 196 5. Maximum Building Heights 196 6. Open Space Requirements 197
APPENDICES
1. Minister’s Direction A1-1 2. Instrument of Appointment A2-1 3. List of Submissions A3-1 4. List of Appearances A4-1 5. List of Background Documents A5-1 6. Aboriginal Heritage Study – Preliminary Brief A6-1
ABBREVIATIONS
ATSIC Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders Commission CoI Commission of Inquiry Council Wollongong City Council DIPNR Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources DLWC Department of Land and Water Conservation (now DIPNR) EPA Environment Protection Authority HIA Housing Industry Association Illawarra LALC Illawarra Local Aboriginal Land Council NIRAG Northern Illawarra Residents Action Group NPWS National Parks and Wildlife Service PlanningNSW Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources
vii RTA Roads and Traffic Authority SES State Emergency Service SPATE Sandon Point Aboriginal Tent Embassy TWPC Tramway Wetlands Planning Committee UDAS Urban Design Advisory Service
ANZECC Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council ICOMOS International Council on Monuments and Sites
EP&A Act Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 NPW Act National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 TSC Act Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995
DCP Development Control Plan LEP Local Environmental Plan LES Local Environmental Study REP Regional Environmental Plan SEPP State Environmental Planning Policy
AEP Annual Exceedance Probability AHD Australian Height Datum APZ Asset Protection Zone ARI Average Return Interval AUID Area Under Investigation for Development Cooksons Creek The un-named creek on the Cookson Plibrico site CRZ Core Riparian Zone ESD Ecologically Sustainable Development FSR Floor Space Ratio IEL Program Illawarra Employment Lands Program LGA Local Government Area MDP Metropolitan Development Program PMF Probable Maximum Flood PoM Plan of Management SCESFC Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex VCA Voluntary Conservation Agreement VRB Vegetated Riparian Buffer dBA decibels-A weighted ha hectare km kilometre m metre mm millimetre m2 square metre
Note: During the Commission process, the former Department of Planning (PlanningNSW) and the former Department of Land and Water Conservation (DLWC) were consolidated into the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (DIPNR). These two divisions of DIPNR are referred to in this report as DIPNR(PlanningNSW) and DIPNR(DLWC) as they presented separate submissions given the early stages of the consolidation of the former Departments.
viii THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY
On 11 December 2002 the former Minister for Planning directed that a Commission of Inquiry (the Commission) be held to make recommendations on the preferred land uses, planning outcomes and management options for the land edged heavy black on the map …having regard to its values and constraints in the broader context of the surrounding urban and non urban environment (Figure 1).
Figure 1: The Commission of Inquiry Area
The Commission can consider uses that are permissible under current land use controls as well as uses which may be prohibited. Consequently, it can provide an holistic approach to land use within the CoI area, rather than being restricted to individual land holdings.
1 The Commission was advertised in the Illawarra Mercury and the Sydney Morning Herald on 12 December 2002 calling for submissions. Known interested parties were advised by letter.
Background documents were placed on public exhibition from 16 December 2002 at: § Office of Commissioners of Inquiry. § Wollongong City Reference Library. § Thirroul Branch Library.
Submissions were due on 12 February 2003 and were placed on exhibition at the above locations from 19 February 2003. Further submissions were placed on public exhibition as they were received.
The first hearing session of the Commission commenced on 3 March and continued to 7 March 2003. Interim sessions were held on 28 March and 1 May 2003. The reply session was held on 17 and 18 June 2003. Between the two main sessions of the Commission parties were able to ask written questions of each other and to receive answers. Final comments on submissions to the Commission were received until 2 July 2003.
In total, 157 parties made submissions to the Commission, which included a number of form letters and petitions. There was substantial local interest in the Commission. During the Commission 36 parties appeared to present their submissions.
The Commission also met with several local Aboriginal groups either on its own or in the company of other parties. These meetings were necessary to ensure the information before the Commission which related to Aboriginal heritage was corroborated. All relevant information obtained by the Commission during these meetings was available on the public record.
Site Inspections
The Commission undertook a number of inspections of the CoI area, the surrounding locality and further afield. The main site inspections in the company of parties were conducted on the CoI area on 6 March, and from the bend in Bulli Pass down to the Illawarra railway on 27 March 2003.
The CoI area was also viewed by the Commission from the top of the escarpment (3 locations) and Thirroul in the vicinity of Thomas Gibson Park. The catchment of Hewitts Creek within Thirroul was inspected. On several occasions the Commission walked along the cycleway, across adjacent lands and on McCauleys Beach. Other locations visited are listed in Visual Amenity .
2 THE PLANNING BACKGROUND
Sandon Point is located approximately 14 kilometres north of Wollongong City between Bulli Point and Thirroul (see Figure 2). The CoI area is bounded by South Thirroul Beach to the east, the Illawarra railway to the west, Thomas Gibson Park to the north and generally by Stages 1 to 6 of Stockland’s current development to the south.
The CoI area is visually prominent when viewed from the escarpment and neighbouring land. It has an area of approximately 53 hectares, which is the largest remaining area of undeveloped coastal land north of Wollongong. The site has been identified in the Metropolitan Development Program as one of only two major release areas to the north of Wollongong.
Figure 2: Locality Map
Wollongong City Council has had a long in volvement in planning for Sandon Point. This has included a Local Environmental Study (1993) that informed the preparation of a Development Control Plan and the 1997 rezoning. More recently, a process committee was established by Wollongong City Council in January 2002 in recognition of the need to bring all the stakeholders together to resolve issues and identify a way forward. In May 2002, Council resolved to prepare a Master Plan/
3 Development Control Plan (DCP) for Sandon Point in order to provide direction and outline controls for the future development of this area. Council submitted the draft DCP to the Commission.
The proposals by Stockland Development Pty Limited (Stockland) to develop the area immediately south of the CoI area resulted in strong community opposition. Stockland subsequently received approval to develop this latter area of land, known as Stages 1 to 6, for residential purposes. Some of the lots have recently been sold. The community remains vehemently opposed to both the approved and proposed residential development at Sandon Point.
CONTEXT OF THE CoI AREA
Land Ownership and Zoning
Land is owned within the CoI area by Stockland, Cookson Plibrico, Ray Hannah Motors, Sydney Water and Council as shown on Figure 3.
Figure 3: Land ownership in the CoI Area
The majority of the overall Sandon Point site was rezoned in 1997 under Wollongong Local Environmental Plan 1990 to a mix of 2(a) Low Density Residential, 2(b) Medium Density Residential, 4(a) Light Industrial and 6(a) Public Recreation. The Hannah land was zoned 7(a) Special Environmental Protection in 2002. The land zones are shown on Figure 4.
4 Within the CoI area there is 19.16 hectares zoned 2(b) Medium Density Residential, 8.16 hectares zoned 4(a) Light Industrial, 19.27 hectares zoned 6(a) Public Recreation, and 6.56 hectares zoned 7(a) Environment Protection.
Figure 4: Current Land Zoning in the CoI Area
A small portion of land in the southwest corner of the CoI area, approved as part of the Stockland’s Stages 2 to 6 area, has been included in the CoI area. The CoI area follows the original boundary between the 2(a) and 2(b) zones in this location. The land comprises an approved public road and three approved adjoining residential lots. As well, a small area of land within the CoI area abutting the northern end of Hill Street is to be acquired by Council for Public Recreation according to the relevant Section 94 Plan. The Commission acknowledges that these two areas of land would not be directly affected by the Commission’s recommendations.
5 The CoI Area
The Sandon Point locality was used extensively for agricultural activities in the 19th century. The western half of the CoI area was then predominantly occupied by industrial and extractive industry uses. The Cookson Plibrico refractory manufacturing facility remains on the northern bank of Tramway Creek adjoining the Illawarra railway reserve. The eastern half of the CoI area is now comprised of open space within which is located a Sydney Water sewage pumping station and associated pipelines. The following analysis was in the main extracted from Stockland’s submission: § The majority of the CoI area is presently comprised of vacant land. § Stages 1 to 6 of Stockland’s development is an almost completed residential subdivision with associated public open space reserves adjoining the CoI area to the south. § The contemporary drainage pattern within the overall Sandon Point locality consists of Hewitts Creek and Woodlands Creek in the north, and Cooksons Creek and Tramway Creek in the south. Woodlands Creek presently flows into Hewitts Creek before entering the sea, and Cooksons Creek flows into Tramway Creek before entering the sea. § The CoI area is generally contained within a coastal plain, although there are localised topographical variations. § The land to the south and north of the locality is generally developed with modest, single storey detached dwellings, although in recent years some properties have been redeveloped with large 2-storey dwellings and for medium density housing. § A small neighbourhood shopping centre is located at the intersection of Point Street and Sommerville Street to the south. § Bulli Railway Station and shops are located about 600m to the south of the CoI area. § Thirroul Railway Station and shops are located 250 to 500m to the north of the CoI area. § Nearby open space and recreation areas include the O’Brien Street Reserve to the south, Sandon Point Reserve and McCauley’s Beach to the east, Thomas Gibson Park to the north, as well as parklands connecting to Sandon Point Reserve and extending south along the coastline. § Views of the site are primarily from passing trains, rear yards of allotments fronting streets both to the south and north, people accessing the beach and foreshore reserves, and people travelling along the cycle/pedestrian way. The overall Sandon Point locality forms its own self-contained character, and contributes in a limited way to the streetscape and character of the surrounding areas. The CoI area is quite prominent when viewed from the Bulli lookouts at the top of the escarpment. § A major ridgeline runs east-west across the mid-section of the CoI area which is also confined by higher ground to the north and south. § Vehicular and/or pedestrian access is available from a bridge over the railway line connecting to Sturdee Avenue, from a rail underpass to an easement corridor known as Lane 52, via new public roads within Stages 2 to 6, and from existing public reserves. § The major area of indigenous vegetation is the Turpentine forest located within the Cookson Plibrico property. Other parts of the site contain areas of vegetation, primarily along property boundaries and creek lines. § The higher sections of the site provide desirable outlooks to the Pacific Ocean, particularly elevated lands along the central western ridgeline. Some areas of steeper slopes exist on the site adjacent to the main ridgeline or due to past site modification works. § The site has a generally desirable aspect and microclimate, located near to the Pacific Ocean, providing desirable exposure to predominant wind patterns. § The major potential noise sources for consideration in future design are those generated from the Illawarra railway line, and the Cookson Plibrico operations, if the latter do not relocate.
6 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND RELATED LEGISLATION AND POLICY
In this section of the report relevant environmental, planning, heritage and Native Title legislation together with State planning policies, environmental planning instruments, strategies and guidelines are referenced.
LEGISLATION
Commonwealth Legislation
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) was introduced on 16 July 2000 which requires Commonwealth approval for actions that have, may have, or are likely to have, a significant impact on a matter of National Environmental Significance (NES). Matters of NES include declared World Heritage areas, declared Ramsar wetlands, listed nationally threatened species and ecological communities, listed migratory species, nuclear actions, and the environment of Commonwealth marine areas.
Under the EPBC Act, an assessment of the impact of a proposal on any matter of NES and Commonwealth land must be undertaken to demonstrate whether there is likely to be a significant impact. If the assessment concludes that there is likely to be a significant impact then it will become a controlled action under the Act and the proposal must be referred to Environment Australia, the Commonwealth agency that assists the Federal Minister of the Environment to make decisions as to whether an action is likely to have a significant impact and require further assessment.
Suitable habitat was located on the Sandon Point site for several threatened species that are known to occur within 10km of Sandon Point. As these species have suitable habitats on the subject site, there is some potential for them to be impacted upon by the proposed development. An assessment under the ‘administrative guidelines’ of the Act has been undertaken by Stockland’s consultant for these species in order to determine whether the proposal is likely to constitute a controlled action.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 provides for the protection of areas and objects which are of significance to Aboriginal people in accordance with Aboriginal tradition. It allows Aborigines to apply to the Minister to seek protection for significant Aboriginal areas and objects. The Minister has broad powers to make such a declaration should the Minister be satisfied that the area or object is a significant Aboriginal area or object and is under immediate threat of injury or desecration. Relevant definitions include:
Aboriginal tradition means “the body of traditions, observances, customs and beliefs of Aboriginals generally or of a particular community or group of Aboriginals, and includes such traditions, observances, customs or beliefs relating to particular persons, areas, objects or relationships”.
A significant Aboriginal area refers to “an area of land or water in Australia being of particula r significance to Aboriginals in accordance with Aboriginal tradition”.
A significant Aboriginal object refers to “an object (including Aboriginal remains) of particular significance to Aboriginals in accordance with Aboriginal tradition”.
7 Native Title Act 1993
The main purpose of the Native Title Act 1993 is to recognise and protect Native Title, which can be defined as the “rights and interests in land and waters that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have under laws and customs and that are recognised by the common law”.
The Act establishes the National Native Title Tribunal which has responsibilities regarding the hearing and processing of native title claims. The Tribunal maintains a public Register of Native Title Claims and Claimants and a Register of Native Title Determinations. The Register of Native Title Claims allows identification of individuals and organisations which claim traditional cultural links and associations. Stockland’s consultant considers the Register “should not be considered in any way to provide a definitive or comprehensive compilation of such potential claimants”.
NSW Legislation
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act)
The EP&A Act provides the framework for planning and development across NSW. Provisions are made for the preparation of environmental planning instruments which provides a basis for development control. Sections of the EP&A Act, which have relevance to the Sandon Point land include, but are not limited to, the following:
Section 5A of the Act sets out an 8-part test to determine whether a proposal will have a significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats. Section 34A(2) of the Act requires a local council to consult the NPWS when preparing an environmental study or a draft LEP where critical habitat, threatened species, populations , endangered ecological communities and their habitats may or will be affected.
Section 73 requires Council to keep regular and periodic review of its planning instruments having regard to changing circumstances to ensure the objects of the Act are achieved.
By letter dated 30 October 2002, the then Minister for Planning advised Council that he had declared land at Sandon Point (see Figure 15) to be State significant under Section 76A(7) of the EP&A Act. This makes the Minister the consent authority for any future residential, commercial, tourism or industrial development proposed for the site.
The Minister has also directed Council to refer Stockland’s development application for residential development off Wrexham Road to the north of Hewitts Creek (Stage 11) to him for determination.
Pursuant to Section 79B(3) a Council cannot grant development consent without the concurrence of the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) if a development is likely to significantly affect a threatened species, population, or ecological community, or its habitat.
Under Section 91, proposed development on the land will also be integrated development as it requires additional permits or approvals including: § A permit from the Water Administration Ministerial Corporation pursuant to Part 3A of the Rivers & Foreshores Improvement Act 1948 in regard to works within 40m of the creeks located on the land; § A consent to destroy Aboriginal Objects from the Director-General of the NPWS under Section 90 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974; § Authorisation from the local bush fire authority under Section 110B of the Rural Fires Act 1997 if any land is bush fire prone land; and § Consent from the relevant roads authority under Section 38 of the Roads Act 1993 if development involves work on a public road.
8 Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995
The aim of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 is to conserve threatened species, populations and ecological communities of flora and fauna statewide. The main objectives are to conserve biological diversity, prevent the extinction of threatened species, promote the recovery of threatened or endangered species and reduce the pressures that threaten such species.
Where a threatened species or endangered local community (as listed by the Act) occurs on community land, or has its habitat on community land, the Act applies to the site.
This Act requires the planning and development approval process to have regard to the potential for adverse impacts to be imposed upon threatened fauna and flora and their habitats. It requires a determining or consent authority to consider whether there “is likely to be a significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats” when assessing a proposal. If it is determined on the basis of Section 5A of the EP&A Act that a significant effect is likely to occur, a Species Impact Statement (SIS) is required. The SIS should be prepared in accordance with Sections 109, 110 and 111 of the Act and address the requirements issued by the Director-General of NPWS.
One of the key features of this Act is the integration of the conservation of threatened species into the development control processes under the EP&A Act. Amendments to Sections 77, 90 and 112 of that Act set out factors to be considered in deciding whether there is likely to be a significant effect on threatened species, populations and ecological communities and if a Species Impact Statement is required. Where there is likely to be a significant effect the consent or determining authority must seek concurrence of the Director-General of NPWS or, in circumstances, consult with the Minister for the Environment.
Section 91 requires a licence to harm or pick threatened species, population or ecological communities or damage habitat.
The Scientific Committee, established under Part 8 of the Act, has made a final determination to list the Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex in the Sydney Basin Bioregion as an Endangered Ecological Community on Part 3 of Schedule 1 of the Act. The listing of Endangered Ecological Communities is provided for by Part 2 of the Act.
Rivers and Foreshores Improvement Act 1948
The purpose of the Rivers and Foreshores Improvement Act 1948 is to assess and control activities that may have a detrimental effect on the flow or stability of rivers, estuaries or lake environments.
Under Part 3A of the Act, a permit is required to make an excavation or remove material from protected lands, or to carry out works, make an excavation, or remove material from within protected waters. Protected waters are defined as those areas between the banks of a river as defined in the Act. Protected lands are those lands not more than 40m from the top of the bank. The Act also empowers the Department of Sustainable Natural Resource to direct remedial works be undertaken on any lands where works have been carried out which, in the opinion of the Department, have detrimentally affected the flow of protected waters.
9 National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974
The NPWS has a statutory responsibility for the conservation and protection of Aboriginal heritage under this Act. Under Section 90 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, a person must not destroy, deface, damage or desecrate, or cause or permit the destruction, defacement, damage or desecration of, an Aboriginal object or Aboriginal place unless the Aboriginal object or Aborigina l place is dealt with in accordance with a heritage impact permit (previously known as a Consent to Destroy) issued by the Director-General of NPWS.
Water Management Act 2000
The relevant objects of the Water Management Act 2000 are: To provide for the sustainable and integrated management of the water resources of the State for the benefit of both present and future generations and, in particular: (a) to apply the principles of ecologically sustainable development, (b) to protect, enhance and restore water resources, their associated ecosystems, ecological processes and biological diversity and their water quality, … (f) to integrate the management of water resources with the other aspects of the environment, including the land, its soil, its native vegetation and its native fauna.
Heritage Act 1977
The purpose of the NSW Heritage Act 1977 is to ensure that the heritage of New South Wales is adequately identified and conserved. In practice, the Act has focused on items and places of non- indigenous heritage to avoid overlap with the NPWS Act 1974 which has primary responsibilities for nature conservation and the protection of Aboriginal relics and places in NSW.
The Heritage Amendment Act 1998 came into effect in April 1999. This Act instigated changes to the NSW heritage system. A central feature of the amendments was the clarification and strengthening of shared responsibility for heritage management between local government authorities responsible for items of local significance, and the NSW Heritage Council.
Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983
The NSW Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 recognises that land in NSW was traditionally owned and lived on by the Aborigines and that land is particularly important to Aborigines for spiritual, social, cultural and economic reasons.
The Act was designed to give control over land, where possible, to local Aboriginal communities. The principal objectives of the Act are to: § Constitute Land Councils as Aboriginal land holding and managing bodies corporate; § Facilitate the acquisition of land by transfer (of existing Aboriginal reserves), and open market purchase; § Define a process for the processing of land claims against certain forms of Crown land; and § Define which crown lands were open to claim.
The Act provides for a three-tiered structure of Aboriginal Land Councils at the Local, Regional and State levels. The aim of the Council system is to provide Local Council representation across the whole of NSW. Land Council membership is open to any Aboriginal person over 18 who lives within the defined boundaries of a Council area, or has since moved elsewhere. In the latter case membership is subject to a vote by Council members. Council executive positions are elected from and by the membership. Representatives from each of the Local Land Councils form the Regional Councils, and representatives from each of the Regional Councils form the State or NSW Aboriginal Land Council.
10 The Land Council system of representation was originally to be complemented by an Aboriginal Heritage and Culture Commission with responsibility for the protection and management of Aboriginal sites. However, this never eventuated and the legal responsibilities remain with the NPWS.
In the absence of any purposefully constituted system of representation for Aboriginal cultural heritage management, the Land Councils have, until recently, acted as the most accessible and representative bodies for providing community comment on cultural site management and development assessment investigations.
However, in considering cultural heritage issues the Land Council system does not necessarily include people with local tribal and cultural affiliations. Land Council office bearers are elected from contemporary resident Land Council members and need not have traditional ties to the Council area. Similarly, Land Council boundaries do not necessarily relate to tribal or traditional boundaries. For these reasons, and particularly following the recognition of native title rights, additional Aboriginal organizations have developed which specifically seek to represent traditional cultural interests and rights according to various tribal group criteria.
Native Title (NSW) Act 1994
The Native Title (NSW) Act 1994 establishes State based mechanisms for deciding claims to native title. It validates past acts that would otherwise be invalidated by the existence of native title and confirms certain State rights.
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANS AND PLANNING POLICIES
State Environmental Planning Policies
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 5 - Housing for Older People and People with a Disability (SEPP 5)
The aims of this Policy are to increase the supply and choice of housing for older people or people with a disability. Such housing is permitted, with consent, wherever houses, flats, hospitals or “special uses” are permitted in or adjoining urban areas, except for some environmentally sensitive lands. The policy contains development standards and matters the consent authority must consider when determining development applications.
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 11 – Traffic Generating Developments (SEPP 11)
The main objective of the Policy is to ensure that the Roads and Traffic Authority is consulted on major developments as to their traffic implications.
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)
This Policy guides the remediation of contaminated land. Consent cannot be granted for development of contaminated land unless the consent authority is satisfied through a reporting framework that remediation has been satisfactorily carried out to the level required for the proposed use. The policy defines when consent is required, requires all remediation to comply with standards, ensures land is investigated if contamination is suspected and requires councils to be notified of all remediation proposals.
11 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (SEPP 65)
This Policy aims to improve the design quality of residential flat development. It applies to development applications for residential flat buildings comprising three or more storeys and four or more self-contained dwellings. It sets out 10 design quality principles to provide a guide to achieving good design and the means of evaluating the merit of proposed solutions. Provision is made for the establishment of Design Review Panels to provide independent expert advice to consent authority on the merit of the development proposal. The accompanying regulation requires the involvement of a qualified designer through the design, approval and construction stages.
Draft State Environmental Planning Policy No. 66 – Integrating Land Use and Transport (SEPP 66)
This draft Policy aims to improve accessibility and reduce dependence on car travel. It applie s to the preparation of local environmental plans, development control plans, master plans and consideration of development applications. It seeks to improve internal permeability of new residential areas, increase densities to support public transport and promotes building forms and subdivision designs and layouts that encourage and are supportive of walking, cycling and use of public transport.
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 71 – Coastal Protection (SEPP 71)
The overall aims of this Policy are to ensure development in the coastal zone is appropriate and there is a consistent and strategic approach to coastal planning and management. It also aims to provide a clear process for development assessment. The principal objective of the Policy is to protect coastal areas, beaches and headlands for future generations.
According to DIPNR(PlanningNSW), legislation has been passed to include Wollongong in the NSW Coastal Policy 1997. When detailed mapping identifying the coastal zone is completed and adopted by the Minister, SEPP 71 would apply to the Sandon Point area.
The particular aims of the Policy are: (1) (a) to protect and manage the natural, cultural, recreational and economic attributes of the New South Wales coast, and (b) to protect and improve existing public access to and along coastal foreshores to the extent that this is compatible with the natural attributes of the coastal foreshore, and (c) to ensure that new opportunities for public access to and along coastal foreshores are identified and realised to the extent that this is compatible with the natural attributed of the coastal foreshore, and (d) to protect and preserve Aboriginal cultural heritage, and Aboriginal places, values, customs, beliefs and traditional knowledge, and (e) to ensure that the visual amenity of the coast is protected, and (f) to protect and preserve beach environments and beach amenity, and (g) to protect and preserve native coastal vegetation, and (h) to protect and preserve the marine environment of New South Wales, and (i) to protect and preserve rock platforms, and (j) to manage the coastal zone in accordance with the principles of ecologically sustainable development (within the meaning of section 6(2) of the Protection of the Environment Administration Act 1991), and (k) to ensure that the type, bulk, scale and size of development is appropriate for the location and protects and improves the natural scenic quality of the surrounding area, and (l) to encourage a strategic approach to coastal management. (2) This Policy: (a) identifies State significant development in the coastal zone, and
12 (b) requires development applications to carry out development in sensitive coastal locations to be referred to the Director-General for comment, and (c) identifies master plan requirements for certain development in the coastal zone. (3) This Policy aims to further the implementation of the Government’s coastal policy.
Clause 8 of the Policy outlines matters for consideration by the consent authority when preparing a draft Local Environmental Plan or determining a development application. (8) The matters for consideration are the following: (a) the aims of this Policy set out in clause 2, (b) existing public access to and along the coastal foreshore for pedestrians or persons with a disability should be retained and, where possible, public access to and along the coastal foreshore for pedestrians or persons with a disability should be improved, (c) opportunities to provide new public access to and along the coastal foreshore for pedestrians or persons with a disability, (d) the suitability of development given its type, location and design and its relationship with the surrounding area, (e) any detrimental impact that development may have on the amenity of the coastal foreshore, including any significant overshadowing of the coastal foreshore and any significant loss of views from a public place to the coastal foreshore, (f) the scenic qualities of the New South Wales coast, and means to protect and improve these qualities, (g) measures to conserve animals (within the meaning of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995) and plants (within the meaning of that Act), and their habitats, (h) measures to conserve fish (within the meaning of Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994) and marine vegetation (within the meaning of that Part), and their habitats, (i) existing wildlife corridors and the impact of development on these corridors; (j) the likely impact of coastal processes and coastal hazards on development and any likely impacts of development on coastal processes and coastal hazards, (k) measures to reduce the potential for conflict between land-based and water-based coastal activities, (l) measures to protect the cultural places, values, customs, beliefs and traditional knowledge of Aboriginals, (m) likely impacts of development on the water quality of coastal waterbodies, (n) the conservation and preservation of items of heritage, archaeological or historic significance, (o) only in cases in which a council prepares a draft local environmental plan that applies to land to which this Policy applies, the means to encourage compact towns and cities, (p) only in cases in which a development application in relation to proposed development is determined: (i) the cumulative impacts of the proposed development on the environment, and (ii) measures to ensure that water and energy usage by the proposed development is efficient.
Clause 13 of the Policy renders ineffective any provision of other Environmental Planning Instrument, which allows development to be consented to as if it were in a neighbouring zone. Clause 14 requires assessment of an application to ensure it does not result in impeding or diminishing the right of access of the public to or along the coast or foreshore. Clause 15 requires special consideration of development that proposes the disposal of effluent by means of a non-reticulated system. Clause 16 requires that no untreated stormwater is discharged from the development into the sea, coastal creek or similar body of water.
13 Part 5 of the Policy requires the preparation of a master plan as part of the development application process. Specific matters set out in SEPP 71 include :
Master plan required before certain consents may be granted 18.(1) A consent authority must not grant consent for: (a) subdivision of land within a residential zone, or a rural residential zone, if part or all of the land is in a sensitive coastal location, or (b) subdivision of land within a residential zone that is not identified as a sensitive coastal location into more than 25 lots, or (c) subdivision of land within a rural residential zone that is not identified as a sensitive coastal location into more than 5 lots, unless: (i) the Minister has adopted a master plan for the land, or (ii) the Minister, after consulting the Coastal Council, has waived the need for a master plan for the land under subclause (2). Consent authority to consider master plan 19. A consent authority must not determine a development application for development on land to which this Policy applies unless the consent authority has taken into consideration the provisions of a master plan adopted under this Part. Preparation of master plans 20.(2) A draft master plan is to illustrate and demonstrate, where relevant, proposals for the following: (a) design principles drawn from an analysis of the site and its context, (b) desired future locality character, (c) the location of any development, considering the natural features of the site, including coastal processes and coastal hazards, (d) the scale of any development and its integration with the existing landscape, (e) phasing of development, (f) public access to and along the coastal foreshore, (g) pedestrian, cycle and road access and circulation networks, (h) subdivision pattern, (i) infrastructure provision, (j) building envelopes and built form controls, (k) heritage conservation, (l) remediation of the site, (m) provision of public facilities and services, (n) provision of open space, its function and landscaping, (o) conservation of water quality and use, (p) conservation of animals (within the meaning of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995) and plants (within the meaning of that Act), and their habitats, (q) conservation of fish (within the meaning of Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994) and marine vegetation (within the meaning of that Part), and their habitats.
SEPP 71 applies to the coastal zone of NSW. Maps which will encompass the Sandon Point locality are being prepared to identify the coastal zone according to the Coastal Protection Act 1979. The provisions of SEPP 71 will apply to the site once the relevant maps have been prepared and adopted. Parties recognised that assessment of the CoI area should be in accordance with SEPP 71.
14 Regional and Local Environmental Plans
Illawarra Regional Environmental Plan No. 1 (IREP No. 1)
The Plan provides a framework for planning in the Illawarra region. It categorises land within the Illawarra region according to land use features and provides a framework for future planning and for how to best use land resources, improve quality of life and protect regional interests and investment.
The aim of the Plan is: To maximise the opportunities for the people of the region and the State to meet the individual and community, economic and social needs with particular reference to the way in which these needs are related to the allocation, availability, accessibility and management of the region’s land resources having regard to the objectives specified in Parts 2-16…
Provisions in Part 6 relate to industry. The objectives are: (a) to ensure that there is sufficient industrially zoned land to meet industrial requirements, (b) to encourage industries and other enterprises to locate within the region to diversify the economic base or act as stimuli to the local economy or both, and so provide new employment opportunities, and (c) to locate industrial land where it will meet the particular requirements of industry while having a minimal adverse impact on the natural environment and the amenity of living areas.
Part 7 deals with living areas. The objectives relating to living areas are: (a) to ensure that urban expansion is orderly and efficient having regard to the constraints of the natural environment and that sufficient land is available to prevent price rises resulting from scarcity of land, (b) to ensure that new residential land or land for higher density development is only developed where there are adequate utility and community services available or there is a commitment from the relevant authorities or developer to provide those services, (c) to provide for a range of lot sizes, dwelling types and tenure forms to cater for varying household needs in all local government areas, (d) to ensure that residential development does not take place on hazard-prone lands, and (e) to minimise bush fire risks to urban development.
Provisions in Part 13 are related to coastal lands, wetlands and other water bodies. The objectives are: (a) to protect beach systems and conserve their scenic, recreation and natural values, (b) to maintain and improve public access to waterways, lakes and the sea front, and (c) to protect the productive ecosystems and natural habitats of the region’s estuaries, wetlands, lakes and lagoons and their scenic attributes.
Clause 107 deals with development on land adjacent to, or in close proximity to, a lake, lagoon, river or the coast. It states “the consent authority shall take into consideration the need to facilitate public access to the waterfront by requiring dedication of appropriate land for open space purposes”.
Part 14 relates to recreation and tourism. The objectives include: (a) to promote a wide range of leisure opportunities, (b) to conserve and promote the region’s natural, historical and cultural features which are the basis of the tourist industry, and (c) to preserve access to natural resources and public lands which have recreational value.
Part 15 provides provisions relating to environmental heritage. It controls the demolition and renovation of items identified by the Plan as items of the environmental heritage of the region. It also requires the consent authority when considering a development proposal in the vicinity of an item of
15 the environmental heritage, to make an assessment of the effect on the listed item prior to determining the proposal.
Clause 131 requires the consent authority to have regard to the findings and recommendations of the Illawarra Region Aboriginal Resources Study published by the then Department of Environment and Planning in 1980 when considering development proposals or activities for the region.
Wollongong Local Environmental Plan 1990 as amended (Wollongong LEP 1990)
Wollongong LEP 1990 divides the City into a variety of land use zones. Council is the consent authority for any development that occurs within land that is zoned under the LEP. The provisions for each zone include the objectives of the zone, and outlines what activities are and are not prohibited under the zone.
Amendment No. 139 of Wollongong LEP 1990, gazetted in February 1997, rezoned most parts of the site to 2(b) Medium Density Residential, 4(a) Light Industrial, 6(a) Public Recreation. The Hannah land was rezoned 7(a) Special Environmental Protection in April 2002 (Amendment No. 194). Figure 4 shows the current zoning of the site.
The aim of Wollongong LEP 1990 is to provide a framework for land use management in the City of Wollongong to achieve the following objectives: (a) to encourage the proper management, development and conservation of natural and man- made resources (including agricultural land, natural areas, forest, minerals, water and the built environment) for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment; (b) to protect the environment from degradation and despoliation by protecting environmentally sensitive areas from development and minimising adverse impacts of urban development on both the built and natural environment; (c) to protect and improve the quality of life and the social well-being and amenity of local residents; (d) to encourage economic diversification and growth of the business and industrial base to increase employment; (e) to conserve the environmental heritage of the land to which this plan applies; (f) …
The objectives of the 2(b) zone are: (a) to cater for a wide range of housing types, essentially domestic in scale and character; (b) to allow for a range of residential densities and for urban consolidation in appropriate locations; and (c) to allow some diversity of activities and densities provided – (i) scale and height are comparable to those of the locality; (ii) there is little increase in traffic generation; and (iii) there will be no significant detraction from the character of the locality or the amenity of any existing or proposed development nearby.
The obje ctives of the 4(a) zone are: (a) to cater for a wide range of manufacturing and service activities which will not interfere with the amenity of nearby residents; and (b) to allow some diversity of activities which will not prejudice the objective referred to in paragraph (a) from being achieved or significantly detract from the operation of existing or proposed manufacturing and service industries or the amenity of nearby residents.
The objectives of the 6(a) zone are: (a) to identify areas where recreation facilities for the general use of the community for active and passive recreation may be developed; and
16 (b) to cater for the development of a wide range of facilities for the benefit of nearby communities.
Within the 6(a) zone, the following developments are permissible with consent: Advertisements; business signs; camp or caravan sites; community facilities; education establishments; forestry; recreation areas; recreation facilities, registered clubs; restaurants; utility installations.
The objectives of the 7(a) zone are: (a) to protect environmentally important lands having special aesthetic, ecological or conservational value; (b) to identify and protect the foreshore environment which enhances the visual amenity and possesses ecological or conservational value; (c) to identify and protect lands forming part of the catchment areas for water supply; and (d) to allow some diversity of activities on degraded land, which will not prejudice the objectives referred to in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) from being achieved or significantly detract from the environmental or visual quality or character of the locality or the amenity or operation of any existing or proposed development in the locality.
Within the 7(a) zone, the following developments are permissible with consent: Advertisement; any purpose associated with the protection and provision of stored water supplies and any purpose ordinarily incidental or subsidiary to such a purpose; leisure areas; mines; utility installations.
Residential flat buildings, dual occupancy development, dwelling houses, recreation areas and other specific uses are permissible with consent in the 2(b) zone. Subdivision would be permissible in the 2(b) zone with consent, after advertising and subject to Clause 11 which outlines a number of matters with which Council must be satisfied prior to granting consent. These matters include consistency with one or more objectives of the zone, that the development provides a service primarily for the area and for which there is a clear need, provision of adequate car parking, that there will be minimal interference with amenity, and that the development is generally in character with the scale and ambience of the immediate area. Clause 12(2) states that the floor space ratio for 2(b) zone is 0.5:1.
Schedule 1 of the LEP 1990 lists the Turpentine forest on the Cookson land as a heritage item having local significance. Clause 28 requires Council when considering a development application on a site of a heritage item to make an assessment of the extent to which the carrying out of development would affect the significance of a heritage item prior to determining the application.
Clause 29B requires consideration of development on land affected by known or potential archaeological sites.
There is no provision in Wollongong LEP 1990 which allows owners of 6(a) zoned land to require Council or any other authority to acquire the land. Council adopted a contributions plan in June 2001 for certain of the 6(a) zoned land in the eastern portion of the CoI area.
Development Control Plans
Development Control Plan No. 94/17 (DCP 94/17)
DCP 94/17 provides the guidelines for development on the CoI area, notwithstanding Council’s preparation of the Sandon Point Draft DCP. Several aspects of DCP 94/17 have been superseded by further investigation and following Land and Environment Court appeals relating to Stages 1 to 6. Of particular note is the inappropriateness of the location of the road connection across Tramway Creek detailed in DCP 94/17, the preferred access now being further west. Other matters relating to noise mitigation works were also amended. Nevertheless, DCP 94/17 remains the applicable DCP for the CoI area.
17 DCP 94/17 became effective in February 1997. The aims and objectives of DCP 94/17 are: (a) to provide a balance between residential and industrial development of suitable land and protection of sensitive land associated with the foreshore, creek corridors and Koori middens. (b) to ensure the public open space areas, es pecially associated with the McCauleys Beach foreshore, are both returned to a state representing a natural coastal ecosystem and provide for a desirous area of passive and active recreation of local and regional significance. (c) to ensure development of residential zones is free of creek flooding and ocean inundation according to precautionary hydraulic and hydrological principles to allow for a 100 year planning period. (d) to ensure a planned and integrated mix of dwelling types in residential zones are developed in keeping with locational and environmental constraints of the sites on integrated concept plan. (e) to ensure contaminated areas of the site are adequately remediated. (f) to ensure efficient and safe vehicular access minimising impact on adjoining areas. (g) to maintain employment opportunities within the site. (h) to ensure pollutants from stormwater runoff are adequately treated. (i) to provide enhanced flora and fauna habitats. (j) to ensure that works in the public open space areas – coast area rehabilitation, creek treatments, stormwater pollution management, cycle/pedestrian way construction, landscaping and open space fencing is carried out by the developer and maintained for three years by agreement with Council and in accordance with a plan of management prepared for the area.
Section 5 details site works and maintenance requirements on public open space including stormwater pollution management, creek treatments, landscaping, installation of cycle/pedestrian way, removal of the spoil pile on Hannah’s land, creek crossings and erosion and sedimentation control.
Section 6 specifies contaminant remediation measures “must be completed simultaneously with the earthworks required for infrastructure development to the satisfaction of Council and the EPA”.
Section 7 sets out 13 urban design requirements. Section 7(h) relates to the requirement of a master plan for development of medium density residential 2(b) areas. Section 7(j) specifies density requirement in terms dwelling yields per hectare, that is 15 in a 2(a) zone and 25 in a 2(b) zone.
Section 8 states that vehicular access to and within the site “must be as indicated on Attachment 2” of DCP 94/17. It proposes two access points to the site, one via Wrexham Road and the other via Point Street, as well as a north-south collector road linking the access points.
Section 9 requires any new industrial development to be compatible with development in residential zones and a landscape buffer be provided between the industrial area and adjacent open space and residential areas.
Section 10 concerns flood proofing to residential development.
Section 11 relates to Aboriginal heritage. It defines two management zones for each of the two identified areas, Area 1 near the confluence of Woodlands/Hewitts Creek and Area 2 near the mouth of Tramway Creek. It also details management requirements of each zone.
Section 12 prevents dwellings being built within 50m of the sewerage pump station. It also requires a landscape buffer as well as vehicular access for maintenance purposes.
Section 13 provides for subdivision construction access, soil and water management works and removal of tramway embankment.
Section 14 requires the preparation and implementation of management plan for public open space by the development. The plan should be approved by Council.
18 Sandon Point Draft Development Control Plan
In May 2002, Wollongong City Council resolved to establish a Steering Committee to oversee the review of DCP94/17 and establish a Master Plan for the site. Council also resolved to prepare a Plan of Management for the Open Space components of the site once the DCP/Master Planning process was completed.
According to Council’s submission, in considering the issue of a review of the existing DCP, Council also considered the merits of establishing a Master Plan for the site and through what mechanism that Master Plan should be established. It was of the view that the site would benefit from a LEP based Master Plan. However, it was recognised that to achieve this, it would involve an extended time- frame. Thus, it was acknowledged that a DCP based Master Plan would be the first step in clarifying spatial and environmental planning issues for the site. It was also of the view that the revised DCP would provide a more contemporary set of development controls than those in DCP 94/17.
The draft DCP is a two volume document. Volume One is the draft DCP that provides a framework to guide future development and restoration of the site and Volume Two details the Environment and Planning Context that provides the most recent analysis of the issues at Sandon Point. In Council’s submission to the Inquiry it was pointed out, that among other matters, Wollongong City Council has resolved to: § Present the proposed Development Control Plan to the Commission as a Draft Development Control Plan that has not been endorsed by Council, because of the lack of time for public consultation and resolution of key issues. § Enhance key areas of the draft Development Control Plan including but not limited to: (a) appropriate management of the floodplain. (b) the need for public facilities such as childcare. (c) affordable housing. (d) vegetation management. (e) tourism and employment. § Exclude Volume Two: Environment and Planning Context from the final Development Control Plan and to provide this document as background information only and not a formal part of Council’s submission.
Volume One of the draft DCP is in three parts. Part 1 deals with introductory matters and explains the aims and objectives of the DCP and the statutory basis for the document. Part 2 identifies development principles and master plan requirements for Sandon Point. A master plan is required to be submitted that demonstrates compliance with the development principles identified. It also identifies other requirements to be met prior to the development of land at Sandon Point and includes such matters as subdivision plans, integrated management plans and plans of management for those areas zoned as open space. Part 3 provides planning and urban design controls that developers are required to comply with.
The Commission notes in Volume Two, as part of the “Enquiry by Design” workshop process, four different development scenarios were investigated, namely, the community vision, Thirroul Village Green, Western Link and the Central Spine. The identified development area in Volume One is quite similar to the “Central Spine” development scenario.
A summary of the Sandon Point Draft DCP is given in Proposed Development Control and Draft Master Plans. Planning and related issues arising from this draft DCP are canvassed under Preferred Land Uses and Planning Outcomes.
19 Development Control Plan No. 9 – Residential Standards and Design Guidelines
The aim of this DCP is to establish Council’s residential development standards and guidelines to minimise potential adverse impact on the community. It applies to the whole of the City of Wollongong.
The DCP consists of two parts. Part 1 deals with residential standards whilst Part 2 details design guidelines. All residential development is required to conform to the provisions and standards set out in Part 1 of the Plan and to take account of those set out in Part 2. It applies to new development, redevelopment, alterations or additions for all residential purposes and to certain other purposes generally compatible with residential development including changes of use.
Draft Development Control Plan No. 54 – Managing Our Flood Risks (Dec 2002)
This draft DCP applies to the whole of the Wollongong LGA. According to the draft Plan, it will provide general provisions relating to all the floodplains and specific provisions relation to individual floodplains.
The aims of the Plan are: (a) to minimise the potential impact of development and other activity upon the aesthetic, recreational and ecological value of the waterway corridors. (b) increase public awareness of the hazard and extent of land affected by all potential floods, including floods greater than the 100 year average recurrence interval (ARI) flood and to ensure essential services and land uses are planned in recognition of all potential floods. (c) inform the community of Council’s policy for the use and development of flood prone land. (d) reduce the risk to human life and damage to property caused by flooding through controlling development on land affected by potential floods. (e) provide detailed controls for the assessment of applications lodged in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 on land affected by potential floods. (f) provide different guidelines, for the use and development of land subject to all potential floods in the floodplain, which reflect the probability of the flood occurring and the potential hazard within different areas. (g) apply a “merit-based approach” to all development decisions which takes account of social, economic and ecological as well as flooding considerations. (h) to control development and other activity within each of the individual floodplains within the LGA having regard to the characteristics and level of information available for each of the floodplains, in particular the availability of FRMSs and FRMPs prepared in accordance with the FMM and its predecessor, the FDM. (i) deal equitably and consistently with applications for development on land affected by potential floods, in accordance with the principles contained in the FMM, issued by the NSW Government.
The draft Plan sets out the criteria for determining applic ations for proposals potentially affected by flooding. The criteria are structured in recognition that different controls are applicable to different land uses and levels of potential flood inundation and hazard. Each floodplain is divided into different precincts based on levels of potential flood risk, and controls are proposed according to risk level.
Schedule 4 of the Plan provides planning and development controls applicable to the “consolidated Hewitts Creek Floodplain” which incorporate Slacky, Tramway, Woodlands, Hewitts and Thomas Gibson Creeks.
20 POLICIES, GUIDELINES AND STRATEGIES
Policies
NSW Coastal Policy 1997
The Coastal Policy provides a framework for decision making by local councils and State agencies in relation to the coastal zone as defined in the Policy. It is designed to ensure a more balanced, integrated and co-ordinated approach to coastal management and planning. It applies to the whole of the NSW Coast except for the urban areas of Sydney, Newcastle, Illawarra and Central Coast regions.
The Policy is based on the four principles of ecologically sustainable development (ESD) as it is considered that such an approach represents the best opportunity of reconciling competing interests. ESD refers to development that uses, conserves and enhances the community’s resources so that the ecological processes on which life depends are maintained and the total quality of life now and in the future can be increased. The four principles of ESD are conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity; inter-generational equity; improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms; and the precautionary principle.
The Policy is divided into two parts. Part A contains the policy itself and an overview of how it will be implemented, monitored and reviewed. Part B contains the detailed strategic actions to implement the policy.
In order to give expression to the ecological sustainability of the NSW coast, nine goals have been adopted which are underpinned by a set of principles. All goals are said to be inter-related and no one is more or less important than another. The goals are: 1. To protect, rehabilitate and improve the natural environment 2. To recognise and accommodate natural processes and climate change 3. To protect and enhance the aesthetic qualities of the coastal zone 4. To protect and conserve cultural heritage 5. To promote ecologically sustainable development and use of resources 6. To provide for ecologically sustainable human settlement 7. To provide for appropriate public access and use 8. To provide information to enable effective management 9. To provide for integrated planning and management
The NSW Flood Prone Land Policy (2001)
The primary objective of the Policy is: To reduce the impact of flooding and flood liability on individual owners and occupiers of flood prone property, and to reduce private and public losses resulting from floods, utilising ecologically positive methods wherever possible.
The Policy provides for the development of sustainable strategies for managing the human occupation and use of the floodplain from within a risk management hierarchy covering avoidance, minimisation (using planning controls) and finally mitigation works.
The Policy forms the cornerstone of the Floodplain Management Manual: the management of flood liable land (2001). The Policy provides for, amongst other things: § Financial and technical assistance to Councils in preparing strategic management plans. § Councils to be responsible for the determination of flood planning levels and appropriate planning and development controls based on social, economic and ecological, as well as flooding considerations.
21 § Explicit recognition that floodplain risk management needs to take into consideration Government policies and legislation allowing for the sustainable usage of the floodplain as a natural resource, and that the planning and assessment requirements laid down in those policies and legislation must be complied with by all agencies associated with the use, development and management of the floodplain. § Emphasis on the need to consider ways for maintaining and enhancing the riverine and floodplain ecology in the development of floodplain risk management plans. § Protection of Councils and other public authorities and their staff against claims for damages in accordance with section 733 of the Local Government Act 1993 providing they act in accordance with the Manual.
Floodplain Management Manual: the management of flood liable land (2001)
The Manual supports the Flood Prone Land Policy. It emphasises the need to consider existing, future and continuing flood risks on a strategic rather than ad hoc or individual basis. Other major issues in the Manual that are relevant include: § The importance of floodplain management plans. § The importance of incorporating relevant portions of management plans into Council’s Environmental Planning Instruments. § The explicit need to consider floods up to the probable maximum flood (PMF). § Recognition of the need for local flood plans to address flood readiness, response and recovery and integrating the role of the State Emergency Service (SES) in this regard. § The need to maintain and enhance the riverine and floodplain environments including consideration of the needs of threatened species, populations and ecological communities as part of any flood modification measures. § The need to consider and manage acid sulphate soils and their associated problems. § Incorporation of the principles of ESD when managing risks associated with the human occupation of the floodplain. § An increased emphasis on catchment considerations. § Recognition of the potential implications of climate change on flood behaviour.
NSW State Rivers and Estuaries Policy (1989)
This policy was developed by the NSW Government to encourage the sustainable management of the natural resources of the State’s rivers, estuaries and wetlands and on the adjacent riverine plains, so as to reduce, and where possible halt: § Declining water quality, § Loss of riparian vegetation, § Damage to river banks and channels, § Declining natural productivity, § Loss of biological diversity, and § Declining natural flood mitigation; and to encourage projects and activities which will restore the quality of the river and estuarine systems, such as: § Rehabilitating remnant habitats, § Re-establishing vegetation buffer zones adjacent to streams and wetlands, § Restoring wetland areas, § Rehabilitation of estuary foreshores, and § Ensuring adequate stream flows to maintain aquatic and wetland habitats.
22 The objectives of the Policy are to manage the rivers and estuaries in NSW in ways which: § Slow, halt or reverse the overall rate of degradation in their systems, § Ensure the long term sustainability of their essential biophysical functions, and § Maintain the beneficial use of these resources. These objectives will be achieved through the application of the following management principles: § Those uses of rivers and estuaries which are non-degrading should be encouraged. § Non-sustainable resource uses which are not essential should be phased out. § Environmentally degrading processes and practices should be replaced with more efficient and less degrading alternatives. § Environmentally degraded areas should be rehabilitated and their biophysical functions restored. § Remnant areas of significant environmental values should be accorded special protection. § An ethos for the sustainable management of river and estuarine resources should be encouraged in all agencies and individuals who own, manage or use these resources, and its practical application enabled.
Adoption of the policy means that the sustainability of the river and estuarine resources and their biophysical functions will be given explicit consideration in resource management decision making.
NSW Wetlands Management Policy (1996)
This Policy was developed by the NSW Government to -
Encourage the management of the wetlands of the State so as to halt, and where possible, reverse: § Loss of wetland vegetation; § Declining water quality; § Declining natural productivity; § Loss of biological diversity; and § Declining natural flood mitigation.
Encourage projects and activities which will restore the quality of the State’s wetlands, such as: § Rehabilitating wetlands; § Re-establishing areas of buffer vegetation around wetlands; and § Ensuring adequate water to restore wetland habitats.
Adoption of the NSW Wetlands Management Policy means that decision-making will give explicit consideration to the biophysical requirements of wetlands with the goal of ensuring their sustainable management.
The goal to guide decision-making for wetlands is: The ecologically sustainable use, management and conservation of wetlands in NSW for the benefits of present and future generations.
This goa l will be achieved by adopting the following principles: § Water regimes needed to maintain or restore the physical, chemical and biological processes of wetlands will have formal recognition in water allocation and management plans; § Land use and management practices that maintain or rehabilitate wetland habitats and processes will be encouraged; § New developments will require allowance for suitable water distribution to and from wetlands;
23 § The construction of purpose-built wetlands on the site of viable natural ones will be discouraged; § Natural wetlands should not be destroyed, but when social or economic imperatives require it, compensation through the rehabilitation or construction of a wetland will be required; § Degraded wetlands and their habitats and processes will be actively rehabilitated as far as is practical; § Wetlands of regional or national significance will be conserved; and § The adoption of stewardship ethos and co-operative action between land and water owners and managers, government authorities, non-government agencies and the general community is necessary for effective wetland management.
The Policy will be implemented in four main ways by: § Applying these principles to decision-making by Government agencies in their activities affecting wetlands; § Co-ordinating the wetland work of Government agencies; § Providing support to the community; and § Preparing an annual Wetland Action Plan.
Implementation of the Policy will be overseen by the State Catchment Management Coordinating Committee and preparation of the Wetland Action Plan will be undertaken by a sub-committee with representation from relevant Government, industry and community bodies.
Guidelines
Coastal Design Guidelines for NSW
The Coastal Design Guidelines were prepared by the Coastal Council of NSW, the Urban Design Advisory Service and Tourism NSW after extensive consultation. The Guidelines were released in March 2003 and “provide the principles and examples of urban design best practice in various coastal settings, for different kinds of settlements and developments, from cities to hamlets and isolated coastal dwellings”.
The guidelines consider the NSW coast in terms of a hierarchy of settlements. This provides a framework for analysing and understanding the important relationships between settlements and the local, urban and natural areas, and between neighbouring settlements and reserves.
At a local scale, within the settlement hierarchy the guidelines support the following relevant key objectives: § To protect and enhance the cultural, ecological and visual characteristics of a locality. § To limit coastal sprawl by establishing separation and greenbelts between settlements. § To integrate new development with surrounding land uses. § To integrate land use with transport. § To protect local character.
In discussing the “desired future character”, areas of visual sensitivity include: § Views to and from the coast, rivers, lakes and other water bodies. § Views to and from the hinterland. § Views of headlands. § Night and daytime views. § The urban settlement as it sits within the landscape. § Public views which are retained and reinstated, including views from the streets and public areas to the water.
24 § Enhancing and upgrading the open-space network for conservation, recreation, views and public access.
In terms of buildings, it provides that predominant building types in suburban areas include small apartment buildings, town houses, semi-detached and detached dwellings; development is predominantly low scale ; and housing, employment and transport are integrated into the town centre as well as in surrounding suburban centres. The height of buildings are to be subject to place-specific urban design studies with residential buildings generally being 1 or 2-storeys. Where visual prominence is not apparent, 3-storey buildings may be appropriate. New development is appropriate to the predominant form and scale of surrounding development (either present or future), surrounding land forms , and the visual setting of the settlement.
The intention of this policy and these initiatives is to enable the planning and management of the coast in an integrated and holistic way. This will mean that new development and redevelopment is placed in a well articulated and supported strategic context.
Draft Aboriginal Heritage Impact Assessment Guidelines
The aims of the Guidelines are: § To clarify the information requirements for proponents and consultants seeking to meet the statutory obligations of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and Heritage Act 1977. § To facilitate positive Aboriginal cultural heritage outcomes which are developed through the involvement of Aboriginal communities in assessment processes.
The Guidelines consist of three parts. Part 1 defines Aboriginal heritage, and discusses cultural landscapes, the role of Aboriginal people in the assessment of their heritage and the legislative context for heritage assessment. Part 2 outlines the Aboriginal heritage impact assessment process together with the questions that need to be addressed in the assessment report. Part 3 provides guidance on obtaining information and reporting on Abor iginal heritage impact assessment.
Strategies
Illawarra Coast- Draft Planning Strategy (1993)
This draft planning strategy was produced as a discussion paper to generate community comment on coastal planning and management. It attempted to achieve the following objectives: § To identify the broad context and vision for management of the area. § To examine critical issues important to future land use decisions. § To identify opportunities for further urban expansion and areas where constraints limit further urban development. § To examine the servicing implications of develo pment in areas identified as being capable of absorbing urban growth pressures. § To examine opportunities for economic growth. § To suggest policy, management and administrative processes to help resolve the critical issues and to achieve a broad vision.
Conclusions drawn in the draft strategy were: § The coastal environment is fragile; § Natural resources along the coastline are important to the local and regional economies; § The coastline is rich in cultural heritage; § There are opportunities and constraints for urban expansion along the coastline; and
25 § Integrated management of the coastline is necessary.
The draft strategy stated that the planning, servicing and development of new urban areas in Wollongong would continue to be co-ordinated by the Illawarra Urban Development Program (now encompassed by the Metropolitan Development Program).
Illawarra’s Action for Transport Strategy
It is an integrated land use and transport strategy that generally seeks to achieve the same aims and objectives as draft SEPP 66. It was created out of a whole of government task force to provide a holistic, whole of government approach to resolving transport planning issues for the northern Illawarra.
It identifies Thirroul Station as a major interchange for the northern suburbs of Wollongong. It promotes transit oriented development principles such as connectivity, higher densities, mixed use etc, within new urban proposals to reduce car travel time and support public transport. The Strategy was publicly exhibited and subsequently endorsed by relevant agencies. The Commission was advised that a recent review of the strategy reinforced the earlier principles and complement those contained in the State Government’s Transport Planning package.
Metropolitan Development Program (MDP)
The MDP now encompasses the Illawarra Urban Development Program, which was established in the early 1980s to coordinate the release of new residential land in Wollongong, Shellharbour and Kiama. The program was developed and implemented to: (a) ensure there is sufficient land available for new housing to avoid shortages; and (b) provide geographic choice in housing across the program area, so that service agencies can program delivery of their services.
Lands have been identified on the program on the basis of their physical capability for residential development with a notional dwelling yield. This calculation is revised through detailed studies and suitable areas may be rezoned as a result of these studies. Following the 1992/3 Local Environmental Study, Sandon Point was included in the program in 1995.
Sandon Point, and Edgewood at Woonona, are the only release areas identified on the program north of West Dapto. Sandon Point is reported as producing 390 lots over a 5-year period. Edgewood is expected to be completed by 2005. There are very limited opportunities for other greenfields residential development opportunities north of Wollongong according to the MDP.
Draft Housing Strategy for Wollongong
The aims of the draft Housing Strategy are “to encourage a diversity of housing choices and forms in the Wollongong LGA with respect to tenure, size, design, price, types and location”.
The objectives are to: 1. Facilitate the supply of, and improve people’s access to, housing that is affordable, and appropriate to their household structure and life cycle stage. § Provide improved information on housing opportunities, needs and key housing related indicators. § Promote and encourage diversity in housing type and density that: - is suitable for many different household structures; - avoids concentrations of high expense and low cost housing; - avoids high rise, other than in planned locations; - intersperses medium density in small parcels throughout the city;
26 - locates medium density close to services and transport nodes. § Improve the condition and composition of the public rental housing stock to better meet local housing needs. § Ensure effective implementation of planning policies and housing objectives. § Improve housing affordability and access to affordable housing. § Promote opportunities for housing choice and diversity. § Expand and enhance the community housing sector as a viable housing tenure. § Maintain close working relationships between key housing providers in the region, and continue advocating Wollongong’s housing needs to other spheres of government. 2. Encourage efficiency and ecological sustainability in the provision of housing and urban development. § Modify or introduce planning policies and/or guidelines which require the development of energy efficient buildings and result in or contribute to development that is ecologically sustainable. 3 Ensure the provision of physical and social infrastructure required to develop liveable communities, including the provision of support services and facilities for those requiring such support to live independently. § Resource the development of local community services and facilities. § Improve co-ordination in the delivery of housing, basic infrastructure (such as open space and community facilities) and support services for people requiring support services to live independently.
The draft Strategy acknowledges that the achievement of the objectives and strategies depends on the development of strong and coherent relationships between the key stakeholders, namely Wollongong City Council, the South Eastern Regional Office of the Department of Housing, the Sydney Office of the Commonwealth Department of Housing and Regional Development, the local/regional community housing sector, the regional private real estate and housing and land development industries, the crisis accommodation sector and the Wollongong community. The draft Strategy contains 9 recommendations which are considered to contribute to improving access to affordable, appropriate and secure housing for all households.
Draft Plan of Management for Thomas Gibson Park, Thirroul (December 2000)
Council has prepared a draft Plan of Management for Thomas Gibson Park, Thirroul. The draft Plan was placed on public exhibition. A public meeting was subsequently held on 4 April 2001. A report summarising the issues raised in the meeting was presented to the Council’s Administrative, Works and Community Services Committee June 2002 meeting. It was resolved to “defer consideration of the draft Plan ….. and give further consideration to this matter upon completion and adoption by Council of the overall master plan for Stockland’s development at Sandon Point”.
Of relevance to the Commission of Inquiry is that Thomas Gibson Park adjoins land owned by Stockland to the north, between the railway line and residential development to the east. It is also proposed that northern access to the Stockland proposal would be provided through the southwest corner of Thomas Gibson Park from the Wrexham Road railway bridge. Such access, including the area of the road would require about 2,000m2 of Thomas Gibson Park. There is considerable community opposition to alienation of public land for private development.
27 Generic Plan of Management for Community Land Categorised as Natural Areas
On 26 August 2002 Council has adopted a Generic Plan of Management for Community Land Categorised as Natural Areas. This Plan only covers an area that is categorised as “natural area” and is either owned or managed by Council. The “natural area” is then further sub-categorised into bushland, wetland, foreshore, escarpment or watercourse.
The Plan provides:
Where a site that might otherwise be categorised natural area is affected by an item that Council, by resolution, has identified as being any of the following: § A site of a known natural, geological, geomorphological, scenic or other feature that is considered by Council to warrant protection or special management considerations, or § A wildlife corridor, or where a site is a critical habitat, contains or directly affected by a recovery plan or threat abatement plan as declared under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 or the Fisheries Management Act 1994, or § A site that Council considers to be of Aboriginal, historical or cultural significance, that site must be covered by a site specific plan of management and is not covered by this plan.
The objectives of this Plan are based on the core values of sites of natural area: Biodiversity: To maintain a high level of genetic, species and ecosystem diversity within natural areas. Ecological: To maintain ecological processes and interactions that occur within an ecological community. Social: To provide natural areas that are highly valued as socially significant scenic features. Scenic : To provide natural areas which enhance the visual amenity of the area. Education: To provide natural areas which may facilitate educational and scientific research and development. Recreation: To promote use of the land that may enable public use and enjoyment of that land. Intergenerational Equity : To ensure the preservation and regeneration of existing natural areas both now and for future generations.
Section 36(E) of the Local Government Act 1993 specifies the core objectives for land categorised “Natural Area” as follows: (a) to conserve biodiversity and maintain ecosystem function in respect of the land, or the feature or habitat in respect of which the land is categorised as a natural area, and (b) to maintain the land, or that feature or habitat, in its natural state and setting, and (c) to provide for the restoration and regeneration of the land, and (d) to provide for community use of and access to the land in such a manner as will minimise and mitigate any disturbance caused by human intrusion, and (e) to assist in and facilitate the implementation of any provisions restricting the use and management of the land that are set out in a recovery plan or threat abatement plan prepared under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 or the Fisheries Management Act 1994.
This Plan also sets out the objectives of various sub-categorised “natural area” as provided for in Section 36 of the Local Government Act 1993. It details the specific management issues, objectives and performance targets, means of achievement and performance indicators for each sub-categorised “natural area”, ie, bushland, wetland, escarpment, watercourse and foreshore.
28 Following the adoption of the Plan, Council will develop the Natural Area Strategic Plan, which will focus on issues such as nature conservation, visitor usage and cultural heritage as they relate to the specific natural area sites throughout the City.
In order to assess the effectiveness of the plan, Council shall give consideration to the plans, objectives and performance targets in its Annual Report and State of the Environment Report. This annual performance review will also serve to prioritise works and activities subject to budgetary and other influences that prevail at that time.
Principles for Urban Stream Management (November 1997)
This document, Principles for Urban Stream Management, introduces principles for the sustainable management of urban streams in the Illawarra region to provide a whole of government approach. The goal is to ensure that urban streams retain and enhance both the natural functions of watercourses and the quality of life for people of the Illawarra. The objectives include minimising risk to life and property, maintaining and enhancing environmental attributes including channel stability and biological diversity, achieving multi-use of riparian zones including aesthetic landscape and recreation opportunities, and meeting water quality and environmental flow objectives.
The following eight principles were considered important for urban stream management: 1. Minimising Risk : Urban stream management must consider community safety and minimise risk to life. In addition, minimisation of risk to property, structures and recreation users should also be incorporated in urban stream design. 2. Independence: A catchment must be considered as a multi-functioning unit linking aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems such as river floodplains, estuaries and tributaries. 3. Individuality: Each stream has its own unique characteristics. Drainage designs must recognise the individual features of each catchment. 4. Continuity: The linear nature of aquatic ecosystems must recognise the need for continuous corridors to allow natural processes associated with organisms, sediment, flora and fauna. There is a need to maintain and re-establish these corridors. 5. Existing Habitat Values: Maintaining and enhancing existing habitat is extremely important to ensure greater biodiversity and vegetation removal should only be considered as a last resort. 6. Natural Stream Processes: Engineering designs must facilitate natural stream processes and incorporate indigenous vegetation and natural materials. 7. Multi-disciplined Approach: An optimum solution to stream design should incorporate expertise in hydraulics, hydrology, fluvial geomorphology, riverine ecology, vegetation and revegetation management, engineering, and town planning. 8. Maintenance and Construction: Designs should produce a self-sustaining ecosystem, reducing construction impacts and long term maintenance requirements.
Planning for Bushfire Protection 2001
The Planning for Bushfire Protection document was developed by the NSW Rural Fire Service and DIPNR(PlanningNSW). It provides the necessary planning considerations when developing sites for residential uses in close proximity to areas likely to be affected by bushfire. It outlines bushfire planning matters that need to be considered at various stages of the planning process. One of the key features of the document is the linkage of bushfire hazard for a site with the implementation of appropriate bushfire related planning and development controls.
29
30 DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN AND DRAFT MASTER PLAN
In this section of the report the Commission summarises the Sandon Point Draft Development Control Plan and the Master Plan prepared by Stockland for land it owns within the CoI area.
SANDON POINT DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN
Wollongong City Council’s primary submission detailed the background leading to the preparation of the Sandon Point Draft Development Control Plan (referred to as the draft DCP). In preparing the draft DCP Council stated that assessing and balancing interagency, ecological, social, cultural and economic goals have been the highest priorities. A Master Plan for the site has not been completed due to time constraints and the inability to resolve key issues between all parties.
The future of Sandon Point has been an issue of contention for many years. Planning and consultation associated with the area has been occurring since the early 1990s resulting in the current zoning of the area and the adoption of DCP 94/17 in early 1997. The objectives of DCP 94/17 are detailed in Environmenta l Planning and Related Legislation and Policy.
Recent studies have identified areas of ecological and heritage significance within private land in Sandon Point that raise concerns as to the appropriateness of current zoning to protect these significant areas. Potential conflicts in residential and industrial uses are also issues of concern.
In considering the zoning issues, Council was of the view that the site would benefit from a Local Environmental Plan (LEP) based Master Plan but recognised the process would involve an extended time-frame. Whilst a DCP based Master Plan could serve as the first step in clarifying spatial and environmental planning issues for the site. Council was also of the view that a revised DCP would provide a more contemporary set of development controls than those in DCP 94/17. In May 2002, Council resolved to establish a Steering Committee to oversee the review of DCP 94/17 and establish a Master Plan for the site.
As part of the input into the review of the DCP, Council commissioned two traffic studies (Stapleton 2002, Gabites Porter 2002), an Aboriginal Heritage Study (Therin 2003) and a mapping of the vegetation communities by Adam.
Council’s primary submission included Volumes One and Two of the draft DCP. Volume One is the draft DCP , and Volume Two provides background information but does not form part of Council’s submission. As Volume Two details the environment and planning context that provides the most recent analysis of the issues at Sandon Point, the Commission considers it beneficial to refer to some of the background and key assumptions detailed in Volume Two so as to understand the environmental planning principles and requirements as well as the development controls proposed in the draft DCP.
Enquiry by Design Workshop
Section 11 of Volume Two describes the “Enquiry by Design” Workshop process. The Workshop was held between 10 and 13 September 2002 as part of the DCP review process to investigate different development scenarios for Sandon Point. The Workshop sought input from a range of stakeholders including Department of Land and Water Conservation, DIPNR(PlanningNSW), Sydney Water Corporation, National Parks and Wildlife Service, Roads & Traffic Authority, Stockland (Constructors) Pty Ltd, Cookson Plibrico Pty Ltd, Ray Hannah Motors Pty Ltd, Therin
31 Archaeological Consulting, Council staff from Strategic Planning, Development Assessment and Compliance, Design and Property Divisions, and Community members.
It was pointed out that the four community representatives on the Steering Committee were unable to attend the Workshop, but wished to have recorded their concerns about the process of determining the future of the site. The Workshop provided an opportunity for a collective review and consideration of the inter-relationship between issues like transport, land use, urban design, the environment, and physical and social factors. It canvassed four development scenarios.
Scenario One – Community Vision This scenario is based on the proposal contained in the Sandon Point – A Community Vision – Bushland Management Strategy 2002 and Beyond prepared by the Tramway Wetlands Planning Committee in association with NIRAG. It is a “no development” scenario as all land would be rezoned for public recreation/environmental protection and reserved for a regional park. The Cookson Plibrico factory would be retained to maintain local employment.
Scenario Two – Thirroul Village Green This scenario focused on a possible relocation of part of the sports facilities at Thomas Gibson Park to within Stockland’s land at Sandon Point. Potential redevelopment of parts of Thomas Gibson Park to medium density residential and mixed use within walking distance to Thirroul railway station would be permitted. A north-south road link from Point Street to Station Street and an east-west road link from Wrexham Road to Surfers Parade would be constructed.
Scenario Three – Western Link This scenario focused on a possible link road along the western side of the development adjacent to the railway. The scenario also looked at a possible link to the north to Station Street adjacent to the Illawarra railway line through State Rail Authority land and/or Thomas Gibson Park. The Cookson Plibrico site would be developed for residential use.
Scenario Four – Central Spine Scenario Four is quite similar to Scenario Three in terms of residential development area, including development of the Cookson Plibrico site for residential use. The main difference is this scenario focused on a link road that connects the north and south of the site more centrally. It also considered a possible land swap associated with the Wrexham Road connection.
Although many of the opportunities and constraints had not been fully mapped at the time of the Workshop, preliminary economic, environmental and social assessment of each of the four scenarios concluded that Scenarios Three and Four were the “preferred” option by the Design Workshop.
Draft Development Control Plan
Key Assumptions and Considerations
Council stated that the goal of the draft DCP is “to guide any development of land in a way that provides for restoration of the remainder of the site”. The key assumptions and considerations to achieve this goal are: § Part of the site is suitable for development. § Residential use is a preferred future use of part of the Cookson Plibrico site. § Although the boundaries of the proposed development area were primarily determined by environmental factors, they are in the main located within the area currently zoned for residential use on privately owned land.
32 § Current floor space ratio (FSR) control of 0.5:1 over the whole site may not produce an appropriate built form for the site as part of the site is suitable for higher density development. § Potential exists to extend land currently zoned 6(a) to include identified environmental areas. § One of the key priorities is to enhance the Turpentine forest. However, the edge of the forest is “slightly adjusted” to allow access for maintenance purposes, and to retain sufficient land for development to enable an economic return for Cookson Plibrico to relocate to a more appropriate location. § Ecological requirements should be the primary determinant of the width of the riparian corridors, not the flood conveyance requirements. § The contours of the land in the riparian corridor need to relate to the ecological integrity of the corridor and, in general, should not include major changes in levels. § The width of proposed buffer zones would depend on what would be reasonable to require of the developer by way of rehabilitation or restoration along each watercourse so as to provide sufficient ecological integrity for the riparian corridor. § The existing pond between the old Woodlands Creek and Cookson Plibrico site is an ideal habitat for the threatened species, the Green and Golden Bell Frog. § As there is not an existing watercourse/ecologic al community on the western piped section of Woodlands Creek and rehabilitation of a riparian corridor would be at substantial cost to the developer, a total riparian corridor of 40m minimum is proposed. § The proposed buffer zone for Hewitts Creek is a minimum of 20m to the north and 10m to the south of the Creek. § There is limited opportunity to widen the riparian corridor along Tramway Creek. § Cooksons Creek has potential to enhance existing SCESFC and expand upon the riparian corridor in association with the Turpentine forest, creating improved faunal habitat linkages. § Asset Protection Zones (APZ) are proposed which could incorporate the road systems, pedestrian walkways, cycleways and managed fringe strips. However, on the northern side of Hewitts Creek “some balancing with economic imperatives” resulted in a reduction of the proposed APZ to retain some developable land. For the same reason, a lesser APZ is proposed for the Cookson Plibrico site. § A secondary road system in the APZ would improve access to the open space areas and riparian corridors for management and fire protection, as well as minimising problems associated with rubbish dumping onto bushland areas when backyards adjoin bushland. § As a significant part of the proposed development area has been subject to disturbance to the original surface profile , which has impacted upon the level of archaeological significance of these areas. Archaeological testing should be undertaken in areas where the level of disturbance is identified as either undertermined or undisturbed.
Structure of the Draft DCP
The draft DCP (Volume 1) is in three parts. Part 1 deals with introductory matters and explains the aims and objectives of the DCP as well as the statutory basis for the document.
The aims of the DCP are to: § Define the environmental constraints to development of Sandon Point; § Maintain significant natural, ecological and environmental characteristics of Sandon Point; § Implement environmentally sustainable development at Sandon Point; § Identify and conserve both the Aboriginal heritage significance and cultural heritage significance of Sandon Point; § Introduce requirements for master planning and integrated management of Sandon Point; and § Demonstrate best practice in natural, open space, urban and residentia l planning, development and design.
33 The objectives of the DCP are to: § Protect environmentally sensitive land associated with the foreshore, creek corridors and indigenous and non indigenous cultural and physical heritage; § Mitigate flooding risk to any existing or future development in the catchment area through a flood plain management strategy that results in appropriate development on the site and sensitive flood mitigation controls; § Rehabilitate existing riparian corridors and ensure that width, buffers to development, quality of landscape, and diversity of vegetation to support principles of ecological sustainability are provided; § Ensure the development of the site provides for the long-term re-establishment, protection and management of native flora and fauna habitats at Sandon Point for current and future generations; § Establish a network of public open space areas, especially those associated with the McCauleys Beach foreshore, and to restore them to a state representing a natural coastal ecosystem whilst allowing for limited recreational use; § Conserve significant areas of natural, Aboriginal and non indigenous cultural and archaeological heritage and to promote heritage values and interpretative facilities on the site; § Ensure that measures to remediate potentially contaminated areas of the site are implemented prior to use; § Promote environmentally sustainable stormwater management for the site, to ensure pollutants from stormwater runoff are adequately treated and to mitigate any impacts of stormwater runoff quality and quantity; § Provide a safe and efficient means of access and movement for all transport modes that allows for integration of transport and development whilst aiming to minimise impacts of transport to natural, residential and heritage areas; § Create a high quality public domain incorporating both urban and natural areas with appropriate native landscaping that assist the sustainability of flora and fauna habitats on the site and minimise maintenance costs; § Establish a diverse and visually interesting built form in keeping with the context and environmental constraints of the site; § Ensure that all development is compatible with, and has minimum impact on, adjoining dwellings and offers high levels of amenity for existing and future residents; and § Ensure that certain infrastructure and other works required beyond the boundary of the site are undertaken either prior to or as part of the development of the land.
Part 2 of the draft DCP identifies development principles and master plan requirements for Sandon Point. A master plan is required to be submitted that demonstrates compliance with the development principles identified. This part also identifies other requirements to be met prior to the development of land at Sandon Point and includes such matters as subdivision plans, integrated management plans, and plans of management for those areas zoned as open space.
The key environmental planning principles are: Comprehensive (a) The entire Sandon Point site is to be subject to a comprehensive and integrated Master Plan that strikes a balance between environmentally sensitive land uses and those areas suitable for development.
34 Land Use (b) Future residential uses are to be restricted to the Area Under Investigation for Development (AUID) as shown in Figure 2.2 of the draft DCP . (c) The Cookson Plibrico site (Lot 2 DP24431) is currently zoned Light Industrial 4(a). Any development of this site is required to address the potential conflict between existing industrial operations and future residentia l development in the short term. Any Master Plan prepared for the site should, however, consider this site as being suitable for residential development and be developed to incorporate the site. (d) The Ray Hannah Motors site (Part Lot 47 DP737406) needs to be incorporated in the plan. The Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study has identified that Woodlands Creek should be re-diverted into its original corridor. This is subject to further investigation related to protection of sewage infrastructure and concerns about the re-diversion from an indigenous heritage perspective. The fill referred to as “Mt Thirroul” should be removed. (e) The zoning boundary does not represent the developable area. (f) The AUID boundary is setback from existing zone boundaries to meet ecological needs. Ecological Requirements (g) Riparian corridors are to be protected. These corridors are made up of the Core Riparian Protection Zone (CRPZ) and a Vegetated Riparian Buffer (VRB). The rationale behind these zones has been documented in Volume Two. (h) Ecological requirements are to be used to determine the width of riparian corridors. (i) The CRPZ will be a minimum width of either 20m or the width of the existing SCESFC. (j) The flood conveyance requirements can be accommodated within the riparian corridors. (k) To protect and enhance the existing SCESFC, a minimum 40m vegetated riparian buffer is required around the SCESFC. (l) Rehabilitation of the riparian corridor along the existing piped section of Woodlands Creek should include a Vegetated Riparian Buffer of minimum 10m either side of a 20m CRPZ. (m) The total riparian corridor width for Hewitts Creek should range from a minimum of 40 to 65m, comprising of a CRPZ of between 10 to 35m, a minimum 20m VRB to the north of the creek, and a minimum 10m VRB to the south of the creek. (n) The southern boundary of Tramway Creek has been determined by Stages 1 to 6. The northern boundary is defined by the cadastral boundary of the Cookson Plibrico site. (o) The total riparia n corridor width for Cooksons Creek should be a minimum of 70m, comprising of a CRPZ of 20m, a southern VRB of minimum 10m and a northern VRB of minimum 40m. (p) Realignment of Woodlands Creek to restore its original path to Tramway Creek. (q) Removal of the southern section of the gabion wall along Hewitts Creek to restore a natural meander for ecological purposes. (r) Provision of an additional buffer of minimum 10m from the edge of the pond/wetland just south of Woodlands Creek to provide a habitat for the endangered Green and Golden Bell Frog. (s) Protection and enhancement of the existing Turpentine forest with suitable buffers. (t) Conservation and enhancement of the existing Turpentine forest through the protection of riparian corridors with suitable buffers. Residential & Open Space Interface (u) A Managed Buffer Zone is to be created between any built form and proposed riparian corridors for : - Asset protection for the purposes of minimising bushfire risk; - An additional buffer to riparian corridors; and - The natural surveillance of Open Space. (v) Widths of the Managed Buffer Zone, incorporating an Asset Protection Zone, are subject to approval by the NSW Rural Fire Service.
35 Flood Conveyance Requirements (w) Any area proposed for development should be outside of the High Risk Flood Zone identified in the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Management Study (2002). (x) Where the area proposed for development overlaps with the Medium Risk Flood Zone identified in the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Management Study, the developer is required to meet the development standards in accordance with Council’s requirements. Aboriginal Heritage Requirements (y) Archaeological sites and sites of Aboriginal significance are to be conserved. (z) Prior to the Master Plan being completed there is a need for further investigation.
Part 3 of the draft DCP provides planning and urban design controls with which developers are required to comply. The development guidelines and controls compliment the Master Planning Principles identified in Part 2. This Part also addresses the following heads of consideration: § Natural Environment and Riparian Corridors; § Floodplain Management; § Stormwater Management and Water Quality; § Open Space; § Access and Movement; § Built Form; § Aboriginal Heritage; § Non Aboriginal Heritage; and § Other Issues.
Objectives, guidelines and performance measures are set for each heads of consideration. The objectives state what Council is seeking to achieve and the desired outcomes relating to each head of consideration. The guidelines set out how the objectives may be delivered and the performance measures are prescriptive standards that would assist the achievement of the required objectives and guidelines. However, many guidelines and performance measures are yet to be detailed in the draft DCP and the Commission notes that “the numerical controls are provided as guide only and are subject to review and confirmation”.
Council’s Submission to the Inquiry
Council stated in its submission that the draft DCP is based on a number of key factors which remain unresolved and represent major issues of contention. Furthermore, that the main objective of the draft DCP is to “simultaneously enhance the economic, social, cultural and ecological values of the site”. The resultant draft DCP aims to balance the competing values. However, Council acknowledges that there remain strongly held views in the community which differ from those presented in the draft DCP.
In summary, Council believes the draft DCP has been prepared to align with the requirements of SEPP 71. It recommends the Commission use the draft DCP as a base for assessing the merits of Stockland’s draft Master Plan submitted to the Commission. Council also pointed out that a number of areas in the draft DCP require strengthening. It acknowledged there are divergent views, particularly from the community members about the long term use and management of the site. Council considers the draft DCP represents a basis for policy decisions to be made about the future of the site. The draft DCP also represents the most thorough and detailed professional analysis undertaken to resolve the “very difficult” issues at Sandon Point.
36 STOCKLAND’S DRAFT MASTER PLAN
Stockland’s primary submission to the Inquiry includes a draft Master Plan proposal for its land within the CoI area at Sandon Point, as well as for the Cookson Plibrico property. The Master Plan is based on extensive background studies and incorporates the locational and statutory planning context associated with the site.
Conceptual Design Parameters
Design Objectives
The primary design objectives of the draft Master Plan are described as follows: § To ensure that while distinguished as a distinct thriving urban community, the Sandon Point site is responsive to its local context and is integrated into its unique natural setting. § The Master Plan should offer the potential for a diverse range of innovative and quality, housing solutions. § To ensure creation of a desired built form and landscape that would stimulate a sense of interaction and community well-being. The retention and rehabilitation of watercourses through the site and areas of Turpentine trees to provide soft edges to the built form encouraging interaction and active use. § The architectural vision seeks to respond to the surrounding coastal environment. The architectural pallet to be used should be a combination of contemporary architecture with a distinct coastal character. The architecture seeks to reflect the particular informal character, openness and individuality appropriate to a beach front community. § The existing creek systems, regardless of dilapidated or non-existent form, should be rehabilitated where in existence or constructed with natural creek features. § The design of the creek system takes into consideration ecological, geomorphological, flooding, open space/recreation, landscape and urban design considerations. § The creek systems and associated riparian corridors must be designed so as to be practical in terms of their establishment and able to be maintained in the long term to ensure their ecological sustainability. In this regard, the riparian corridors have been designed to form part of an overall public open space system, linking to existing public reserves, particularly those located on the coastal fringe, incorporating natural systems. § The Master Plan embellishes special places identified on the site. Hewitts, Woodlands and Cooksons Creek are addressed through urban form and pedestrian/cycle networks. The major stand of Turpentine trees is preserved and becomes a focus of the Master Plan. § Strong linkages both visually and physically to the open spaces within and surrounding the site exist, thus encouraging the wider community to enjoy these areas. § A strong identifiable public domain has been created, both in the landscape realm but also within the built form. The built form would reinforce public spaces through its architecture, planning and scale. § The main north-south link through the site provides for a connection to Point Street via the public road system approved in association with Stages 1 to 6, crossing Tramway Creek at the location of the existing sewer crossing, crossing the remaining creeks at locations previously identified in association with the then DLWC, and connecting to an augmented railway crossing to join with Wrexham Road. This north-south link would also provide for a bus route through the site, and is generally consistent with the routes identified within Council’s proposed draft DCP. § The internal road layout system has been designed to provide maximum connectivity with a road pattern which minimises traffic speed, is sympathetic to potential final landform, and maximises opportunities for views.
37 § A hierarchy of collector street, access streets and access places has been created. Their positioning is both to enhance existing traces on the site (drainage lines, Turpentine forest) and also to facilitate connections through the site. § A network of linkages is planned for the site that encourages connections to the surrounding open space and the green corridors that permeate the site. § The vast majority of lots contained within the Master Plan would have double garaging on title, limiting the extent of on-street parking. Where appropriate, parking is taken off the street onto a shared driveway enhancing streetscapes and varying the urban form. § The interface between residential land and the riparian corridors has been a critical consideration for both ecological and crime safety reasons. The Master Plan provides for an active frontage to residential development at this interface, by way of either public roads, a pedestrian/cycleway system, or with potential for future multi-dwelling developments (“4- packs”, apartments or townhouses) to be orientated towards the open space and incorporate communal pathways at the interface. Rear lanes become driveways shared by 3 or 4 neighbours. The connections through the open space network are strong and promote safety. § A depth of land has been allocated between the proposed public road system and the Illawarra railway corridor to accommodate either east-west orientated dwellings with acoustic amelioration provided by walls at the boundary and treatment to the buildings, or north-south orientated dwellings serviced by an internal private road which comprises in part the wall of the dwelling for acoustic abatement supplemented by adjoining acoustic walls and dwelling construction treatments. The intention is to avoid a continuous high, acoustic wall along the western boundary of the lands, by utilising the design of the dwelling to act as an acoustic abatement barrier where higher walls are required. § Heritage interpretive facilities would be incorporated into the estate in recognition of past indigenous and European occupation of the land. These interpretive facilities would be consistent with the findings of the various heritage, archaeological and Aboriginal cultural studies undertaken and is generally consistent with the outcomes envisaged by Council’s proposed draft DCP. § It is intended to encourage a consistent architectural theme to future built form, through the establishment of urban design guidelines, led by the co-ordinated design and construction of multi-unit dwelling sites within the estate. The design of future dwellings would also take into consideration amenity issues associated with overlooking and view sharing. § The design of the estate overall would maximise the application of ESD principles through passive solar design and water collection and reuse. The road layout has been designed to specifically facilitate the optimum orientation of future dwellings for the purposes of maximising solar access.
The draft Master Plan also lists principles to establish the basis for social, demographic, topographical and architectural parameters, providing variation in house types and designs, as well as articulating streetscape .
Landscaping
Stockland also advised that a Landscape Master Plan for the proposed development has been prepared by its consultant. However, the plan was not submitted to the Inquiry except for 10 diagrams showing conceptual ideas as to the locations of street planting, cycleway and pedestrian linkages, and cross sections of riparian corridors.
According to the Master Plan, the Landscape Plan aims to balance the protection, enhancement, management and connection of the riparian corridors, Turpentine forest and SCESFC areas with the provision of a compatible and economically viable development.
38 Bushfire Hazard Management
The draft Master Plan indicates the bushfire hazard management would be incorporated into the final design, including a 20m Inner Protection Area. The use of fire retardant species would be maximised where there is no conflict with ecological requirements.
The final detailed landscape design may inclu de a proportion of the 20m Inner Protection Area required for bushfire hazard management purposes within the riparian zone in selected locations. In such circumstances, the landscape design would aim to provide scattered trees and shrubs with a managed understorey to satisfy the performance criteria for Inner Protection Areas.
Flooding
The design of creek corridors aims to convey the 1 percent annual exceedance probability (AEP) flood within creek banks, with spill over onto the road reserve or pedestria n/cycleway corridors in the probable maximum flood (PMF). These maximum floods are based on the theoretical worst case scenario of a combination of the culverts above the site being blocked or unblocked (Council’s policy since the 1998 flooding in the area). Allowance was made for enlargement of the railway culverts on Tramway and Woodlands Creeks as recommended in the Flood Study and Plan.
The proposed areas for residential development would be located above the 100 year average return interval (ARI) flood level plus a freeboard of 500mm. To provide additional capacity for storms larger than the 100 year ARI, the areas along creek banks would be road reserves (minimum width 15m) or cycleways (minimum width 10m) as additional buffer zones to the creeks.
Riparian Zones
According to the Master Plan, the riparian zones have been designed to establish a Core Riparian Protection Zone with a minimum width of 30m which is consistent with management actions recommended in the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report.
A trickle flow channel (3 month ARI capacity) would meander through a low flow channel (1 to 2 year ARI capacity), which would then break out into an overflow area. This overflow area would be contained within a broader corridor with a capacity to contain the 100 year ARI and further overflow into the floodplain during PMF events.
The channels would be stable (no damage) up to the 5 year ARI storm, with increasing damage to the vegetation up to the 100 year ARI storm. The channel walls and other structural elements would be stable up to the 100 year ARI so that catastrophic failure would not occur.
The NSW Fisheries requirements/guidelines regarding crossings or changes in bed levels would be incorporated into the design. Floodplain management requirements would be consistent with the Floodplain Management Manual and Council’s requirements. The design is also said to be consistent with the intentions of the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan.
Water Management
Water sensitive urban design principles would apply to the water supply, stormwater and wastewater systems for the development, including: § Consideration of the entire water cycle management; § Minimisation of the quantity of water used by the site; and § Limitation of the export of stormwater and wastewater (and/or pollutants) attributable to the development of the site to the greatest practical extent.
39 Housing Form
The draft Master Plan nominates areas for different housing densities and forms as shown on Figure 5.
Figure 5: Master Plan Housing Density and Forms
40 A summary of the housing typologies and resultant densities is provided in Table 1 below:
Table 1: Summary of Residential Density Yields
Type Lot Size Density (Nett**) Potential Yield (Dwellings) Apartment N/A* 40+/ha 265 Townhouses 250-350m2 30-40/ha 73 Small lot housing 350-450m2 20-30/ha 63 Dwelling houses 450m2 plus 10-20/ha 107 Total 33/ha*** 503 * To be developed as integrated torrens, strata or community title complexes. ** Total developable area excluding roads and open space is 15.3ha. *** Nett density exclusive of roads and open space. General Note: The above lot sizes and yields are subject to final design and approval.
The estimated resultant gross density yield is approximately 17 dwellings/hectare excluding the eastern CoI area which is recommended for public open space uses. The Master Plan asserted that the proposed density is similar to that expected for new development in reasonable proximity to a railway station. It includes diagrams to illustrate the various types of dwellings proposed.
The draft Master Plan acknowledged that the 2(b) Residential zone under LEP 1990 provides a variety of housing forms including residential flat buildings. However, rather than maximising overall dwelling yield, a distribution of housing densit ies is proposed based on the following principles. § Maximising density within proximity to Thirroul Railway Station; § Allowing for relatively greater densities in areas of higher amenity, associated with potential views or proximity to open space lands; § Provision for certain housing forms which allow for particular issues to be addressed; § Housing types of differing potential heights have been distributed so as to maximise opportunities for view sharing; and § Providing opportunities to create an interesting urban design outcome for the overall development.
Access to Wrexham Road
The existing Wrexham Road bridge is capable of being widened on either side to accommodate a high standard roadway and pedestrian footpaths to provide access to the site. The portion of Thomas Gibson Park required for the Wrexham Road extension is unimproved and unutilised. No public facilities would be affected by the proposed road extension. The connection has been identified in DCP 94/17. The proposed access provides an opportunity to establish a secondary north-south link road as an alternative route to the Princes Highway and Lawrence Hargrave Drive that would benefit the community as a whole.
Stockland also pointed out that the land required for the Wrexham Road connection would be compensated for by either offsetting land to be dedicated as public open space along Hewitts Creek, or by direct acquisition of the land required for the road at agreed market value.
41 Finished Levels
A significant part of the western half of CoI area has been highly disturbed and contains uncontrolled fill. Part of the land is also prone to flooding. Earthworks are required to rehabilitate the land and provide suitable development platforms for the construction of residential buildings. A preliminary site regrading plan is included in the draft Master Plan. The proposed regrading has regard to the following constraints: § The bus route requirement and the provis ion of an evacuation route in times of flooding. § Flood levels in the proposed upgraded creeks. The proposed subdivision would be graded to be higher than the 1 percent ARI flood event with a freeboard of 0.5m. All habitable floor levels are to be above the PMF flood level. § The proposed development area would be regraded to create separate subcatchments to capture flows from minor storm events for treatment in a number of water quality facilities. § The extent of regrading has been minimised on the edges of the proposed development area and in the immediate vicinity of the Turpentine forest so as to minimise potential impact on neighbouring properties and the forest.
Environmental and Social Considerations
Environmental issues were canvassed in the draft Master Plan proposal, supported by 15 consultant reports. Environmental issues are considered fully in Values and Constraints of the CoI Area. Issues considered by the Master Plan included traffic and transport, flora and fauna, water quality, heritage site remediation, flooding, creek geomorphology, Aboriginal and non indigenous heritage, geotechnical considerations, acoustic management, and bushfire planning.
Urban Design
The draft Master Plan is considered to provide an appropriate mechanism to establish future urban form and density and it is recommended the FSR provisions under LEP 1990 be amended so as not to apply to lands for which a Master Plan has been prepared to accord with the provisions of SEPP 71. The draft Master Plan provides a site specific urban design outcome which connects with existing residential character of the surrounding area, ties in with existing street network and reinforces the existing character of the surrounding open spaces.
The layout has been arranged to focus upon the Turpentine Forest and watercourses as these areas would provide not only recreational spaces, but also a landscaped, green setting for adjacent residences. The open space areas would: § Respect the unique nature of the site, respond and re-establish natural water courses and protect the remnants of the Turpentine Forest. § Encourage a strong sense of community through the provision of consolidated areas of open space with communal ownership. § Provide a sense of “openness” to the site. § Provide a strong sense of arrival, with views into the open spaces available from vantage points along the central boulevard.
The design and landscaping of the road system would clearly delineate their functions. The main road would be a tree lined boulevard. Smaller branch roads provide access to homes with small scale street trees to ensure a landscape dominant, human scaled street.
The site planning and layout offers significant permeability. Access ways adjoining the watercourses together with street connections would assist in reinforcing the predominant landscape proposal of the development. These access routes, while catering for pedestrian movements, would offer small seating spaces and garden areas linking with the surrounding open space.
42 Open Space Requirements
Additional lands (such as the Hannah property) should be incorporated within the public open space system to provide for their long term management, to ensure their environmental sustainability and to provide for open space linkages. Such additional areas represent areas of regional significance for conservation and open space/recreational purposes. Stockland considers a strategy for acquisition of such lands should be formulated under a regional Section 94 Contribution Plan as well as involv ing Council and State funding.
Community and Urban Support Facilities
Future residents of the site and those within adjoining and surrounding areas would benefit from additional community facilities and small-scale convenience store/café outlets as proposed in the draft Master Plan. It asserted that such proposal would provide a community focus and reduce outward- bound traffic. The draft Master Plan identified some preferable locations for mixed use development, generally associated with apartments, which could provide opportunities for ground floor facilities such as a convenience store, café or commercial based child-care centre.
Although the currently 2(b) zoning provides for community facilities to be located within such zone, the proposed mixed uses would not be permissible within the current 2(b) zoning. Stockland considers current zoning provisions should be reviewed so as to enable mixed use developments in locations identified in the draft Master Plan.
Stockland’s Conclusion The proposed development is considered a desirable outcome by Stockland as it provides for: § A mechanism for the restoration of the vacated industrial and extractive industry sites; § Relocation of the Cookson Plibrico heavy industrial development considered inappropriately sited in its current context; § A mechanism to provide for the rehabilitation of the existing creek corridors and adjoining riparian corridors; § Creation of a comprehensive and integrated public open space system which incorporates these riparian corridors and provides for their long term management; and § A resolution of peripheral issues such as increasing vehicular, pedestrian and cycle linkages between adjoining areas and the coast.
43
44 SUMMARY OF SUBMISSIONS
This section of the report contains a brief summary of the submissions made to the Commission. The relevant issues raised and addressed by parties are canvassed in the following sections.
COUNCIL AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Wollongong City Council detailed its position and included presentations relating to the facilitation process for Sandon Point, an overview of the draft Development Control Plan (DCP), a traffic and transport assessment, a review of flooding, an outline of the environmental constraints and opportunities, a draft Aboriginal heritage assessment, and commentary on the major planning and policy issues in its submission. The draft DCP (Volume One) was tendered as part of Council’s submission together with Volume Two - Environmental and Planning Context as background information. In addition, Council provided substantial further documentation at the request of the Commission and other parties. This report makes extensive reference to documentation provided by Council.
Council stated that it prepared the draft DCP (which has not undergone formal public exhibition) to comply with SEPP 71. SEPP 71 requires a master plan for the site as well as consultation with the community. Council noted that there are still significant divergent views within the community. Council’s professional staff are satisfied that policy decisions about the future of the site can now be made.
Sandon Point is considered by Council to be a special place for which there is a diversity of competing values and cultural perspectives. These include ecological and Aboriginal heritage value, land ownership and potential land use conflicts, the extent of developable area and zoning, access into and out of the site, provision of community facilities, flooding considerations, and long term management.
The draft DCP (Volume One) is comprised of three parts: § Background: which refers to environmental planning documents, aims and objectives, and the master plan process § Master Planning: which refers to master planning principles and process, environmental and urban planning principles, and integrated management planning. § Development Controls: which address suitable development standards for the natural environment and riparian corridors, floodplain management, stormwater management and water quality, open space, access and movement, built form, Aboriginal heritage, non- Aboriginal heritage, and other issues.
The preceding section of the report summarises issues considered in the Sandon Point Draft Development Control Plan. The Draft DCP is also referred to extensively in Values and Constraints of the CoI Area.
Associate Professor Paul Adam was commissioned by Council in early 2003 to accurately map the vegetation communities on the site. He concluded that previous vegetation mapping (Sainty 2001) was generally accurate and that proper fauna studies are needed before further development. Associate Professor Adam recommended areas for further study, protection of existing flora and fauna values as well as riparian corridors, referred to the accumulative impacts of humans and their activities, and considered the nature of buffer zones needed further investigation consistent with previous planning studies and the precautionary principle. He suggested a minimum 40m buffer zone would be appropriate.
45 Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (formerly Department of Land and Water Conservation – DLWC) provided a guide to the conservation and rehabilitation of the unique natural features of the site in a manner that it considers complements future development. DIPNR (DLWC) recognised the positive nature of Council’s draft DCP in pursuing integrated natural resource management options.
DIPNR(DLWC) addressed its statutory and policy framework relevant to Sandon Point, as well as issues related to riparian corridor, wetland management, floodplain risk management, and planning. It made recommendations in relation to these matters.
Furthermore, it referred to a wide range of relevant policies and guidelines noting that the general objectives and principles of natural resource management policies can be considered as seeking to balance resource use with the protection and enhancement of natural resources. It refers to the NSW Flood Prone Land Policy (2001), Floodplain Management Manual (2001), NSW State Rivers and Estuaries Policy (1989) and that its statutory function in relation to the Sandon Point area is limited to its role as an approval body in accordance with the Rivers and Foreshores Improvement Act 1948.
Riparian corridors and wetland management were addressed in some detail by DIPNR (DLWC). It notes matters relating to its Deed of Agreement with Stockland and the circumstances which resulted in the Deed; outlines issues relevant to stream integrity; and addresses historical corridor widths, Stockland’s proposal, minimum creek basal widths , and overall corridor widths.
A strategic approach to floodplain risk management is strongly supported by the Department. It refers to the flood history and flood planning for the Illawarra and that the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Management Study and Plan has recently been completed. Implications for flooding at Sandon Point and the provisions in relevant Acts and other documents are noted.
DIPNR(DLWC) concluded its submission with specific recommendations for the riparian corridors associated with Woodlands, Hewitts, Tramway and Cooksons Creeks; floodplain risk management; wetland management; and planning.
Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (PlanningNSW) promoted a balanced approach to the future of Sandon Point in its submission. The site contains areas of significant ecological and heritage value that need to be protected and managed. There are also portions of the site that are suitable for a range of urban uses. If developed with the highest urban design principles and with important natural and open space areas being brought into public ownership then significant public benefit could result. DIPNR(PlanningNSW) is committed to striking a balance that achieves positive economic, environmental and social outcomes. The submission provides an overview of planning and environmental issues relevant to the site and identifies general objectives and planning principles for the various issues.
The values and constraints of the subject land are addressed by DIPNR(PlanningNSW) under vegetation, riparian areas/corridors/wetlands, fauna, flooding, land contamination, Aboriginal cultural heritage, access and transport, open space, human and community services, existing industry, and visual amenity/urban design.
Environment Protection Authority notes that the development would not require licensing by the EPA. Furthermore, the land contamination issue has been assessed as not being a significant risk of harm and consequently the consent authority is responsible for ensuring that any contamination is appropriately remediated.
NSW Fisheries responded to questions asked by the Commission.
46 National Parks and Wildlife Service broadly supports the land use planning outcome proposed by Council and considers the draft DCP achieves a good balance in protecting biodiversity values as well as a development outcome. In addition it recommends completion of the Aboriginal heritage assessment of the site, rezoning of areas of conservation value, preparation of a plan of management for conservation and Aboriginal heritage areas, an Aboriginal community consultation program, reinstatement of the original course of Woodlands Creek, and sensitive design of access and infrastructure considering the ecological constraints and Aboriginal cultural heritage values of the site. NPWS has had significant involvement in land use planning at Sandon Point and may also have a further role in plan making as well as development assessment. It has an ongoing statutory responsibility for the conservation and protection of Aboriginal heritage and supports further archaeological investigation. Key recommendations were made by NPWS relating to: § Plan-making: land use zonin g, development control plan, and plan of management. § Threatened Species: riparian corridors, stormwater, traffic, infrastructure, flora and fauna. § Aboriginal Heritage: consultation and archaeological assessment.
NPWS also submitted a copy of the Biodiversity Planning Guide for NSW Local Government and Draft Aboriginal Heritage Impact Assessment Guidelines.
NSW Rural Fire Service responded to questions asked by the Commission.
Sydney Water stated that water and sewerage facilities can be made available to the site. It detailed the history of water and sewerage services in the region. There is adequate capacity in the existing trunk water and sewerage systems to service development at Sandon Point. The developer would fund all new reticulation works to service the development. Sydney Water requires all weather 24- hour access to the sewage pumping station at Sandon Point and a 50m buffer zone to residential development. It also states that if flood levels rise due to any development then Sydney Water would require protective measures to be undertaken for its sewage pumping station.
PRIVATE LANDOWNERS
Cookson Plibrico Pty Ltd employs 80 people at its Sandon Point site manufacturing refractory materials for Australian and overseas clients. The company’s submission refers to its history from when it purchased the business and the site in 1989, as well as planning issues since the early 1990s. It is convinced its long-term operations are incompatible with housing and will result in economically disastrous consequences for the company and a completely unsatisfactory environment for new residents. Cookson Plibrico also claims it has been inadequately informed by Council relating to planning decisions likely to affect its operations. It stated that its site was rezoned 4(a) Light Industrial from 4(c) – Extractive Industry without being notified and that the Land and Environment Court was permitted to proceed on incorrect information regarding noise from its 24-hour operations. Later, no communication occurred between the Council appointed facilitator and the company. The company considers it has 2 main options: § Remain at Sandon Point – noise mitigation works would be required as would rezoning of the land to Heavy Industrial 4(b) to permit expansion; or § Sell the site and relocate – this would cost about $9 million to be funded by sale of land or other means and would take up to 3 years to implement.
Cookson Plibrico requires that it be dealt with equitably and fairly so its business and the jobs of its 80 employees are maintained. It prefers the second option of relocation, self-funded by sale of its land.
47 Australian Industry Group referred to earlier land zoning, potential noise impacts on adjacent residential areas as the buffer zone is reduced, potential job losses, and the lack of industrial land in the Illawarra in relation to the Cookson Plibrico operation. The group contends that Cookson Plibrico should be supported in relocating within the Illawarra, and that appropriate financial assistance be provided.
Stockland Development Pty Limited submitted an overview and detailed supporting documents of the values and constraints of its lands within the Sandon Point area. Stockland concluded that urban development is a desirable outcome as it provides for: § A mechanism for the restoration of the vacated industrial and extractive industry sites; § Relocation of the Cookson heavy industrial development considered inappropriately sited in its current context; § A mechanism to provide for the rehabilitation of the existing creek corridors and adjoining riparian corridors; § Creation of a comprehensive and integrated public open space system which incorporates the riparian corridors and provides for their long term management; and § A resolution of peripheral issues such as increasing vehicular, pedestrian and cycle linkages between adjoining areas and the coast.
Stockland referred to the concept of balance in assessing the suitability of its proposed Master Plan for residential development on the western portion of the CoI area at Sandon Point. It addressed statutory planning, master plan preparation, traffic, flora and fauna, hydrology, flooding, creek geomorphology, water quality, Aboriginal and non indigenous heritage, site remediation, acoustic amenity, bushfire and urban design. Summaries of the specialist studies were included in the accompanying consultant’s reports which are referred to in detail in this report.
In addition, matters which Stockland stated also need consideration for a balanced outcome included, but were not limited to, accessibility, the need for more housing, the need for open space, and proximity to facilities and transport.
Stockland provided background history of the land including zoning history, ownership, locality analysis, statutory planning context including comment on relevant policies and plans, current subdivision proposals, the DCP review, and Stockland’s preparation of a draft Master Plan for the lands noting the salient issues.
The overall draft master plan prepared by Stockland provides for development of the western areas within the subject lands including the Cookson Plibrico site. A mix of dwelling houses, small lots, townhouses and apartments are proposed with a north-south link road joining Wrexham Road to Point Street. The submission details design objectives, architectural principles and housing type; landscaping and environmentally sensitive areas including riparian corridors; flooding and water management; housing form; and road access. Zoning of the land to 2(b) and 6(a) is recommended.
Stockland considers its proposal balances the high level of disturbance on the site and the suitability of the site in context with the surrounding area, with the need to recognise the environmental importance of the site. The proposal would see the construction of watercourses with a number of natural features and would also see the establishment of native vegetation along these corridors, producing an increase in riparian corridor width.
Given the history of opposition to development on the site, Stockland does not expect that any proposal for development would be supported by the local community, who would like to see a regional park created on the site. Stockland considers that such a proposal is not feasible, nor is it sustainable, since neither Council nor State government is likely to commit the necessary funds to acquire, develop and maintain such a facility.
48 COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS
ASP International requests the setting aside of Sandon Point as a surfing reserve as it is a world-class surfing venue.
Coast and Wetlands Society Inc. considers the Inquiry is essentially about vision and the whole area of the subject land needs to be treated as one entity. The Society refers to the importance of the place to Aboriginal people and for European industrial history, the nature of the topography and the effects of heavy rain, the inappropriateness of land engineering solutions to relieve flooding effects, is concerned to ensure that wetland areas are well protected (unlike what has happened for Stages 1 to 6), argues for ecologically robust buffers, supports development of a substantial habitat corridor along Woodlands Creek, notes the extent and importance of flora and fauna habitat in the area, and that cumulative impacts of an increased population have not been adequately assessed. The Society’s preferred outcome is for a regional park and it suggests uses for various portions of the land. Before any development could be considered further, detailed investigation of the cultural and ecological values of the land would be required.
Illawarra Escarpment Coalition considers that Sandon Point is a valuable open space and a wonderful natural habitat, which when linked to the west would provide a green corridor between the mountains and the sea. The land is too valuable to be subdivided. The submission lists issues requiring more attention, questions Council’s planning, contends residential development of the land is not environmentally sustainable, and supports the community in its quest for the area to become a regional park.
Illawarra Greens state that the overwhelming majority of the community do not want residential and inappropriate development on the land. Sandon Point is beautiful and unique. It should be protected to preserve its spiritual, cultural, heritage, environmental and recreational importance.
The Greens refer to the immense indigenous significance of the area which is reflected in the burial sites, the tool making site, and that it is part of an ancient Dreaming track. A comprehensive archaeological and cultural study is necessary. Furthermore, the ecology of areas adjoining Tramway Creek has been damaged by works in Stage 7 and the NPWS has not acted to prevent further damage. The site is also contaminated by asbestos and other hazardous compounds. Much of the area is flood prone and further development would exacerbate current problems; zoning decisions and public consultation have been poor; adequate building setbacks from creeks have not been adopted; and there are outstanding legal issues. The Illawarra Greens want a regional park established on the land, managed with input from the community, Aboriginal people appropriately compensated, and major legislative reform to the planning system.
Illawarra Local Aboriginal Land Council (LALC) opposes the Sandon Point development in its entirety due to the adverse effects it would have on Aboriginal cultural heritage, and on the environment. Further comprehensive Aboriginal archaeological and cultural studies with input from the traditional owners are required. The Illawarra LALC points to the Kuradji burial, the tool-site, the camp site, and the living and oral cultural heritage of the local Aboriginal community to the present day. Reference is also made to an earlier great ceremony near Excelsior Coal Mines and that area’s connection to Sandon Point, which was a gathering place to exchange stories and make tools, and which had ample fresh water and abundant food. The Illawarra LALC attached extracts from the draft Therin (2003) report, the book Australian Legends, and Maria Journal to support its position. During the Commission the Illawarra LALC tendered further details and report extracts to support its position.
Korewal Eloura Jerrungarah Aboriginal Corporation (Mr Reuben Brown) strongly argued that Sandon Point is a very important Aboriginal place and not enough attention has been paid to Aboriginal cultural heritage values. Mr Brown tendered a copy of a submission made to the NPWS
49 concerning these issues for Stages 1 to 6, which included expressions of cultural significance (marked “restricted” as they contain valuable traditional knowledge). A draft of There was to be a great ceremony at Thirroul (Reyburn, March 2002) and the Hiscock (2002) report were also submitted by Mr Brown. In these circumstances it is not appropriate to further summarise Mr Brown’s submission.
McCauley Park Progress Association has concerns with Council’s procedures regarding the draft DCP for the Sandon Point land, opposes any alienation of existing parkland for access to this land, and proposes a regional park.
National Parks Association – Illawarra Branch supports protection of the lands at Sandon Point due to its natural and cultural features pointing out that the Illawarra coastal zone is under threat from inappropriate development. The Branch supports the proposal for a regional park on the land and seeks a moratorium on work within the subject lands. National Parks Association notes the very high conservation significance of certain areas at Sandon Point, both ecologically and culturally. It suggests development of a regional park as the best form of protection for Sandon Point and that a green corridor along Woodlands Creek would provide protection for a comprehensive range of ecosystems. The Association also believes the only way to achieve bio-diversity protection is by defining the site’s full conservation values, placing all identified values and suitable buffers immediately under protective zoning and NPWS ownership, and implementing best practice protective management measures for the conservation and rehabilitation of the site.
Nature Conservation Council of NSW Inc. believes Sandon Point must be conserved for its conservation and heritage values as well as being integrated into a sustainable planning context. In particular, no further development should be allowed so that the environmental and cultural values of the site can be conserved. Open space on the coastline must be retained and managed for conservation purposes, mitigation measures should be adopted to protect habitat, and independent Aboriginal heritage and environmental studies are required. A regional park is strongly recommended.
National Trust stated its concern that industrial heritage on the land had been destroyed, noted the high Aboriginal and ecological significance of the place, considered SEPP 71 and the Coastal Policy should guide planning decisions, pointed out the flood prone nature of portions of the site, and urged the Commission to reject further development of the lands.
Neighbourhood Committee 3 is concerned that over a long period of time environmental and heritage laws and policies have not been used to protect the specified features of the site. It points to the site’s unique ecological and heritage values which have not been adequately protected to date, the need for ecologically sustainable development, and the lack of suitable traffic access and management. The Committee also refers to the ongoing community involvement in the locality, alternative visions for the site including a regional park, and problems with Council’s planning. The Committee refers to the following community concerns: § The circumstances of original land sales; § Planning and rezoning issues; § Protecting flora and fauna; § Aboriginal and European heritage; § Traffic and access problems; § Flooding issues; § Wetland and creek restoration; § Monitoring and enforcing consent conditions; § Contamination and site remediation; § Community consultation failures; and § Community service and infrastructure problems.
50 The Committee is of the view that proper recognition and respect to Aboriginal heritage is required by protecting Sandon Point and undertaking further studies. It believes the whole site (including Stages 1 to 6) should be managed to protect the biodiversity, viability, scenic quality, heritage and environmental values. It recommends all works in Stages 1 to 6 be stopped and the whole site be resumed and rezoned for environmental protection.
Neighbourhood Committee 5 makes a number of comments and notes the land’s values and constraints including ecological, heritage and infrastructure. It recommends that: § The development should be limited to an area which does not impact on the sensitive wetland and beach area, and is not within the flood plain; § An Aboriginal and European heritage study should be undertaken and consideration given to it in planning the development; § Building envelops on the blocks of land should be strictly adhered to when building is undertaken; § Only vegetation native to the area should be planted on building blocks; § Housing in the area should be strictly monitored; § Further consideration should be given to the infrastructure of the development; and § No community land should be used to access blocks of land within the development.
NIRAG Inc. (Northern Illawarra Residents Action Group) refers to the natural attributes of the region generally and the Sandon Point area in particular. The Group supports the principles of ecologically sustainable development, the key tenets of which must be incorporated meaningfully into any planning outcomes and management options for the site. The group also refers to the ongoing concerns it has with the development of Stages 1 to 6. It lists 23 areas of specia l concern and provides attachments to substantiate its position.
NIRAG recommends that the Commission of Inquiry: § Identifies and recognises the unique features of the site; § Identifies all the constraints to any development, utilising the “Precautionary Principle” to ensure that where full scientific knowledge or sufficient data is not available then more conservative assumptions must prevail; § Develops a framework for land use that complements the site’s natural assets and enhances the unique environment and heritage features so that they are preserved for future generations; § Acknowledges that this site has a cultural significance to Indigenous people and environmental value to the Illawarra Region and the State of NSW that is far in excess of any beachfront housing estate; § Requests the NSW Government to commit to introducing legislation that will buy back, and rezone as Environmental Protection, the entire land currently subject to the CoI and the land called Stages 1-6 of the current Stockland development at Sandon Point.
Along the full length of Tramway Creek, as a minimum, proper ecologically sustainable buffer zones must be established where construction for the Stages 2 to 6 of Stockland’s residential development has already commenced. In addition, the present riparian zones are not sustainable and the SCESFC is threatened.
In conclusion, NIRAG submitted that only land uses that enhance, preserve and protect the land from unsustainable and inappropriate development are acceptable in terms of ESD. The whole area should be planned and managed to protect its biodiversity and natural environment values, Aboriginal and European heritage, and its unique scenic qualities.
51 North Illawarra Reconciliation Group (Mr Bruce Reyburn) refers to the importance of recognising reconciliation and cultural partnership as core values and constraints for the land at Kuradji-Sandon Point. Reconciliation needs to be recognised as it is part of the social urban context, it is strongly supported in Council’s Statement of Reconciliation and Commitment, and respecting and recognising Koori values is central to the reconciliation process. The original values and constraints at Kuradji- Sandon Point came from Koori culture. The situation at Kuradji–Sandon Point requires a healing approach both to land and to social matters. Moreover, freehold title does not mean Aboriginal spiritual and cultural rights do not continue to co-exist. Mr Reyburn concludes that the Stockland development is a most unwelcome development in light of the ongoing cultural genocide at Kuradji- Sandon Point. He strongly emphasised that Aboriginal archaeological heritage and Aboriginal cultural heritage need to be considered appropriately.
The Group recommends that unless free consent is sought and given by appropriate indigenous authorities, any development proposals which affect heritage values should not be permitted. Future developments should be based on enhancing and protection indigenous cultural heritage. Mr Reyburn also provided extensive recommendations to the draft scope for further Aboriginal heritage work.
Sandon Point Aboriginal Tent Embassy (Mr Roy (Dootch) Kennedy) raised the following points which he considers need investigation: § Damage to the land, which must be restored and recovered; § Dumping of artefacts in earth piles on the AIR site which must be returned; § Sale of Sydney Water Board land to the developer in 1999 following discovery of the 6,000 year old burial of Kuradji Man in 1998; § Removal of the landfill mountain on the Hannah land; § How the National Parks and Wildlife Service handled the issue of Aboriginal consultation; § Consultation by a Heritage Council Officer; and § Inadequate consultation, with the Aboriginal community.
Mr Kennedy also submitted a video tape and 2 audio cassettes in relation to Kuradji as well as a book of oral histories from individual members of the Illawarra Aboriginal community.
Sandon Point Bushcare Group (Mr Van Wijk) supports land use options at Sandon Point which promote social equity and ecological sustainability. Sandon Point is unsuitable for residential development. The group’s submission: § Refers to the sale of Sydney Water land and the purchase of a portion of the land by Council; § Opposes alienation of public parkland for road access; § Supports the significant Aboriginal cultural and heritage values of Sandon Point; § Notes most of the European heritage of the site has been destroyed; § Points out the ecological values of the land; § Suggests further consideration of the comprehensiveness of the Hewitts Creek Flood Study; § Questions the adequacy of stormwater quality control; § Recommends independent assessment of site contamination; § Highlights potential conflicts in the traffic impact assumptions; § Reports that coastal recession occurs in the area; and § Requests the regional park option be investigated.
Mr Van Wijk listed relevant areas of interest on and in the vicinity of the lands. He attached comments he made to Council relating to the draft DCP for the Sandon Point site, and provided additional information concerning the subject and nearby lands. He is also of the view that assessment of the values and constraints of the Sandon Point land should not be limited to the subject site alone. A total catchment perspective will provide a better understanding of the values and constraints that apply to the Sandon Point site.
52 South Coast Labour Council supports the broad thrust of concerns raised regarding effects on the environment and Indigenous/European heritage. The Labour Council also addressed costs and benefits of the proposed residential development and its likely effects on employment and industry development.
Surfer Magazine considers major housing development would have a profoundly negative impact on the South Coast’s most renowned recreational surfing location, and would almost certainly destroy indigenous sites.
Thirroul Action Group refers to its involvement in the Sandon Point saga, summarises issues relating to community consultation, and sets out the values and constraints of the land and how they should be managed.
Aboriginal Heritage – the remnant sand dunes of McCauley’s Beach contained the burial of a “clever fella ”, one of only 3 known similar burials in Australia. The Sandon Point area is of significant importance to the Aboriginal community but the Aboriginal heritage values of the site continue to be degraded. The Group asks for a full study of Aboriginal heritage on the site and for the Commission to examine the possibility of resuming all land in Stages 1 to 7.
European Heritage – the Bulli coal mine provided great wealth to the local area, due in part to the low cost of land transport of the coal via the tramway direct to ships berthed at the Sandon Point jetty. The community still maintains the strong mining history of the area. The Group expressed its concern for loss of the tramway route to residential development and is also saddened by the loss of industrial history from the AIR site.
Coastal Wetlands, Creek and Habitat – the wetlands at Sandon Point comprise about 27 percent of the Illawarra’s remaining wetlands. The Group objects to narrow creek setbacks, suggesting from 20m/40m to 100m is required around creeks and wetlands respectively, referring to DIPNR(DLWC) correspondence and the Simpson Inquiry report. They consider the lack of a buffer on the south side of Tramway Creek will affect the viability of the wetlands. Furthermore, the group contends the creek buffers prepared by the draft DCP are inadequate to properly protect ecological values of the creeks and wetlands on the site.
Flood – huge amounts of water flowed down Hewitts, Woodlands and Tramway creeks in the August 1998 flood. Many properties adjacent to the creek systems sustained major damage. The Group asks whether proposals for the site would adequately cater for floods.
Stormwater Quality Basins – These basins (in Stages 1 to 6) did not perform during recent rain events. The Group questions why Council is not monitoring the conditions of consent which states that “the developer must ensure that stormwater from the subdivision does not increase pollutant levels in the creek”.
AIR Site – this site is part of the original floodplain and is not suitable for medium density housing. The Group recommends that the land be purchased for redevelopment as a regional park. The AIR site is also suspected of containing hazardous substances.
Traffic and Access – the Group objects to alienation of public parkland for road access to the northern end of the Sandon Point land as well as use of Wrexham Road. It also questions the estimated likely traffic volumes. A traffic impact statement is required to fully assess the impacts. A road running north-south through the area is rejected. The Group also wants uses other than residential considered for the site, and for operations at the Cookson Plibrico factory to be retained.
Stockland’s proposal is an overdevelopment of the site. The Group asked the Commission not to recommend an increase in density of the 2(b) areas on the AIR site and in Stage 7. Further, they asked that there be no development at Sandon Point until the traffic problem at the bottom of Bulli
53 Pass is resolved. The Group also disputes Stockland’s valuation of the site at $115M for a regional park. Its professional valuer’s estimate is between $14M and $23.3M.
Copies of letters between DIPNR(DLWC) and Stockland concerning development setbacks to creeks, water quality issues, and riparian corridor development and management were also submitted. According to the Group the Government’s policies which relate to protecting the environment need to be adhered to so that the natural and cultural values at Sandon Point are preserved.
Total Environment Centre (TEC) considers Sandon Point a significant natural asset under threat from current and proposed works. It notes the Aboriginal and the substantial local community involvement over many years. The TEC points out that the site has important natural, cultural and recreational features, holds major importance for the local Aboriginal community, contains remnant areas of native coastal vegetation (including an endangered ecological community) and adjoins rock platforms which provide habitat for a threatened bird species. It believes the area should be fully protected (including Stages 1 to 6) in accord with the aims of SEPP 71 and the principles of ecologically sustainable development. A regional park for the land is supported.
Wadi Wadi Coomaditchie Aboriginal Corporation (Mr Allan R Carriage) is a Wadi Wadi man from the Illawarra area who is very upset and saddened by what has happened at Sandon Point. He would like to see the whole area which is sacred become a cultural and environmental park for all people, both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal. Mr Carriage wrote that the area is very significant for Aboriginal people as told to him by his mother. Aborigines still have that feeling about the importance of Sandon Point today but the authorities are not listening. He referred to tool-making areas, women’s areas, and areas to camp out of the winds. It was a tribal meeting place, a good fishing area, had ample bushtucker as well as medicines, and from the Point one can see and signal up and down the coast. Sandon Point remains very significant for Aboriginal cultural and spiritual values. Mr Carriage wants development to stop.
RESIDENTS
Cheryl Akhurst objects to the alienation of public parkland, finds Council’s planning and community consultations inadequate, refers to Aboriginal heritage and environmental matters being ignored, and requests the area be conserved.
Joy Akhurst objects to the alienation of public parkland and lack of compliance with consent conditions. The area should be conserved.
David Beswich considers it essential that the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the site are protected. The whole Sandon Point area should be set aside for recreational purposes including a Government buyback of Stages 1 to 6. Adequate coastal recreational areas are required in the locality to cater for the local population as well as visitors from southwestern Sydney.
Cathy Bloch notes that Sandon Point is a beautiful undeveloped place with environmental, cultural and historical values. It has particular cultural significance for Aboriginal people. Other issues are that the land is subject to flooding, the sale of the Water Board land, contamination and site remediation, and traffic congestion. Ms Bloch supports the recommendations on the form letter.
Christine Bird knows the site as a beautiful coastal oasis with plentiful wildlife. Ms Bird opposes residential development. She wants the area kept as an important area of biological diversity, support and promotion for Aboriginal heritage, to ensure the area operates as an effective floodplain, and to make certain current provisions for traffic and infrastructure are not overloaded by too rapid an expansion of the local population.
54 Lisa Byleveld considers the planning approach for the land has been inadequate and not had proper regard to community, ecological, Aboriginal or European heritage values. The area should be a regional park including Stages 1 to 6. Ms Byleveld detailed the constraints on the lands: § Aboriginal heritage – the land is of extraordinary Aboriginal heritage value; § Flooding – most of the land is on a flood plain; § Contamination – local knowledge is that the former factory site is contaminated; § Long term planning – green corridors from the escarpment to the sea should be preserved and a 40m building setback from the top of creek banks maintained; § Traffic – studies have been inadequate and the proposals involve alienation of parkland; § Community consultation – has been inadequate, poorly organised and managed, and Council has disregarded community vision; § Infrastructure – is already at capacity and should not bear greater demands.
Alice Ca rtan does not want the lands turned into a housing estate but into a regional park. Ms Cartan is appalled at the alienation of public land for road access, notes that the former AIR site could be contaminated and is subject to flooding (as are other areas of the site), refers to inadequate traffic planning, questions why the land was rezoned for residential purposes, points to the significant Aboriginal and European values of the area, refers to the poor community consultation and treatment of the community, and opposes overdevelopment of the site.
John and Robyn Cashman expressed surprise that the current development at Sandon Point was allowed. They refer to the charm of the area, request that no further development be allowed especially following discovery of an Aboriginal skeleton, consider that the area should be designated a regional park, and seek a Local Environmental Study to ascertain the impacts of Stages 1 to 6.
Stephen Carter supports the 5 issues raised in the form letter. He also tendered and performed a song called Kuradji Spirit Calling which expressed his personal and emotional feelings.
Leonard G Chamberlain notes that the Sandon Point site is one of the few sites on the Illawarra coastline which remains undeveloped. He wants no further development at the Sandon Point site and supports the other 5 issues raised in the form letter. Mr Chamberlain suggests limited residential development, retention of Cookson Plibrico, re-allocation of land usage, and redesign of traffic flows.
Kerry Anne Christian provided a chronology and socio-political background to the Sandon Point areas. In particular the community’s special association with Sandon Point, its dedication, and ability to preserve the site for future generations. Mrs Christian refers to the draft DCP, the concept of a regional park, the need for any developed land to be flood free, maintenance of industrial employment, and the need to consider coastal processes and abnormal wave events.
Four options for Sandon Point were considered by Council’s Enquiry by Design workshop. The community supports the strategy produced by the Tramway Wetlands Planning Committee. The other options are criticised by Mrs Christian as they require the alienation of public parkland. Mrs Christian included documentation in her submission relating to the iconic surfing characteristics of the Sandon Point–South Thirroul area, long term planning and community involvement in the northern Illawarra, and community concerns with the planning processes for Sandon Point.
Community concerns include the sale of Sydney Water land, planning and rezoning issues, protection of flora and fauna, Aboriginal and European heritage, traffic and access, flooding, wetlands and creek restoration, monitoring and enforcement of consent conditions, soil contamination and site remediation, community consultation failures, and availability of community service and infrastructure. Neighbourhood Committee 3 asked the Commission to properly respect Aboriginal heritage by ensuring its protection, and to recommend that the NSW Government commit to buying back and rezoning the Stages 1 to 6 land.
55 Karen Cobban refers to the unique qualities of the land as it is a major coastal wetland, the only remaining corridor in the northern Illawarra between the escarpment and the sea, a sacred site of great significance for Aboriginal people, a major Aboriginal burial ground, and a significant archaeological site for all Australians. Ms Cobban wants the site preserved and questions the procedures for issuing Consent to Destroy permits. She also refers to the flooding characteristics of the land for which the earlier flood studies were inadequate, the European heritage significance of the land, and the ecological values of its flora and fauna. Procedural and legal matters relating to the sale and the use of public land, planning decisions, and government processes were also raised by Mrs Cobban. Vision is needed to obtain the best outcome at Sandon Point.
Stockland’s original proposal was for single storey dwellings, but has since been modified to include townhouses and apartments up to 5-storeys in height. The proposed development is inappropriate for a coastal region, a wetland area and a highly contaminated AIR site. The influx of new residents from the proposal will change the fabric of the local community and overload existing infrastructures. Thomas Gibson Park is public land and should not be used to facilitate private development.
Ms Cobban is also of the view that the AIR site is heavily contaminated and should be thoroughly assessed by an independent body to ascertain the actual level of contamination and remediated accordingly to safeguard the community’s health.
Dr Joseph Davis provided a brief history of planning for the area including the initial consideration of residential development on lower and more coastal areas of the site. He notes the destruction of the regionally significant European heritage on the lands including parts of the tramway and the former AIR buildings, as well as the destruction of Aboriginal heritage.
Land contamination issues are also of concern to Dr Davis who considers there is a “quite reasonable possibility that significant areas of serious contamination remain uninvestigated throughout the site”. He questions whether the contaminated site audits have been sufficiently thorough as well as the adequacy and transparency of Council’s community consultation processes, which he considers lacking. Moreover, the Commission should adopt some caution in relation to whether the site was actually a Category 2 remediation site under SEPP 55 and whether it is really an uncontaminated site.
Dr Davis is particularly interested in flooding and riparian amenity aspects of the land. He is concerned for the flooding nature of the former AIR land, the historic functions of creek overflows during floods, and the protection of existing flood prone residents. Establishing green corridors along Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks and access across public parkland are also important. Dr Davis recommends returning Hewitts Creek to a low-velocity sinuous floodplain overflow condition so as to preserve the SCESFC. If the Commission is constrained by the former DLWC’s deeds of agreement, he considers a compensatory approach for Hewitts Creek should be adopted. Creek bank design should follow that of the banks of Woodlands Creek west of the Highway.
He supports limited development at Sandon Point to pay for the restoration of the natural floodplain detention basin between Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks, and protection of the endangered SCESFC. Dr Davis considers limited development north of Hewitts Creek and between the Cookson Plibrico land and Woodlands Creek could occur provided effective riparian corridors are established.
The intersection of Wrexham Road and Lawrence Hargrave Drive is a sun-blinding hazard according to Dr Davis. He objects to any measures that actively encourage use of private motor vehicle s and recommends promotion and enhancement of pedestrian amenity.
Dr Davis believes the AIR site between Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks has considerable Aboriginal archaeological potential as it may have been an important ochre site. He also recommends the AIR site between Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks be rezoned 7(a) for environmental protection to be consistent with the zoning of Hannah’s land.
56 Lyle J Davis requests that the Commission find that all development work at Sandon Point cease, no future development occur on the subject land, and no houses be built on Sandon Point. Mr Davis’ submission contains a report of instructions he received from Uncle Gubbo (Ted Thomas) at the Tent Embassy. Also attached was a submission to the NPWS in relation to a Consent to Destroy permit for areas at Sandon Point, noting what Mr Davis referred to as the unsatisfactory resolution of certain Aboriginal issues between Council and Stockland. The submission included the Hiscock report, referred to the important tool-making site along Tramway Creek in the lower parts of Stages 2 to 6, listed the affidavits from Aborigines submitted attesting to the site’s cultural significance, and raised concerns for works within Tramway Creek.
Maureen Davis is an Aboriginal woman particularly concerned for the ongoing highly disrespectful and offensive desecration of Aboriginal culture and heritage on the land at Sandon Point. She refers to the Hiscock report and correspondence with State and Federal Governments. These mainly concern Aboriginal cultural and heritage matters relating to Stages 1 to 6 submitted to the Land and Environment Court in July 2001. Ms Davis strongly refutes that the level of representative consultation with the Aboriginal community indicated by the Navin Officer (2002) report actually occurred. Ms Davis submitted substantial documentation relating to the history of Aboriginal people since colonisation, social problems in the community, and family genealogies. She recommends that work at Sandon Point cease immediately, no future development be approved, the site be declared a significant Aboriginal site, and the future of the site be determined by Aboriginal people.
Ms Davis also strongly recommends an Aboriginal Heritage study be completed within the Local Government Areas of Wollongong, Shellharbour and Kiama. The whole Aboriginal community must be involved in any future developments within the Wollongong Local Government Area from the planning stages. She requests that the Forestry Commission and NPWS return the escarpment as a National Park Reserve to the Aboriginal people.
Ross Dearden points out that Sandon Point has a distinctive character and an industrial heritage. The unique intrinsic values of the area need to be preserved and not developed for residential use. Vision and innovative solutions are required. A cultural and environmental centre is suggested by Mr Dearden. The surf at Sandon Point is known all over the world. These attributes need first to be recognised and then decisions made consistent with coastal policies identifying the land’s ecological and social constraints, including its significant Aboriginal cultural and heritage values. Mr Deardon believes a real master plan must be adopted which identifies the site constraints, identifies the unique features and elements on the site which make it special, develops ecologically sustainable land uses that enhance and complement the identified natural features, and ensures that land uses are compatible and are planned to conserve the natural values. A beachfront housing estate is not suitable and the land should be purchased to preserve values.
Cynzia Dei-cont refers to Sandon Point as a special place, which still retains its essential values after over a century of neglect. Ms Dei-cont encourages development of eco-tourism facilities on the site so the natural and cultural heritage of the land is preserved as well as development of a green corridor from the sea to the escarpment along the historic Aboriginal access to the area.
Ken and Carole Dixon object strongly to aspects of the proposed development at Sandon Point as there has not been appropriate community consultation. Cultural and heritage issues have not been given adequate acknowledgement, there are no plans for the necessary infrastructure, the land could flood, access roads are not adequate, and there would be alienation of public parkland.
K.J Dowling has no objection to the development at Sandon Point. Public access to open space and the beach remains.
57 Karen Gough doesn’t want hundreds of new homes built at Sandon Point. Ms Gough notes issues including flooding, traffic, access, ecological and Aboriginal cultural heritage as being of major concern to the community. The land should be a reconciliation park due to its Aboriginal and ecological values. There should be development of an Aboriginal cultural centre and protection of sacred sites, with the Aboriginal community having a management role given the significance of the site to the Aboriginal community.
Terry Hagan has concerns for increased traffic, inadequate infrastructure, floodin g, sale of public land, and Aboriginal and European heritage.
Rob Hindle considers it is important to preserve Sandon Point as it is one of few developed sites on the Illawarra coastline. He questions the adequacy of the Aboriginal heritage and flood studies, objects to alienation of public land, and notes there is a lack of public infrastructure. He wants no further development, the site conserved, and consistent planning decisions.
Professor P Hiscock responded to questions asked by the Commission in relation to his report on Aboriginal heritage issues.
Lynette Jacona believes the land at Sandon Point is fragile and has Aboriginal and European heritage value. It also has high ecological values and these should be protected. Current development dominates the public spaces and further development should stop.
Lynne and Mike Jones are concerned about previous zoning decisions and that the draft DCP does not meet the needs of the community. They also point out that the land is the last strip joining mountains to the sea, traffic matters are not being given proper attention, the development would impinge on public parkland, Aboriginal issues are not given adequate consideration and the aquatic ecosystem is being neglected.
Stephen Jones feels the proposed development at Sandon Point is inappropriate as it would increase traffic, reduce parkland, ignore Aboriginal heritage, and affect wetlands and watercourses.
Fiona Lock expressed concern for previous planning and dubious decisions relating to Sandon Point. Ms Lock sought examination of many matters including land purchases, land zoning, flooding characteristics, soil contamination, traffic access, previous court evidence, Aboriginal and European cultural and archaeological matters, the need for open space, and lack of planned infrastructure.
Bonita Martin submitted 28 documents, being press releases and cuttings from various newspapers over the past 2 years. They present a chronology of the latest stage of a long running fight, depict how the community has rallied, and refer to the failure of government to protect the site.
Dave Martin considers Sandon Point a special place and the best outcome for Sandon Point would be to leave it alone. Its special qualities would be strangled by a compromise. Cle aning of the former industrial development has provided a vision of what Sandon Point once was, and what it might be again.
John McCarthy strongly objects to the development proposals for Sandon Point in respect of Stages 1 to 6 and all future stages believing that the scale of development is too large. It is environmentally and socially unacceptable to develop a massive subdivision which will have enormous adverse public impacts. Mr McCarthy lists his reasons for opposing Stages 1 to 6 referring to lega l processes, previous Court decisions, the lack of species impact studies and traffic studies, as well as social, cultural and environmental issues. He also submitted a video taken by Mr T Stephenson on 5 July 2002 relating to activities associated with Stages 1 to 6, and tabled extensive documentation relating to activities in relation to construction works within or adjacent to Stages 1 to 6. He refers to Professor Hiscock’s report on Aboriginal archaeology, the issuing of permits by the National Parks and Wildlife Service, and the placement of fill on the AIR site. Mr McCarthy claims these issues
58 indicate problems relating to project management, planning law and Council’s role. The community has no confidence that future stages will be managed any better.
David McEvoy considers Council’s community consultation on Sandon Point has been deficient, has engendered widespread community concern, and will result in the destruction of the land’s inestimable social, ecological and cultural value. He refers to the extensive community input to protecting the land at Sandon Point and its frustration with planning processes.
Peter and Kathy McKenzie request that loss of parkland, increased traffic, flooding aspects, soil contamination and impact on industrial employment be taken into account. The McKenzies object to the approved and proposed residential developments at Sandon Point as the relevant issues including cultural and heritage matters, flooding, traffic access, and recreational and social needs have not been adequately addressed. In addition, Council’s draft DCP is flawed as community input was lacking and alienation of parts of Thomas Gileson Park is proposed. They also recommend an independent authority to co-ordinate a new plan for Sandon Point.
Jill Merrin submitted that land at Sandon Point including Stages 1 to 6 should be protected from any further development and managed for conservation. Relevant policies have not been enforced at Sandon Point and the present disjointed mix of land tenures and zoning does not reflect the true constraints of the land. Sandon Point has high environmental and cultural importance due to its Aboriginal cultural, European heritage and range of ecological values. Previous planning for the site has been poor, community input not accepted, and current works are not being adequately policed with consequent adverse environmental impacts on surrounding lands. Ms Merrin considers a regional park for the land as the best management option. Ms Merrin is Convenor of the Tramway Wetlands Planning Committee and tendered a copy of the Committee’s report Sandon Point – A Community Vision.
Robert Miller suggests that cumulative impacts and site constraints have yet to be adequately assessed, the site has significant ecological and Aboriginal cultural values, and a foreshores regional parklands system should be developed. Mr Miller details the benefits of a regional park including that it would provide open space for broad community use, protect Aboriginal sites, protect and enhance ecological values, productively use flood prone land, link to existing public access ways, provide for tourism, and create significant employment.
Mr Miller expanded on the regional parklands concept comparing its benefits with the disbenefits of the Stockland proposal relating to tourism, flood abatement, social values and the environment. He considers that residential development would only benefit Stockland’s shareholders, whereas a regional park would benefit the whole community.
Also, the proposal has not been assessed under the Fisheries Act as NSW Fisheries has not been provided with any documentation relating to the proposed development. Mr Miller doubts the claimed flood-free access of the proposed north-south link road as it would traverse 3 creeks, all of which are high to medium risk floodways.
Residential development as proposed by Stockland would remove the “village atmosphere” of the area and change it to resemble a suburb of Sydney. The density proposed would not be able to allow pla nting of trees to soften the visual impact created by the development when viewed from Bulli Pass, the escarpment and the cycle track. Mr Miller also raised other issues including provision of community services, crime prevention, potential impact on fauna from night lighting, increased traffic on local roads and bush fire risk. Given the environmental and Aboriginal heritage significance of the site, he recommends the site including Stages 1 to 6 be rezoned 7(a).
Mr Miller also expressed his dis-satisfaction to the quality of answers to his questions that he received from Council and certain government agencies. He felt disadvantaged in preparing his final submission to the Commission without adequate answers to his questions.
59 John Moore submitted that the local community has no confidence in Council, previous zoning decisions should revisited, there will be unacceptable traffic increases, developer contributions are inadequate, a public park should be developed, the proposed development of Stages 1 to 6 is out of place, and a village green concept should be planned for the land.
Mark Newsham wants the cultural, environmental and heritage values of Sandon Point protected. There should be no more housing development, a regional/heritage park established, further indigenous heritage studies, planning decisions consistent with SEPP 71, and the impacts of Stages 1 to 6 investigated.
Danie Ondinea and Jeff Brown want the terms of reference of the Commission expanded to include Stages 1 to 6, a regional park developed, and the Aboriginal and ecological values of the land protected. Once the site is lost it will not be recoverable. They are also concerned that environmental safeguards required by Council are not working on Sandon Point and irreversible damage is occurring to nearby important habitats. They prefer the land be reserved for a regional park to protect Aboriginal and European cultural heritage and conserve flora and fauna habitats.
Michael Organ, MHR, wishes to save Sandon Point and believes he has a special responsibility for people and place in this part of the Illawarra. He refers to Sandon Point as being beautiful, special and irreplaceable and that the community mourns the damage already done. In addition, the community has no faith the Commission of Inquiry process will see justice done, or even a fair compromise reached. Mr Organ refers to the negative social impact unpopular developments have on the psyche of a community.
Mr Organ interpreted the terms of reference to include consideration of Stages 1 to 6 as surrounding urban context as they are intrinsically inseparable from the rest of the Inquiry area. He questions the current legal and procedural model for assessing developments and argues that the introduction of private certific ation has given more power to developers at the expense of Council and the community. Moreover, consultants to the developer never recommend against development. An independent authority is needed to examine the potential value and impact of a development.
He notes and supports the community version of a regional park at Sandon Point. It would combine Aboriginal and European heritage, ecological values and the opportunity for a green corridor linking the escarpment to the coast.
The Aboriginal communit y are the experts in the field of their culture and he recommends that the Commission engage them as fully as possible, particularly given their culture is predominantly oral. The known Aboriginal archaeological history of the Sandon Point area points to its significance but the cultural and archaeological studies are incomplete. Mr Organ recommends that the local indigenous communities should have more authority to determine the significance of the land. He notes that many indigenous people are distressed by the destruction of Aboriginal sites. They believe houses should not be built any closer to the sacred burial place Kuradji.
Aboriginal heritage is considered by Mr Organ to be by far the most important matter at stake at Sandon Point. He also refers to the important fauna habitat and significant wetland areas, the flood prone nature of much of the area which is unsuitable for development, the consistent failure of the planning process over the past decade to include people and their views and to safeguard environmental and cultural values, the concerns of the community in relation to Stages 1 to 6, and the procedures used for the sale of the Sydney Water land.
Mr Organ firmly believes the land at Sandon Point should be bought back for the people, rezoned environmental protection, and made a regional park. The land comprising Stages 1 to 6 should also be part of the park.
60 Margaret O’Riordan contends the proposed development is inappropriate because: § The Sandon Point area is of great cultural signif icance to the Aboriginal community as evidenced by the archaeological records and oral history; § The area has significant European history associated with coal transport and coke manufacture; § The flora and fauna of the site include endangered and threatened species with high conservation value; § The site is part of the last green corridor linking the escarpment to the sea; § The ecological values of the site would not be properly protected; § Traffic issues have not been thoroughly assessed and parts of Thomas Gileson Park should not be alienated; and § The Council has failed in its responsibility to the community.
Elizabeth Perey wishes that no houses ever get built at Sandon Point, considers the land should be zoned Open Space, and notes the area is a special pla ce for Aboriginal people.
David Perram considers the value of Sandon Point cannot be underestimated but any development at Sandon Point would increase values.
Margaret and Hans Paduch consider the proposed development of Sandon Point is ill-conceived. They refer the use of the area by Aborigines, the development history of the area, the village atmosphere of Bulli and Thirroul, and the constraints of flooding and increased traffic.
Alex Peterson suggests re-diversion of Upper Tramway Creek, restoration of Woodlands Creek and removal of levees from the south bank of Hewitts Creek, as well as building setbacks to provide for flood function, flora and fauna habitat, and bushfire protection. Mr Peterson also requests a 7(a) Environmental Protection zoning for the land, expansion of the culverts under the railway line , and that adequate Aboriginal studies be completed.
Mr Peterson is critical of the shareway connections from Stockland’s development to the existing cycleway. He considers they are impediments to the safe operation of bicycles and recommends the design issue be referred to Council for recommendation. He is also of the view that there is a need to redesign the heavy vehicle emergency access and Tramway Creek crossing to the Sydney Water sewage pumping station.
He pointed out that the flood impact assessment for Stages 2 to 6 was based on the assumption that the existing railway culvert restriction on Tramway Creek would remain. Given that the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Management Plan recommends the enlargement of the culvert, the building footprint of the proposed development in Stage 7, as well as that in Stages 2 to 6 should be reviewed. Mr Peterson considers uncertainty as to the locations of the water quality sampling points casts doubt on the validity of monitoring results. He also contended that recent rain events proved the stormwater detention ponds do not work and result in overflow water ponding on the cycleway as well as excess runoff into the lower part of the Tramway Creek wetland.
Alan and Karen Reid believe the proposed development at Sandon Point is inappropriate because: § The area is the last green corridor on the Illawarra coast; § The loss of open space is not good planning; and § The land has significant Aboriginal and ecological value;
The Reids also question a number of matters relating to Stages 1 to 6 and right of access to their land at Sandon Point.
Sharralyn Robinson refers to the legislation and charters designed to protect and conserve Aboriginal heritage but has to conclude Aboriginal heritage has not been protected. She notes the Therin (2002) report, the Hiscock (2002) report and the NPWS all acknowledge the significance of the Sandon Point
61 area for Aboriginal people, both culturally and archaeologically. But there is a need for more investigation and Ms Robinson recommends a course of action for assessing the entire site before any further development could be considered. The Aboriginal community would need to have an essential role in identifying the social and spiritual significance of the site.
Dr Denise Russell considers the land should be a public park because: § The views from the land are of incredible natural beauty; § Some of the land would be used for recreation and other areas once rehabilitated would foster the return of native animals; § Children would be encouraged to appreciate natural beauty; § Aboriginal culture and heritage must be given due recognition; § Local village community life would be threatened by the large influx of additional residents; and § Security problems could occur if residents are away from homes for lengthy periods each day.
Anthony Ryan presented a local history of the Sandon Point area from the 1950s. He decries what he considers the despoliation of the natural values of the land through human intervention over that period, particularly the destruction of natural habitats, the disappearing sea life, and the degradation of the local creeks. A plan of management is required for Sandon Point to capitalise on its environmental attributes and its reputation as a world class surfing location.
Christina Slon points out the significance of Sandon Point to Aboriginal people noting that its full significance has not been determined. She provided information of the number of Aboriginal skeletons located on the site since 1887. As a result of the site’s significance its destruction would be an abuse of power – the whole site should be protected. Ms Slon asks a number of questions relating to the planning process to date. She also refers to a traffic study she commissioned for the proposed road connection from Wrexham Road, which indicates a route parallel and adjacent to the railway line would be feasible.
In addition Ms Slon collected 401 signatures on form letters which raised similar issues to those noted on the individual form letters received by the Commission and referred to later in this section of the report.
Deborah Smith is concerned about traffic, sale of the Sydney Water land, building within 40m of creeks, and the adequacy of infrastructure.
John Smith considers the whole of the site needs to be considered as this was the basis of the rezoning. If the whole of the site is not considered the outcome of the Inquiry will be constrained. Expanded terms of reference must be requested or the Inquiry will be seen to be reduced in status. Mr Smith questions the integrity of the rezoning and planning approvals process for the Sandon Point area.
Carol Speechley and Paul Hickman submitted a number of songs composed at the Aboriginal Tent Embassy. They also point out the cultural significance of the Sandon Point area, the abundance of archaeological material in the locality and the connection of Sandon Point with other significant Aboriginal sites. They believe that the area could be a focal point for reconciliation and for teaching future generations of children about their unique culture and history. It also has the potential for establishment of an indoor/outdoor cultural centre with permission of the traditional people, and provides the opportunity for general environmental education initiatives. Moreover, Sandon Point is still important to Aboriginal people and this will continue.
Dr Karla Sperling contends that the no development option for the site should be considered, the true Aboriginal significance of the site has not been adequately recognised, the site contains important habitat which is capable of regeneration, the zoning does not convey a right to develop, and that
62 ecological sustainability cannot be achieved by seeking a balance between environment and development.
Jake Spooner is a local surfer who is concerned about the existing local traffic congestion, the potential impact of development on the ocean and sea life, the likely flood problems, and whether the infrastructure is adequate.
Paul Stephenson submitted a copy of The Sandon Point, a community bulletin for the protection of Sandon Point, attached to a form letter.
Tony Stephenson considers the approved development too close to the Aboriginal burial ground and that the proposed development will disrupt the natural flow in the creeks. The former AIR site is flood prone and a former industrial site complete with waste landfill area. Alienation of public parkland for road access is not wanted and roads in the area are already too busy with traffic from the other new subdivisions. The Sandon Point area would make a beautiful parkland area. Mr Stephenson also tendered 3 videos totalling 10½ hours viewing and included a written summary of their contents.
Elsa Story submitted that the Sandon Point site provides the opportunity to preserve a rare escarpment-to-beach flora and fauna corridor. Inappropriate development as proposed would significantly restrict this option as well as reducing the environmental, cultural and heritage values of the site. The site should be developed as a Regional Park. Ms Story refers to the need for proper and consistent planning, adequate infrastructure, clear planning and development guidelines, parkland to be protected from alienation, traffic management, flood control, the remediation and protection of wetlands, and stiff penalties for breach of consent conditions. Aboriginal culture and heritage must be protected given the site is a sacred place for Aborigines, and Aboriginal people must be consulted in relation to use of the site.
Jane Taylor and Jim Keski-nummi treasure the natural values of the current open space areas, seek protection of the Aboriginal and European heritage values of the area, consider contaminated land has not been properly remediated, and refer to flooding and traffic congestion as well as the strain on community services and infrastructure. They oppose what they consider the destructive development proposals for the land.
William Tibben focused on his concern for the lack of a comprehensive and independent Traffic Impact Statement that incorporates both the technical and social aspects of traffic management. Mr Tibben lives in Point Street with his family and considers local people should be consulted. He questions statements in the available traffic studies, raises road safety issues around Bulli Public School, is concerned that a link road which would increase local traffic flows could be constructed between Thirroul and Point Street, highlights the dangers for children in the vicinity of the Point Street railway bridge if traffic flows increase, and suggests a railway crossing at Hobart Street. Mr Tibben feels that the cheap option of widening the Point Street railway bridge for access to Sandon Point has not had due regard to residents, and particularly children’s safety.
Irene Tognetti is appalled at the lack of consultation and lack of Council support. She refers to the potential noise impacts from the refractory industry, considers Aboriginal heritage studies inadequate, refers to the lack of local infrastructure and provision for affordable housing, points out that flooding and traffic access are serious issues and notes the unique nature of the local community and the locality’s natural attractions.
Jill Walker questions the planning procedures adopted for Sandon Point referring to sections of the Illawarra Regional Environmental Plan No.1 1986, and the apparent lack of rigour in applying the requirements of Wollongong Local Environmental Plan 1990. She refers to constraints to developing the land including flooding, soil contamination, traffic, land instability, coastal policy considerations, Aboriginal heritage and European heritage. Ms Walker details issues relating to her concerns for the
63 past and ongoing mistreatment of Aboriginal and European heritage. Other matters raised include recent cases in the Land and Environment Court, the sale of Sydney Water land, application of development consent conditions, public access rights, Council’s attitude to the public’s complaints, and the need for consistency and due process in the application of planning laws.
Shauna Wilkinson points out Sandon Point is one of the few areas of open space which provides for walking, bike riding, skating and surfing activities for locals and visitors in an area of exquisite beauty. It is of even greater importance because of its Aboriginal cultural heritage and the opportunity it provides for reconciliation. Recommendations taken from one of the form letters are also included in her submission.
Ms Sue Andersen, Ms Rosalind Batten, Mr David Bell, J M McCann, Mr Alan Coombs, Mr John & Mrs Anne Dening, Ms Susan Fawaz, Ms Diane Feneley, Frank Gallagher, Ms Lesley Gordon, Gayle Grey, Mr Paul Grey, Daniel Hagan, Tony Hagan, Fay Haines, Mr Peter Heath, R A Heath, Tim Hoban, Stephen Hodgson, Stephen Hyland, David Isaac, Ray Jaeger, M Jamieson, Joan Mary Johnston, Mrs Anne Kain & Mr Warren Kain, Ryan Kerr, Karl Koschutzke, Beryl and John de Kroon, Ms Anne Maree Lawless, Mr Adrianus Leonardus van Wyk, Janice Lum, Vanessa and Glenn Marks, Ian McKinlay, Robin McKinlay, Steven G McNally, E Metcalf, D Miller, Jill Molan, Alexander J Notzon, NS and L Patchett, Ms Lis Rust, Mr Paul Tardent and Ms Nadine Tong, Mr Karl and Mrs Maija Upenieks, Ms Nicola Varley, Ms Bronwyn Watkins, and Mr Scott Williams signed a form letter requesting that the Commission make the following recommendations: § No future development at the Sandon Point site; § The site be conserved and managed by the NPWS as a Regional Park; § Preparation of a Local Environmental Study to assess the impacts of development Stages 1 to 6; § Preparation of an indigenous heritage study to identify and protect key sites; and § All planning decisions at the site to be consistent with SEPP 71.
Maxwell Ackerman, Colin and Narelle Anderson, Doug Anderson, Paul Baker, Robyn Cashman, Alicia Chilby, Frank Church, Ian Cobban, Vimala Colless, Greg Cook, Michael Crighton, John and Susan Cropper, Kelly Cumming, A Cunningham, Sonia Dutka, Joanne Fletcher, Maria Hulbert, Kerry Pedersen, G R Phillips, Jefferey John Pountney, Ceri Ritchie, Pat Roe, Anthony Ryan, Bevan Skinner, Kim Stephenson, S Steyne, Jennifer Tibben, Kaye Tomlinson, Josef Trunecke, Dr Deborah Truneckova, Marcia Mary Turner, Mitchum Walters, Neil Wilcock, Helen Wilson, and Cecilie Anne Yates also signed the form letter referred to immedia tely above, as well as raising other matters including: § Future housing would threaten existing industrial issues on the land; § The Sandon Point land should be saved for future generations of people as well as wildlife and plant life; § Additional open space is needed for future generations in such wonderful places, so no further development should be allowed; § Conservation of Sandon Point would be good for the health and well-being of local residents; § Aboriginal values must be considered and Aborigines should be given a greater role in administering the area; § The community should be involved in decis ions regarding heritage matters; § Additional houses mean more cars on already busy roads; § Provision for increased traffic are inadequate; § Employment opportunities in the area are very limited meaning longer commuting times; § Development of Stages 1 to 6 should be halted and a full traffic impact study undertaken, or resident’s and children’s lives will be at risk; § The unspoiled beauty and green space at Sandon Point must be preserved; § Government and Council processes should be fully investigated; § Development of Stages 1 to 6 should cease and legislation introduced to buy back that land for public use;
64 § The site should not be developed because of its Aboriginal and ecological values; § The land should be restored to its original condition; § Threatened species using the site would be disturbed; § Marine life has declined in the vicinity and a marine park should be declared; § The effect of global warming; § The enforcement of appropriate lighting codes; § Roads not to be constructed over creeks or through parks; § No building on a floodplain or filling sites which affect natural creek processes; § No one has listened to valid arguments for stopping inappropriate development; § Public access to the areas should be assured and not cut off by development; § The wetland is a fragile and threatened area; § Native vegetation and estuarine environments should be rehabilitated; § The report of the Tramway Wetlands Planning Committee should apply to the site; § Further destruction of this unique site should not occur; § Adequate control and appropriate discharge points for stormwater are required; § Soil contamination could be a hazard if residential development occurs on certain of the land; § No further destruction should occur at Sandon Point; § Flooding and stormwater issues need to be fully investigated; § The proposals would result in overdevelopment of the area; § Infrastructure is inadequate for the increased population proposed; § Lack of community consultation; § Future of the Sturdee Avenue railway bridge and potential for traffic access along Sturdee Avenue and Beattie Street; § Large increase in local population; § Appointment of independent site monitors; § Council’s planning has not had regard to the wishes of the community for open space and development of the land as a public precinct; and § Impact of flooding on the development.
Kerry Air, Ms Cheryl Akhurst, Mr Max and Mrs Marjorie Allan, Ms PS Andersen, PA Atkins, Mr Joseph R Battersby, Ms Sharlene Booth, Ms Nita Borland, Mr Donald Bray, Ms Sylvia Burrows, Ms Patricia Cadogan, Mr Jayne Carrothers, Mr Graham & Mrs Elly Castle, Ms Vicki Cleaver, Ms Julie Clifford, Mr Bob and Mrs Sandra Cole, Mrs Di and Mr Barry Curtin, Mr Ian Menzies Dow, Mr John Edwards, Ms Gillian Fletcher, Mrs Angela and Mr Donald Hannan, Mrs Michele and Mr Bill Harvey, Mrs Barbara Hatch, Mr Kerry Frank Hawke, Mr James Hopkins, Mr Mark Hoyl, Ms Joan Mary Johnston, Mr Robert and Mrs Christine Kocal, Mrs Dorothy Lloyd Sefton, Mr Michael London, L McCann, Mr Mark Miklas, Mr Michael Momsen, Mrs D Moore, Mrs DC Morand, Ms Kathy Parsons-Young, Mr Alex Peterson, Ms Stephanie Robinson, Mr Thomas John Ronan, Ms Heather Sainsbury, Mr Mark J Schipp, Mr Guy C Slater, Mr Ronald K Smith, Ms Anne -Margaret Vassallo, G Vozza, Ms Betty Walsh, Ms Rachael Woodcock, and Mr David and Mrs Lynne Wright signed a form letter opposing any reduction in local parkland and proposed that a significant area of the land at Sandon Point be resumed and regenerated as a regional coastal park.
Jan McKenlay, Barbara Meyns, B J Olive, and Les and Marie Pa llister also signed the form letter referred to immediately above and as well raised additional matters including: § The need to preserve the environmental and heritage aspects of the land; § Worsening traffic with increased development; § Sandon Point once destroyed cannot be regenerated; and § Hobart Street with a new bridge over the railway line, should have been designated the major traffic access route.
65
66 VALUES AND CONSTRAINTS OF THE CoI AREA
The land at Sandon Point which is the subject of this Commission is shown on Figure 1. The terms of reference of the Commission in relation to those lands are to make recommendations on the preferred land uses, pla nning outcomes and management options having regard to its values and constraints in the broader context of the surrounding urban and non urban environment. Throughout this section of the report the Commission has had due regard to the principles of ecologically sustainable development in its considerations.
The parties appearing before the Commission provided argument relating to 2 main positions. The indigenous and non indigenous community generally want no residential development on the site, for the Cookson Plibrico industrial operation to remain, and for the land to be developed as a regional park. On the other hand Stockland considers the western section of the CoI area could be developed for residential use. Stockland submitted a draft Master Pla n, as discussed earlier in this report. Council submitted a draft DCP which supports residential development on the western section of the CoI area, but not to the same extent as Stockland. Council’s draft DCP and Stockland’s Master Plan are referred to throughout this section of the report. Other parties, including government agencies, community groups and residents provided substantial submissions on various aspects of the terms of reference. Brief summaries of the submissions received have been reported earlier in Summary of Submissions.
ABORIGINAL HERITAGE
Aborigines have lived on the south coast of New South Wales for probably in excess of 40,000 years. Archaeological evidence in the south coast region has established that Aborigines were using the animal resources of the estuarine environments from at least 20,000 years ago. The Kuradji or “clever fella ” buried at Sandon Point is thought to be up to 6,000 years old and the nearby tool-making site about 4,000 years old. Aboriginal culture is an old culture. Most of the evidence however, relates to the last 2,000 years due to the nature of the resources used by the Aborigines, and is understandably richer in more recent times.
Archaeological investigations in coastal areas have mainly concentrated on shell middens. These are present right along the coast, with clustering in particularly favoured areas. A number of middens on the coast have been excavated and many hundreds surveyed, but comparable study has not been done on the coastal plain and foothills. There is evidence of large gatherings of Aborigines on the north coast but these activities have not been documented for the south coast.
Prior to European colonisation the Aboriginal people of Bulli were part of the Dhawarral language group which extended from Sydney to the Shoalhaven. The Aborigines lived as an integral and integrated part of the natural environment rather than being alienated from it – not dominating or exploiting nature. They developed a social life whic h reflected this harmony as well as the co- operation between men and women and between different groups which made it possible. In everyday life the work of hunting and gathering was shared. The food obtained was also shared.
Documented evidence of the late 18th century is that Aborigines were camping and living in the Illawarra region including the Sandon Point area. Prior to European settlement in the early 19th century, the local Aboriginal people were known to be friendly and helpful.
The environmental changes over the first century of European colonisation of the Illawarra were fundamental and profound. Timber was harvested from about 1812, official settlement of the Illawarra began in 1815 and the region was first surveyed in 1816. The land was progressively cle ared, fences erected, pastoral and agricultural practices developed, and coal mining commenced in 1849.
67 The evidence indicates that the events which followed European colonisation had a huge impact on the lifestyle of the Aborigines. The Aborigines were forced to give up their land by those in more powerful positions. Government policies and legislation of the day also resulted in adverse impact on Aborigines. The result was that Aborigines were prevented from hunting and gathering within their cultural boundaries. They were alienated from their land as well as their spiritual beliefs and journeys. This was devastating for the social, economic and spiritual life of these people. When they lost their land they lost themselves. Displacement from their land also caused traditional boundaries to be crossed resulting in conflict with other tribes.
A large number of Aborigines succumbed to white diseases, some left the district, others would have starved, and many were massacred. By the end of the 19th century only about 30 Aborigines remained in the Illawarra.
Aboriginal Culture
Dreamtime is the remote past of the Spirit Ancestors, which lives in Aboriginal legends handed down by word of mouth from generation to generation for at least 40,000 years. In song, story and poetry, art, drama and dance, the Dreamtime tells how the Spirit Ancestors formed and gave life to the land and laid down the Law. This included the structure of society, rituals to maintain the life of the land and rules for human behaviour. For Aboriginal people the Dreamtime explains the origin of the universe, the workings of nature and the nature of humanity, the cycle of life and death. It shapes and structures Aboriginal life by regulating kinship, family life, and the relations between the sexes, with a network of obligations to people, land and spirits.
Aborigines had a rich ceremonial life and sizeable groups were drawn together for ceremonial purposes. Religion did not exist as a separate category of behaviour but was pervasive being manifest in many aspects of social and economic behaviour. Beliefs were expressed in myths which told of the wanderings and behaviour of the spiritual ancestors. Myths drew attention to right and wrong forms of behaviour and were related in a number of ways to the physical environment which figured largely in many aspects of Aboriginal life. Aborigines did not own the land but belonged to the land, which with all forms of life within it was regarded as a sacred trust, to be preserved and passed on in a timeless cycle of mutual dependence. Tribal land could be considered a constellation of Dreaming Places.
Features of myths were enacted in ritual, and each group performed rituals relating to their own myths. Among coastal groups of New South Wales, the most important rituals were connected with initiation. In evidence before the Commission initiations are practised today by Aborigines and are still conducted at Sandon Point.
Aboriginal society was spiritually integrated. Aboriginal religion was the centre of existence, impossible to separate from any aspect of tribal life. The land was their church, its natural features their monuments, and the most sacred sites and objects of Aboriginal religion were secret.
The tribes were made up of clans, each descended from and named for a Spirit Ancestor of the Dreamtime. This Spirit Ancestor was symbolised by the animal, bird or fish that was the clan totem.
As well as the clan totem, each individual belonged to a personal totem, which was part of his or her name. This was identified by a Dreaming of the mother or father, or by interpreting a natural sign. The totem creature was a guardian spirit that warned of danger or communicated important news about relatives. Being part of the personal totem meant being spiritually related to other people of that totem. It was a personal and special link identifying the individual with a particular place and creature. Mr Kennedy related his personal experiences of the power of his totem.
68 The Elders and the Rule of the Law
Aboriginal society was ruled by the Elders, select old people who had passed through all the stages of initiation. Their power was their knowledge of the ceremonies and the Law, and through them the rule of the Law in all Aboriginal life was absolute. There were male and female Elders: § The Elders made all the important decisions, gave inspiration and advice, arranged marriages and organised all training, initiations and ceremonies; § They arbitrated and settled disputes, held inquests if anyone died unexpectedly, fixed punishments if laws were broken, and decided on revenge parties or war against other tribes; and § They were the keepers of the Law, the source of practical and spiritual wisdom, and responsible for the well-being of all their people and the land.
The most important and powerful of the Elders were the Wireenun or Coradji (Kuradji). These are sometimes referred to as witchdoctors, sorcerers or medicine men. Aboriginals called them Clever Men, or Clever Old Men. There were also women of high degree. Women also had their own rituals and sacred objects, their own role in perpetrating the Dreamtime Law.
The Elders were high priest, doctor, lawyer and judge, magician, psychologist and counsellor. From long training they knew all the traditional Dreamtime lore of the tribe, the whole of the past, which was also the present and future. At their initiation they were ritually dismembered and reconstituted, dying so as to be reborn with the power of the Dreamtime.
Historical Intentions, Legislative Aspects and Guidelines
Documented evidence submitted to the Commission by members of the Aboriginal community (Carriage, Davis, Robinson) referred to directions, laws, policies, processes and procedures issued or put in place since 1768 to protect Aboriginal heritage. Protection was inherent in orders given to Captain Cook, matters for consideration given to Cook by the Royal Society, instructions to Governor Phillip, and the tasks of the Protector of Aborigines as stated by Lord Glenelg.
However, British justice did not apply to the Aborigines, despite Governor Macquarie’s words to that effect. Aborigines could not give evidence in court or defend themselves until later in the century, as they were considered heathens and unable to swear upon the Bible. They were also forbidden to own land, except if it was specifically granted by the Governor and under close supervision by whites.
In NSW Aboriginal culture is now protected by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Heritage Act 1977, and the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. Other Acts referred to in submissions include the NSW Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 which recognises that land in NSW was traditionally owned and lived on by Aborigines, and that land is particularly important to Aborigines for spiritual, social, cultural and economic reasons. Also, the Native Title (NSW) Act 1994 which ensures that NSW law is consistent with relevant Commonwealth legislation. Relevant Commonwealth Acts are the Australian Heritage Commission Act 1975, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984, and the Native Title Act 1993. In addition the Australian Heritage Commission has listed “Significant Places” and Council has a policy to protect Aboriginal heritage. The Aboriginal community strongly argued that these supposed safeguards have not protected Aboriginal heritage despite their good intentions.
The Burra Charter, 1999
The Burra Charter provides guidance for the conservation and management of all types of places of cultural significance including natural, indigenous and historic places with cultural values. Cultural significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific or social value for past, present or future generations,
69 and is embodied in the place itself, its fabric, setting, use, associations, meanings, records, related places and related objects. Places may have a range of values for different individuals or groups. The Burra Charter further states that: Places of cultural significance enrich people’s lives, often providing a deep and inspirational sense of connection to community and landscape, to the past and to lived experiences. They are historical records that are important as tangible expressions of Australian identity and experience. Places of cultural significance reflect the diversity of our communities, telling us about who we are and the past that has formed us and the Australian landscape. They are irreplaceable and precious.
These places of cultural significance must be conserved for present and future generations.
The Burra Charter advocates a cautious approach to change: do as much as necessary to care for the place and to make it useable, but otherwise change it as little as possible so that its cultural significance is retained.
Article 8 of the Burra Charter states that conservation requires the retention of an appropriate visual setting and other relationships that contribute to the cultural significance of the place.
Aboriginal Heritage Impact Assessment
Historically, archaeology has dominated government and academic interest in Aboriginal heritage. A simplistic approach to defining Aboriginal heritage developed that placed primacy on the information that could be gleaned from archaeological excavations, rather than the experience of living Aboriginal people. However, more recent surveys have led to the recording of many story places embodied by landscape features rather than archaeological material. Aboriginal people also place values on biodiversity and environmental health as well the importance of continued access to land and ongoing involvement in environmental management. These values are closely linked with the ways in which Aboriginal people define their identity and lifestyle. To accord with the Burra Charter an appropriate visual setting and other relationships that contribute to the cultural significance of a place need to be retained.
Moreover, locations associated with camping, hunting, gathering and medicine trees have temporal or functional relationships which form part of a system of land use and social interaction which cannot be seen in isolation. The cultural value of a location to Aboriginal people cannot be understood by excising it from its surroundings. Cultural values are intimately tied to the concept of well-being, a link which has been downplayed due to the focus of Aboriginal heritage management on material remains. Aboriginal cultural values need to be integrated into environmental decision making and in most cases on a broader scale than in relation to individual developments (English, 2002).
The National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) has recently exhibited Draft Aboriginal Heritage Impact Assessment Guidelines for comment. The purpose of the guidelines is to assist interested parties in identifying and assessing Aboriginal heritage values. The guidelines reinforce the position which English sets out in the paper referred to above.
In introducing the guidelines the NPWS states: The majority of Aboriginal heritage assessments in NSW are conducted in the context of development proposals. Assessments mainly focus on archaeological surveys. They generally do not adequately identify the historical and social significance of the development area to Aboriginal people, or assess the impacts of the development on all heritage values.
It now considers this approach inadequate as it is widely recognised that: Aboriginal heritage is dynamic. It includes tangible and intangible expressions of culture that link generations of Aboriginal people over time. For Aboriginal people, relationships with country, people, beliefs, knowledge, law, language, symbols, ways of living, sea, land and objects all arise from their spiritual and cultural practices and associations.
70 Aboriginal heritage includes landscapes and places that are important to Aboriginal people as part of their customary law, developing traditions, history and current practices. Aboriginal heritage landscapes, areas and places have associated heritage values which include spirituality, law, knowledge, practices, traditional resources or other beliefs and attachments.
Aboriginal people have occupied the NSW landscape for at least 50,000 years. The evidence and important cultural meanings relating to this occupation are present throughout the landscape, as well as in documents and in the memories, stories and associations of Aboriginal people. Therefore, any activity which impacts on the landscape may impact on Aboriginal heritage.
Moreover, the social, historic, scientific and aesthetic heritage values of a pla ce or object are commonly interrelated. Because all assessments of heritage values occur within a social and historical context, all potential heritage values will have a social or Aboriginal community heritage component. This includes traditional, historical and contemporary associations of Aboriginal people with the environment as well as physical items within the environment.
The guidelines also point out that the EP&A Act requires the consent authority to consider the potential impact on all Aboriginal heritage values, including natural resource uses or landscape features of spiritual importance, as well as the impact on Aboriginal objects and Aborig inal places. And that an Aboriginal heritage impact assessment should have regard to the requirements of the EP&A Act.
NSW Coastal Policy 1997
The Coastal Policy has as one of its equally ranking nine goals, the effective management and conservation of cultural heritage places, items and landscapes. An objective of the goal is: To recognise the rights and needs of indigenous people and to ensure inputs by Aboriginal communities prior to making decisions affecting indigenous communities.
The principles underlying the policy as it relates to cultural heritage are: § Cultural heritage gives a sense of history, place and identity, and is of economic as well as social and cultural importance to the community. It should therefore be recognised as an asset and conserved. § It is important to recognise contemporary culture given the increasing rate of change. § The protection of Aboriginal cultural heritage is essential for its intrinsic value and as part of the historic development of the country.
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 71- Coastal Protection
One of the aims of SEPP 71 is “to protect and preserve Aboriginal cultural heritage, and Aboriginal places, values, customs, beliefs and traditional knowledge”. It also requires consideration of “measures to protect the cultural places, values, customs, beliefs and traditional knowledge of Aboriginals”. Any master plan prepared must illustrate and demonstrate, where relevant, proposals for heritage conservation.
Reconciliation and Commitment
Wollongong City Council has endorsed inclusion of its Statement of Reconciliation and Commitment into Council’s 2003-07 Corporate Plan. The Statement includes: Wollongong City Council acknowledges and gives recognition to the fact that this land and its waters were settled as colonies without any treaty or consent; that the Aboriginal people of the area are the first peoples and they have, as a result of the invasion, suffered deep loss and grief caused by the alienation from their traditional lands, the loss of lives, freedom and the forced removal of children. Council also acknowledges the rights of indigenous Australians to live
71 according to their own beliefs and customs and gives due respect and recognition to the continuing customary laws, beliefs and traditions of the indigenous people of the area.
Wollongong City Council supports the people’s movement towards reconciliation and seeks to give practical expression to this process through its actions. Council also supports working together in partnership with all sections of our community to ensure the principles of equity, access and human rights are provided for all members of the indigenous community through the provision of culturally appropriate services and programs.
As a local government authority, Wollongong City Council commits itself to: § ensuring local indigenous involvement in events and celebrations of significance which respect the dignity and protocols of the local Aboriginal community; § the ongoing development of strategies to improve the level of participation of local Aboriginal people in the local Government decision making process; § ensuring all of its staff through its induction program are exposed to relevant education and cultural awareness to assist in their knowledge, understanding and appreciation of Aboriginal cultural heritage and the needs of the Aboriginal community; § ensuring that the Aboriginal employment strategy continues to be implemented, enhancing the prospects for Aboriginal people to be employed within Wollongong City Council; § annually celebrating Reconciliation Week and NAIDOC Week; § flying the Aboriginal flag in front of its Administrative building; and § actively promoting the protection of Aboriginal heritage and culturally significant areas within the city.
Wollongong City Council acknowledges that the Aboriginal culture continues to strengthen and enrich our community and that the area is now occupied by people who are drawn from many different lands and who share the values of tolerance and respect of one another. As a leader of the community, the Council pledges itself to fight against injustice and overcome disadvantage within its area of jurisdiction in an effort to bring about a city which is recognised for its valuing of the community and its history and in the provision of justice and equity for all.
Aboriginal Heritage Investigations
There has been a long history of archaeological work undertaken as part of environmental impact assessment in the Illawarra region. Several research investigations have also been undertaken which yielded deeper insights into particular aspects of the Aboriginal heritage of the Illawarra. Two Aboriginal heritage studies have been undertaken over the Wollongong area. Nevertheless, it is acknowledged by Aboriginal heritage specialists that further detailed investigation is required to properly understand Aboriginal use of the Illawarra area.
Investigations relating to Aboriginal heritage of the Sandon Point locality include: § Fullagar, R and D. Donlon 1998 - Archaeological Salvage Excavation at McCauleys Beach, Thirroul, NSW Preliminary Report (7 July 1998). § Fullagar, R and L.Head 1990 - McCauleys Beach Midden, Thirroul, NSW; Report to NPWS on the Archaeological Excavation. § Fullagar, R, L.Head, E. Bryant and S.Beamen 1999 - Tsunami Disturbance on Coastal Shell Midden: McCauleys Beach New South Wales, in J.Hall and I.McNiven (eds), Australia Coastal Archaeology, ANH Publications, Canberra pp 235-238. § Navin , K 1992 - Assessment of Aboriginal Archaeological Resource - Sandon Point, Wollongong, NSW. § Navin , K 1996 - Proposed Walkway Upgrading Program Sandon Point, Bulli, NSW; Report of Archaeological Survey. § Navin , K and Officer 1993 - Further Archaeological Investigations Sandon Point, Wollongong, NSW.
72 § Navin Officer Heritage Consultants August 2001(a) - Sandon Point Residential Subdivision: Stage 1 Development Area, North of Wollongong, NSW. § Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2001(b) - Sandon Point Residential Subdivision: Stages 2-6 Development Area, Bulli, North of Wollongong, NSW. § Navin Officer Heritage Consultants October 2001 – Sandon Point Stages 1-6 Development Area: Summary Report. § Navin Officer Heritage Consultants August 2002 - Sandon Point Residential Subdivision, Stages 2-6 Development Area, Bulli, North of Wollongong, NSW; Analysis of Surface Collected and Excavated Aboriginal Artefactual Material.
In addition, an evaluation report has been prepared by Dr Peter Hiscock entitled Appraisal of Archaeological Studies at Sandon Point, New South Wales (August 2002). Therin Archaeological Consulting published a draft report entitled Sandon Point – Aboriginal Heritage Assessment (February 2003) drawing on previous work but expanding the scope to include a broad cultural assessment of the significance of the area to the Aboriginal community. Therin also undertook an archaeological survey by walking over the area extensively. No new sites were identified which according to Therin was due to the low level of exposure and visibility. Therin considered that further sub-surface investigation is required. Troy and Walsh (February 2003, incomplete) and McIntyre- Tamwoy (February 2003) produced reports which Stockland submitted to the Commission. The latter report reviewed previous reports including the draft Therin report recognis ing that: Until such time that information is available which discounts the occurrence of intact natural surface deposits either at current surface levels or buried at depth beneath fill over the rest of the other parcels of land referred to in the Commission of Inquiry then the recommendations for additional investigation and assessment in the Draft TAC [Therin] 2003 report and WCC proposed Draft DCP should apply.
This report also considers that the western area of Sandon Point has a lower likelihood of significant Aboriginal archaeological deposits occurring: This is in part due to the degree of disturbance and in part because the most likely site distribution would have been along spurs running out to headlands such as Bulli Point, along beaches such as McCauleys Beach, and in well watered areas immediately behind the dunes where relatively dry raised areas occur adjacent to creeks.
The NPWS in 2001 conducted investigations and sought information from the Aboriginal community relating to an Aboriginal Place nomination for Sandon Point but little specific information was provided regarding the cultural values at Sandon Point. The report of these investigations by Nightingale (2001) is entitled Draft Aboriginal Place Investigation Report.
The NPWS has now initiated the Illawarra Regional Aboriginal Heritage Study to document broad heritage themes in the Illawarra and to examine long term management issues for Aboriginal heritage.
The local Aboriginal and wider community referred many times to the Hiscock (2002) report. In Hiscock’s submission to the Commission it is noted that sites of the size of the one at Sandon Point are not common and the site appears to have contained a very large potentially valuable artefact assemblage. However, Hiscock did not take size itself as the sole measure of significance and considered the assemblage should have been considered both large and information rich until further studies showed otherwise. His report concluded that: § Archaeological investigations have revealed that the development area (Stages 1-6) contained an enormous archaeological site, containing several million artefact fragments. Such sites are extremely rare along the Australian coast and even if the context of these artefacts was heavily disturbed this represents an assemblage of unusual and valuable qualities. The statements by Navin Officer do not give adequate acknowledgment to the size and potential of such an assemblage.
73 § Multiple processes disturb the site but the archaeological investigations should be considered inconclusive as to the extent and intensity of disturbance processes or the degree of information that remains in the assemblage. The conclusion that little or no information about prehistoric activities remains is not justified on the evidence presented. § The archaeological investigations have provided a useful characterisation of the site but are not extensive or detailed enough to develop final statements of scientific significance. § The preliminary judgement of the archaeological material contained within Stages 1-6 underestimates the likely potential of such an immense and complex assemblage. It remains possible, even likely, that this site should be considered of national importance for questions of ancient technology and economy.
The NPWS acknowledges the significance of the area to Aboriginal people but considers that: The Hiscock report provides no suggestions, recommendations or new evidence. Rather, it interprets pre-existing evidence to suggest that the number and density of Aboriginal artefacts on part of the Sandon Point site are higher than previously estimated. Density and volume of artefacts alone are not sufficient reason to deny a permit.
Navin Officer strongly challenged many aspects of the Hiscock report, which was critical of their archaeological investigations and analysis of the Stages 1 to 6 area. They consider Hiscock’s report relies on hypothetical situations, poorly supported arguments, unreliable assumptions, and conclusions not supported by the evidence. Nevertheless, Navin officer agreed the Sandon Point assemblage has research and scientific values of local and regional significance. They do not concur that it has national significance.
Publications of a more general nature to which reference has been made in the documented evidence to the Commission include: § National Parks and Wildlife Service: The Aborigines of New South Wales, Parks and Wildlife Vol 2 No 5. § Organ, Michael 1990: Illawarra and South Coast Aborigines 1770 – 1850. § Organ, Michael 1993: Illawarra and South Coast Aborigines 1770 – 1900. § Parbury, Nigel 1986: Survival – A History of Aboriginal Life in New South Wales.
It is generally accepted that further archaeological work is desirable, consistent with that recommended by Therin (2003), and that the Aboriginal community should be involved. Investigations in the main should concentrate on areas which have largely escaped significant disturbance and retain the original topsoil. These areas can be effectively determined by using aerial photographs, site fill plans, borehole and investigation pit logs, and site histories. Further investigation may also be required in relation to the Aboriginal site previously uncovered on the Hannah land (see also Aboriginal Archaeological Heritage).
Draft Aboriginal Place Investigation Report
The draft Sandon Point Aboriginal Place Investigation Report (NPWS, June 2001) reviewed information already available and identified a number of important issues for Aboriginal heritage: § An Aboriginal Place may be declared on any land in NSW if the area “is or was of special significance to Aboriginal Culture”. § Land is of cultural significance to Aboriginals if the lands are significant in terms of the traditions, observances, customs, beliefs, or history of the Aboriginal people of the area. § Information on the special significance of the place can only be determined by Aboriginal people with knowledge of the area. § The land has been identified by local Aboriginal community representatives as being significant, particularly as a burial of a Kuradji (Clever Man) is known to occur on the land.
74 § Many local Aboriginal community representatives consider that development of Stages 1 to 6 will impact on the cultural significance of the place. § Threats to flora and fauna are of concern to the local Aboriginal community as the total environment is important. § It is only from the turn of the century – when white historians and anthropologists were recording in earnest aspects of Aboriginal cultures along the South Coast – that specific names such as Wodi Wodi and Thurrawul were allocated to local ‘tribes’ and ‘languages’ (Organ 1990). § The Sandon Point land is in a prime position to support dense coastal occupation given it is situated in and near a variety of environmental zones, including coastal, estuarine and adjacent hinterland. This broader landscape would provide a range of both animal and plant foods and fresh water resources. Food resources would include fish, shellfish, mammals, birds, plants, reptiles, and bird and reptile eggs. Food was available not only in the shoreline/inter-tidal zone (shellfish and fish) but also in the wetland/swamp (turtles) and on the land (birds, possums and other mammals). § Pardoe (1998) proposes both a religious and economic role in burial practices. Cemeteries are “viewed as symbolic markers of group affiliation and, through that, land ownership. Cemeteries are found only where large groups and permanent but finite resources coincide” (Pardoe 1998:183). § Pardoe suggests that elaborate burial practices reflect lineal ties to specific tracts of land and control of (or right to) resources within that land (Pardoe 1998:198). This may be evidenced by the burial at Sandon Point which was concluded to have grave goods and therefore shown material evidence of ritual, as opposed to mundane activities. Considering the trend towards smaller tribal areas where resources are greater (Tindale 1940), such as on the south coast of NSW, perhaps the Sandon Point burial can be seen as a marker of territory or rights of access to particular resources. § The McCauleys Beach midden is of moderate significance in a local context given sections of it are disturbed but the site is important to the local Koori community….the degree of disturbance to the midden precludes an assessment of high local significance (Navin and Officer 1993). Note: This comment predates the exposure of the burial. § The site on the Hannah land is of moderate to high archaeological significance in a local context, as relatively undisturbed deposits within lowland contexts, close to estuarine environments within the coastal margin of the Illawarra must be comparatively rare due to disturbance from industrial and urban development (Navin and Officer 1993). § The Aboriginal community (Illawarra LALC) advised that the buria l site was a “men’s business only” site. § An assessment of both direct and indirect impacts of development is required. This is particularly important given the presence of the burial at Sandon Point and the cultural heritage value this place holds for members of the local Aboriginal community. § A spokeswoman for SPATE said that the proposed housing development would have a detrimental impact on the local Aborigines’ cultural right to identify with their land and their spirituality. § The Illawarra LALC issued a le tter (February 2001) stating that Sandon Point has been declared an Aboriginal Place of State significance. This indicates that this area is recognised as a place of particular significance due to its Aboriginal sites and values. § Discussions with members of the Aboriginal community revealed that: - Sandon Point is significant as a Kuradji (Clever Man) is known to be buried there; - It is a burial place, with suggestions of more burials being located there; - The proposed development will impact on the cultural significance of the place, particularly in relation to the burials; and - It was a meeting place for men from the coast and over the mountains.
75 § The area considered by the local Aboriginal community to be significant included the area of DCP 94/17 (and consequently all the land subject to this Commission).
Nightingale (2001) concluded that an Aboriginal Place declaration may be warranted, but considered further consultation with the Aboriginal knowledge holders would be required.
The Illawarra Aboriginal Community
The six main Aboriginal organisations in the Illawarra which currently claim to have an interest in the Sandon Point area are: § Illawarra Local Aboriginal Land Council § Coomaditchie United Aboriginal Corporation § Korewal Elouera Jerrungurah Tribal Elders Aboriginal Corporation § Sandon Point Aboriginal Tent Embassy (SPATE) § Wadi Wadi Coomaditchie Aboriginal Corporation § Wodi Wodi Elders Corporation
Therin (2003) conducted a series of interviews with members of these organisations which are reproduced in his report. The main points raised in these interviews are summarised below under Oral Cultural Heritage.
Aboriginal Cultural Heritage
It was widely accepted by parties to the Commission that Aboriginal cultural significance can only be determined by the Aboriginal community.
The Illawarra LALC is particularly concerned that respect be given to the Sandon Point area due to: § The presence of the beach midden and Kuradji burial site; § The continuous cultural practices at Sandon Point including traditional uses of the site and the taking of the biological resources of the site by traditional owners; and § The traditional local stories specific to the place and its surroundings rising up to the escarpment and beyond, all part of the tapestry of cultural heritage.
Navin Officer (2001b) considers that: Cultural significance is a relative value based on variable references within social and scientific practice. The cultural significance of a place is therefore not a fixed assessment and may vary with changes in knowledge and social perceptions.
Aboriginal significance can be defined as the cultural values of a place held by and manifest within the local and wider contemporary Aboriginal community. Places of significance may be landscape features as well as archaeologically definable traces of past human activity. The significance of a place can be the result of several factors including continuity of tradition, occupation or action; historical association; custodianship or concern for the protection and maintenance of places; and the value of sites as tangible and meaningful links with the lifestyle and values of community ancestors. Aboriginal cultural significance may or may not parallel the archaeological significance of a site.
In addition, Navin Officer (2001b) noted that: § The Illawarra LALC indicated their primary interest is in the burial and midden site, though the LALC is waiting to see what emerges from the analysis of excavations in Stages 2 to 6 (Note: the Illawarra LALC now consider the tool-making site a particularly important site and that the whole of the land at Sandon Point has significance to the majority of the Aboriginal community).
76 § The Wodi Wodi Elders Corporation considers that overall it is unlikely anything of real significance would be found in the development area because the traditional Aboriginal activity in this area would have focused on the beach dunes and the Point itself. § The Korewal Eiouera Jerrungarugh Tribal Elders Aboriginal Corporation has provided statements which declare Sandon Point to be a very significant place of spir itual significance and part of their cultural heritage. They state that the Point was a meeting place where the chief of the Illawarra would meet the chief of the Gundangara People to trade and tell their stories. The Corporation made recommendations regarding the conduct of further excavations and the salvage of a larger number of artefacts. § The Sandon Point Aboriginal Tent Embassy has clearly indicated their opposition to the proposed development and their belief that the artefacts revealed by the archaeological excavations have high Aboriginal cultural significance. The archaeological deposits revealed in the testing program are considered to be an integral part of the overall Aboriginal cultural heritage significance of the Sandon Point area. This is based, at least in part, on the cultural significance of the burial site located adjacent to McCauleys Beach.
Navin Officer (2002) considers it is conceivable that Aboriginal cultural values associated with the site include an aesthetic response to the site’s cultural history, its landscape and setting.
Troy and Walsh (2003) in their preliminary report to Stockland stated that: Archaeological and social research to date indicates the area of Sandon Point is of cultural significance for Aboriginal people. There is some indication that Aboriginal people differ in their opinions about the significance of the area. Our research into the Aboriginal cultural heritage of the area is preliminary. However, it is clear that the cultural significance includes but is not limited to that which is observable in the physical environment in the form of artefacts, landforms or vegetation.
In the Aboriginal assessment report prepared for Council, Therin (2003) states that: The importance of Sandon Point as a meeting place is confirmed by Aboriginal oral history. As part of a submission to the Land and Environment Court in August 2001, Reuben Brown, Chairman of the Korewal Elouera Jerrungarugh Aboriginal Elders Corporation, recalled that Sandon Point was a “meeting place where the Chief of the Illawarra would meet the Chief of the Gundangarra People to trade and tell stories”. The reminiscences of Mrs Dollahan, a descendant of the Geraghty family who settled at Bulli in about 1826, provides general support for the statement of Reuben Brown. In the 1930s and 1940s she collated the memories of her family about local Aboriginal people. She wrote that in the late 1820s after Patrick Geraghty had settled at Bulli, members of the “Mountain Tribe” (possibly from the Southern Highlands) would stop at the farm for a feed of rice and brown sugar before travelling further south (see Organ 1990: 495). They would also stop for a meal on the return journey. It is likely they met with local Aboriginal people before proceeding with their trip.
Therin also considers that: The Aboriginal cultural significance of the study area cannot easily be summarised as the views of the community representatives interviewed as part of this report are widely divergent and in some cases conflicting. At the most basic level all representatives who had knowledge of the site, in particular Jim Davis, Allan Carriage, Rueben Brown, Basil Smith and Jeff Simpson, agree that the area was an important camping/meeting areas for Aboriginal people in the past as the site lies on the crossroad of two important travel routes, one up and down the coast and the other being the main track down the escarpment, the Bulli Pass. The general consensus among the Aboriginal community regarding the study area being the location of a significant camping/meeting place is sufficient to define the study area as having significant Aboriginal cultural significance. In addition, Allan Carriage, Reuben Brown and Jeff Simpson all believe that the site has further cultural and spiritual significance in addition to being a camping/meeting place. There is no consensus within the Illawarra Aboriginal community regarding the future development of parts of the study area.
77 The NPWS acknowledges that it is Aboriginal people who should determine the cultural significance of Aboriginal heritage. The NPWS has a strong commitment to working in partnership with Aboriginal people to manage and conserve Aboriginal cultural heritage. It recognises that Aboriginal cultural heritage includes both traditional and contemporary associations of Aboriginal people with the environment as well as physical sites.
Further, the NPWS recognises that diversity of views can exist within any community and agreement may not always be possible. If agreement cannot be reached within a community or between communities on a cultural heritage issue, achievement of the best possible conservation outcome should underpin decision making.
To ensure Aboriginal cultural issues are adequately addressed the NPWS recommends that: § The Aboriginal community groups be consulted early in the process in a comprehensive and meaningful way to identify locations and cultural values of Aboriginal objects and places of significance that may be affected by the proposal so that potential impacts can be avoided wherever possible. Consultation should also be used to identify whether there are culturally acceptable mitigative measures when impacts are considered to be unavoidable; § Options for conserving Aboriginal objects within development footprints be fully explored in discussion with the Aboriginal community as part of the DCP process; § Proposed impacts on Aboriginal objects be discussed with the Aboriginal community groups and only considered where there are no viable alternatives. The NPWS will require a clear demonstration that alternatives to site destruction have been fully explored at Sandon Point in considering any application for a consent under Section 90 of the NPW Act; § The process and timeframes for consultation and communication should be followed or renegotiated with the relevant parties if changes to the schedule are required; § Documentation be submitted by developers detailing outcomes of consultation with Aboriginal community groups, including their views and their recommendations regarding areas of high cultural significance, impacts on significance, possible mitigation strategies and other protection strategies. Consultation with the Aboriginal community groups must be undertaken to determine a strategy for appropriate interpretation of the Aboriginal cultural significance of the site. Aboriginal community groups should approve the final interpretation strategy which might include a food and fibre trail, interpretive signage and a keeping place.
Fullager (the archaeologist who conducted the burial excavation) considers the burial is the most significant archaeological feature as it was not disturbed and was of a special kind, being positioned carefully and containing grave goods which indicates some kind of ritual.
Mr Kennedy (SPATE) considers that since the Navin Officer reports of 1992 and 1993 the significance of the land has changed dramatically as a result of the discovery of the Aboriginal skeleton uncovered in the dunes at McCauleys Beach in 1998. The whole site now needs to be re- examined to determine just how big the burial site is , and what other sites of Aboriginal heritage significance may exist or have existed in the area before non indigenous occupation.
All groups have a common concern to protect the nearby burial and midden site, and most believe the artefacts retrieved during the test excavation programs are further evidence that the area had once been a focal point of occupation by their Aboriginal ancestors. They also referred to their concerns for the environment overall and sought to maintain a natural or wildlife corridor (one group suggesting it be centred along Tramway Creek) between the coast and the escarpment. Furthermore, the Illawarra LALC has adopted a motion which declares the lands at Sandon Point are of State significance. There is adamant opposition from many in the local Aboriginal community to any residential development on the Sandon Point land.
78 Ms Robinson points out that the Therin (2003) report acknowledges the need for the cultural/spiritual connection to be considered equally as important as archaeological findings. Moreover, Aboriginal oral history reveals that Sandon Point has “huge significance” to Aboriginal people and that: § The Cultural Significance of the Aboriginal Heritage of the Site has not been resolved. § There maybe conflicting and/or co-existing values identified in the assessment of cultural significance. § The assessment of significance by non-Aboriginal heritage professiona ls may differ from values and levels of significance placed on the site by Aboriginal people. § There may be differences within the Aboriginal community about the site’s cultural significance. § Information regarding the cultural significance of the site is limited. It is common for traditional knowledge of significant areas not to be disclosed outside of the Aboriginal community. § Previous assessments of cultural significance have not explored the regional and State-wide context of the site. § Previous archaeology based assessments have not considered the disturbed areas as having cultural significance. § Certain areas have already been identified as having high archaeological significance. These areas need to be protected, preserved and managed. § There is a strong need to protect, preserve and manage Aboriginal heritage for the benefit of current and future generations. Aboriginal heritage includes areas, objects and burials, or other evidence of the past Aboriginal uses of the area that have cultural significance. § The cultural significance of the Aboriginal heritage at Sandon Point could be better promoted and enhanced on site. § There needs to be recognition that some areas of Sandon Point have been zoned for residential purposes, there are development pressures on the land, and without a suitable framework there is likely to be increased damage to areas/items of Aboriginal heritage and cultural significance. § There is insufficient information about the Aboriginal archaeological heritage on the site. § Aboriginal people have an essential role in identifying the social and spiritual significance of the site. § The management and protection of archaeological artefacts is required.
Oral Cultural Heritage
Therin (2003) reports verified conversations with a number of Aboriginal people concerning their knowledge and recollections of the Aboriginal heritage of the Sandon Point area. These are recorded in Therin (2003) but are incomplete as not all records have been verified by the people concerned. Aboriginal heritage matters raised in the verified conversations include:
Geoff Simpson – § The spoil pile on the Hannah land should be removed. § Woodlands Creek should be redirected to its original course . § Camping grounds were on high ground among trees to the north (of Hewitts Creek).
Mr Simpson in other oral evidence referred to Bulli Man looking up to see Appin Man on the escarpment, and to the ongoing meetings of these two Aborigines over time.
Reuben Brown – § Sandon Point was a meeting place for Aboriginal people . § Local Aborigines travelled to the top of the escarpment to meet other Aborigines and to camp. § Houses are now located on the Aboriginal camping ground to the south of Tramway Creek.
79 § Flying foxes and possums were caught for food in the [Turpentine] forest area. § Fruit, wild berries and medicines were also gathered on the north side of Tramway Creek through to Hewitts Creek. § Aborigines did not camp on Cookson’s land. § All areas have the same significance whether for camping, hunting, gathering, meeting, tool- making and buria l. § Sandon Point was named Ngarrabaan (Ngurumbaan) meaning the past/present/future because it was a meeting place. § Woodlands Creek should not be redirected to Tramway Creek because the land would be disturbed. § No development should occur as all the land is significant. § The area is still significant because of all the activities which occurred in the past (on the land). § Further approved archaeological work is supported so additional understanding of Aboriginal use of the area is gained.
Allan Carriage – § The area is a big dish from the mountains to the sea and is very significant spiritually to Aboriginal people . § There is a woman’s area in the vicinity of Cookson’s land, up on the side of the hill. § Sandon Point is very spiritual. § Sandon Point was a meeting and trading place for about 4 tribes. § Young buck men camped near the tool site. § Aboriginal people still have their connection with the spirit of the earth, and their burial grounds. § Aborigines camped on both sides of the dish. § Sandon Point was a lookout Point. § All the area was a big meeting ground. § Different leaves were used to make different coloured smoke. § The sea and creeks were hunting areas for lobster, abalone, sea urchins and fish. § The area was known for its medicines. § Food was gathered from the area. § Artefacts will be found down the side of the crest of the hill. § The spiritual and cultural associations of the land will never go away. § Agrees with directing Woodlands Creek to its original path. § Does not support any residential development at Sandon Point. § Supports proper archaeological studies.
Joyce Donovan – § Believes Sandon Point is not a place for woman because of the burial of a “clever fella ”. § Traditional foods came from the sea. § Aboriginal people would have camped at Sandon Point. § There may have been initiations or bora grounds in the area. § Locations of natural water were usually considered birthing places. § A birthing place would not have been close to the burial site of the “clever fella ”. § The burial site of the “clever fella ” is a special men’s area because of the bag around his neck. § Supports further archaeological studies of the area. § Previous groups who lived in the area should be honoured. § If there is ochre in an area that means the area is relevant to men’s business.
80 Specific areas referred to in his talks with these members of the Aboriginal community were marked in Therin (2003) on an aerial photograph of Sandon Point (see Figure 6). The numbers refer to the following past uses of the land as related to Therin by the Aborigines he intervie wed:
1. Sandon Point – Middens 10. Burials and Midden 2. Tool Making Site 11. Camp Site 3. Camp Site 12. Cultural Centre Site 4. Turpentine Forest – Food 13. Artefacts 5. Burial Site/Women’s Area 14. Artefacts/Women’s Area/Camp Site 6. Original Topsoil (under fill) 15. Burials 7. Camp Site 16. Artefacts 8,9. Food Resources 17. Burials (possible)
Figure 6: Traditional Aboriginal Land Uses
81 Reuben Brown’s Statement of Significance (to the Land and Environment Court – Navin Officer 2001b) includes the following text: The Bulli Sandon Point area was and still is a very significant place of the area. Sandon Point was the meeting place where the chief of the Illawarra would meet the chief of the Gundangara People to trade and tell their stories.
Sandon Point is a very significant area to me and my people as we are the descendants of the traditional people the Elouera = Illara = Illowrie = tribe. Sandon Point is very important to us and there was a lot of movement at the area meeting = camping = toolmaking = story telling, abundance of seafood = bush tucker = bush medicines = freshwater. It is of spiritual significance and part of our cultural heritage. Every Aboriginal that occupied these lands used these tracks to move throughout their territory and meet with our people. They knew every geographic feature and precise boundaries between their lands. Stories have been passed down orally. This land is not unsung land, it is of ancient and sacred significance. It is our history as much as any other’s history.
Traditional owners of the land strongly argue that they are the ones who should determine the Aboriginal heritage significance of the land, and of any artefacts found on the land.
Aboriginal Archaeological Heritage
Navin Officer undertook Aborigina l archaeological assessment of Stages 1 to 6 at Sandon Point. For the Stage 1 area Navin Officer (2001a) concluded the archaeological evidence indicates there is no surviving archaeological significance. For the Stages 2 to 6 area Navin Officer (2001b) considered there are two major criteria applicable to assessing scientific or archaeological significance: 1. The potential of a place to provide information which is of value in scientific analysis and the resolution of potential research questions. Sites may fall into this category because they contain undisturbed artefactual material, occur within a context which enables the testing of certain propositions, are very old or contain significant time depth, conta in large artefactual assemblages or material diversity, have unusual characteristics, are of good preservation, or are a constituent of a larger significant structure such as a site complex. 2. The representatives of a place. Representativeness is a measure of the degree to which a place is characteristic of other places of its type, content, context or location. Under this criteria a place may be significant because it is very rare or because it provides a characteristic example or reference.
The investigations report for the Stage 2 to 6 area concluded that: The Sandon Point site can be described as possessing a limited degree of scientific significance within a local and regional context with low to medium level research potential for understanding regional Aboriginal systems of stone artefact reduction, transport, curation and discard. This assessment is based on the fact that little is known of the manufacturing strategies employed by Aboriginal people exploiting the Wollongong coastline and hinterland, and because the site has some potential to provide a representative stone artefact assemblage which is reasonably intact despite a high degree of disturbance due to ploughing and burning which has significantly reduced the scientific value of the site.
Points made by Therin (2003) concerning Aboriginal archaeological assessment include: § The primary focus of academic research in Australia is the interaction of Aboriginal people and the environment in which they lived; § The basis for consultant assessment of archaeological significance is generally the identification and mitigation of legislative requirements; § The level of information required to critique archaeological assessment reports is not easily accessible;
82 § The NPWS is commissioning regional studies aimed at identifying the current status of Aboriginal archaeology in a region and implementing research agendas for further relevant archaeological assessment; § The amount of time and money required to undertake a thorough review of the archaeology of a region is prohibitive for consultant archaeologists; § Archaeologists have used significance criteria that do not require regional comparative analysis, namely site disturbance and artefact attribute analysis; § The level of information presently available for Sandon Point precludes the identification of significance at this stage, except for the area defined as the McCauleys Beach midden which should be rated of high archaeological significance at a regional level.
The density of artefacts across a site does not necessarily indicate the significance or the representativeness of the site according to Therin (2003). Differing artefact densities represent different aspects of site use. Activities such as the manufacture of stone tools (knapping) can result in the creation of large numbers of artefacts in a relatively short period and does not necessarily indicate the degree to which a site was used or the significance of the site. Alternatively, areas containing low density artefact scatters may indicate a concentrated or repeated use of an area by Aboriginal people as each artefact comprising the site may have been deposited as an individual discard event. A site containing 100 artefacts may represent several hundred years of the repeated use of a site, whereas a site containing several thousand artefacts may only represent a brief use of the site for knapping. Therin recognises that disturbance does to some degree reduce the archaeological significance of an Aboriginal site, but a disturbed site may still be the best preserved example in the area.
Agricultural, pastoral and/or industrial use of the land in the Sandon Point area has occurred since about 1815. According to Stockland (McIntyre-Tamwoy, 2003): The effects of these land uses on Aboriginal archaeological sites are an important factor in the survivability of the physical remains of the sites. Clearly all activities that modified the natural ground surface will have reduced the likelihood of finding intact archaeological remains. Clearing of trees will have removed any scarred or carved trees and removal of stumps will also have disturbed surface evidence of middens and campsites. More significant removal of soil will have in most cases removed all physical evidence.
Section 90 – Consent to Destroy
The NPWS can issue a Section 90 Consent to Destroy an Aboriginal site under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NPW Act). The relevant procedures must be followed including consideration of alternatives. Stockland were granted Section 90 Consents to Destroy in respect of Aboriginal sites in the Stages 1 to 6 area. Spoil from those areas was stockpiled on Stage 7 and the AIR site. Relics contained in the soil on or in the vicinity of the Stage 7 area have been destroyed or are in the process of being destroyed according to Stockland.
Furthermore, artefacts removed from the land as part of the salvage operation required by a condition of the Section 90 Consent to Destroy are being used to prepare a report, also required by the consent. On completion of the report the artefacts would be delivered to the Australian Museum as required by the consent.
Many in the local Aboriginal community are particularly concerned as to the fate of relics contained in soil from the tool-making site on Stages 1 to 6. They point out that some of the soil was placed on or in the vicinity of Stage 7 and some on the AIR site, all of which could contain relics. The Aboriginal community in the main consider these relics are significant to their culture and should be recovered.
83 Further Aboriginal Heritage Studies
The large majority of parties who commented on Aboriginal heritage issues recognised there needed to be additional investigation and assessment of Aboriginal archaeological and cultural heritage at Sandon Point. The Commission supported further investigation and assessment from an early stage and DIPNR(PlanningNSW) offered to co-ordinate the initial planning for further study. Constructive comment from a number of parties has been incorporated into the process to date, during which a draft brief for the scope of further investigation and assessment has been prepared (see Appendix 6). Comments on the draft brief are currently being sought from the broad Aboriginal community and other interested parties.
The NPWS recommends in relation to further archaeological assessment that: § The Therin (2003) report be finalised and the report findings applied to inform the draft DCP. § The NPWS be consulted and provided the opportunity to comment once the Therin report is finalised and the draft DCP has been amended. § Further testing is not required in areas identified for conservation and where no further impacts are envisaged. § Archaeological investigation can, however, be used to identify representative conservation areas, assist in the planning process through identification of heritage constraints, and to gather information about Aboriginal occupation and use of the area prior to the finalisation of the Master Plan/DCP. § All areas that may be impacted through development, including riparian drainage, pathways and other infrastructure be included in further archaeological investigations.
Based on the current understanding of artefact distribution over the study area Therin (2003) considers it is reasonable to predict that Aboriginal artefacts are likely to occur at differing densities over the entire study area. In fact Aboriginal objects have been found from the ocean to the Illawarra railway reserve on the southern side of Tramway Creek. Therin recommends additional sub-surface in vestigation prior to the approval of any further development applications, and the results be used to: § Determine the cultural and scientific significance of the area as a whole; § The suitability of areas for further conservation; and § Requirements for additional archaeological work in areas determined as suitable for residential development.
Therin also recommends: § A research methodology be devised for future archaeological sub-surface investigation over the study area. The research methodology should address standard archaeological research questions as well as addressing the need to further expand the current archaeological knowledge regarding the Aboriginal use of the area. The methodology should address the issues and questions that are of relevance to the Illawarra Aboriginal community and should be prepared in close consultation with the Illawarra Aboriginal community. § A representative sample of the Aboriginal heritage present over the study area be conserved. Conservation should be based upon the results of current and future sub-surface investigation as well as the location of the identified Aboriginal sites. The selection of areas for conservation should be based on conserving a representative sample of the Aboriginal heritage identified or potentially present over the site. Conservation should be formalised by Council through appropriate zoning or through the definition of the area to be conserved as an Aboriginal Place. § All Aboriginal groups represented within the Wollongong LGA be consulted in regard to all development or sub-surface disturbance proposed for the study area. All reasonable concerns or requests made by the Aboriginal groups should be seriously considered as part of the consultation process.
84 § An anthropologist be engaged to undertake an anthropological study of the history and genealogy of the Aboriginal people of the Illawarra particularly those who claim association with the study area. The appointment of the anthropologist should occur prior to the approval of further development applications on the study area.
According to Therin the excavation and the analysis of the evacuated artefactual material that has occurred to date can be considered to be the minimum of what has been required to assess areas of the study area currently subjected to development and is significantly less than similar excavations in other parts of NSW, particularly the Sydney Basin and the Hunter Valley. This trend of extremely small excavations and limited analysis of the material excavated is a general trend within the Illawarra which has resulted in a relatively basic understanding of the Aboriginal occupation and use of the area.
Therin supports further systematic investigation of the study area which will serve two main purposes: 1. To define the extent of the physical Aboriginal heritage of the study area beyond that identified by previous archaeological sub-surface investigations. This will facilitate: § The ability to determine the impact of future proposed development on the physical Aboriginal heritage of the study area as a whole. § The identification of suitable and representative areas of the study area for conservation. 2. To establish the nature of the Aboriginal use of the study area. This will facilitate: § The ability to make an informed decision regarding the Aboriginal heritage significance of the study area as a whole. § Provide the Illawarra Aboriginal community, archaeologists and the general public with information regarding the Aboriginal use of the study area, facilitating a less emotional and more informed approach to management of the Aboriginal heritage of the study area.
The Aboriginal community as well as many residents requested that an inclusive approach be adopted with the Aboriginal community. This is to ensure all Aboriginal people have the opportunity to participate in determining the scope of further Aboriginal heritage studies as well as the development of any Aboriginal Cultural Centre and environmental restoration projects (see Conservation of Aboriginal Heritage).
In large part agreement has been reached between government agencies, Council and Stockland. However, there remains some dispute as to the need for additional investigation on the AIR site. Stockland argues that the AIR site has been extensively disturbed and the topsoil removed as has been shown by geotechnical investigations and aerial photographs from earlier periods. Consequently , the AIR site does not have subsurface integrity which is strongly related to the likelihood of Aboriginal sites surviving below the current fill. As such it has a low potential to retain Aboriginal relics.
Regional Aboriginal Heritage Investigation
Stockland’s Aboriginal heritage consultant (McIntyre-Tamwoy) suggested a regional research and investigation proposal to address Aboriginal archaeological and cultural heritage issues. The proposal was developed from ideas and suggestions of Aboriginal people and colleagues. It covered the Illawarra generally and included the establishment of a Co-operative Centre for Research, an Illawarra Heritage Trust, a survey and investigation program on public and private lands, and a local studies community research facility. Mr L and Mrs M Davis also recommended a regional Aboriginal heritage study in a submission to the Commission.
85 Planning for Aboriginal Heritage Assessment
At the request of the Commission, Council and DIPNR(PlanningNSW) undertook to co-ordinate the process for further investigations of Aboriginal heritage at Sandon Point. Council funded the preparation of a preliminary draft scoping document. Additional information, particularly relating to the Aboriginal cultural significance of the area is required so that any future development and management of the land recognises and responds to the cultural significance of the site. Involvement of the Aboriginal community is a crucial element of the investigation. Council and DIPNR(PlanningNSW) indicated that the following stages are proposed: § A draft scope is currently being finalised, taking into account comments received from Council, DIPNR(PlanningNSW) and NPWS. This scoping report will inform the future preparation of a brief for the project. It is important to note that the draft scope will be discussed with the Aboriginal community to ensure that it addresses issues and answers questions that are relevant to that community. § The project will be managed by a steering committee that will include representatives from Wollongong City Council, DIPNR(PlanningNSW), NPWS, the Aboriginal Community and other stakeholders, including la ndowners. DIPNR(PlanningNSW) is prepared to chair this committee. Discussions are currently underway with Sharralyn Robinson, Council’s Aboriginal Liaison Officer, and the National Parks and Wildlife Service on how best to ensure that the various Aboriginal groups are given an opportunity to be represented on the committee. § The steering committee will be responsible for selecting and managing a consultant to undertake the study. It is expected that this will be an ‘open tender’ process. A detailed brief for the work will be prepared by the committee, in consultation with the Aboriginal community. Consultants, as part of their expressions of interest in tendering for the work, will be expected to describe the methodology they will use to undertake the brief.
Further discussion with the Aboriginal community and other parties is proposed by DIPNR(PlanningNSW) to ensure the scope of the brief is agreed. This may require amendments to the scoping document already prepared (Appendix 6) according to DIPNR(Pla nningNSW).
Ms M Davis suggested that to meaningfully involve the Aboriginal community, a public Aboriginal community forum be conducted. In this way a broad overview of the Aboriginal community’s concerns could be obtained to guide the preparation for further Aboriginal heritage investigation and assessment at Sandon Point.
Mr Reyburn provided detailed comment on development of the scope for further Aboriginal heritage investigation at Sandon Point. He recommended the draft scope include culturally appropriate means to provide information, appointment of an Aboriginal cultural heritage consultant, consideration of engaging both a man and woman Koori liaison officer, provision of a professional facilitator, appropriate consideration of gender matters, and protection of Koori values and rights. Any steering committee formed should have Koori representatives, an agreed dispute resolution process, and result in a consultant(s) acceptable to Koori stakeholders.
He also submitted a recent publication titled Development and Indigenous Land: A Human Rights Approach. This document sets out principles concerning the relationship between traditional owners and custodians and developers, which are based on the human rights of self determination and development, equality and non-discrimination, and protection and maintenance of culture. Mr Reyburn also noted that the Attorney-General’s Department (Legal Assistance Branch) has established a Native Title Practitioners Panel which includes such practitioners as anthropologists, archaeologists and mediators.
86 Draft Development Control Plan
Council notes in its draft DCP – Environment and Planning Context that: § The Therin report (which is still to be finalised) has provided information which highlights the significance of the site as a camping and meeting place at the intersection of the main north- south and east-west tracks. § It does not support examination of genealogies to determine who is most qualified to speak for the area but the ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and Sites) Cultural Diversity Code which allows any person who has an association with the site to express their values in an assessment of the cultural significance of the site.
The draft DCP includes a summary of what is known about Aboriginal heritage on the site largely derived from the Therin report. Further investigations are supported in line with Therin’s middle ground option, namely: A cohesive and focused research design and methodology for sub-surface testing under a Section 87 Preliminary Research Permit (PRP) be formulated for the entire study area and undertaken prior to any further development of the study area. The research and methodology be implemented on a development by development basis.
Furthermore, that in the process of formulating a Plan of Management and Voluntary Conservation Agreement for the open space portions of the site, a Conservation Strategy and Interpretive Plan be developed in consultation with the Aboriginal community.
Council’s draft DCP sets out general objectives and principles to ensure the appropriate protection of Aboriginal heritage and cultural significance. The draft DCP also refers to the preferred methodology for further archaeological investigations, to finalisation of the Therin report, and recommends future actions derived from the Therin report.
Contemporary Aboriginal Heritage Issues
Therin (2003) recommends that a sample of the Aboriginal heritage located over the study area be conserved and protected from all future development. A representative sample should include areas of the site that are reflective of the various Aboriginal uses of the study area. The identification of these areas should acknowledge that variations in artefact density and composition represent different uses of the area by Aboriginal people and that the scientific and cultural significance of an area is not necessarily determined by the density of artefacts present or the level of disturbance.
Moreover, Therin considers that at present two areas suitable for conservation in the study area can be identified. The area identified by Navin Officer (1993), which incorporates the entire length of the coastal dune south of the mouth of Tramway Creek and a portion of the coastal area immediately behind the dune, should be conserved and protected from all future development. The coastal dune contains a substantial identified midden deposit, (Fullagar and Head 1990, Fullagar and Donlon 1998 and Navin Officer 1993), is the location of at least one Aboriginal burial which has been removed and reburied within the area, and has a high potential to contain further burials. The area immediately behind the dune contains an identified sub-surface artefact scatter (Navin Officer 1993). This general location has high archaeological and Aboriginal cultural significance. This area was the subject of an investigation into the suitability of the area to be defined as an Aboriginal Place (Nightingale 2001).
The other site is the area identified by Navin Officer (1993), which is immediately in front of the soil stockpile on the Hannah land and is also suitable for conservation. Based upon historical and aerial photographs, the area appears to be relatively undisturbed and contains an identified sub-surface Aboriginal artefact scatter. The le vel of excavation and analysis undertaken by Navin Officer as part of the 1993 excavations makes it difficult to fully determine the nature of the artefact deposit present over this area at present. Given that there are no other identified artefact scatters in this part of the
87 area, conservation of this area would be a good start to the process of conserving a representative sample of the Aboriginal heritage of the study area.
Therin considers identification of further conservation areas is not possible at this stage due to the general lack of information regarding the nature and extent of the Aboriginal heritage of the study area. The further sub-surface investigations proposed in the study area will provide the necessary information regarding the nature and extent of the Aboriginal heritage and allow the identification of other areas containing artefact deposits that could be considered to be representative of the Aboriginal uses of the area. In this regard, it is noted that the Land and Environment Court has stated that “the critical point is the cultural significance of a site, established by the existence of consistent stories associated with the site and its archaeological evidence”.
In August 2002, the National Trust declared Sandon Point to be a Significant Place due in part to the threat to Aboriginal sites. The community also strongly supports the protection of Aboriginal heritage at Sandon Point, variously calling for: § Completion of the Aboriginal Place report; § Recognition of Aboriginal sacred sites; § Adequate consultation with the Aboriginal community; § Recognition that landmarks and habitat constitute part of the Aboriginal heritage landscape; § Preservation of landmarks and habitat; § Establishment of a reconciliation park; and § Compensation for destruction of Aboriginal heritage.
Aboriginal sites management plans will be necessary for sites identified for conservation. Educating people about the importance of these places is also vital for their long-term protection.
Voluntary Conservation Agreement
A Voluntary Conservation Agreement is proposed for land in the vicinity of the burial and midden site, nearby wetland areas, and other important archaeological deposits and riparian areas. Agreements between the Aboriginal community, landowners inclu ding Council, Stockland as well as the NPWS are yet to be finalised. The NPWS stated it does not have a statutory basis on which to buy back land for the Aboriginal community to own and protect.
Cultural Interpretive Resource Centre
Stockland considers there is an opportunity to develop a Cultural Interpretive Resource Centre on the land. It could incorporate a Keeping Place for Aboriginal relics. Creation of educational multimedia software documenting local indigenous heritage is also suggested by Stockland. However, Stockland pointed out that it is important for the Aboriginal community to have ownership of the proposals and to have developed them.
Food and Fibre Trail
The Aboriginal community has broadly welcomed the creation of a food and fibre trail to commemorate indigenous heritage in the area and the traditional reliance of the indigenous people on various plant species for nutrition and existence. Stockland proposes that the local community be involved in planting and maintaining the trail.
88 Commission’s Comments
The Commission has extensive evidence before it in relation to Aboriginal archaeological and cultural heritage at Sandon Point, notwithstanding that further investigative work is required. The evidence to the Commission leaves no doubt that the Sandon Point area is highly significant for the majority of the local contemporary Aboriginal community. Reinforcing this significance is the fact that the Sandon Point locality is one of the few remaining areas in the Illawarra region whic h contains important Aboriginal heritage in a relatively natural setting. The extensive submissions and the extended contact the Commission had with the Aboriginal community has provided an informed basis for the Commission to address Aboriginal heritage.
The stories contained in the oral and written submissions to the Commission from the local Aboriginal community in regard to the land at Sandon Point are generally consistent and supported by archaeological evidence, but there are discrepancies. The Aboriginal community will need to resolve these issues which concern the location of burial places relative to women’s sites and whether artefacts, other than scattered artefacts, would be found at or in the vicinity of a women’s site. However, these matters are not for the Commission to determine. They have not influenced the Commission’s findings or recommendations to the detriment of any party to the Commission.
The late Uncle Guboo (Ted Thomas), an Aboriginal elder who was highly respected by many in the Aboriginal and non indigenous community, stated there were to be no houses on the land. However, it is unclear as to the extent of the land to which he was referring. His authority is also disputed by some in the Aboriginal community.
Sandon Point was an important meeting place for Aborigines and embodies timelessness. The Aborigines’ longstanding and intimate relationship with the land ensures that Sandon Point is significant to them. Oral and written testimony before the Commission is irrefutable in this regard. Nearly all Aborigines who tendered evidence to the Commission do not want residential development to occur on any of the land as it has all been an integral part of their traditional life and culture over thousands of years.
Many members in the Aboriginal community also consider the areas of land at Sandon Point within the CoI area to which artefacts have been moved with the spoil from the approved development of Stages 1 to 6 are now more significant, notwithstanding that the NPWS had issued Consents to Destroy for the artefacts. These areas should not be developed for residential purposes according to the Aboriginal community as in Aboriginal culture, if people live on this land, they could become sick due to the presence of the artefacts.
Evidence of past uses of specific areas within the CoI area by Aborigines have given these places additional significance. The burial site uncovered in 1998 indicated that in-situ and highly significant archaeological remains do survive in the area. This has changed many Aborigines’ views of the significance of a wider area. Further archaeological study is consequently necessary in other areas to ascertain whether additional important Aboriginal archaeological evidence exists on the site.
Because of the importance of Aboriginal heritage issues at Sandon Point, Council urged the Commission to resolve the Aboriginal heritage issues which had not been decided as a primary objective. In particular, that the Commission satisfy itself of the Aboriginal heritage significance of the site prior to considering other matters. The Commission seriously considered Council’s recommendations but the extended delays to completing the current Therin Aboriginal heritage study and the need for further Aboriginal archaeological and cultural assessment within the CoI area meant Council’s wish could not reasonably be adopted.
89 The archaeological (scientific) significance of the Sandon Point area cannot be finally determined at this stage as there has been insufficient archaeological investigation. The scientific significance of the Aboriginal heritage within the Sandon Point area must also be established in relation to the regional and local context. Nevertheless, it is widely acknowledged that the McCauleys Beach midden site is of high archaeological (scientific) and cultural significance and should be conserved. Conservation of an area adjacent to the spoil pile on the Hannah land and the remaining area of the tool-making site are also suggested. Further areas may also warrant conservation for their archaeological (scientific) and cultural significance.
The Aboriginal cultural significance of the Sandon Point area differs between the groups in the Illawarra Aboriginal community. Some members believe the whole area is of considerable cultural significance. All groups/individuals whose evidence is before the Commission believe that Sandon Point was an important camping and meeting place. The story of Bulli Man and Appin Man reinforces its importance and there are references to men’s places and women’s places. The Turpentine forest, its surrounds and the wetlands were hunting and gathering grounds. The nearby ocean and rock platforms were important for fishing, as were the creeks and lagoons.
Development of a Voluntary Conservation Agreement, a Food and Fibre Trail, and a Cultural Interpretive Resource Centre with the involvement of the Aboriginal community from the outset is supported by the Commission. These proposals should be included in the overall Plan of Management for Sandon Point.
Tensions have arisen between certain parties and consequently it has been and remains difficult to progress the above concepts despite the ongoing effort of parties. In these circumstances the Commission considers that DIPNR should continue to have a co-ordinating role , and recommends accordingly.
The Commission has reviewed the claims and counter claims reported in relation to Hiscock and Navin Officer. It is unhelpful for the Commission to comment on their respective claims. The Commission has taken into account the information provided by both parties in assessing Aboriginal heritage at Sandon Point. It has found aspects of that information beneficial in understanding Aboriginal heritage issues.
A number of submissions to the Commission, but especially those from the Aboriginal community sought to broaden the Commission’s interest in local and regional Aboriginal heritage as well as other Aboriginal issues. Further investigation of regional Aboriginal heritage was also supported by the NPWS and Stockland. The NPWS stated it is commencing a program of regional studies in NSW. Stockland submitted an outline for regional Aboriginal heritage studies. However, despite the need for a comprehensive regional Aboriginal cultural heritage program, one has not been commenced in the Illawarra to the Commission’s knowledge, and the Commission must assess the Aboriginal heritage issues at Sandon Point in the absence of any comprehensive regional study.
Information before the Commission clearly indicated the many wide ranging social and cultural issues confronting the local Aboriginal community outside of Sandon Point. However, the Commission was not directed by the Minister to inquire into these broader issues, but the matters relevant to the subject lands at Sandon Point.
Aboriginal heritage values of the land at Sandon Point are an important matter for the Commission to consider. They include both Aboriginal archaeological and cultural heritage. Considerations of these values cannot be confined to the CoI area and therefore must be considered in the context of the wider area with Sandon Point the focus, as required by the Commission’s terms of reference. Similarly, the Commission is not limited to considering only the requirements of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 which, while important in assessing Aboriginal heritage, are directed more to archaeological values than overall Aboriginal heritage values as pointed out in submissions.
90 The Commission considers that as a minimum, areas of the land which have special Aboriginal heritage significance need to be conserved and protected as well as the areas with high ecological and visual conservation values. Visual context is also an important factor in maintaining Aboriginal heritage values of the more significant Aboriginal sites in the foreshore and backdune areas within the CoI area. The proposed apartment buildings along the eastern edge of the Cookson Plibrico site and the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek would dominate these areas. However, much of the western section of the CoI area has been significantly disturbed by previous agricultural, extractive and industrial uses. The Commission’s terms of reference require it to have regard to all relevant values and constraints of the land, one of which is its development potential. In all these circumstances the Commission is not persuaded that appropriate residential development should be excluded from all of the land. It is generally the more disturbed land that the Commission considers suitable for urban development.
There remains a level of dispute as to the areas in which further archaeological study is desirable to resolve Aboriginal heritage issues at Sandon Point. The main area in dispute is the AIR site between Hewitts Creek and Woodlands Creek. Stockland contends that as this area is highly disturbed and geotechnical investigations have indicated that the topsoil has been removed, there is little likelihood of any Aboriginal sites remaining intact. The Aboriginal community, Council, and the NPWS are of the view that the AIR site needs further investigation. The balance of scientific evidence favours Stockland’s position that there is little likelihood of Aboriginal sites or artefacts being located on the AIR site. However, any decisions to consider Aboriginal heritage in this way as the basis for further work, given the history of Aboriginal heritage investigations and subsequent outcomes at Sandon Point, is unlikely to be generally accepted or even desirable . The Commission finds there is a strong contemporary social claim for a greater degree of certainty than may otherwise have been the case. In these circumstances the Commission supports further Aboriginal heritage investigation to include the AIR site as recommended by Council, the NPWS and the Aboriginal community. The Commission also strongly supports the Aboriginal community being meaningfully consulted in the selection of an archaeologist(s) to undertake the further work recommended at Sandon Point.
Stockland, as the principal landowner and the developer, needs to continue consultation with the local Aboriginal community to the greatest extent reasonable. Adopting a position before consultation, such as the need or not for further Aboriginal archaeologic al investigation on the AIR site, is unlikely to be helpful in developing the necessary trust and co-operation. The Commission has noted Stockland’s meeting with the Sydney Regional Council of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders Commission (ATSIC) in April 2003, and the ongoing involvement of ATSIC Councillor Mary Davies to assist in resolving issues between Stockland and the Illawarra Aboriginal community. Wide ranging consultation as Stockland has undertaken previously and again intends with the aid of a facilitator, is encouraged by the Commission in working to achieve an outcome with general acceptance. The Commission also considers that ongoing consultation between the local Aboriginal community and Stockland is essential. But it may need to occur at a number of levels and be inclusive rather than selective for substantial local Aboriginal acceptance of the outcomes. The Commission supports the concept of partnership in relation to proposals to improve understanding as well as protecting the significant Aboriginal heritage and ecological values at Sandon Point.
The level of previous Aboriginal archaeological and cultural assessment in the Sandon Point locality is seen by many, at least in a broad social sense, as less than adequate. The Commission acknowledges that the requirements of the NPWS have been addressed as pointed out by Stockland. However, the Commission is not persuaded that the focus of Aboriginal heritage assessment has appropriately addressed Aboriginal cultural heritage or even Aboriginal archaeological heritage (other than that required by the NPWS) in the Sandon Point area. The Commission talked with individual Aborigines and groups within the Illawarra Aboriginal community to assist it in understanding the significance of the land at Sandon Point to Aboriginal people. These meetings have reinforced the information placed on the public record and pointed out during site inspections as part of the Commission processes, but did not add any relevant new information.
91 The Commission recognises that an extended time would be needed to meaningfully undertake wide ranging consultation with the Aboriginal community. However, it also notes that both the draft Aboriginal Place Report (June 2001) and the draft Therin Report (February 2003, commenced November 2001) have not been completed due to an inability to finalise a number of consultations/inputs from the Aboriginal community. This has resulted in significant criticism of the parties involved. However, much of the criticism of the relevant agencies and authors of the above draft reports is, in the Commission’s view, ill-informed based on evidence before the Commission. The NPWS remains open to consultation regarding the Aboriginal Place report and timely involvement of the relevant parties. Therin is still seeking to complete his draft report with input from the local Aboriginal community. Clearly, consultation and involvement must be a two-way process.
A point of agreement between parties is the need for further investigation of Aboriginal heritage at Sandon Point. This was evident from the first session of the Commission and it instigated preparation of a preliminary draft scope to assist in developing the brief for further archaeological and cultural heritage investigation. The Aboriginal community and other parties with a genuine interest were encouraged to participate. Council provided funding and DIPNR has had an initial co-ordinating role. Constructive input from parties, including participation of the Aboriginal community is resulting in meaningful progress towards developing a final scope before preparation of the brief for further Aboriginal heritage study at Sandon Point. The Commission strongly recommends further Aboriginal heritage investigation on the CoI area at Sandon Point to assist in clarifying the extent and depth of Aboriginal significance.
The Aboriginal community has requested that archaeologists acceptable to the Aboriginal community be appointed to undertake any further Aboriginal archaeological work. The Commission supports the involvement of the Aboriginal community in further archaeological and cultural heritage assessment of the Sandon Point lands and recommends accordingly, including provision of expenses for the Aboriginal community to appoint an independent adviser.
At the time the public sessions of the Commission concluded a preliminary scoping document was still being developed by Council and DIPNR(PlanningNSW) in consultation with the NPWS. DIPNR(PlanningNSW) stated it intended to consult and involve the Aboriginal community and other interested parties in preparing the final scoping document. This may mean that the present scoping document (Appendix 6) requires substantial review. The Commission encourages the meaningful and comprehensive involvement of these parties throughout the process of developing the procedures as well as undertaking and reporting further Aboriginal heritage assessment at Sandon Point. It recommends that finalisation of the scoping document, which is a starting point for development of the brief for further Aboriginal heritage investigation on the CoI area, continues to be co-ordinated by DIPNR. The Commission is satisfied DIPNR is aware of the need for cultural sensitivity in this matter as well as the need to ensure both Aboriginal cultural and archaeological heritage issues are appropriately considered. Clearly, the progression of these investigations needs to be co-ordinated as the evidence to the Commission indicated that without a relevant organisation having this role , little progress is likely. The Commission recommends that funding initially be provided by DIPNR and Council with contributions from Stockland and Cookson Plibrico in proportion to the investigations conducted and reported in relation to land these latter two parties own.
92 FLORA AND FAUNA
The flora and fauna characteristics of the Sandon Point area are well documented in the studies, reports and maps submitted by various parties to the Inquiry. These include: § Sandon Point, Bulli/Thirroul Flora and Fauna Assessment by Quality Environmental Management Pty Ltd, October 1992 (1992 QEM Study); § Sandon Point Flora and Fauna Assessment by Connell Wagner Pty Ltd and Sainty & Associates Pty Ltd dated 12 June 2001 (2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report); § Flora and Fauna Assessment – Proposed Residential Subdivision, Lots 1 and 2 DP224431 Sandon Point by Connell Wagner Pty Ltd dated 7 February 2003 (2003 Connell Wagner Report); § Sandon Point – A community Vision – Bushland Management Strategy 2003 and Beyond by Tramway Wetlands Planning Committee, January 2003 (2003 TWPC Report); § Mapping of existing vegetation by Prof Paul Adam, January 2003 (2003 PA Mapping); and § Bioregional Assessment Study Part 1 – Native Vegetation of the Illawarra Escarpment and Coastal Plain , August 2002 by National Parks and Wildlife Service (2002 Bioregional Study).
Although the 1992 QEM Study is over 10 years old, it is still relevant as it is the only flora and fauna study before the Commission that covers the whole Sandon Point area. However, the NPWS considers that the study is limited by the extent and timing of its surveys. The 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report and 2003 Connell Wagner Report were submitted by Stockla nd to support its draft Master Plan proposal. These la tter two reports focused on Stockland’s land and the Cookson Plibrico property.
The Tramway Wetlands Planning Committee is a community based Committee. Its 2003 report provides a management strategy for the Tramway wetlands and associated natural areas at Sandon Point. The 2003 PA Mapping updates the vegetation distribution of the Sandon Point area, whilst the 2002 Bioregional Study provides a more general description of vegetation on the Illawarra Escarpment and the coastal plain.
The vegetation on Sandon Point is described as a mixture of native and introduced species. Vegetation units include grassland, wetland (reedland), scrubland, open forest and dune vegetation.
Grassland covers the majority of the area. This vegetation unit tends to merge with wetland units along watercourses and with dune vegetation close to the beach. In general, the grassland unit is considered to have low conservation significance as introduced species dominate. However, small stands of native grass species are present throughout the site especially on the south side of Tramway Creek. These areas comprise native species such Kangaroo Grass (Themeda australis), Blady Grass (Imperata cylindrica) and Redleg (Bothriochloa macra) which are considered to be of high conservation significance given the lack of other areas of native grass throughout the site. The Commission notes the development of Stages 1 to 6 may have altered the grassland composition and distribution south of Tramway Creek. However, it should be noted that development occurring on Stages 1 to 6 is outside the terms of reference for this Commission.
The wetland units are mainly associated with the four watercourses and are predominantly freshwater upstream of the cycle path. The four watercourses are Tramway Creek, Cooksons Creek, Woodlands Creek and Hewitts Creek.
The wetland contains Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex (SCESFC) which is a name given to the plant community characterised by the assemblage of species occurring on waterlogged estuarine alluvial soils strongly influenced by periodically poor drainage conditions. This vegetation community is found in more silty locations with higher nutrients, and generally has little open standing water.
93 The SCESFC is a mosaic ranging from forest to scrub to reedland. It includes open-forest with Eucalyptus robusta and Eucalyptus botryoides, woodland with Livistona australis, scrub with Melaleuca species including Melaleuca linariifolia, Melaleuca styphelioides and Melaleuca ericifolia , herbland with waterferns, and reedland with Phragmites australis. Casuarina glauca may occur as a component of the community. The SCESFC is an Endangered Ecological Community under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act).
The Tramway Creek wetland system is the largest wetland system in the Sandon Point area. According to the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report, its width varies from a minimum of 3m at the sewer main crossing to a maximum of 50m immediately west of the cycle path. The Commission notes that the 1992 QEM Study pointed out that “the outer perimeter of this community may vary from year to year depending on rainfall and other factors”. A submission from Professor Adam on behalf of the Coast and Wetlands Society advised that wetland boundarie s are subject to interpretation and will fluctuate naturally between years. However, in general terms, he concurs with the boundaries mapped in the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report.
Cooksons Creek is a small tributary of Tramway Creek. According to the 2003 Connell Wagner Report, the presence of aquatic species indicates this creek is frequently inundated. The Woodlands Creek wetland is relatively narrower with an average width of 9m. However, this wetland unit follows not only the diverted section of Woodlands Creek, patches of wetland are also found along the original creek alignment. In Hewitts Creek, the wetland unit is found east of the junction with the diverted Woodlands Creek.
Four different forest associations are present in the area. The first is the native Swamp Mahogany (Eucalyptus robusta) along the south bank of Tramway Creek. The second group is a mixture of native and introduced species along Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks. The third group is the Turpentine forest on the Cookson Plibrico property. The fourth group encompasses the trees located along the boundary perimeters within the CoI area for screening purposes, which comprise mainly Melaleuca quinquenervia, Casuarin a glauca and Eucalyptus spp.
Several areas of scrubland are located within Sandon Point. However, the most significant of these is located on the south bank of Tramway Creek, approximately 300m east of the Illawarra railway. The Commission notes the 1992 QEM Study also reported one specimen of Serigia arbonescens was observed within the open forest (Turpentine forest). This species was described as regionally rare in the Illawarra. The Commission notes the 2003 Connell Wagner report did not indicate whether or not this species still exists.
The 1992 QEM Study described the dune vegetation as not well represented in the area as a result of the almost complete absence of a sand dune system. This community occurs only as a narrow, discontinuous band along the remains of a dune system that forms the eastern boundary of the area. The Commission notes this may have changed due to the rehabilitation carried out by the local landcare group on the frontal dune system south of Tramway Creek.
The area is considered to contain habitats and potential habitats for several rare, threatened and endangered flora and fauna species including Isachnae globosa, Hibiscus diversifolius, Maundia triglochinoides, Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex, Latham’s Snipe, Painted Snipe, Australasian Bittern, Sooty Oystercatcher, Pied Oystercatcher, Southern Emu-wren, Green and Golden Bell Frog.
It is generally recognised that the current zonings do not reflect the ecological values of the core riparian zones (see Riparian Corridor Function and Planning).
94 Investigations at Sandon Point
1992 QEM Study
The 1992 QEM Study did not find any plant species that are of national conservation significance in the area. However, the following species were found to be represented in the area and were considered to be of local or regional conservation significance because of their limited distribution, or because their morphological features were identified by local residents as particularly associated with the area. The species included Hibiscus diversifolius, Seringea arborescens, Melaleuca styphelioides, Eucalyptus robusta, Eucalyptus pilularis, Eucalyptus saligna/E. botryoides hybrids, Syncarpia glomulifera, Crinum pedunculatum, Themeda australis, Bothriochloa macra and Imperata cylindrica.
The grassland area was assessed as having low botanic value except for the stands of native Kangaroo grass (Themeda australis) and Redleg (Bothriochloa macra). The aquatic and associated vegetation was also considered as having limited botanic value, but could have local conservation value due to a local scarcity of such habitats. The Turpentine forest was not considered having particular botanic value but the mature trees contributed to habitat diversity for both plants and animals.
According to the Study, no animals listed on the then Revised (interim) Schedule 12 of the National Parks & Wildlife Act 1974 were observed within the Sandon Point area. However, 4 Schedule 12 species could have used the area as suitable habitats were available in the area. These included the Sooty Oyster Catcher, Green and Golden Bell Frog, Pied Oyster Catcher and the Australian Bittern. Several species of regionally rare fauna as well as native species at their limit of known distribution were also observed, including the Yellow-bellied three-toed skink.
The Study reported a list of 126 bird species that were either observed during its surveys or reported in previous studies. The area was found to contain a diverse range of bird species and habitat niches associated with the beach and rock platform, grassland sward and waterways. Highest species richness was found in beach and dunes, creek lines and open forest. Two classes of bird habitat were identified. The Study recommended the protection of Class 1 bird habitat because it fulfils generally accepted criteria used to assess the conservation value and capability of avifauna habitats. Class 2 habitat required a lesser level of protection as its main purpose was to establish buffer strips to link the fragmented habitat access corridors and to rehabilitate strategically located degraded sites.
This Study recommended the retention and conservation management of the sedgeland/rushland/ shrubland habitat. This was due to the scarcity of similar aquatic and avifauna habitat on the coastal strip between Bellambi and Port Hacking/Botany Bay, and on its relatively rich representation of indigenous flora and fauna (particularly bird) species. The recommended conservation area included disturbed areas and sections of the creeks that have been substantially modified, as such areas still contain some elements of usable habitat, and their habitat potential could be upgraded. The Study also recommended the retention of the small stand of Turpentine open forest on the basis of its contribution to habitat diversity (particularly in rela tion to birds) within the study area, as well as for its visua l amenity for local residents.
Management strategies to enhance the value of fauna habitat resources within the area were also recommended including: § Retention of the settling pond and associated riparian system within the AIR site to retain reptile and amphibia habitat; § Introduction of ‘floater’ rocks in proximity to the wetlands to enhance reptile habitat; § Retention of the pockets of kangaroo grass to ensure the continued existence of the she-oak skink; and § Elimination of the mosquito fish from the swamp areas to allow native fish and amphibians to populate this habitat.
95 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report
The Connell Wagner & Sainty Report covered most of the Stockland owned land including Stages 1 to 6. It was pointed out that although formal surveys were not carried out on lands not owned by Stockland (the Hannah land or the Cookson Plibrico property), incidental observations of both flora and fauna species were noted and comment provided throughout the relevant sections of the report.
During site inspections for the report, one regionally significant flora species (Isachne globosa) and one locally significant flora species (Hibiscus diversifolius) were observed.
Isachne globosa was observed growing along both banks of Tramway Creek and also within the triangular area below the Cookson Plibrico property fence at the confluence of the Tramway and Cooksons Creeks. The report pointed out that all areas of Isachne globosa have been included within the boundary of the wetland.
Hibiscus diversifolius was observed growing along the banks of Hewitts Creek. The Commission notes the 1992 QEM Study recorded the largest specimens were growing along the banks of the oxbow formed in Hewitts Creek. It was recorded as being relatively uncommon within the Illawarra region as this species has only been recorded at Sandon Point and Bellambi. It is still common elsewhere on the NSW Coast and is often found on disturbed land.
This report did not find the previously recorded Maundia triglochinoides, a threatened species listed as Vulnerable (preliminary) on the Schedules of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Sandon Point is not considered to represent optimal habitat for the species as it has generally not been recorded south of Wyong.
The grassland unit found on the site is considered to have low conservation significance, except those small areas on the south bank of Tramway Creek which contain a high percentage of native grass species. Several of these small areas contain almost pure stands of Kangaroo Grass (Themeda australis) and Blady Grass (Imperata cylindrica) which, although they occur on disturbed sites, are increasingly disappearing in the northern Illawarra region. These areas of native grasses have value for regeneration of indigenous vegetation. However, weed maintenance would be required to avoid Kikuyu and Whiskey Grass from colonising and overtaking these areas.
The entire wetland unit found within the site is considered to have high conservation significance. According to the report, there have been several studies in recent years assessing the significance of wetlands in the Illawarra, all of which note the gradual removal and degradation of wetlands in the region. The Tramway Creek wetland system is one of only two wetlands within the Thirroul Catchment Unit, the other being Flanigans Creek Lagoon. The Tramway Creek wetland was assessed as being of regional significance due to it providing habitat for an isolated population of the Southern Emu-wren and being the only coastal locale for the White-cheeked Honeyeater in the Illawarra.
Flora
Detailed investigations of flora contained within the site found 18 of the 30 characteristics species of the Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex (SCESFC), which is listed as an Endangered Ecological Community under the TSC Act 1995. The identified species include Acacia longifolia, Hypolepis muelleri, Baumea juncea, Imperata cylindrica, Isachnae globosa, Calochlaena dubia, Carex appressa, Casuarina glauca, Melaleuca stypheloides, Persicaria strigose, Phragmites australis, Eucalyptus robusta, Pteridium esculentum, Triglochin procera, Typha orientalis, Glochidion ferdinandi, Hydrocotyle peduncularis and Viola hederacea.
The Melaleuca styphelioides scrubland vegetation unit found along the south bank of Tramway Creek is also considered to be of high conservation significance. Although this species is recorded as being
96 relatively common south of Wollongong, it is becoming uncommon north of Corrimal. The Eucalyptus robusta forest vegetation unit on the south banks of Tramway Creek is also considered to be of high conservation significance given that it is considered to be representative of the original vegetation covering the area.
Fauna
Fifty(50) species of birds were recorded across the site. This compares with 126 bird species recorded in earlier studies or which are expected to utilise the resources found within the site. The report explained the low number of birds observed during the survey being directly attributable to the short survey duration. It refers to the habitat assessment contained within the 1992 QEM Study which identifies 12 bird habitat zones within the site. These zones are still considered to be accurate today, with the exception of Zones 6 and 9, which should be combined as providing a single habitat assemblage. The report also highlighted that several of the bird habitat zones identified in the 1992 QEM Study are not owned by Stockland, hence some of the species either listed as occurring within the site, or expected to occur in the 1992 QEM Study are not expected to occur within the Stockland owned land.
This report identified two species of frogs from calls within the site, being the Common Eastern Froglet (Crinia signifera) and Striped Marsh Frog (Limnodynastes peronii). Only the Common Eastern Froglet was recorded in the 1992 QEM Study. Habitat for frogs exists in many locations throughout the site, particularly along and within Tramway Creek and Woodlands Creek, as well as in pockets of free-standing water to the north of Woodlands Creek.
The threatened Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea) has been previously reported within the site in July 1999 and November 2000. However, it was not found durin g the recent survey. The report acknowledged that the recent surveys were conducted outside the general calling season for the species. The species was listed on both the Schedules of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 and the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Although the species was not found during recent surveys, the site is considered to represent potential habitat for the species.
An 8-part test has been applied to the following species and Endangered Ecological Community on the basis that they have been recorded within the site, or potential habitats are available. § Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex § Maundia triglochinoides § Painted Snipe (Rostratula benghalensis) § Australasian Bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus) § Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea)
The result of the 8-part test revealed that the proposed development would not have a significant effect on either the above species or community provided management recommendations were implemented. The recommended management measures include: § A riparian buffer zone 13 to 25m wide for the southern bank of Tramway Creek to allow for the re-establishment of the forest components of the SCESFC community and provide protection to the sensitive wetland/reedland areas. § If the Cookson Plibrico property is acquired, a similar riparian buffer zone would be required for the northern bank of Tramway Creek. § The existing piped section of Woodlands Creek is to be opened up and a riparian buffer zone 30 to 60m wide provided for the length of the creek. § The riparian zone on all creeks is to be planted with species characteristic of the SCESFC community, or in the case of Hewitts Creek, species characteristic of SCESFC or a moist forest association.
97 § The proposed planting scheme of the riparian zone is to be reviewed by an ecologist familiar with the location and nature of the SCESFC species and community. § Planting is to be maintained for at least 10 years and dead or unhealthy plants are to be replaced so that the zones can become self-perpetuating. § Introduced species are to be removed from within the Tramway, Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks riparian corridors, with some exceptions as outlined in the report. § There is to be no road or bridge crossing of Tramway Creek downstream of the corner of the Cookson Plibrico property. § An 88B zone is to be established along selected properties on Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks to increase the width of the vegetated buffer zone. The 88B zone will vary from a minimum width of 3m (side boundaries) to a minimum width of 6m (front/rear boundaries). § Artificial fauna habitat elements such as logs and nesting boxes to be introduced to the Woodlands Creek riparian corridor until such time as the zone is self-maintaining.
The conclusion of the 8-part test was based on a series of points of consideration. Of particular relevance are the following: § The wetland units may become contaminated with sediment during construction, due to the slope of the site and the inability of most soil and erosion plans to manage moderate to major rainfall events. Once the construction phase concludes and nutrient run-off from gardens and contaminants released from new bitumen is over, the planned stormwater control method (sand filter and diversion of flow to the lower end of Tramway Creek) would result in greatly reduced contamination of the system. § The proposed development does not include activities that are likely to significantly reduce the size of the reedland component of the community. Runoff and sedimentation during and post development have the potential to impact on the quality of the reedland. However, the stormwater management plan for the development indicates that the impacts would be minimised by the diversion of all flows up to the 1 in 5 ARI to a zone approximately 150m upstream of the bicycle path (adjacent to the sewage pumping station). Filters would also be installed to further protect the Tramway Creek wetland. § The development as proposed and assessed does not include provision for: - increasing the capacity of the culvert under the Illawarra railway at Tramway Creek; and - a bridge crossing of Tramway Creek or the tributary flowing from the Cookson Plibrico property. These would need to be assessed separately if it was determined that this would occur either as part of the development or at a later stage. § The 13 to 25m buffer zone does not represent an ecologically robust buffer zone (a minimum of 30m is generally required). However, the proposed 13 to 25m landscape buffer zone would allow for a vegetated link to be (re)established between the existing isolated forest and scrubland sections of the SCESFC community and would also provide an effective buffer for the sensitive wetland/reedland components of the community. In this respect, the 13 to 25m landscape buffer would improve both the aesthetic and ecological values of the creek/community over what currently exists at the site. It would also allow for the forest and scrubland components of the community to be re-established, thereby increasing species diversity and providing varied fauna habitat along Tramway Creek.
The report also contains an indicative vegetation management plan. Section 1 of the plan briefly outlined management of works during the construction phase. Sections 2 to 5 detailed plant selection, staging of bush regeneration and planting, preparation for planting, and planting stages. Section 6 dealt with faunal requirements for the riparian zone and Section 7 related to maintenance. Section 8 provided monitoring and review process with Section 9 covering other issues including community involvement.
98 2003 Connell Wagner Report
Flora
The 2003 Connell Wagner Report focused its assessment on the Cookson Plibrico and Dairy Farmer’s properties. The Cookson Plibrico site contains a large stand of open forest dominated by Turpentine (Syncarpia glomulifera) as well as a small drainage line (Cooksons Creek) where a wetland community is found.
The Turpentine forest is listed in the State Heritage Register as it is a “rare example of coastal wet sclerophyll forest dominated by Syncarpia glomulifera trees possibly in excess of 100 years of age”. Very few examples of this coastal vegetation were noted to remain in the Illawarra. Wollongong City Council advised that the forest is listed “in Schedule One, Part One of the Wollongong LEP 1990 as a heritage item of local significance”. According to the 1992 QEM Study, this species is well represented on the escarpment but not as common close to the coast. Stockland also noted that the forest is listed on the State Heritage Inventory, with a recommendation that the site be created as a public fauna reserve. Stockland also asserts that the extent of the forest proposed in its draft Master Plan is consistent with that shown on the in ventory map.
The 2003 Connell Wagner Report estimated the forest is about 1.26 hectare(ha ) in area (the Commission notes the 1992 QEM Study recorded that the area of the forest was approximately 1.4ha). Implementation of the draft Master Plan as proposed by Stockland would remove approximately 86m2 of edge vegetation associated with the Turpentine forest. According to the 2003 Connell Wagner Report the edge vegetation is heavily weed invaded and contains few native species. Proposed maintenance, enhancement and establishment of the Turpentine forest would expand its area to approximately 1.9ha, and would more than adequately address the removal of edge vegetation. Furthermore, the increase in the quality and quantity of the Turpentine forest is considered a net benefit to the forest and is in keeping with the State Heritage Register criteria for its listing.
Three bridge crossings are proposed in the draft Master Plan. The report acknowledged that the proposed crossing over Tramway Creek may impact on the wetland. However, it stated that: The proposed crossing over Tramway Creek would pass through an area that is largely based on fill and contains degraded vegetation. The placement of a concrete span structure bridge would require the removal of vegetation. However, such removal is required as part of the management actions for Tramway Creek, therefore is considered to have negligible impacts on native vegetation and the integrity of future management actions.
As the bridge crossings would be located in the riparian zones, they have the potential to expose substrates and lead to erosion. However, it is considered that an Environmental Management Plan would be able to mitigate impacts associated with the construction of the bridge crossing of Tramway Creek.
The Woodlands Creek crossing would be over a cleared area and the crossing over Hewitts Creek would pass from cleared land across exotic vegetation. Neither crossing would involve removal of any significant native vegetation or bird habitat.
Stockland’s proposal would also need to consider the replacement of culverts under the Illawarra railway at Tramway and Woodlands Creeks. The key impact of wider culverts would be to increase flow during high rainfall events. This would have the potential to impact on the wetland community on Tramway Creek. However, the report considers “the existing SCESFC is degraded, contains a number of exotic species, and is to be replaced by SCESFC plantings”. It stated that the designs of streams and plantings would “accommodate, as far as is practicable, increased flows during high rainfall events” (the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report indicated that this potential impact needs to be assessed).
99 Fauna
An assessment under the administrative guidelines of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) was carried out for two vulnerable species, the Grey-headed Flying-Fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) and the Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea) as suitable habitats for them are available within the site.
Eight species of locally occurring Commonwealth listed migratory bird species may occur on the site. They are the Latham’ Snipe (Gallinago hardwickii), White-bellied Sea-Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster), White-throated Needletail (Hirundapus caudacutus), Black-faced Monarch (Monarcha melanopsis), Spectacled Monarch (Monarcha trivirgatus), Satin Flycatcher (Myiagra cyanoleuca), Rufous Fantail ( Rhipidura rufifrons), and Painted Snipe (Rostratula benghalensis). The report found “no listed migratory species would be significantly impacted by the proposed development”.
The report concluded that no threatened plant species listed under the EPBC Act were located on the Cookson Plibrico property and the proposal was not likely to constitute a controlled action concerning species listed under the EPBC Act. As such, a referral to Environment Australia is not considered necessary.
An 8-part test was carried out for Maundia Triglochinoides, Grey-headed Flying-Fox (Pteropus poliocephalus), Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea), and the Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex.
No threatened plant species listed under the TSC Act were located on the Cookson Plibrico site. The Grey-headed Flying-Fox was observed flying over the site and is considered likely to occasionally forage on the site. Suitable habitats for several threatened fauna and one flora species were located on the site. However, proposed development would be unlikely to significantly impact on species listed under the TSC Act. Thus a species impact statement was not considered necessary.
The report directed attention to the fact that “appropriate management recommendations and actions for Tramway, Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks are identified in the Deed of Agreement between Stockland and DIPNR(DLWC). The Land and Environment Court approved development in Stages 1 to 6 and stipulated conditions for consent that were to minimise any likely adverse environmental impact and protect the amenity and character of the locality to ensure compliance with Environmental Planning Instruments”. The proposed buffer zones for Cooksons and Hewitts Creeks are based on those applied to Tramway and Woodlands Creeks to ensure consistency with all buffer zones.
It was also pointed out that the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report considered a 30m buffer to SCESFC “as an ecologically robust buffer”. However, as noted in the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report and in the Deed of Agreement, the 30m buffer is flexible. The report considers that “the buffer applies to a corridor that may be wider or narrower in places than 30m, however, encompasses an area of vegetation that is, as a whole, ecologically robust”.
The report recommends: § Investigation be carried out for Stockland to acquire the Ray Hannah Motors land. Although the current proposal does not rely on the Ray Hannah land to deliver the environmental outcomes of the proposed development. It has significant potential to provide habitats and water quality improvement features – such as constructed wetlands. This would compliment the habitats created on Stockland controlled land and assist improvement of water quality which is currently impacted upon by the larger urban catchment to the west of the CoI study area. § Introduction of artificial fauna habitat elements such as logs and nesting boxes to the riparian corridors until these areas are self-maintaining.
100 Sandon Point – A Community Vision – Bushland Management Strategy 2003 and Beyond
This Management Strategy was prepared by the Tramway Wetlands Planning Committee (TWPC) in association with the Northern Illawarra Residents Action Group with assistance from Natural Habitats Ecosystem Management. The TWPC is a community based Committee. The aim of the Committee was to bring together stakeholders, community, experts and government representatives to develop and implement a Plan of Management for the Tramway Wetlands and associated natural areas at Sandon Point.
A two day on-ground survey and assessment of the area was carried out in November 2001. The assessment area extended from the pre-1947 tramway line adjacent to O’Brien and Sommerville Streets to the south, to the bushland north of Hewitts Creek, to the Illawarra railway to the west, and to the dune formation behind Thirroul Beach to the east.
To aid the mapping and assessment process, the area was divided into 12 zones. Habitat values and conservation significance were determined after assessing and scoring a series of indicators within each management zone. The indicators included: § Size and shape of an area of remnant vegetation; § Condition of remnant vegetation; § Dominance, or otherwise, of introduced species; § Natural regeneration potential; and § Potential fauna habitat.
Other factors that contributed to the habitat and conservation value of a zone included prior known rare and significant sites, and the connectivity and potential connectivity of a remnant area to wildlife corridors. The Strategy then detailed the soil characteristics, vegetation communities, weed density, habitat value, major impacts and contribution to the conservation value of Sandon Point for each of the 12 zones.
The report found that due to earthworks in the zone south of Tramway Creek, much of the habitat value of that zone has been reduced and major rehabilitation would be required to restore its value. The zone east of the Turpentine forest has the potential to provide a green corridor extending from the forest to the coastal dunes. It would also provide a vegetated buffer on the northern riparian zone of Tramway Creek.
The Turpentine forest offers a complex and diverse vegetation structure providing a wide variety of habitat potential that are not available in other parts of Sandon Point. It is also a significant seed source for regeneration work within the area. The Hannah land is of significant habitat value as the original alignment of Woodlands Creek supports indicative species of the SCESFC community. Opening up of the piped section of Woodlands Creek would contribute to the green corridor potential for the area.
The Hewitts Creek remnant swamp wetland near the Woodlands Creek junction is the most intact and undisturbed remnant vegetation on Sandon Point. This wetland is a highly valuable seed source and a potential habitat for the Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea). It also has a significant number of characteristic species of the SCESFC community. Despite high weed invasion, native species diversity is abundant and resilient within Hewitts Creek east of the Woodlands Creek junction. The ‘straightened’ section of Hewitts Creek eastward to the cycleway offers nesting and roosting sites for various bird species. The regionally rare Swamp Lily (Crinum pedunculatum) and Swamp Hibiscus (Hibiscus diversifolius) were found in the area.
Following assessment of the 12 zones, the Management Strategy detailed its policy recommendations and framework for management in Section 7. Management outcomes and action required are identified for remnant vegetation and vegetation conservation, wetland and riparian management,
101 significant flora and fauna, wildlife habitat and wildlife corridors, noxious and environmental weeds, fauna conservation, and pest animals, and fire management. The Management Strategy also recommends management outcomes and required actions in relation to the economic, social and cultural aspects of conservation of the site. An on-ground works program for each zone and indicators for monitoring are included in Section 8 of the Management Strategy. Section 9 concluded that: On comp letion of the additional studies by the independent biodiversity team, further data may well be evident to assert the significance of the area as a local and regional biodiversity hotspot. Until the time that all data is available it would seem prudent to adopt the precautionary principle as to the conservation significance and future planning of Sandon Point before determinations are concluded.
Bioregional Assessment Study Part 1– Native Vegetation of the Illawarra Escarpment and Coastal Plain, August 2002
The Bioregional Study refers to the collection and analysis of flora and fauna data required to identify, describe and map vegetation communities and fauna habitats within the Wollongong Local Government Area (LGA). The study area included not only the escarpment and foothills, but also the coastal floodplains, estuaries and other coastal environments. The purpose of the study is to provide a regional context to improve understanding of the relative conservation status of biodiversity attributes as well as providing supporting evidence of potential linkages and networks that may support conservation goals.
The vegetation profile for the Estuarine Alluvial Wetland referred to Sandon Point as the example location for the vegetation community. Estuarine Alluvial Wetland forms a component of the SCESFC community. There is a total of 35ha of Estuarine Alluvial Wetland community in the Wollongong local government area, however, only 10.68ha (30.5 percent of total) is within Council Reserves.
Mapping of Existing Vegetation by Associate Professor Paul Adam
Council commissioned Associate Professor Adam to accurately map the vegetation communities on the site including the extent of the endangered ecological community, SCESFC. The mapping was carried out across the whole Sandon Point area. As well as mapping the SCESFC, other features of interest were recorded, both for documentation and to mark reference points for future studies. Adam was satisfied the mapping in the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report was generally accurate bearing in mind possible variations in boundary positions between seasons.
The mapping by Adam has a high degree of overlap with the vegetation communities for Sandon Point mapped by NPWS as part of the flora and fauna studies for the preparation of the Illawarra Escarpment Environmental Management Plan. It identified SCESFC, Class 1 and 2 bird habitat as well as vegetation communities. However, it did not indicate areas of known habitat for vulnerable or endangered fauna recorded on the site or expected to frequent the site. The northeast corner of the Cookson Plibrico property was identified as Class 1 bird habitat comprised of Acacia scrub. The NPWS considers this latter area should be included with the Turpentine forest for protection.
102 Submissions by Parties
National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS)
Council has regularly consulted the NPWS since 1993 regarding land use planning at Sandon Point. Since January 2001, the NPWS has provided extensive comments to Council in relation to the 1992 QEM Study, DCP 94/17, the Master Plan for Sandon Point, the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report, the Sandon Point Draft DCP, the revised draft Master Plan and the mapping by Adam in 2003.
The NPWS considers the flora and fauna assessment in the 1992 QEM Study is generally satisfactory in terms of the methodology applied, but it is limited by the extent and level of surveys. NPWS pointed out that a number of factors have changed since the assessment in 1992 including: § Alteration and development of the wetland and vegetation associations since 1992; § Additional threatened species and endangered ecological communities have been listed since the commencement of the TSC Act in 1995; § The significance of the wetland habitat is likely to have increased since 1992 due to the loss or deterioration of other habitat within the region; and § Additional records of threatened species have been noted for the general area.
Based on the 1992 QEM Study recommendations that certain areas warrant management for conservation purposes, the listing of SCESFC community and the extent of habitat present, the NPWS recommends that all land containing SCESFC and a 40m buffer be managed for conservation purposes. Such area should be rezoned 7(a) - Environmental Protection (Special) as the 6(a) Public Recreation zone permits activities that are inconsistent with the conservation objectives. Roads, stormwater control structures, leisure areas of high impact, and utility installations should be avoided and prohibited in the SCESFC habitat. Adjoinin g zones should only allow a level of development that does not significantly affect the values within the Environmental Protection zone.
The NPWS directed attention to the inadequacy of DCP 94/17 to ensure conservation of the wetlands, particularly issues relating to the quality and quantity of stormwater discharge into wetland areas. It also recommended the removal of the road crossing of Tramway Creek as it would detrimentally impact on the integrity of the wetland. If a crossing is required, it suggested the crossing be parallel to the Illawarra railway on the western perimeter of the site.
The methodology applied for flora and fauna assessment in the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report is generally satisfactory according to the NPWS. However, it noted the fauna survey was undertaken in Autumn which might have resulted in some amphibia and reptile species, notably the Green and Golden Bell Frog, not being detected. Given the proposed protection and buffering of the wetland vegetation unit and low reliability of previous records on the site, the NPWS accepted the report’s conclusion that additional surveying or protection mechanisms for the species would not be required. However, the NPWS changed its position in recommendations to the Commission and now considers that targeted surveys for the Green and Golden Bell Frog should be conducted.
Although the NPWS considered the report provided an adequate delineation of the boundary of the SCESFC, only limited information was provided on the significance of the community within a regional context (area, condition, viability and security of other remnants of the community within the region). Nonetheless, it noted the remnant SCESFC adjoining Tramway Creek is considered to have high conservation significance and is not well represented in the region.
The NPWS also noted the proposed riparian buffer zone is inconsistent with the earlier recommendation of a 40m buffer zone in the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report. Of concern to the NPWS is that substantial portions of the SCESFC are proposed to be cleared or not protected by a buffer and that the buffer zone is primarily for the purpose of maintaining and enhancing water
103 quality. It did not accept that clearing of portions of the scrubland unit would be acceptable on the basis of additional habitat being planted within the buffer to offset the loss. Biodiversity should be, and is most effectively conserved in-situ, and natural habitat features of high conservation significance should be retained in the first instance and augmented by additional enhancement.
Other comments and recommendations made by the NPWS included that: § Insufficient information was provided to enable an assessment of the impact of the proposed drainage and flood control measures on the riparian corridor values and the SCESFC community. Alteration to the natural flow regimes of creeks and streams and their floodplains and wetlands have been listed by the NSW Scientific Committee as a key threatening process under the TSC Act 1995. The design of drainage and flood control measures would need to be sensitive to these factors; § The northeast corner of the Cookson Plibrico property, identified by Adam as Class 1 bird habitat and Acacia scrub for the NPWS flora study, should be incorporated with the Turpentine forest for protection; § A plan of management should be prepared for the conservation area to ensure it is actively managed, primarily for the protection of native fauna, flora and Aboriginal heritage; § Woodlands Creek should be reinstated to its original course and the riparian corridors of Sandon Point should be re-established to restore connectivity to the SCESFC; § Water quality and runoff quantity (including peak flows and volumes) from developed areas should be controlled prior to entering the vegetated buffer of SCESFC habitat; § Crossings of riparian areas and buffers should be minimised to ma intain integrity of the habitat; § Detailed information indicating known or anticipated areas of habitat for vulnerable or endangered species, communities and populations recorded on site, or expected to frequent the site, should be mapped to ensure adequate management measures would be undertaken to conserve them; and § Targeted surveys should be conducted to determine the presence of the Green and Golden Bell Frog given the suitability of the wetlands to support this species.
The NPWS also advised that the approval from its Director-General may be required under Section 79B of EP&A Act before consent can be granted for any proposed development on Sandon Point.
Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (DIPNR-DLWC)
DIPNR(DLWC) advised that Cooksons Creek, despite being the smallest watercourse at Sandon Point, contains extensive stands of Isachnae globosa and joins with Tramway Creek to form an extensive wetland area. Areas fringing this intersection zone as well as the northern bank of Cooksons Creek can be characterised as undisturbed landforms with native seedbanks and regenerating vegetation. This combination of natural features, together with the potential cultural significance of the undisturbed landform areas, makes the Turpentine forest and the associated riparian corridor of Cooksons Creek worthy of protection. To conserve the integrity of the wetlands and land identified as SCESFC, the DIPNR(DLWC) recommended that: § Appropriate stormwater management controls be established to ensure that there are no adverse impacts of the new development on stormwater quality and quantity; § The advice of the NPWS be considered and integrated into any future Master Plan including the need to address any matters of relevance under the TSC Act 1995; and § Council utilise its statutory powers under the EP&A Act to address the policy provisions in the NSW Wetlands Management Policy to manage any wetlands on the site identified for conservation or rehabilitation. This may include the need for Council to identify appropriate buffer zones and other controls to ensure that the impacts of future development on the wetlands are appropriately managed.
104 Wollongong City Council (Council)
Ecological requirements are addressed in Section 12.4 of Volume Two of the draft DCP which was submitted as background information to the Commission. However, this section focused mainly on appropriate width and treatment of riparian corridors. Generally, where SCESFC is located, it forms the core riparian zone and will be protected by a buffer of varying widths.
A strong relationship between the Turpentine forest and the riparian corridor along Cooksons Creek has been identified as such a connection would offer potential for the Turpentine forest to expand and re-establish an ecosystem connection along this riparian corridor. This linkage includes a Class 1 bird habitat connection. Furthermore, there is an extended area to the east of the Turpentine forest which should be considered for re-establishing the original gradation of vegetation communities that form part of a vegetation/riparian corridor for ecosystem connectivity to the wetlands/SCESFC community and ultimately to the dunal area.
The draft DCP considers there are environmental benefits to be gained from restoring the original alignment of Woodlands Creek to connect with Tramway Creek. Benefits include restoration of flow through the SCESFC and wetland complex, provision of a north-south connection for birds and other fauna, and rehabilitating the original stream meander. Similarly, the installation of a meander in Hewitts Creek at the boundary of the Stockland and Hannah properties would have environmental benefits including, but not limited to, restoring natural flow patterns and establishing a wider riparian corridor.
Council submitted that a high priority has been given to ensuring protection of the SCESFC community, riparian corridors and the Turpentine forest. A set of specific principles and controls related to setbacks, buffers and ongoing management have been develo ped to ensure the protection of the SCESFC community.
Stockland
Stockland’s main recommendations and comments on issues relating to flora and fauna were drawn from the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report and the 2003 Connell Wagner Report, both of which it submitted. They are as follows: § The riparian zone on all creeks is to be planted with species characteristic of the SCESFC community, or in the case of Hewitts Creek, species characteristic of SCESFC or a moist forest association; § The proposed planting scheme for the riparian zone is to be reviewed by an ecologist familiar with the location and nature of the SCESFC species and community; § Planting is to be maintained for at least 10 years, and dead or unhealthy plants are to be replaced so that the zones can become self-perpetuating; § Introduced species are to be removed from within the Tramway, Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks riparian corridors, with some exceptions as outlined in its primary submission; § There is to be no road or bridge crossing of Tramway Creek downstream of the corner of the Cookson Plibrico property; § Artificial fauna habitats such as logs and nesting boxes are recommended to be introduced to the Woodlands Creek riparian corridor until such time as the zone is self-maintaining; § The Turpentine forest is to be protected, enhanced by removal of weed species and the planting of locally indigenous native specie s, and expanded as a single area of vegetation connected to the Tramway Creek wetlands as shown on the draft Master Plan. Urban stormwater from the proposed development would not be drained into the Turpentine forest; § Finalisation of the draft vegetation management plan referred to within the 2003 Connell Wagner Report and its integration with the management measures for Tramway Creek required in association with the development of Stages 2 to 6. This vegetation management plan is to be
105 implemented in conjunction with the development of the land, and used as a basis for the long term management of the lands when addressed as part of a future plan of management of the overall public open space lands, in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993. A similar vegetation management plan for land within the eastern portion of the CoI area should be prepared and integrated with the Stockland vegetation management plan and incorporated within any future plan of management for the public open space lands; § In order to ensure the long term ecological sustainability of the creek systems within the CoI area, an overall catchment management strategy should be developed by Council and the relevant government agencies, to control weed sources and water quality; § Remove the soil stockpile located on the Hannah property and reinstate the land to a more natural form; and § Restore the lower reaches of the riparian corridors (between the western portion of the CoI area to their coastal outlets) including weeding and replanting.
In response to the claimed misconception created by submissions to the Commission, Stockland pointed out that the majority of the site where development is proposed is extremely disturbed, comprising the residue of the demolished refractory buildings and the Cookson Plibrico factory. The site is also separated from the escarpment by the Illawarra railway, the Princes Highway and/or Lawrence Hargrave Drive, as well as the suburb of Bulli.
The Master Plan proposal would create a large amount of open space, including the riparian corridors, and development would be set back from the beach and foreshore. Access to the beach and foreshore would be improved via a number of public roads and pathways. These roads and pathways would be in public ownership and properly maintained.
Stockland also contended that the issue at Sandon Point is not destruction of existing forests or watercourses, as these have already been destroyed. The issue is how to restore the site. Its proposal would provide not only new housing, but also a very significant improvement in the quality of the watercourses, their riparian zones, and the connections from the escarpment to the coast.
The only SCESFC to be affected by the proposed development would be in the highly disturbed section of Woodands Creek, near the eastern boundary of the AIR site. The disturbance would be caused mainly by the reconstruction of Woodlands Creek. Stockland pointed out that even if the area were to be developed as a regional park, similar disturbance would be required if Woodlands Creek is to be re-established. Proposed landscaping works in the riparian zones would recreate a new SCESFC community. The Master Plan proposal would result in an increase in the area of SCESFC.
The Turpentine forest has been regenerating from a small grove 50 years ago and regeneration is continuing. Stockland’s Master Plan proposal would provide a strong connection between the Turpentine forest and the Cooksons Creek. Such connection would permit the continuing regrowth of the forest. Its proposal would provide more than adequate protection for the forest, and provision has been made for the forest to become public open space as recommended in the heritage listing.
In summary, Stockland argued that its Master Plan proposal would have no impact on the existing environment, but rather, would produce clear positive environmental benefits of a standard greater than normally applied in the assessment of a development application. Furthermore, the issue is not the destruction of vegetation as claimed in some submissions but how to effectively restore the site.
Residents and Community Groups
Many parties to the Commission raised issues of concern in relation to the impacts from the development of Stages 1 to 6 on the Tramway Creek wetland and other vegetation communities in and on the south bank of Tramway Creek. Potential impacts on the environmental value of Sandon Point if any development at all were to be approved on the CoI area were also a major concern to
106 most residents and community groups. Many residents support the acquisition of Stockland’s land for a coastal regional park. A few consider limited development could occur on certain parts of the area to provide funding for the restoration of the rest of the area. A summary of the main issues of concern regarding flora and fauna raised in these parties’ submissions follows: § Aerial photographs dating from 1938 to 2001 demonstrate the regrowth and natural expansion of the Turpentine forest. The slashing of the forest for hazard reduction is retarding the natural regeneration of the forest in the eastern part of the forest. Such activity prevents the recovery of the natural areas, encourages weed invasion and limits the expansion and formation of linkages to the Cooksons and Tramway Creeks wetland system. It will have a long term effect of degrading the environmental quality of the site. The Turpentine forest and the area to its east should be conserved to maintain ecological integrity and ensure faunal vegetation connection across the area in both a north-south and east-west direction. Objection was also raised in relation to the proposed adjustment of the Turpentine forest boundary for machinery access for maintenance purposes and to facilitate residential development; § Thorough investigation of the environmental costs and benefits of the mound of fill on the Hannah property would be required before a decision can be made as to whether it should be removed or vegetated with appropriate native species; § The primary objective for remnant habitats should be preservation and conservation, rather than restoration. If areas are recognised as being of conservation value, the obje ctive should be conservation in-situ; § The restoration of Woodlands Creek would create a substantial habitat corridor. However, the re-establishment of Woodlands Creek and its re-diversion from Hewitts Creek to Tramway Creek should not be a trade-off for removal of any existing remnant vegetation along other creek corridors, such as the Tramway wetlands; § Stockland’s proposed buffer zones do not encompass all the mapped SCESFC. Recommended buffer zone ranges from a minimum of 40m to 100m. The buffer areas should be managed for conservation purposes, and development works such as water retention works, transport routes or retaining structures should not be permitted. Also buffers should be provided for not only creek banks, wetlands and endangered ecological communit ies, but also all natural areas; § The 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report and 2003 Connell Wagner Report are flawed as field surveys were inadequate to obtain background data and were carried out at the wrong time of the year. Proper fauna studies need to be carried out prior to any further development including, but not limited to frogs, reptiles, birds and mammals including bats and invertebrates; § A purpose built mountain bike facility within the area should be considered so as to divert such activity from the forest; § The wetland area at the junction of Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks has not been assessed for its habitat value (particularly for the Green and Golden Bell Frog) and ecological significance; § Housing development should not occur on the Class 2 bird habitat north of Hewitts Creek as this area provides an opportunity to extend the green corridor into Thomas Gibson Park; § Stockland’s proposal would have a number of negative impacts on the area including clearance of remnant bushland, habitat modification, displacement of threatened species and ecological communities, soil erosion, and water pollution resulting in the slow destruction of ecological systems and the environmental value of Sandon Point; and § The increase in human and domestic animals impacts from a larger local population particularly children, cats and dogs on both the coastal communities in the public lands and the beach and intertidal zones have not been assessed. Such an increase in population would result in local extinction of many species.
The Coast and Wetlands Society acknowledged wetland boundaries are subject to interpretation and that they will also fluctuate naturally between years. It concurs with the mapping in the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report. The size, location and appropriateness of buffer zones need to be
107 determined on a case by case basis. Consideration should also be given to expanding the area of a range of habitats as well as providing linkages between areas.
Wetlands provide habitat for a variety of insects which have the potential to act as vectors for a range of arboviruses. Degradation of wetlands can lead to increased populations of some insects and exacerbate the hazard. The presence of wetlands and consequent risks to human health (even if currently minor) is a constraint against allowing housing development – the health risks should be assessed in the same way as bushfire hazard.
The Society recommends no development on Hannah’s land and the undeveloped part of the Cookson Plibrico property. The various stands of trees which exist, particularly in and around the southern part of the site and north of Hewitts Creek, should be protected and augmented to form part of the regional habitat network.
Neighbourhood Committee 3 considers a management plan must be prepared, with its main objective being to preserve and retain the biodiversity and structure that remains intact as remnant ecological communities. These remnant populations must then be extended into the rehabilitated areas as part of a properly planned program. Stockland’s proposed 10 year maintenance program is commendable but without full details the Committee is not in a position to assess its adequacy. The program must be supported by adequate resources and a committed program of community involvement and education.
The Northern Illawarra Residents Action Group as well as Mr Miller and other residents directed attention to a significant area of native vegetation existing on the southwestern boundary of the AIR site. This vegetation adjoins the northern boundary of the Turpentine forest and the remnant vegetation that occurs along the Illawarra railway corridor. Its ecological value and significance have not been assessed.
Thirroul Action Group considers regeneration of open space sites can to a large extent be left to nature as bioremediation is the state of art way of letting degraded land recover. The group referred to the local landcare group which has been carrying out tree planting and weeding for years in the area and that wetlands at Sandon Point constitute about 27 percent of the remaining wetlands in the northern Illawarra.
Associate Professor Adam believes the Turpentine forest, Hewitts Creek, the foredune and foreshore areas, and Woodlands Creek upstream of the CoI area require a full flora and fauna assessment to determine potential edge effects of development as well as cumulative impacts. The beach and foredune area has been described as an important habitat for migratory birds. The cumulative impacts from future development on this habitat need to be considered as part of the overall assessment and future planning of the site. Management to address threats from feral animals and weeds is also required.
Dr Davis contends that “the largest and most important SCESFC community on the site is at the mouth of Hewitts Creek” as it is probably a natural wetland vegetation remnant of the Hewitts Creek ecosystem. It is likely to have developed under low velocity fluvial conditions. He recommends the watercourses which feed Hewitts Creek be allowed to return to their low-velocity sinuous floodplain- swamp-overflow conditions so as to preserve the community.
Mr Robert Miller believes the 8-part test conducted in the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report is flawed as it contains contradictory opinion and the conclusions were unsubstantiated. He considers a species impact statement is required. Further, infilling of Stage 7 (Lot 235) and the proposed enlargement of the culvert under the railway at Tramway Creek should be assessed for its impact on the SCESFC, as such work would potentially destablise the stream bed due to an increase in flood water velocity.
108 Mr Miller also provided extensive information on the Illawarra Foreshores Regional Parklands concept. The proposed park would link existing community owned parks from Thirroul village in the north to Kiama in the south. Sandon Point is crucial to the proposal as it provides for public transport access by train at Thirroul station, and is at the bottom of Bulli Pass for those arriving by car or bus. It is also linked by the Throsby Track to the Illa warra Escarpment and State Recreation Area. It is the only remaining green link between the ocean and the escarpment in the northern Illawarra.
He also noted that two species of undescribed Mayfly were discovered in the Sandon Point wetlands in 2002. It is of major concern to Mr Miller that the proposed flood mitigation works and the Stockland proposal would alter the hydrology of the wetland and habitat integrity for the Mayfly. He questioned what measures would be implemented to ensure the Mayfly species would not become extinct before they are described and named.
Mr Organ, MHR advised that the Illawarra Catchment Management Committee recommended the retention of all remnant wetland no matter how degraded. The wetlands at Sandon Point are rich in bio-diversity and a suitable habitat for the endangered Green and Golden Bell Frog, contains the regionally rare Hibiscus diversifolius, and is known to be an excellent fish-breeding habitat. The Sandon Point wetlands should be gazetted under SEPP14 as it satisfies the criteria for Sedgeland wetland.
Mr Van Wijk, the co-ordinator of the Sandon Point Bushcare Group, provided extensive submissions. He stated that restoration of disturbed areas can be assisted with the application of an appropriate bush regeneration program for relatively low cost. Further, that although much of the proposed development area has been disturbed, it has the ability to regenerate naturally, be restored to a natural state, or upgraded for use as a recreational area. Disturbed areas could support a diversity of fauna and threatened species, and disused quarries and sediment ponds could form habitat for a range of fauna. Threatened species such as the Green and Golden Bell Frog have been known to colonise such disturbed areas.
In terms of bush regeneration, regrowth areas signify the natural resilience of a site and its ability to recover from disturbance. The recovery of the Turpentine forest on the Cookson Plibrico property is a fine example of regrowth according to Mr Van Wijk. The permanent removal of Lantana (and other weeds) should be undertaken in a staged approach particularly if there is no other shrub understorey nearby for bird habitat.
The opportunity to link the Escarpment Regional Park via two significant green corridors (Woodlands Creek and Slacky/Tramway Creek) to the Sandon Point Foreshore Regional Park must be considered as a positive long term sustainable planning outcome for the catchment.
Mr Van Wijk considers that flora and fauna studies for the Sandon Point area have been conducted in a piecemeal fashion and not all aspects of the local environment have been investigated. For example, there has been no ecological assessment of the marine environment, the rock platforms and intertidal zones. He recommends that all flora and fauna studies for the whole catchment be assessed and consolidated in the form of an Environmental Impact Study, as well as completion of a comprehensive Coastal Hazards Assessment.
109 Commission’s Comment
Hewitts, Woodlands, Cooksons and Tramway Creeks and their associated wetland systems, together with the Turpentine forest and other remnant vegetation provide habitats or potential habitats for native flora and fauna species, including certain rare and endangered flora and fauna, notwithstanding past and current industrial and rural activities. These areas have significant ecological value and should be protected, particularly the endangered SCESFC and the Turpentine forest. The current zonings do not adequately reflect ecological values. Moreover, aerial photographs since 1938 show the land has the capacity and potential to regenerate, as is being demonstrated by the Turpentine forest.
Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Community (SCESFC)
The SCESFC is an endangered ecological community under the TSC Act and the Commission concurs with the overwhelming majority of parties that it should be conserved and protected. The width of an effective buffer to the SCESFC is generally accepted by parties to be 40m, as the Commission canvasses in Riparian Corridor Function and Planning. The Commission finds a minimum 40m wide vegetated buffer to the SCESFC is required. The provision of a 40m buffer notwithstanding, the potential for stormwater to adversely affect the SCESFC was a main issue raised in submissions and the NSW Scientific Committee lists urban runoff as a threat to remnant SCESFC. Stormwater management is canvassed under Water Quality Management.
Stormwater quality and quantity must be controlled prior to being discharged to the vegetated buffer. Sufficient on-site treatment of stormwater within the proposed residential area is required to ensure any discharge of stormwater into the buffer areas is of a quality and quantity that would protect and enhance the habitat of the SCESFC. Treatment should also use best available technology to ensure that discharged stormwater contains minimal litter, sediment, oils and nutrients, as well as approximating natural flow.
The Commission notes the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report concluded that impact from proposed development on the SCESFC would be minimised “by the diversion of all flows up to the 1:5 ARI”. However, the Stormwater Master Plan submitted by Stockland proposed to treat all stormwater discharges to the creeks up to the 1 year ARI flow. There has been no assessment as to what impact there would be on the SCESFC if flows only up to the 1 year ARI are treated and not flows up to the 1 in 5 ARI. The Commission considers a re-assessment is required if the proposed stormwater treatment differs from that previously assessed by the 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report.
Impacts on the SCESFC from stormwater may not be immediately noticeable as effects from siltation and water pollution on the wetlands may occur over an extended period. The Commission recognises the difficulty in identifying, evaluating and proving with certainty impacts that are displaced in time. Even if the impacts could be proven, investigation and study would be a lengthy and costly process. This reinforces the need for effective stormwater treatment.
As canvassed in Water Quality Management, the stormwater treatment proposed in Stockland’s Master Plan would meet the standards required by the relevant guidelines. However, having regard to the conservation significance of the SCESFC and downstream aquatic habitats, a continuing high standard of stormwater treatment is critical to the long-term protection of the SCESFC and water quality. The Commission recommends that Council review its requirements for treatment of stormwater from the site in consultation with DIPNR and the NPWS.
110 Woodlands Creek
There is general agreement that the piped section of Woodlands Creek should be removed to provide the opportunity for a continuous environmental corridor between the coast and the escarpment. Opinion differs as to the width of the corridor and the extent of ecological benefits derived from such a corridor (see Riparian Corridor Function and Planning).
Stockland points out that although the Woodlands Creek catchment si less urbanized than the catchments of Hewitts and Tramway Creeks, there is a break of at least 750m between the site and the escarpment as the intervening lands are in private ownership. In addition, much of the public land between the Princes highway and the Illawarra railway is highly disturbed, although less so between the highway and the escarpment. These disturbed areas have a strong potential to, and currently are, introducing weeds, exotic species and nutrients into the downstream area, thus reducing the benefit of a continuous corridor according to Stockland. The Commission acknowledges that these processes occur downstream of urban areas and are occurring along the lower reaches of Woodlands Creek. However, the Commission is persuaded by the evidence that given the largely non-urbanised nature of Woodlands Creek (79 percent native forest, 16 percent rural, 5 percent urban) weed species and nutrients would not overwhelm revegetation and rehabilitation of the riparian lands. It finds that development of an effective environmental corridor would not be precluded by the existing land uses within in the catchment.
Depending on the final design of Woodlands Creek, reconstruction of the creek may impact on the SCESFC along the eastern section of the creek on the AIR site. The Commission recommends the design and reconstruction of the creek have regard to the existing SCESFC and that the NPWS should be consulted. Mitigation measures should be implemented to minimise impact.
It is also generally agreed that Woodlands Creek should be re-diverted to its original course. The Commission supports the proposed re-diversion given its flood mitigation benefit to downstream residents on Hewitts Creek. The evidence indicates there are patches of SCESFC on the original Woodlands Creek. The proposed re-diversion has the potential to encourage further regeneration of SCESFC along this original creek alignment which may develop into a more substantial wetland system.
However, the proposed re-diversion is a major concern to the Aboriginal community. They are concerned that the increased flow from the re-diverted Woodlands Creek onto Tramway Creek would accelerate erosion problems at the opening, which in turn would impact on the nearby burial site and middens in the frontal-dune area. The Commission agrees that this concern needs to be addressed when detailed design for the re-diversion proceeds. However, the Commission notes that local anecdotal evidence is that since the 1998 floods a significant volume of water in Woodlands Creek follows the original creek line.
Turpentine Forest
The Commission supports protection of the significant Turpentine forest particularly noting its ability to regenerate and to link with the area to its east for natural regeneration and expansion. This will allow the creation of an east-west corridor linking the Turpentine forest to the SCESFC wetlands and on to the coastal dune system. Such a corridor would provide a diverse habitat environment for not only birds, but also other flora and fauna. This eastern area would also form part of a north-south corridor linking Tramway Creek, Cooksons Creek, the Turpentine forest and Woodlands Creek.
111 Hewitts Creek
The 1992 QEM Study indicated the area north of Hewitts Creek as Class 2 Bird Habitat and identified it “for a lesser level of protection which aims to establish buffer strips to link currently fragmented habitat access corridors and to rehabilitate strategically located erosion sites”. The Commission finds that the eastern part of this area should be protected given the presence of significant vegetation cover which has increased since the 1992 QEM Study. Conservation of this area of bird habitat would provide a corridor linking fragmented habitats from lower Hewitts Creek to Thomas Gibson Park.
The western part of this northern area is not well vegetated. As discussed in Access and Traffic, if the AIR site north of Woodlands Creek is to be developed, the Wrexham Road extension is the appropriate access for the site. Given the recommended conservation of the eastern part of the area, the Commission supports the development of the western area for residential use. The Commission recommends the proposed Wrexham Road extension be used to delineate residential and conservation uses north of Hewitts Creek. The location of the Wrexham Road extension has been assumed as identified in Stockland’s Master Plan.
There is an existing wetland system at the junction of Hewitts Creek and the diverted Woodlands Creek. Past aerial photographs indicate an artificial pond was built at the northeast corner of the AIR site. It appears over time that this pond and adjacent land along the diverted Woodlands Creek has developed into a wetland system. The Tramway Wetlands Planning Committee’s submission suggested this wetland has a significant number of species characteristic of the SCESFC community. When Woodlands Creek is re-diverted it is proposed to fill the gabion channel of the diverted section of Woodlands Creek. Stockland’s Master Plan proposal also involves improvement works on Hewitts Creek and DIPNR(DLWC) recommends the removal of gabion from the south bank of Hewitts Creek. The Commission concurs with the NPWS that a target survey for the Green and Golden Bell Frog, as well as assessment of the ecological value of the above wetland and any potential impacts from the proposed works should be carried out. Mitigation measures would also be required to ensure wetland habitats are protected prior to in-filling of the gabion channel and reconfiguration of the south bank of Hewitts Creek.
The 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report considers “vegetation downstream of the junction of Hewitts Creek with the Woodlands Creek diversion channel to be representative of the SCESFC community”. Dr Davis considered the lower reaches of Hewitts Creek contain remnant natural vegetation and as such may be especially important. These matters should be given further consideration in developing a plan of management for the conservation areas of the site.
Disturbed Land and Rehabilitation
The western part of the CoI area has been subject to substantial past development associated with agriculture, industrial facilities and extractive industry. The creek systems within this western area have been substantially disturbed and the evidence to the Commission is that they are generally incapable of being ecologically sustainable in the long-term without human intervention.
Residents contend that disturbed land, if left alone, can regenerate naturally and that disturbed land also supports a diversity of fauna habitats. The ability of the Green and Golden Bell Frog to colonise disturbed areas was given as an example to support their contention. Stockland’s consultant responded by pointing out that the highly altered nature of the site together with urbanization in the surrounding areas, particularly upstream, are important factors that would influence the type of vegetation which would regenerate on the site. Further, that the original suite of native species may not tolerate the altered conditions of the site, with the exception of a small number of disturbance- adapted native species.
112 The Commission accepts that disturbed land offers certain habitat value to some small fauna. This is not dissimilar to the value of Lantana, which is a weed yet it provides some habitat value to certain birds and small fauna in areas where there is no understorey. If left alone or with assisted rehabilitation, regrowth will occur on disturbed land. But such regrowth is unlikely to have the same original native vegetation composition due to urbanisation of surrounding areas. The question is whether all disturbed land should be conserved as desired by most residents. In the Commission’s view, the answer to this question should have due regard to the status of the land which is privately owned, its location and context, the initial rehabilitation and long-term management costs, government policies and strategies relating to urban development, as well as population growth and housing demand. Furthermore, past studies including the earlier Local Environmental Study, DCP 94/17, Council’s draft DCP, and Stockland’s assessments have concluded that portions of the western part of the CoI area can be developed for residential purposes.
Nevertheless, the Commission does not accept the proposition that simply because the land is disturbed, it is necessarily available for development. The Commission considers in circumstances where the land has the potential to form an important corridor linking fragmented habitat areas, even if it is disturbed land, it should be preserved for ecological purposes.
The Commission finds that the eastern part of the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek should be rehabilitated to create a north-south corridor linking the Turpentine forest to the Woodlands Creek corridor and thence to the escarpment. As discussed in other sections of this report, the residential apartment development on this part of the AIR site (and on the eastern areas of the Cookson Plibrico site) would also have significant adverse visual impact when viewed from the pedestrian and cycle path. Its close proximity to an Aboriginal burial site is a further constraint which mitigates against residential development on this land. Given these constraints and the potential ecological benefits of rehabilitating and conserving this part of the AIR site and the portion of the Cookson Plibrico site east of the Turpentine forest, the Commission recommends that this land be rezoned 7(a) and rehabilitated.
Stockland estimated that to rehabilitate the land for a regional park would cost about $3 million. Residents contend that the cost of assisted regeneration by the local bushcare group is $12,000 per hectare. The estimated rehabilitation cost of $3 million provided by Stockland allows for general earthworks to shape the site suitable for its use as public reserve, topsoiling, turfing and limited tree planting. There is no detail break-down as to the cost of planting. The residents’ estimate of $12,000 appears to be mainly for planting. The two estimates are clearly not comparable. The Commission strongly supports restoration of the CoI area, and recommends that the Aboriginal and local communities be consulted in preparing conservation plans.
Tramway Creek Culvert
The Hewitts Creeks Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan recommends a high flow culvert at the Illawarra railway on Tramway Creek. The 2001 Connell Wagner & Sainty Report did not assess the impact from these works on the SCESFC downstream in Tramway Creek. The report recommended that the impact should be assessed either as part of the development application or at a later stage. The Commission notes the 2003 Connell Wagner Report considers “the existing SCESFC is degraded, contains a number of exotic species and is to be replaced by SCESFC plantings”. This latter report also stated that the design of streams and plantings would “accommodate, as far as is practicable, increased flows during high rainfall events”. The Commission considers such assessment and recommendations are inadequate given the endangered listin g of the SCESFC. They are also inconsistent with the earlier report. Moreover, the NSW Scientific Committee listed alteration to the natural flow regimes of creeks and streams, their floodplains and wetlands, as a key threatening process for the SCESFC.
113 The Commission recommends that prior to finalising the design of the culvert and other associated flood control measures, a proper assessment, in consultation with the NPWS, be carrie d out to identify potential impacts from the proposed works on the SCESFC as well as mitigation measures to minimise impacts. In circumstances where mitigation measures are impractical or not feasible, compensatory replanting in a nearby non-impacted area should occur.
Other Issues
The Commission has reviewed the evidence relating to removal of the mound of fill on the Hannah property having regard to the potential flood mitigation benefits. The Commission recommends that it be removed subject to the owner’s agreement, as well as protection of Aboriginal archaeological sites and the ecological values of adjacent land.
The Commission supports minimising the number of bridge crossings of riparian and buffer areas to maintain integrity of habitat. The Commission also recommends retaining the 4(a) Light Industrial zoning for the Cookson Plibrico factory area, at least until further Aboriginal heritage and noise studies are conducted. Also, that the eastern portions of the AIR site south Woodlands Creek and the Cookson Plibrico site not be developed, and that apartment buildings not be permitted on any of the CoI area south of Woodlands Creek. In these circumstances the Commission does not consider there is sufficient need for traffic access across either Tramway Creek or Woodlands Creek as proposed in Stockland’s Master Plan and Council’s draft DCP. The only necessary creek crossing required would be over Hewitts Creek from the Wrexham Road extension to the AIR site north of Woodlands Creek.
Many submissions called for more studies to be carried out, particularly for the foreshore area, marine environment, and the whole of the catchment area. The NPWS also recommended detailed information relating to known/potential habitats for vulnerable or endangered species, communities or populations be recorded and mapped to ensure adequate management measures are undertaken to conserve them. The Commission is satisfied however, that it has adequate information for it to make strategic planning recommendations for the site. Clearly, some more detailed studies would be required to develop and implement a plan of management.
Should the Sandon Point wetlands be included in SEPP 14 – Coastal Wetlands? The Commission notes advice from DIPNR(PlanningNSW) that although previous investigation for SEPP 14 had found the wetlands to have value, the level of degradation and disturbance, as well as surrounding land uses were of concern. Furthermore, the relatively small size of the wetlands prevented them from being accurately mapped at the 1:25,000 scale used for determining SEPP 14 wetlands, and as a result the wetlands were not considered for inclusion in SEPP 14. Although not included in SEPP 14, DIPNR(PlanningNSW) suggested that any future master plan for the land should ensure their protection and include measures to achieve their rehabilitation. The Commission is satisfied that when implemented, its recommendations relating to riparian corridors and environmental protection measures would provide adequate protection to the SCESFC at Sandon Point, even though it is not protected as a SEPP 14 wetland.
114 RIPARIAN CORRIDOR FUNCTION AND PLANNING
Riparian lands form the transition between terrestrial and aquatic environments. It is generally referred to as land adjoining or directly influencing a body of water and in the present case includes land immediately alongside creeks, including the creek bank itself, and areas surrounding wetlands. Riparian management is a central issue to creek bed and bank stability, water quality improvement, biodiversity, and the ecological function of the creek corridor. The evidence is strongly supportive of ensuring healthy riparian corridors for Hewitts, Woodlands, Cooksons and Tramway Creeks.
The report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Long Term Planning and Management of the Illawarra Escarpment emphasised the importance of the effective management of riparian lands, especially as a result of rainfall patterns and the topographical features in the Illawarra. It recommended preparation of “a plan identifying riparian and desirable green corridors”. NSW Government recognition of this issue resulted in the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (DIPNR, formerly Department of Land and Water Conservation) preparing the Riparian Corridor Management Study (April 2003) for Wollongong City Council. The study sets out objectives for all riparian lands in Council’s local government area on a catchment/stream basis. The Commission has reviewed the report and considers it provides sound guidance for addressing long term riparian corridor management requirements in terms of ecologically sustainable development. The Commission is satisfied that the rankings given to these latter streams are reasonable and should be generally supported. The hierarchy of catchment ranking for Hewitts, Woodlands, Cooksons and Tramway Creeks within the CoI area is a relevant matter for this Commission to consider in relation to the principles of ecologically sustainable development.
The Commission has inspected the catchment of these creeks, some areas in the presence of parties, others on its own, to place them in context for assessing their values and constraints in relation to the CoI area at Sandon Point. It has had due regard to all submissio ns to the Commission and to relevant environmental planning documents.
For the portions of the creeks whic h are an integral part of the CoI area at Sandon Point, the Commission has specifically considered the values and constraints of riparian land management in relation to strategic planning matters and the proposed residential/open space development of the CoI area. Information before the Commission clearly indicates the long-term benefits of restoring, maintaining, and enhancing the ecological value of the creeks and riparian lands. The contribution of the creeks and riparian lands to sustainable development of the CoI area in their urban and non urban context is significant. An important aspect is the removal of the piped section of Woodlands Creek immediately east of the Illawarra railway and then its restoration to mimic a naturally functioning creek system.
Riparian Land Planning
The Riparian Corridor Management Study (DIPNR, April 2003) identifies riparian land as providing a number of important environmental and other values including: § A diversity of habitat for terrestrial, riparian and aquatic species; § A food source for a diversity of aquatic and terrestrial fauna (such as organic material, fruiting and flowering plants); § Promotion of the movement and re-colonisation of individual species and plant and animal populations; § Shading and temperature regulation; § Conveyance of flood flows; § Settlement of high debris loads; § Reduction of bank and channel erosion through root systems binding the soil; § Water quality maintenance through the trapping of sediment, nutrients and other contaminants;
115 § An interface between development and waterways; § Visual amenity; and § A sense of place with green belts naturally dividing the suburbs.
The Study identified three riparian environmental categories:
Category 1 Environmental Corridor - provides linkages for wildlife ideally between the coast and the escarpment.
Category 2 Terrestrial and Aquatic Habitat - provides basic habitat and preserves the natural features of a watercourse.
Category 3 Bank Stability and Water Quality - has limited if any habitat value but contributes to the overall health of a catchment.
Each stream segment was categorised by assessing existing land use, the degree of channel modification and the potential for habitat restoration. Moreover, while existing use rights need to be recognised, new urban development is considered by the Study to be an inappropriate use of riparian corridors.
General principles have also been developed in the study to manage riparian land and to ensure that its environmental signific ance would not be compromised. It recommends identifying three natural resource management zones at an early planning stage, namely: § Core Riparian Zone - which is fully vegetated with local provenance vegetation. § Vegetated Buffer Zone - to protect the core riparian zone from edge effects but which is not necessarily as heavily vegetated. § Asset Protection Zone - (or Fire Protection Zone) which protects development from bushfires.
Category 1 streams on the Sandon Point land include Woodlands Creek, Hewitts Creek below its confluence with Woodlands Creek, Tramway Creek below its confluence with Cooksons Creek and Cooksons Creek. Category 2 streams are Hewitts Creek above its confluence with Woodlands Creek and Tramway Creek above its confluence with Cooksons Creek. On a total catchment basis Woodlands Creek is identified as a Category 1 stream for its full length, whereas sections of Hewitts Creek are Category 1, 2 or 3. Tramway Creek is a Category 2 stream at all locations above its confluence with Cooksons Creek.
Minimum environmental objectives for riparian land recommended in the Study are summarised in Table 2.
Riparian zone widths should be maximised to conserve and improve ecosystem viability as well as enabling natural riparian zone processes to function in an unimpeded manner according to the Study. The benefits of wider corridors include a reduction in edge effects, an increase in potential for greater diversity of habitats and wildlife, an increase in the likelihood of an effective green linkage, and improved water quality and bank stability.
In regard to infrastructure, the Study considers that wherever possible all services should be located on the outer edge of the riparian zone, the number of crossings minimised, and access requirements and recreational opportunities integrated. Riparian land should be regarded as not available for development, and perimeter roads and open space used as a buffer between riparian land and development.
116 Table 2: Minimum Environmental Objectives for Riparian Land
Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Parameter Environmental Terrestrial & Bank Stability & Corridor Aquatic Habitat Water Quality Delineate riparian zone on a map and zone yes yes not required appropriately for environmental protection Provide a minimum core riparian zone width 40m from top of 20m from top of no minimum – bank bank pipes last resort Provide additional width to counter edge effects 10m 10m generally not on the urban interface required Provide continuity for movement of terrestrial and yes (including yes where aquatic habitat piered crossings) appropriate Rehabilitate/re-establish local provenance native yes yes where vegetation appropriate Locate services outside the core riparian zone yes yes wherever possible
Locate playing fields and recreational activities yes yes outside core riparian zone
Treat stormwater runoff before discharge into yes yes yes riparian zone or the water course
Deed of Agreement
A Deed of Agreement was negotiated between the Water Administration Ministerial Council and Stockland (Constructors) Pty Limited at the time the Stages 2 to 6 development went before the Land and Environment Court for determination. The Deed of Agreement refers to all 11 stages of the development and includes proposed setbacks of 30 to 60m for Woodlands Creek as shown on the relevant map. DIPNR (formerly DLWC) stated that the concerns it had at the time the Deed of Agreement was made included: § The important need to provide for an ecologically robust connection of Woodlands Creek between the escarpment and the coast, and intentions by the developer at that time to compromise this with urban development over the Woodlands Creek corridor; § The need to provide for the management of additional environmental features that had been identified on the site that included remnants of the endangered ecological community Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex (SCESFC); and § The fragmented development approach which did not appear to adequately integrate ecological and geomorphic issues for creek rehabilitation, together with a heightened appreciation of flood behaviour in the catchment following the August 1998 floods.
The deed represented an attempt on the part of the then DLWC to work towards improved stream management outcomes having regard to statutory limitations. These limitations and associated constraints included: § The apparent lack of any legal right to seek riparian management on a ‘whole -of-site’ basis, and the difficulties associated with Council and relevant landholders in attempting to address the site holistically at the time; § Previous DIPNR(DLWC) advice faxed to Stockland in 1999; § Uncertainty as to the extent that vegetated riparian protection zones could be prescribed under provisions of the Rivers and Foreshores Improvement Act 1948 (RFI Act) following the recently concluded Land & Environment Court hearing (Water Administration Ministerial Corporation v Auburn Council & Ors [2000] NSWLEC 76).
117 DIPNR(DLWC) made it clear to the Commission that unless otherwise lawfully directed, it would comply with the Deed of Agreement in its future administration of the RFI Act on the CoI area. However, issues relating to the spatial needs of riparian corridors, flood conveyance areas, stormwater management, and open space areas for the CoI area remain unresolved.
Council could require riparian corridor dimensions in excess of the core riparian zone outlined in the Deed of Agreement through planning instruments according to DIPNR(DLWC). It considers such an approach is the appropriate regulatory mechanism to provide for ecological protection.
Riparian Land Functions
A fundamental premise supported by the majority of parties to the Commission is that provision for flood conveyance should not compromise ecological objectives for the riparian corridors.
Ecological Function
The NPWS, in answer to a question on the corridor width required for effective ecological functioning, having particular regard for an escarpment to the sea corridor along Woodlands Creek replied: Australian and overseas scientific data on suitable riparian corridor widths for ecological functioning is extensive but not conclusive. Generally the findings indicate that the wider the buffer, the better the ecological function. Buffer widths must reflect the unique attributes of the subject area to protect existing values and enhance them where possible. Suitable buffer widths must address ecological attributes, flooding potential, water quality and waterway maintenance issues. It is critical that the width provided has appropriate landform configuration and is appropriately revegetated. The NPWS notes that DLWC’s [now DIPNR] primary submission (section 3.2) addresses some of the factors relevant to ecological functioning.
The NPWS considers that a minimum vegetated buffer for the Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex (SCESFC) of 40m, as set out in historic advice and the NPWS primary submission, is required to protect the community.
Furthermore, the NPWS supports Council’s initiatives made in the draft revised Development Control Plan, January 2003 and believes that it will adequately address ecological functioning at Sandon Point given the opportunities and constraints of the site. The vegetated buffer should protect the core areas of ecological conservation value and allow for a rehabilitated corridor link from the sea to the escarpment. A wider corridor however would provide greater ecological benefits as long as an effective Plan of Management was in place.
There are a range of factors that need to be considered on an integrated basis, including flooding, stability, treatment form and bank batters, vegetation extent, and extent of floodplain to ensure adequate protection for SCESFC. NPWS is concerned about the impacts on SCESFC and riparian vegetation if the Stockland’s proposal for creek bank treatment that involves excavation and steep banks is permitted. As advised by the Scientific Committee, SCESFC occurs on waterlogged estuarine alluvial soils, strongly influenced by periodically poor drainage conditions. Proposed treatments to the riparian corridor must be assessed to determine their impacts on the current water flow regime.
The NPWS suggests that the buffers and the conservation areas only be finalised once the Aboriginal heritage significance of the site has been confirmed. This will facilitate the incorporation of areas of Aboriginal heritage significance within conservation and buffer areas. There is also a need to consider vegetated buffers for edge effects and bushfire protection zones.
According to Brisbane City Council’s Waterways Corridor Methodology Background Study (December 2002) general trends indicate that wider riparian corridors have a lower percentage of weed species. Furthermore, particular studies referred to in the Background Study indicate that a
118 buffer width of 30m or more is necessary to maintain plant diversity, whilst a width of 100m is desirable to facilitate species links with other terrestrial ecosystems and act as a habitat corridor.
DIPNR’s(DLWC) main concerns relating to Stockland’s proposal treatment for riparian corridors are: § The planform and cross-sectional design; § Long term impacts and liabilities of proposed channelisation works for flood mitigation on geomorphic stability, integrity of vegetation, and ecological sustainability; and § Stormwater impacts on riparian corridors and wetlands.
It is argued by DIPNR(DLWC) that as the Sandon Point site contains riparian corridors and wetlands of regional significance, this presents “a unique opportunity to rehabilitate Woodlands Creek and associated riparian corridors to provide an ecologically robust connection between the escarpment and the sea”. There is the potential for native vegetation dispersal downstream to the Sandon Point site given the upper catchment of Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks are in good condition.
The 1938 aerial photographs provide a reference condition to assist with sustainable natural channel designs according to DIPNR(DLWC). The Stockland proposal is for narrow corridor widths (25 to 35m) adjacent and downstream of the Illawarra railway line whereas historically the creek corridors were 80 to 100m wide in these locations. Furthermore, effective ecological function requires natural outcomes for the low flow channel which would include dense vegetation communities around the banks of watercourses. Recommendations made by DIPNR(DLWC) for riparian corridors for each of the creeks are:
Woodlands Creek - § The minimum width for a core riparian zone should be 30 to 60m as agreed in the Deed of Agreement with Stockland, although a width of 40m from the top of the creek bank should be considered as well as vegetated buffer and fire protection zones. A low flow channel with the capacity for the 1 year flood should meander within a floodplain having a minimum base dimension of 40 to 70m. The finally determined location of the riparian corridor for Woodlands Creek would need to have regard to the alluvial geology of the site. Stormwater quality measures should not intrude into the core riparian zone. The original course of the creek should be reinstated to its junction with Tramway Creek. Hewitts Creek - § The minimum width for a core riparian zone should be 30m not including vegetated buffers or fire protection. A low flow channel with the capacity for the 1 year flood should meander within a floodplain having a minimum base width of 30m. The meander on the Hannah land should be reinstated and the gabions should be removed from the south bank. Tramway/Cooksons Creek - § The Deed of Agreement sets the development limit for the south bank of Tramway Creek. A 40m setback to the north bank of Tramway Creek and for both banks of Cooksons Creek should be required where feasible. Any road crossing of Tramway Creek should be towards the western end of the site.
DIPNR(DLWC) refers to the extensive literature on riparian buffer widths and the general guiding principle of “the wider the better” when addressing ecological objectives. Design of riparian corridors involves serious consideration of the former geomorphic characteristics of the stream channels and associated geomorphic floodplains on the site, particularly the earlier meandering nature of natural streams on the site. These are shown in Figure 7 for Hewitts Creek and Woodlands Creek as derived from 1938 aerial photographs.
Woodlands Creek has been identified by DIPNR(DLWC) as the last remaining catchment in the Illawarra that has the potential to create a continuous functioning riparian corridor within the currently urbanised area of Wollongong. Its catchment is comprised at 79 percent native forest, 16 percent
119 rural and 5 percent urban land uses. It has the potential to be developed with sufficient dimensions to facilitate wildlife functions between the escarpment and the sea. From an ecologically sustainable perspective, its regional significance is dependent on the dimensions, design, and final treatment of riparian corridors and creek channels through the CoI area at Sandon Point (as well as through public and private lands to the west of the Illawarra railway line). The legitimacy of the spatial requirements of the riparian corridors critical to effective and long term sustainable catchment functioning needs to be acknowledged according to DIPNR(DLWC).
Figure 7: Indicative Natural Riparian Corridor Widths.
DIPNR(DLWC) considers the Hewitts Creek catchment also has significant ecological features with the upper catchment being 59 percent native forest above the Illawarra railway line. Lower Hewitts Creek contains some remnant Turpentine trees and elements of the ecologically significant SCESFC. The long term health and ecological function of this catchment will be governed by the controls that are placed on setbacks to future development, creek treatments and management practices of landholders. The dynamic geomorphic processes in Hewitts Creek are characterised by erosion in the upper catchment and sedimentation in the floodplains of the lower catchment. It is important that plans for new development in the lower catchment recognise these dynamic processes. The flood planning levels for new development of the lower coastal floodplains are not only sensitive to the hydraulic roughness parameters of the riverine corridors but should also take account of potential sedimentation in the lower catchment, particularly over a 50 to 100 year planning timeframe.
Tramway Creek is largely confined by Stages 2 to 6 and Stage 7 of the Stockland development to the south, and the existing footprint of the Cookson Plibrico factory to the north. The Tramway Creek wetlands are a regionally significant feature (see Flora and Fauna).
Cooksons Creek that links the Turpentine forest and the Tramway Creek wetlands is also a significant riparian corridor worthy of protection. Of the four creek systems at the Sandon Point site, Cooksons Creek is the least disturbed of all the streams, albeit the smallest of the four watercourses. Despite
120 being the smallest watercourse on the site, Cooksons Creek contains extensive stands of Isachnae globosa, a regionally significant flora species (Sainty and Associates, September 2001), and joins with Tramway Creek to form an extensive wetland area. Areas fringing this intersection zone, as well as the northern bank of Cooksons Creek can be characterised as undisturbed landforms with native seedbanks and regenerating vegetation. This combination of nature features, together with the potential cultural significance of the undisturbed landform areas, makes the Turpentine forest and the associated riparian corridor of Cooksons Creek worthy of protection and hence careful consideration is required regarding the potential footprint of future land uses.
Although a major component of Stockland’s residential development at Sandon Point involves proposals for constructing low flow channels and riparian corridors, DIPNR(DLWC) is particularly critical of Stockland’s proposals for Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks. DIPNR(DLWC) considers greater basal width corridors are desirable as they would facilitate incorporation of geomorphic floodplains, enable a more sinuous stream channel course, and facilitate provision of riparian zone requirements. Reduced basal riparian corridor width together with reduced channel lengths leads to steeper channel slopes, higher shear stresses, higher stream power, and higher velocities than would have occurred under earlier natural stream conditions. The minimum basal widths should be 30m for Hewitts Creek and 40 to 70m for Woodlands Creek according to DIPNR(DLWC). Its fundamental concerns are that with Stockland’s proposal, despite previous extensive consultations, DIPNR’s (DLWC) requirements have not been meaningfully adopted by Stockland, including: § The need to mimic natural hydrological regimes for water course treatments; § Treated channels should be curved, not straight, so they replicate the former natural watercourse; § Roughness of treated watercourses should reflect natural roughness having regard to riparian requirements and flows velocities to sustain vegetation assemblages; § Hydraulically efficient straight channels with limited vegetation are inconsistent with natural design and would require regular maintenance/removal of vegetation to prevent blockage and consequent liability to Council; § The need for a functional riparian zone and natural channel section; § The need for a full assemblage of vegetation with likely natural obstructions; § The need for variations in channel cross-section and meandering of the channel within the flood plain; § Straight channels would require reinforcing to prevent storm flow shear stresses damaging riparian vegetation on a regular basis; § Whether appropriate flood flows are used having regard to steep catchment, channel modifications and future liability for land owners, Council and government agencies; and § The need for a sensitivity analysis for a range of flood hydrology and design flows having regard to supporting flood studies for development.
DIPNR(DLWC) considers key points relating to effective wildlife corridor widths for ecological function drawn from Australian and International guidelines, and which support the widths recommended in the Riparian Corridor Management Study (2003), are: § Appropriate widths for riparian buffer and corridors will depend on the specific ecosystems being managed and the bioregion; § Wider corridors are used by a wider range of fauna types and remain more effective over time; § Corridor widths suitable for wildlife habitat and movements range from a minimum of 50m to several hundred metres and the aim should be to revegetate land to at least 30m either side of a watercourse; § Between 46 and 76m from the top of bank is recommended for protection of stream functions in the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Integrated Stream Bank Protection Guidelines;
121 § A minimum of 100m (total corridor width) is recommended to facilitate movement of mammals and other terrestrial wildlife through bushland areas; § Waterway corridors should retain a minimum of 30m of vegetation on either side of the channel and major waterway corridors may require a 60m wide corridor on both sides of the waterway; and § The general philosophy is the wider the better with widths of 100m or more being more desirable if the land resources are available, but a minimum of 50m from the top of each bank is required if the function is for a wildlife corridor.
Furthermore, DIPNR(DLWC) considers the following design parameters would assist in establishing the spatial needs for the rehabilitation of the riparian corridors of Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks in a sustainable manner: § A multi-stage channel be reinstated that resembles the natural geomorphic form (a low capacity naturally functioning creek within a broader floodway). Analysis of landforms from historical aerial photography indicates that minimum basal floodpla in widths of 30m for Hewitts Creek and 40 to 70m for Woodlands Creek are appropriate. The general design should also exhibit a tendency for the corridors to widen downstream; § The low flow channels for Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks should be naturally treated and have a capacity no greater than the 2 year ARI flood. Analysis of the hydraulic capacity of abandoned channels on Woodlands Creek is likely to provide useful information on appropriate low flow channel capacities for this relatively undisturbed catchment that could be incorporated into final refinements of channel designs; § In order to address the inundation regimes required for sustainability, the basal floodplains should be inundated by the 5 year ARI flood and the Core Riparian Zone should lie largely within the basal floodplain; § The low flow channel for Woodlands Creek should be sinuous and meander across the reconstructed basal floodplain as much as practicable. This will assist in the development of pools and riffles, adding to the natural hydraulic diversity of the low flow channel; § Hewitts Creek naturally exhibits a lower sinuosity than Woodlands Creek but the large meander where Hewitts Creek exits the Sandon Point site be reinstated including the removal of the gabions on the south bank; § The top width of a reconstructed multi-stage channel may be governed by the batter slopes for a range of stability, safety and access issues. However, there is a need to consider the minimum widths required for ecological functions as identified in the documents submitted to this Commission of Inquiry, the Commission of Inquiry into the Long Term Planning and Management of the Illawarra Escarpment and the Riparian Corridor Management Study.
The recommended dimensions and associated descriptions of the form of the riparian corridor as set out in the study were developed according to best practice principles documented in numerous publications including the Rehabilitation Manual for Australian Streams (Rutherford et al., 1999), the Brisbane City Council Natural Channel Design Guidelines (BCC, 2000) and Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles Processes and Practices (USDA, 2000). An indicative cross-section and pla nform design for a meandering channel submitted by DIPNR(DLWC) is shown in Figure 8.
This results in the minimum required riparian corridor widths for Category 1 streams of 50m buffer (40m core + 10m vegetated buffer) from the top of each bank, and for Category 2 streams of 30m buffer (20m core + 10m vegetated buffer) from the top of each bank (see Table 2). When transposed to an aerial photograph and located to accord with the alluvial geology of Woodlands Creek, the DIPNR(DLWC) preferred conceptual riparian corridors for Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks are as shown in Figure 9. DIPNR(DLWC) points out, however, that these preferred riparian corridors do not consider matters other than riparian corridor issues. The community strongly supports the DIPNR(DLWC) recommendations with respect to riparian corridor design.
122 Figure 8: Floodplain Vegetation along a Meandering Channel.
Figure 9: DIPNR(DLWC) Preferred Conceptual Riparian Corridors
123 DIPNR(PlanningNSW) referred to the disturbance which had occurred to the three main watercourses within the CoI area. It noted that they still retain a number of natural values and perform roles in the conveyance of flood waters, water quality improvement, aesthetic appeal and open space, as well as supporting scarce wetland communities that provide habitat for a number of fauna species. DIPNR(PlanningNSW) stated it supports: § Riparian corridors being restored to reflect their former natural state including a more natural rather than engineered profile, as far as practicable. A more natural profile should provide better environmental performance and is considered more sustainable in the long term; § Riparian and wetland areas being zoned to reflect their role in environmental protection and/or enhancement and that appropriate buffers be implemented to protect these areas; § Woodlands Creek being re-established as a vegetated corridor link between the escarpment and the sea; § Wetland areas being retained, and rehabilitated where necessary, in a more natural state; and § The views of NPWS and DIPNR(DLWC) being sought in the preparation of a Plan of Management for natural areas.
Council is committed to sustainable ecological function of vegetated riparian corridors, which should not be compromised by other requirements such as flood conveyance or bushfire hazard mitigation buffers. The draft DCP for the site contains Council’s position in relation to riparian land management suggesting that the following principles are essential to establishing and maintaining a riparian corridor: § All riparian corridors should comprise a core riparian zone along each watercourse flanked by a vegetated riparian buffer on each side, limited development could occur in the buffer depending on the ecological values of the core riparian zone; and § A managed buffer zone outside the vegetated riparian buffer incorporating an asset protection zone. This zone could include roads, paths, playgrounds and stormwater management mechanisms.
Council’s objectives in relation to riparian corridors are: § Protection of existing wetland communities and restoration of wetlands to a state representing a natural coastal ecosystem. § Long-term protection, enhancement and management of the SCESFC and other Core Riparian Zone (CRZ) areas. § To ensure that the riparian corridors of Hewitts, Woodlands, Cooksons and Tramway Creeks are appropriately sized and rehabilitated with regard to providing sustainable ecological function. This objective should not be compromised by other requirements such as flood conveyance or bushfire buffers, but rather incorporated into the design in an integrated manner. § To ensure that the ecological and geomorphic amenity of the riparian corridors through the site are appropriately designed, rehabilitated and managed consistent with relevant policies and current best management practice. § Any rehabilitation or management of Woodlands Creek should have as its primary objectives: - To protect and enhance existing SCESFC and the wetlands; - To promote the continuous ecological linkage through the Illawarra railway corridor to the escarpment; and - To minimise human impacts on the riparian corridor. § Any rehabilitation or management of Cooksons Creek should have as its primary objectives: - To protect and enhance existing SCESFC and the wetlands; - To improve ecological integration of the riparian corridor with the Turpentine forest; and - To minimise human impacts on the riparian corridor. § Any rehabilitation or management of Tramway Creek should have as its primary objectives: - To protect and enhance existing SCESFC and the wetlands; and - To manage the already existing human impacts on the riparian corridor.
124 § Any rehabilitation or management of Hewitts Creek should have as its primary objectives: - To re-establish the CRZ; - To manage flood conveyance requirements; and - To manage the already existing human impacts on the Riparian Corridor. § All future riparian corridors on the site should be incorporated within Zone 6(a) Public Recreation (in accordance with Wollongong Local Environmental Plan 1990 as amended) to ensure that future Plans of Management will cover these areas.
Guidelines, performance measures for each of the four creeks, and additional required studies are set out in the draft DCP. A set of specific principles and controls related to setbacks, buffers and ongoing management to ensure protection and enhancement of ecological values generally and in particular for the SCESFC, riparian corridors, and the Turpentine forest has been developed. Environmental planning principles and requirements for riparian corridors are set out in Part 2, Section 2.4 of the draft DCP under Ecological Requirements: § Riparian corridors are made up of the Core Riparian Zone (CRZ) and Vegetated Riparian Buffer (VRB). § Ecological requirements are to be used to determine the width of riparian corridors. § The CRZ will be a minimum width of either 20m or the width of the existing SCESFC. § Flood conveyance requirements can be accommodated within the riparian corridors. § To protect and enhance the existing SCESFC, a minimum 40m vegetated riparian buffer is required around the SCESFC. § Rehabilitation of the riparian corridor along the existing piped section of Woodlands Creek should include a VRB of minimum of 10m either side of a 20m CRZ. § The total riparian corridor width for Hewitts Creek should range from a minimum of 40 to 65m, comprising of a CRZ of 10 to 35m, a minimum 20m VRB to the north of the creek, and a minimum 10m VRB to the south of the creek. § The boundaries of Tramway Creek have been determined by Stages 1 to 6 along the southern boundary. The northern boundary is defined by the cadastral boundary of the Cookson Plibrico site. § The total riparian corridor width for Cookson’s Creek should be a minimum of 70m, comprised of a CRZ of 20m, a southern VRB of minimum 10m and a northern VRB of minimum 40m. § Realignment of Woodlands Creek to restore it to its original path connecting to Tramway Creek. § Removal of the southern section of the gabion wall along Hewitts Creek to restore a natural meander for ecological purposes. § An additional buffer of minimum 10m should be provided from the edge of the pond/wetland just south of Woodlands Creek to provide a habitat for the endangered Green and Golden Bell Frog. § Protection and enhancement of the existing Turpentine forest by protecting riparian corridors with suitable buffers.
Stockland’s design objectives for creek systems and riparian corridors included that: § The existing creeks systems, regardless of dilapidated or non-existent form, should be rehabilitated where in existence or constructed with natural creek features. § The design of the creek system to take into consideration ecological, geomorphological, flooding, open space/recreation, landscape and urban design considerations. § The creek systems and associated riparian corridors must be designed so as to be practical in terms of their establishment and able to be maintained in the long term to ensure their ecological sustainability. In this regard, the riparian corridors have been designed to form part of an overall public open space system, linking to existing public reserves, particularly those located on the coastal fringe, incorporating natural systems.
125 Additionally, Stockland states its design of riparian zones would be consistent with the management actions recommended in its flora and fauna assessment and provide for both low flow and trickle flow channels. It also aims to balance the protection, enhancement and management of the riparian corridors, Turpentine forest and SCESFC areas with provision of a compatible and economically viable development, pointing out that long term maintenance costs need to be taken into account. However, Stockland considers the key to the long term management and, therefore, sustainability of the riparian corridors involves: § The provision of a mechanism (such as the economic development of the urban zoned land) to allow for the construction and embellishment of the riparian corridors. § The design of the corridors so as to reasonably ensure that they will be ecologically sustainable . § Provision of a mechanism to ensure that these lands are acquired from current owners on just terms so as to secure them as public open space and provide for their long term maintenance and management.
In commenting on Council’s draft DCP Stockland’s flora and fauna consultant (Connell Wagner, February 2003) notes that: Most centrally, the proposed draft instrument does not properly recognise the site being at the lower end of an urbanised catchment, where influences outside the site boundaries cannot be controlled. This in turn constrains the ability to achieve several of the objectives identified in the proposed draft DCP. In particular, the urbanised catchment is a source of contaminated stormwater runoff and weeds. The reedland/rushland in the middle sections of Cooksons Creek contains a high number of weed species. These factors call into question the ability of the objectives of the proposed draft DCP to achieve “sustainable” natural environments and “the long term protection” of wetlands on the Sandon Point site.
King and Buckney (2000) provide evidence of the difficulty of controlling impacts on native vegetation. They found that streams in urban areas are susceptible to both the invasion of exotic plants and the alteration of native plant communities. King and Buckney found that the invasion of nutrient enriched streams was almost inevitable given the number of possible sources for exotic propagules in urban areas.
Further, King and Buckney (2000) found that, even if exotic plants could be either removed or controlled, the original community of native species may not tolerate the altered conditions. Indeed, the changes in community composition indicated that the original community of native species was replaced with ‘weedy’ natives or native species adapted to higher nutrient concentrations in urban streams. These constraints must therefore be recognised in any evaluation of the potential impact of the proposal, particularly when considered against the aims and objectives of the proposed draft DCP.
The consultant’s report also states in relation to management actions for the four creeks on the subject land: Appropriate management recommendations and actions for Tramway, Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks are identified in the existing Deed of Agreement. These recommendations and actions were borne out of discussions with the DIPNR(DLWC), and contributed to a joint statement of experts in the Land and Environment Court. The Land and Environment approved the development and stipulated conditions for consent that were to minimise any likely adverse environmental impact and protect the amenity and character of the locality to ensure compliance with Environmental Planning Instruments.
It is noted that the width of the buffer to riparian vegetation differs between the Council’s proposed draft DCP, this report and those identified in the previous Deed of Agreement. While the buffers often have a similar shape, the proposed draft DCP buffers are often much wider than those proposed by this study and those in the previous Deed of Agreement. Notwithstanding this, it is considered that as the measures in the Deed of Agreement were adequate to minimise adverse environmental impacts such that consent could be granted, the proposal is in keeping with the intent of the proposed draft DCP. As such, the width of the riparian buffer proposed is appropriate.
126 It is considered that the management recommendations and actions previously proposed, and the preparation of a Vegetation Management Plan would adequately minimise any likely adverse environmental impact and comply with Environmental Planning Instruments.
As with the previous agreement, the management recommendations and actions for Cooksons Creek are considered likely to benefit not only the endangered SCESFC community, but also increase the habitat available for several of the locally occurring threatened fauna species.
Riparian and Vegetated Buffer Zones
Comments and recommendations made by Stockland’s consultant in relation to riparian vegetation and buffer zones included:
Cooksons Creek
Cooksons Creek contains an area of reedland/rushland located in a relatively short, incised drainage line that approximates the riparian zone. The drainage line passes from urban land to the west, under the Illawarra railway line through a culvert to cleared land, followed by the lower reaches of the Turpentine forest. It contains vegetation identified as being commensurate with the SCESFC.
The buffer zones for Cooksons Creek are based on those applied to Tramway and Woodlands Creeks, to ensure consistency amongst all buffers. The design of buffer zones involved the consideration of a number of factors, namely topography and stream morphology, flooding, SCESFC and the location of the site downstream of an urban area.
For Cooksons Creek, as was the case with Tramway and Woodland Creeks, a 30m buffer has been applied to the SCESFC, which is considered an ecologically robust buffer. It is noted the 30m buffer is flexible. The buffer applies to a corridor that may be wider or narrower in places than 30m, however, it encompasses an area of vegetation that is, as a whole, ecologically robust.
For the SCESFC buffers on Cooksons Creek, the buffer varies from a total width of 79m wide to the west, opening up to a width of approximately 270m when it becomes part of the larger area of vegetation associated with Tramway Creek. The northern section of the buffer for SCESFC (from the centre of the creek) varies from 21 to 24m, with the southern section of buffer from 55 to 56m.
For the riparian vegetation buffers on Cooksons Creek, the buffer is approximately 45 to 50m wide. This buffer varies from 35 to 10m to the south and 28 to 12m to the north, expanding to 130m to the north when the unnamed creek passes through the Turpentine forest.
A typical cross-section for Cooksons Creek proposed by Stockland at its eastern end is shown in Figure 10. A significantly wider creek corridor is proposed in the vicinity of the Turpentine forest.
Turpentine Forest
The Turpentine forest is to be protected, enhanced by removal of weed species and the planting of locally indigenous native species, and expanded as a single area of vegetation connected to the Tramway Creek Wetlands. Urban stormwater from the proposed development will not drain into the Turpentine forest.
127 Figure 10: Cooksons Creek Cross-section
South North
Tramway Creek
Tramway Creek contains a large area of reedland and an area of Eucalyptus robusta forest and Melaleuca styphelioides scrubland. All three of these vegetation units make up the mosaic referred to as SCESFC. To provide protection to this community, the southern bank of Tramway Creek is proposed to have a setback varying in width from 13 to 25m from the edge of the defined wetland boundary. This setback would effectively become a buffer to the wetland and the reedland components of the SCESFC community.
The minimum width of 13m was selected based on various planting schemes and what space various plants require to successfully grow in the area. It is noted that the 13m to 25m buffer zone does not represent an ecologically robust buffer zone (a minimum of 30m is generally required in this instance). However, the proposed 13 to 25m landscape buffer zone would allow for a vegetated link to be (re)established between the existing isolated forest and scrubland sections of the SCESFC community, and would also provide an effective buffer for the sensitive wetland/reedland components of the community. In this respect, the 13 to 25m landscape buffer would improve both the aesthetic and ecological values of the creek/community over what currently exists at the site, and would allow for the forest and scrubland components of the community to be re-established, thereby increasing species diversity and providing varied fauna habitat along Tramway Creek. In assessing potential impacts on SCESFC the consultant’s report (June 2001) noted that the assessment did not include increasing the size of the culvert through whic h Tramway Creek flows under the Illawarra railway line, or construction of a road bridge across Tramway Creek.
If the Cookson Plibrico property was to be acquired, a similar riparian buffer zone would also be required for the northern bank of Tramway Creek to allow for re-establishment of the forest components of the SCESFC community and to protect sensitive wetland/reedland areas according to the consultant (June 2001).
128 Woodlands Creek
Woodlands Creek provides the last remaining relatively undeveloped corridor from the Illawarra Escarpment to the ocean. As part of the proposed development on the site, it is recommended that Woodlands Creek be reconfigured and the existing piped section (extending to 250m east of the Illawarra railway) be opened up. A vegetated riparian buffer zone is to be established along and through Woodlands Creek (within the Stockland owned portions of the site) varying in width from 30 to 60m. Continuation of the riparian zone along Woodlands Creek east of the Stockland owned land is highly desirable and recommended; however, this is outside of the scope of the current assessment.
The waterway of Woodlands Creek would be a flat based, vegetated channel. Some sections of the creek may be terraced, and a central low-flow channel is proposed within a 10m wide creek base. Areas to be vegetated within the riparian zone include: § Both sides of the low-flow channel (min. 2m on each side of the 6m channel); § The batters (total min. 20m horizontally; max. 50m horizontally); § Land beyond the batters to a distance defined by the width of the riparian zone in that location; § Land in the easement beside the adjoining road; and § Land zoned 88B adjacent to the creek.
At the western end of Woodlands Creek (adjacent to the Illawarra railway), the riparian zone would be approximately 40m wide, reducing to 30m at the proposed road crossing (150m east of railway), and then increasing to 60m before reducing to 35m at the eastern property boundary. To achieve an ecologically sound corridor, the buffer is recommended to be approximately 60m wide tapering to 50m wide for a length of 70m.
A typical cross-section for Woodlands Creek proposed by Stockland is shown in Figure 11.
Figure 11: Woodland s Creek Cross-section
North South
129 Hewitts Creek
The need for a buffer zone along the upper reaches of Hewitts Creek is less pronounced than for Woodlands or Tramway Creeks given the deeply incised nature of this creek and the presence of gabions which help to avoid scour of the banks during periods of high flow.
The alignment of the DCP boundary along Hewitts Creek needs to be reconfigured to allow for appropriate set backs from the creek embankment, but the overall total area of the creek within the DCP will remain essentially unchanged. Proposed works may necessitate the removal of some or most of the vegetation currently in Hewitts Creek; however, as the species are predominately introduced this is not considered to represent a significant threat to either native species or communities.
The vegetation within the creek (and along the banks) is prolific and includes a very high proportion of introduced species. It is considered that the existing vegetation along Hewitts Creek, with the exception of the Turpentine and Fig trees in the northeast corner adjoining the houses, can be removed and replaced with native species indicative of either the SCESFC community or a moist forest community. Native vegetation growing in and along the creek should be propagated and replanted in the riparian zone, as should the following slower growing species that are expected to have once grown in the area including the Cheese Tree-(Glochid ion ferdinandi), Lilypily (Acmena smithii) and Syzygium spp.
In addition the consultant recommends an 88B zone for all lots abutting the creeks to further increase the effective setback by up to 6m.
Management Strategies
A vegetation management plan and strategy, and a riparian corridors management strategy are proposed by Stockland consistent with Council’s requirement for an Integrated Management Plan. Species selection for the riparian corridors will use locally endemic native plants, including those characteristic of the SCESFC community.
Mr Van Wijk referred to the findings and recommendations of the Illawarra Escarpment Commission of Inquiry concerning riparian corridors. He points out that at that Inquiry the then DIPNR(DLWC) considered riparian corridors should be actively managed and a minimum setback of 30 to 40m from the top of the creek banks imposed, with 40m be ing required for greenfields sites and non-urban lands. In addition, in his report Commissioner Simpson considered a critical attribute of such areas is that they provide linkage between the escarpment and coastal areas. Commissioner Simpson also recommended a 40m building setback from the top of creek banks wherever possible to prevent further deterioration of existing environmental conditions. Furthermore, a restricted development area wider than 40m may be required to protect the ecological values of a riparian corridor.
Mr Van Wijk contends in these circumstances due consideration must be given to linking the proposed escarpment park to the “significant environmental and culturally sensitive areas on the coastal plain”. He considers a 40m setback to creeks on the Sandon Point site would be a suitable, but not optimum buffer. It would provide “a robust and sustainable ecological corridor for all creeks that transverse the Sandon Point site”. Moreover, the coast could be linked to the escarpment by two significant green corridors along Woodlands and Tramway/Slacky Creeks.
Creek Crossings
Stockland proposes to construct bridges across Tramway, Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks. There is no proposed bridge crossing for Cooksons Creek. The proposed crossing of Woodlands Creek is located in a currently cleared area, and as such will not involve the removal of native vegetation. The
130 crossing of Hewitts Creek is proposed through degraded areas largely comprised of fill with some vegetation.
The proposed bridge crossing of Tramway Creek passes through areas that are based on fill and/or contain degraded vegetation. The placement of a concrete span bridge would require the removal of vegetation as part of the management actions for Tramway Creek, and as such is seen to have negligible impacts on native vegetation and the integrity of future management actions. However, as the bridge crossing is located in the riparian zone, it has the potential to expose substrates and lead to erosion. Stockland considers that an Environmental Management Plan would be able to mitigate impacts associated with the construction of the bridge crossing of Tramway Creek.
Culvert Widening
Future proposals flowing from the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan will involve the enlargement of culverts under the Illawarra railway line at Tramway and Woodlands Creeks. This has the potential to impact on SCESFC vegetation in Tramway Creek, however, this would not occur on Woodlands Creek, as SCESFC vegetation is not present near these works.
The existing SCESFC in Tramway Creek immediately east of the Illawarra railway is degraded, contains a number of exotic species, and is to be rejuvenated by SCESFC plantings according to Stockland. This will still occur with the enlargement of the culvert. As such, the key impact of the placement of the wider culvert is seen to be increased flow during high rainfall events. The streams and plantings have been designed to accommodate, as far as is practicable, increased flows during these high rainfall events.
Flood and Stormwater Conveyance
The well defined floodplains and terraces across the mid-catchment zone of the Illawarra region have evolved to their current dimensions for several reasons: § To convey floodwaters; § Accommodate large organic debris loads; and § To accumulate sediment delivered from upstream by major flood events.
Dr Davis and Mr Van Wijk pointed out that in times of large storm events the former AIR site, much of which was originally quite swampy, would have been part of the floodplain of Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks. Its role would have been to slow the flow rate thus reducing erosion and channelisation of the creek corridor. They conclude that the attempted confinement of Hewitts Creek has failed. Moreover, it has increased the ecological deterioration, the flood risks and the scour rate of the creek bed.
DIPNR(DLWC) advocates an hydraulic geomorphic assessment to address the hydraulic impacts of proposed works on creek stability and geomorphology, and to resolve width requirements for flood conveyance. It suggests stability criteria should be checked for both a fully vegetated condition (Manning’s ‘n’ = 0.20) and the post-construction condition Manning’s ‘n’ = 0.03). Council’s DCP requires a hydraulic geomorphic assessment which DIPNR(DLWC) strongly supports.
Stockland argued that in assessment of creek stability it had allowed for aquatic plants, sedges and tussock grass, which are able to withstand shear stresses much larger than the 50N/m2 being insisted upon by DIPNR(DLWC). According to Stockland, its proposals would ensure creek stability in the long term.
131 Coast to Escarpment Corridor
Establishment of effective riparian or wildlife corridors from the coast to the escarpment for one or more of Hewitts Creek, Tramway Creek and/or Woodlands Creek is suggested in many submissions including government agency submissions. Council’s draft DCP and Stockland’s Master Plan as relevant for portions of the CoI area support development of riparian corridors. Effective riparian corridors are strongly supported by the community.
A number of community submissions, as well as DIPNR(DLWC) and NPWS, consider riparian corridors associated with Woodlands Creek, and to a lesser extent Tramway Creek would provide an opportunity to effectively link the coast to the escarpment with a green corridor. These parties suggest a wider riparian corridor for Woodlands Creek within the CoI area than proposed by Council’s draft DCP or Stockland’s Master Plan, linking to the escarpment through largely non- urbanised lands to the west of the Illawarra railway line. They contend there is little or no opportunity elsewhere in the northern Illawarra to establish an effective riparian corridor from the coast to the escarpment. Moreover, such a corridor would re-establish an ecological connectivity which once existed, albeit in a minor but nevertheless important step towards establishing a level of ecological sustainability for the Sandon Point lands.
As pointed out by DIPNR(DLWC), of particular note for Woodlands Creek is that 79 percent of the catchment is in a relatively natural state, 16 percent is rural and only 5 percent is urbanised. The low level of urban development and the high percentage of natural vegetation is a sound basis from which to develop an effective riparian corridor from the coast to the escarpment over time, according to DIPNR(DLWC). It is consistent with the Riparian Corridor Management Study referred to more fully elsewhere in this section of the report.
Stockla nd expressed reservations as to the effectiveness of such a corridor, particularly given the level of urban development in the upstream catchment and the major disruption to any wildlife corridor due to the Illawarra railway, the Princes Highway and private land.
Stockland contends that the corridors provided in its Master Plan are sufficient to allow acceptable ecological functions and that wider corridors would not provide measurably greater benefits. It refers the original advice provided by the then DLWC and the later Deed of Agreement which set riparian corridor widths. DIPNR’s(DLWC) current position is clearly inconsistent with the then DLWC’s position, and it is “entirely unreasonable” for DIPNR(DLWC) to renege on previous advice according to Stockland. Moreover, the Master Plan proposed by Stockland will see not only new housing, but also a very significant improvement in the quality of the watercourses, their riparian zones and the connections from the escarpment to the coast. These features will be integrated with the new community and with the retained foreshore, and will be sustainable in the sense that the community (both the new and the existing) will be able to afford the inevitable cost of maintenance.
The Tramway, Woodlands, and Hewitts Creek catchments are shown on Figure 12.
Impacts of Urbanisation
Woodlands Creek is unique in the urbanised areas of Wollongong according to DIPNR(DLWC), for as pointed out above, land use in its catchment is 79 percent native vegetation, 16 percent rural and 5 percent urban. Land use in the catchment of Hewitt’s Creek is 59 percent natural vegetation. DIPNR(DLWC) considers these catchments, and particularly that of Woodlands Creek, provide a sound basis for restoration of effective riparian corridors.
132 Figure 12: Catchments Upstream of the CoI Area
133 Although agreeing with DIPNR’s(DLWC) assessment of land use in the catchments of Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks, Stockland disagrees with DIPNR’s(DLWC) interpretation of the downstream impacts through the CoI area at Sandon Point. Stockland considers there are two factors, connectivity and nutrients/ sediments, which will mitigate against the successful establishment of viable weed-free and low-maintenance corridors, no matter how wide the corridors.
In relation to connectivity Stockland points to the private ownership of riparian lands west of the Princes Highway and the highly disturbed nature of portions of the catchment of Woodlands Creek. The Illawarra railway line and the Princes Highway are also major disruptions to the riparian corridor where they cross Woodlands Creek. Upper Hewitts Creek is separated from Sandon Point by residential development. Moreover, the Sandon Point lands are highly altered, and subject to weed invasion, as well as nutrients and sediment in runoff. Even if exotic species could be removed, the original vegetation may not tolerate the altered conditions. These latter factors are more likely to influence re-establishment of native vegetation than the proportion of upstream native vegetation, according to Stockland.
Commission’s Comments
The fundamental importance of riparian zones for ecological functions and flood conveyance is not disputed by parties to the Commission. Furthermore, it is generally agreed that flood conveyance should not compromise ecological functions. What is not agreed are the attributes required of riparian zones to ensure robust ecological function together with effective flood conveyance in the long-term. The required width, channel design and the density of vegetation are disputed by various parties.
Stockland’s argument for riparian zones to accord with the Deed of Agreement has little merit if ecological function is given appropriate consideration. While narrower riparian zones are relevant for Hewitts and Tramway Creeks due to their disturbed nature and limited opportunity for robust corridor links, the same cannot be said for Cooksons and Woodlands Creeks. Despite the highly disturbed nature of Woodlands Creek east of the railway line, its rehabilitation to provide the initial part of an environmental corridor link from the coast to the escarpment is supported by most parties. However, the width required to provide a robust environmental corridor is strongly contested.
The Commission considers argument that 30m is the minimum width that can provide a robust corridor could be supported in some limited situations. However, the evidence before the Commission is that the wider the corridor the better it can function, although even a narrow corridor is better than no corridor at all. The weight of evidence is that for a major link as is proposed along Woodlands Creek, a minimum vegetated riparian corridor width of 100m is needed to provide effective corridor function. Buffer zones on either side of a core area are essential to limit edge effects.
The Commission also strongly supports consideration of the cumulative significance of the undeveloped nature of the Woodlands Creek catchment, the Tramway Creek wetlands, the Turpentine forest, the Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex (SCEFSC), the potential for reinstatement of former water courses, and Aboriginal heritage values in the design and development of riparian corridors.
The historic approach to riparian issues has focused on the minimum requirements for flood conveyance and is reflected to some extent in the current zoning of the CoI area. It has been proven in the Illawarra to have limitations in delivering ecologically sustainable outcomes. Effective design of riparian corridors requires integrating flood conveyance, natural channel designs and ecological factors, stormwater treatments, and bushfire protection early in the design process using best management practices. The Commission is not satisfied that Stockland’s proposal achieves the required balance between these parameters (in that its riparian corridor design favours hydraulic considerations) and is not sufficiently consistent with its own ecological consultant’s
134 recommendations. Stockland’s proposals do not result in an equitable or sustainable balance between ecological function and development. Nevertheless, the Master Plan process if rigorously applied provides for the balanced integration of the relevant cultural, ecological, riparian, and development issues. It is strategically important for this to occur.
The Commission finds that riparian corridor design should be determined generally according to the principles set out in the Riparian Corridor Management Study (April 2003). This approach is consistent with previous and ongoing planning initiatives in the Illawarra which have been supported by the NSW Government. Stockland’s proposed riparian corridor treatments do not adequately provide for the natural geomorphic function of the creek systems as shown by the 1938 aerial photograph of the CoI area (Figure 7).
The Commission recommends the following parameters be adopted for designing and establishing riparian corridors on the CoI area at Sandon Point:
Woodlands Creek § Remove the piped section as proposed by Stockland and broadly supported by other parties. § A core riparian zone of minimum total width 80m. § A vegetated buffer to counter edge effects 10m wide outside the core riparian zone. § A low flow channel of about 1 year ARI capacity to meander within a floodpla in having a base dimension of 40m to 70m. § Review stability and flood capacity issues using a Manning’s n=0.20 for established vegetation or justify using a different Manning’s n value by way of a sensitivity analysis. § Return the creek flow to its original course in the eastern CoI area.
Hewitts Creek § Remove gabion wall from the southern bank. § A core riparian zone of minimum total width 30m. § A vegetated buffer to counter edge effects 10m wide outside the core riparian zone. § A low flow channel of about 1 year ARI capacity to meander within a floodpla in having a base dimension of 20 to 30m. § Review stability and flood capacity issues using a Manning’s n=0.20 for established vegetation or justify using a different Manning’s n value by way of a sensitivity analysis. § Return the natural meanders of the creek in the eastern portion of the CoI area.
Tramway Creek § Approved riparian setbacks on the southern bank. § Cookson Plibrico fenceline on the northern bank.
Cooksons Creek § A min imum 2 to 5m grassed strip outside the kerb and other approved development adjacent to the eastern part of the factory development. § Mowed grass areas maintained for staff amenity and asset protection adjacent to the western part of the factory development not to encroach within 10m of the existing tree line. § Areas other than the factory footprint and asset protection zones to be zoned 7(a) and brought into public ownership over time.
Plans of management will need preparation and implementation and should include matters relating to vegetation establishment and initial maintenance, future maintenance for flood mitigation, long-term general maintenance, establishment of the vegetated buffer zone, and asset (fire) protection zones, as well as provision of access ways, public open space areas, and stormwater treatment wetlands/ponds.
135 Coast to Escarpment Corridor
The aerial photograph reproduced as Figure 12 shows the Hewitts Creek, Tramway Creek and Woodlands Creek catchments. It indicates the potential for a riparian corridor along Woodlands Creek to provide an effective link from the coast to the escarpment, notwithstanding the presence of the Illawarra railway line , the Princes highway and private property.
The Woodlands Creek catchment is largely undeveloped and provides the best opportunity for establishing a significant habitat link between the escarpment and the coast in the northern Illawarra region. In addition, the majority of the catchment has either 7(a) or 7(b) environmental protection zonings. The Commission is not convinced that the effects of urban development within the catchment, including domestic animals and weed infestation, should be accepted as a reason for not developing an effective environmental corridor along Woodlands Creek given its largely undeveloped nature. There is strong evidence that the Woodlands Creek corridor has substantial potential to be developed as a sustainable environmental corridor with important ecological values. Long-term planning objectives should also be adopted to ensure that the barriers posed by the Illawarra railway and the Princes highway are minimised by any future upgrading works.
The Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan proposes a retarding basin with sediment pond on Woodlands Creek west of the Princes Highway, albeit as a low priority. However, it would enhance the ecological value of the Woodlands Creek corridor. The disturbed area between the Princes highway and Illawarra railway could be rehabilitated/restored with assistance from the RTA and the local landcare group to minimise potential impacts on the CoI area downstream. The privately owned lands between the proposed retarding basin and the escarpment are zoned 7(b) Environmental Protection Conservation. Urbanization of this area is highly unlikely given its current zoning. Thus, in the Commission’s view, a viable environmental corridor could be developed along Woodlands Creek from the coast to the escarpment through the AIR site. Furthermore, anecdotal evidence indicated the Woodlands Creek corridor was a wildlife escape route during the 1968 bushfire. The Commission considers such an east-west link is important to join fragmented habitats between the coast and the escarpment, contribute to habitat diversity, and enhance the ecological value of the land.
The Commission is persuaded of the significant potential for the establishment of an important and effective environmental corridor between the coast and the escarpment suggested in submissions. An effective environmental corridor would take time and money to fully establish given the level of development and the man-made disturbances between the coast and the escarpment. It would require consultation between Council, government agencies, landowners and the community. The Commission recommends that DIPNR assist Council, in partnership with landowners and the community, to develop and implement a management plan for the establishment of an environmental corridor from the coast to the escarpment along Woodlands Creek.
136 FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
Floodplain management in the Wollongong local government area is particularly challenging given the rainfall pattern and the topography. Council has the statutory responsibility in regard to floodplain management. It needs to be satisfied with flood related considerations and the estimation of flood planning levels. The Floodplain Management Manual (2001) provides current best management practice for floodplain issues in NSW, consistent with broader policy issues. The Manual requires decision making for floodplain management to address: § A risk management hierarchy of avoidance, minimisation by planning, and mitigation; § A need to maintain and enhance creek environments as part of flood modification measures; § An increased emphasis on catchment considerations; § A need to consider cumulative impacts; and § A need to consider the full range of floods up to the PMF.
According to DIPNR any future land use planning at Sandon Point should work to integrate these issues. DIPNR noted that Counc il’s draft DCP has incorporated many of these principles, which it considers commendable.
Council adopted the Hewitts Creek Flood Study (December 2002) and the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan (December 2002) on 4 February 2003 rela ting to Hewitts, Woodlands, Tramway, Slacky and Thomas Gibson Creeks. These documents provide relevant background to flood management on the CoI area for integration with Council’s draft DCP, Managing Our Flood Risks. They established existing flood behaviour within the catchment; determined flood extent, levels, depths and velocity of flood waters; derived both hydrologic and hydraulic calibrated models; and provided the basis for assessing risk of dwelling inundation, property accessibility, evacuation and other hazards resulting from floods. Amendments to some existing planning policies and controls are recommended and a range of measures to reduce flood risk considered. Assumptions and details within the Flood Study and Plan were challenged in submissions from some residents.
The Hewitts Creek Flood Study indicates flood liable lands in the catchment. Within the western portion of the CoI area flood liable lands are confined to the creek corridors and that portion of the AIR site between Hewitts Creek and Woodlands Creek. Stockland stated that all the proposed residential lots are located outside the high and medium flood risk zones. The portion of the AIR site proposed for residential lots is rated as a low hazard zone.
Any development of the CoI area would need to have due regard to the relevant findings and following recommendations of the abovementioned studies: § Provision of a high flow culvert under the railway line at Tramway Creek – High Priority. § Re-diversion of Woodlands Creek from Hewitts Creek to Tramway Creek – High Priority. § Enlargement and stabilisation of the existing creek from Woodlands Creek to Tramway Creek – Low Priority. § Provision of a high flow culvert under the railway line at Woodlands Creek – High Priority. § Construction of a levee along the northern bank of Hewitts Creek near Corbett Avenue – High Priority. § Closure of the access lane along Hewitts Creek from Lawrence Hargrave Drive to the railway line , and creation of a creek channel with offline water quality pond and sediment trap – Low Priority.
The studies recommend that the high priority actions should occur over a 1 to 5 year horizon. The enlargement and stabilisation of the rediversion of Woodlands Creek to Tramway Creek is not supported by the community due to Aboriginal heritage and ecological considerations, but the rediversion itself is generally supported.
137 DIPNR(DLWC) refers to the Hewitts Creek flood studies to highlight flooding issues directly relevant to the future planning at Sandon Point including: § Flood design flows should reflect current understanding of flood behaviour including Council’s blockage policy implications; § Flood design flows should not rely on any attenuation of flood flows by the Illawarra railway. This is because future resolution to the existing flood problems upstream of the railway may be compromised; § Future works to mitigate flooding should address the need to maintain and enhance the riverine and floodplain environments including consideration of the needs of threatened species, populations and ecological communities; § Re-instatement of Woodlands Creek to its original path to the lower Tramway Creek wetlands. This will reduce the flood impacts to existing development in the lower Hewitts Creek area but is also consistent with other creek and wetland rehabilitation strategies including re- establishment of ecological connectivity with ocean/wetlands and escarpment; and § Consideration of the full range of floods up to the probable maximum flood and the implications of such an event on life and property to future owners and occupiers. This should include blockage impacts and implications of flood flows overtopping the railway. It is noted that the railway was never designed for overtopping. The consent authority may seek to check the implications of overtopping flows on embankment stability and subsequent risks to life downstream in the event that measures are required to manage this issue.
Council carries complete responsibility for flood related assessments associated with any new development at Sandon Point and will need to be satisfied that any new development is consistent with the Flood Prone Land Policy as set out in the Floodplain Management Manual (2001). In addition, future land use planning consideration of flooding for the site should also address provisions in: § Section 117 (2) direction – G25 Flood Liable Land. § Illawarra REP – notably clauses 3,28,65,66,114 and 116. § Wollongong City Council’s draft Managing Our Flood Risks DCP (2002). § Wollongong City Council’s draft DCP for Sandon Point (2003).
DIPNR(DLWC) supports the need for the hydraulic implications of future creek rehabilitation strategies on flood behaviour to be integrated into the analysis.
Floodplain Planning
Floodplain management is interlinked with riparian corridor management and any action undertaken impacts on both. To ensure compatibility between the two, DIPNR considers it would be appropriate for Council to implement the following: § Once the proposed riparian corridor footprints have been plotted, floodplain management studies should model the hydraulic implications of the higher roughness on flood planning levels; § Where existing development will potentially be adversely affected by dense revegetation of the proposed riparian corridors, strategies to implement flood compatible (low hydraulic resistance) type riparian vegetation or other mitigation works should be recommended; § Ensure that new flood detention basins proposed to mitigate flooding in existing development are located off-line wherever possible; § Ensure that flood detention basins and other works that aim to mitigate the impact of new development on flooding are always located off-line; and § Expedite the floodplain management planning process to ensure the co-ordinated delivery of flood risk management and related riparian management objectives within a suitable timeframe.
138 According to DIPNR it is critical to ensure that any riparian rehabilitation recommended does not increase flood levels to existing development. To ensure this is the case, some compromises may be required to the extent of rehabilitation that can be achieved, such as less dense vegetation or flood compatible vegetation that bends and offers less resistance to flood flows. Council generally concurs with DIPNR’s suggested approach and points out that any proposal associated with floodplain management needs to be analysed in detail to avoid long term negative impacts on future residents and the ecology of the site.
DIPNR remains concerned over the largely straight creek forms proposed by Stockland. Shear stresses resulting from increased stream gradients and hydraulic loading could have implications for long term stream stability. Proposed channels would require reinforcing and vegetation would be damaged on a regular basis. DIPNR advocates the provision of a wider floodway comprised of a multi-function flood conveyance area with a broad local floodplain.
It has further concerns that Stockland’s adopted peak design flood flows for Woodlands Creek may inadequate ly represent the true situation. This is because of assumptions in the hydrologic and hydraulic modelling that there was little by way of calibration data, and a large portion of the upper catchment is very steep with potentially no catchment la g characteristics. A review of the flood flow analysis or a sensitivity analysis of design flows is recommended by DIPNR. DIPNR also raised concern that following review of the flood flows Stockland now proposes to convey more than twice the originally anticipated flow in the creek corridors without any increase in space. It has requested that an hydraulic geomorphic assessment be undertaken by Stockland due to the implications for creek stability.
Draft Development Control Plan
Council’s draft DCP sets out general objectives and principles, guidelines and performance measures. In addition, it requires the developer to submit a Flood Management Strategy.
General Objectives and Principles § Prevention and minimisation of flood risk to any existing or future developments in the catchment area through appropriate development and sensitive flood mitigation controls. § Consideration of the ecological objectives of riparian corridor management in determining the flood management requirements. § Incorporation of open space and recreational opportunities within the flood plain. § Use of drainage easements and flood-ways as an integrated part of the urban design and open space development.
Guidelines § Rehabilitation of riparian corridors should be primarily based on ecological requirements, and not compromised by flood conveyance requirements. § Integration of ecological and flood conveyance requirements. § Hard engineered flood structures are not preferred and should be minimised. § Works should minimise use of landfill or significant changes from original ground levels. § Future development of residential areas should be free of flood risk (up to the 1 in 100 year flood level plus 0.5m). § Future development should ensure there is no additional flood impact to upstream areas. § Proposed development should ensure that proposed creek crossings do not cause any increase in flood levels upstream. § The Master Plan should ensure consideration is given to emergency management issues (access and egress) during a probable maximum flood (PMF).
139 Performance Measures § Land for residential use must be outside of the High Flood Risk Precinct. § Land for residentia l use must be at or above the 1 in 100 year flood level plus 0.5m.
Filling of Land
Council submitted that in accordance with the Floodplain Management Plan filling of land may be considered east of the Illawarra railway subject to: § No flood affectation to adjoining properties; § No loss of flood storage; § Assessment of environmental impacts which could result from increased water velocities and changes to stream morphology; and § An engineer’s report quantifying effects.
Creek Crossings
Council requires that stream crossings: § Do not increase flood levels past the upstream landowners of the site; § Be investigated for their effect on the PMF; § Include appropriate freeboard to the deck soffit; § Include stream treatments to withstand outlet velocities; and § Are designed in accordance with Council’s conduit blockage policy.
Illawarra Railway
The current situation is that culverts under the Illawarra railway at Tramway Creek and at Woodlands Creek are inadequate for flood flows experienced in the locality. These culverts are also prone to blockage. The Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan considers that enlargement of these two culvers is a high priority action.
To highlight concerns, Mr Van Wijk submitted technical evidence which indicated that in 100 year ARI (average return interval) and PMF events, the Illawarra railway line could be overtopped at Tramway Creek in the event of the culvert blocking. The railway (average top of line) is at 17.2m AHD (Australian Height Datum), whereas the above flood events would peak at 17.4m AHD and 17.8m AHD respectively. A number of submissions expressed concern for residents living downstream as well as for the wetlands, should the railway embankment fail in these conditions.
Flood Assessment
Stockland has assessed the stormwater and flood design for the riparian areas of Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks by applying the following principles: § Establishing a Core Riparian Zone with a minimum width of 30m; § Provid ing a low flow channel with a 1 to 2 year ARI capacity, which will then break out into an overflow area. This overflow area will then be within a broader floodplain with a capacity to contain the 100 year ARI and the PMF; § The trickle flow channel (3 month ARI capacity) would meander through the low flow channel to enhance and encourage hydraulic and aquatic diversity; § Consistency with management actions recommended in the Sandon Point Flora and Fauna Assessment 2001. In particular, the adoption of the layouts of the buffer zones and typical creek sections contained in that report;
140 § Ensuring that NSW Fisheries’ requirements/guidelines regarding any creek crossings or changes in creek bed levels are incorporated into the design; § Floodplain management requirements to accord with the Flood Plain Management Manual and local requirements of Council. The design is to be consistent with the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study; and § For the purpose of flood planning level determination, the capacity of the creeks is to be checked by undertaking hydraulic modelling following Council’s Blockage Policy.
Catchment Hydrology
The nature of the hydrology of the catchment is quite complex, as there are several places where significant diversions of flow occur. The major locations that impact on the site are: § The culvert under the disused tramway embankment, parallel to Hobart Street. This culvert is located in the Slacky Creek catchment and is undersized for the catchment draining to it (180ha). A consequence of being undersized is that this culvert has shown a tendency to block with debris during storms. The combination of these factors has the potential to cause major diversions of flows to Tramway Creek, potentially quadrupling the expected flows in the 100 year ARI storm event; and § The railway culvert on Woodlands Creek also creates a major diversion of flow. Here the culvert has a capacity of around the 5 year ARI storm event. For larger storm events, flow is diverted through pr ivate property between Hewitts Avenue and the Illawarra railway.
To investigate the nature of the hydrology of the catchment caused by these and other blockages and diversions a number of modes were investigated: § Clear All structures and opportunities for flows to be diverted in or out of the stream are clear; § Blocked All structures and opportunities for flows to be diverted in or out of the stream are blocked as set out in Council’s Blockage Policy; and § Mixed Structures and opportunities for flows to be diverted in or out of the stream are either blocked or unblocked to develop the critical blockage pattern to maximise flows.
As a result of the complex nature of the catchment hydrology, the site has been considered for three periods: § No development and no flood mitigation measures implemented (corresponding to existing conditions); § Site developed and no flood mitigation measures implemented (corresponding to a period of 0 to 5 years after development); and § Site developed and flood mitigation measures imple mented (corresponding to a period of 5 plus years after development).
Each of these periods corresponds to major changes in the catchment and creek conditions. In each case the worst-case conditions have been utilised to determine the peak 100 year ARI flow in the respective creek.
The Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study has identified the existing flood hazard for the catchment and has described the hazards as: § High Flood Risk Being identified as land subject to a high hydraulic hazard in the 100 year ARI event. This is to include all land within 10m of the top of the creek bank as a setback for erosion risks. § Medium Flood Risk Being identified as land at a level below the 100 year ARI flood level plus 0.5m freeboard/safety margin.
141 § Low Flood Risk All other land within the floodplain (within the limits of PMF flooding) but not identifie d as high or medium flood risk.
The Study recommended a range of mitigation measures to reduce the impact of the designated flood on the catchment as noted above.
Creek Characteristics
Hewitts Creek
Hewitts Creek is a heavily urbanised catchment (43 percent) which will be a limiting factor on the long-term natural regeneration of the creek. The two main reasons for this are: § The upstream seed bank is dominated by exotic vegetation; and § Nutrient levels (in particular phosphorus and nitrates) are likely to be elevated above natural levels and thus favour the growth of exotic over native vegetation.
In its current state the creek on the AIR site would be considered highly degraded. The creek is not closely linked or connected to naturally vegetated upstream reaches. Sections of the creek in urban areas are in poor condition, which would provide a source of seeds, organic matter and nutrients. This will be a limiting factor in the long-term future of the creek.
Downstream, the situation is a little better, with the creek being in reasonable condition although it is a distal remnant and could be viewed as being an “isolated reach with high recovery potential”. It is possible that Typha and Phragmites will migrate upstream and occupy the channels that are created by the rehabilitation works. These emergent vegetation types will provide habitat and also protect the channel during flows in two ways: § They will bind the soil and channel boundary materials reducing direct erosion; and § During high flows they will lie down and actually reduce channel roughness (in channel Manning’s n values will therefore be less during peak flows) by smoothing the creek bed.
Woodlands Creek
Woodlands Creek is a predominantly ‘natural’ creek with only 16.8 percent given over to urban development. Woodlands Creek has the best potential for sustained recovery because the upstream catchment is predominantly bush or rural in nature. It also has a very high chance of retaining and sustaining any replanted native vegetation because the upstream seed banks are natural and the system will not be under constant bombardment from exotic seeds and water enriched in phosphorus and nitrates.
In its current condition the creek on the AIR site is highly degraded but it is well connected to stable, self maintaining systems upstream and downstream. According to Stockland the management strategies proposed are an effective and pragmatic means of achieving river conservation. Without intervention, the creek will never recover because disturbance has diminished and removed any semblance of suitable biophysical structure. The creek will be almost entirely created from scratch, one that incorporates the maximum possible biophysical diversity as well as integrating the requirements for flood mitigation, within the agreed confines of the riparian corridor.
Cooksons Creek
Cooksons Creek is a small, stable creek. It appears in relatively good condition and requires no major engineering or changes to the current fluvial geomorphological structure in order to naturalize or create a more desirable structure.
142 Tramway Creek
Tramway Creek is the southern-most of the creeks and was studied for the now approved development on Stages 1 to 6. Stage 7 (Lot 235), which has now been reshaped with fill from Stages 1 to 6, is within the CoI area and abuts Tramway Creek to the south. Hydraulic modelling indicates that the 100 year ARI flood would be contained by the earthworks with 0.5m freeboard, and about one-third of the site would be flooded in a PMF. There would be no change in flood level upstream of the Illawarra railway in a 100 year ARI or a PMF event.
As noted under Flora and Fauna the impact of amplifying the Tramway Creek culvert under the Illawarra railway on the downstream SCESFC would need to be assessed prior to those works. Incorporation of mitigation measures into any proposed works are likely to be needed to protect the SCESFC.
Manning’s Roughness Coefficient
The roughness of channels is a significant consideration in flood modelling. Stockland provided detail on the calculation of the roughness values it used and the assumptions behind its selection. Roughness factors depend on a number of parameters including surface irregularities, variation in cross-section size, the level of obstruction, vegetation and flow conditions, and degree of channel meandering. Both Council and DIPNR contended that the implications of using a roughness coefficient of 0.20 should be assessed whereas Stockland has used values between 0.045 and 0.13 depending on the conditions being modelled, and whether the flow was channel or overbank flow.
Stockland considers that using a value of 0.20 across the whole zone assumes no maintenance of the riparian corridor, and would be highly conservative. Values cited over 0.15 apply to heavily vegetated overbank and floodplain locations and not to the channel itself according to Stockland. The proposed rehabilitation envisages that creek channels would remain open and that the proposed aquatic species would: § Bind and stabilise the sediments with their roots; and § Lie down in the channel during flooding, thus reducing the effective roughness.
DIPNR’s concerns relate to the potential for increased flood liability and risk to life for future development proposed on the floodplain. And that it may lead to future demands to clear riparian vegetation for flood mitigation. DIPNR points out that it prefers a natural design of the riparian zone such that a sustainable, fully structured vegetation assemblage which includes dense plantings of trees, shrubs and ground cover for the full width of the riparian zone is established. This will invariably result in obstructions in the channel, variations in channel cross-section, and meandering of the channel within the floodplain. It noted that the values used in the Hewitts Creek Flood Study do not reflect the proposed conditions in the riparian zones on the CoI area.
Mr Van Wijk also provided information on Manning roughness coefficients noting that while application of the various factors are somewhat arbitrary “it is reasonable to consider the final condition of the riparian corridor when deciding on the value chosen”. He considers Stockland have leaned towards the low end of the range of values.
143 Commission’s Comments
The Commission recognises the extensive investigations which Council has undertaken for the Hewitts Creek catchment. Despite a number of challenges by residents to the detail of Council’s investigations, the study nevertheless provides a sound basis for stormwater and floodplain management considerations on the CoI area. The Floodplain Management Manual and Council’s draft Managing Our Flood Risks (which will incorporate the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan) provide additional guidance and support.
Land proposed for residential development by Stockland includes land between Hewitts Creek and Woodlands Creek which is flood liable land. The land is considered a low hazard zone by the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan. It is marked as a medium flood risk precinct in the draft DCP. Residential development could be acceptable provided it is free of flood risk up to the 1 in 100 year event plus 0.5m freeboard (safety margin). Stockland proposes that habitable floor levels would be above this level and consequently its development would be consistent with the relevant policies, guidelines and performance levels.
The Commission has considered residents’ concerns for preserving the land between Hewitts Creek and Woodlands Creek as a floodplain, including Dr Davis’ photographs as well as his personal observations and experiences regarding the site over his lifetime.
The Commission is satisfied that this portion of the western section of the CoI area could be developed for residential use, compatible with the established floodplain planning procedures, residents’ concerns notwithstanding. However, this would require Stockland to meet strict requirements as set out in Council’s and DIPNR’s submissions. It would require ecological factors to take precedence over flood conveyance (the Commission notes here that the original creek corridors were determined for flood flows which were less than half the revised PMF flows which must now be accommodated). It would result in a lesser area of land for residential development than proposed by Stockland.
Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan
The Commission notes that Council has completed and adopted the Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan for the Hewitts Creek catchment (incorporating Hewitts, Slacky, Tramway, Woodlands and Thomas Gibson Creeks). This Plan will form the basis for all future development on the floodplain, which includes the CoI area at Sandon Point. The high priority actions of enlarging the culverts on Tramway and Woodlands Creeks under the Illawarra railway are supported by the Commission. An assessment of potential impacts on the downstream SCESFC in Tramway Creek and implementation of mitigation measures to counteract the increased flood flow to prevent ecological damage would be necessary based on the evidence before the Commission.
While these actions are the responsibility of Council, future development on the CoI area would need to be designed for culvert enlargement, which is accepted by Stockland. However, the timing of the actions is uncertain and could take 5 years. The Commission also supports construction of the levee bank to the north of Hewitts Creek at Corbett Avenue, and rediversion of Woodlands Creek to its original flow path to Tramway Creek. Enlarging the existing creek channel from Woodlands Creek to Tramway Creek would need to be fully assessed to ensure it could be undertaken with minimal impacts on Aboriginal archaeology and the ecology of the SCESFC. On the evidence before the Commission, such an outcome may be difficult to achieve. This action is , however, a low priority action and local anecdotal evidence is that since the 1998 floods significant flow to Tramway Creek from Woodlands Creek is now occurring.
Council’s current zone boundary between land zoned 2(b) and that zoned 6(a) was generally based on 1 in 100 year ARI flood conveyance requirements. Stockland now proposes to convey the PMF, for which the volume is approximately twice that of the 100 year ARI volume, largely within the same
144 zone boundary. DIPNR argues that this proposition has not been fully addressed by Stockland, particularly in regard to channel stability, natural stream function and the use of roads for conveyance of extreme floods. Notwithstanding that the Commission recommends wider corridors, it considers that further assessment of the factors raised by DIPNR is required to ensure a precautionary approach, particularly given the location of the CoI area at the lower end of a steep catchment.
Manning’s Roughness Coefficient
The Commission has addressed the design of riparian corridors under Riparian Corridor Function and Planning. It supports the development of a natural ecosystem in wider riparian corridors than proposed by Stockland and it is therefore probable that in time the corridors would become heavily vegetated. Consequently, the Commission finds a precautionary approach is required and as recommended by DIPNR(DLWC) and Council, a Manning’s roughness coefficient of 0.20 should be assessed or justification provided by way of sensitivity analysis if a different Manning’s roughness coefficient is used. Vegetation within the riparian corridor must not result in upstream impacts in the long-term. It should be carefully selected and maintained to ensure that it does not become an obstruction in the channel during flood events (see Future Management).
COOKSON PLIBRICO OPERATIONS
The Cookson Plibrico Pty Limited site is shown on Figure 3. The site contains the existing refractory manufacturing heavy industrial operation, undeveloped land including the heritage listed Turpentine forest (Wollongong LEP 1990 and National Trust), and Cooksons Creek (an unnamed watercourse which generally bisects the site from west to east). The southern boundary and part of the eastern boundary adjoins land owned by Stockland through which Tramway Creek passes, the remainder of the eastern boundary abuts land owned by Stockland, the western boundary is the Illawarra railway reserve , and the northern boundary adjoins land owned by Stockland including the former Dairy Farmers site. The whole of the site is presently zoned 4(a) Light Industry and was rezoned from 4(c) Extractive Industry in 1997. Existing use rights apply but expansion of the current operations would be prohibited development.
There is potential conflict between the existing heavy industrial use of the site and the residential areas approved in Stages 1 to 6 of Stockland’s development. Future conflict could also occur with any residential development in Stage 7. Potential noise impacts are of particular concern. Council in answer to a question from the Commission indicated that the only documented evidence of hours of operation on the site is contained in a letter from Cookson Plibrico dated 1989: It is envisaged that normal hours of operation for the equipment would be from 7:00am to 5:30pm- Mondays to Fridays, however, in the event of exceptionally high work loads it may be necessary to work this machinery to 9:30pm and possibly Saturdays.
Cookson Plibrico stated to the Inquiry that the factory is currently working longer hours than indicated in the above letter. Council has been unable to sight any consent that produces evidence of restrictions on noise or operating hours.
Council indicated that the Cookson Plibrico land was rezoned 4(a) Light Industry as it would allow the existing use as well as recognise the landholders’ intention to relocate in the future. The 4(a) zoning would then facilitate future use of the site for light industrial type businesses which would be more compatible with the adjoining residential area.
Council believes that every effort should be made to assist Cookson Plibrico to relocate due to potential land use conflict, in particular that related to noise. However, if this is not achievable, Council would implement the most effective buffers and noise abatement measures through design, materials used and vegetation plantings. Council also acknowledged it would need to implement a
145 strategy which ensured that in addition to noise abatement measures required as part of future dwelling construction, future new owners to the area are aware of the Cookson Plibrico operations.
Council’s draft DCP provides objectives for the Cookson Plibrico land which are: § To adopt appropriate zonings to reduce conflicts between land uses at the Sandon Point site; § To provide incentives to current land owners with inappropriate land uses to allow them to relocate economically; § To adopt sufficient controls, while current conflicting land uses are present, that will ensure the amenity of any existing and future residential development; § To ensure existing industrial development is screened to open space and residentia l areas; and § To consider appropriate ways of providing employment opportunities on the Sandon Point site.
It has been assumed the Cookson Plibrico site will ultimately be rezoned for residential uses according to Council. But there is no guarantee Cookson Plibrico will relocate.
If the site is retained in its present use and zoning, appropriate controls and development standards need to be developed to mitigate noise and any other off-site impacts affecting adjoining residential areas. This is particula rly important in relation to the proposed development of Lot 235 (Stage 7) immediately to the south of Tramway Creek. The question of the north-south road link would also need resolution. As shown in Council’s draft DCP, if the site were to be rezoned for residential purposes, the developable area is largely confined to the current factory area plus small areas to the northeast of the Turpentine Forest and along the Illawarra railway. On the other hand, Council is concerned for the loss of jobs in the Northern Illawarra if Cookson Plibrico did relocate.
For riparian zones adjacent to the Cookson Plibrico site the draft DCP defines the northern boundary of Tramway Creek as the cadastral boundary of the site. The core riparian zone and the vegetated buffer zone for the northern bank of Tramway Creek have respective widths of 15m and 10m. The asset protection zone proposed is 14m wide. For the southern bank of Cooksons Creek the core riparian zone is a minimum of 10m wide and the vegetated buffer zone is also a minimum of 10m wide. The asset protection zone proposed is 14m wide. The draft DCP proposes these widths to allow economic redevelopment of the site.
Mr D Evans, Managing Director of Cookson Plibrico, indicated a number of options for the company in his submission. The three main options are:
Relocation of Operations: Cookson Plibrico estimates that the cost to relocate and rebuild elsewhere in the Illawarra would be in the vicinity of $9 million. This could be funded from the sale of the land provided the land is rezoned 2(a) or 2(b), but the sale price depends on the area available for development. If insufficient funds were generated by sale of the land Cookson Plibrico would require assistance from government agencies and Council. In addition, temporary interim controls would be needed to resolve potential land use conflicts, to protect the industrial operations at the site and to preserve the 80 jobs over a period of 3 years.
Maintain Operations at Sandon Point: For the Cookson Plibrico operations to remain at Sandon Point, Mr Evans considers that Stockland’s residential development on a large section of the Stages 1 to 6 area, and on the Stage 7 area, would need to cease. Noise mitigation measures such as mounds or barriers would need to be constructed. The site would need to be rezoned 4(b) Heavy Industry.
Government Purchase of the Site: Purchase of the Cookson Plibrico site by Government would be acceptable to Mr Evans, who points out that if this occurred the Turpentine forest and creeks could be protected, the north-south link road could be constructed, approved development could occur, and the factory and offices could be used by the Aboriginal community. Moreover, the 80 jobs at Cookson Plibrico would be saved.
146 Notwithstandin g the canvassing of these and other options Mr Evans firmly believes the only option for Cookson Plibrico is to move. But its site must be rezoned to provide an economically developable area, and consequently the funds to allow the move to take place.
DIPNR(PlanningNSW) points out that Cookson Plibrico is a heavy industrial operation in an area that is surrounded by existing and proposed residential development and open space. Cookson Plibrico currently receive complaints from nearby residential areas about the noise it generates, and this situation is expected to worsen once houses are built on Stages 1 to 6 of the Stockland development. Even some form of light industry could result in conflict and operating problems because of surrounding residential development.
According to DIPNR(PlanningNSW) the continuation of the Cookson Plibrico operations in this location is unsustainable and undesirable in the longer term. Every effort should be made to assist Cookson Plibrico to relocate. If the recommended riparian corridors and Aboriginal cultural heritage work indicate there is not enough potential development to fund the relocation of Cookson Plibrico then a balance may need to be struck between environmental, economic and social considerations to enable additional development potential on the site to be identified. If this is not possible , or the land is found not to be suitable for re-development at all, then other options for encouraging relocation will need to be investigated. Alternative uses suggested for the site included employment generating activities, educational facilities and tourism. Commercial development in competition with the Thirroul centre was not considered desirable by DIPNR(PlanningNSW).
Stockland considers the Cookson Plibrico industrial development is inappropriately sited in its current context.
Many community and resident submissions strongly support Cookson Plibrico being encouraged to remain at Sandon Point due to the local employment the operation provides in an area where similar employment is difficult to find.
Noise Assessment
Several assessments of the potential noise impact of the Cookson Plibrico operations at existing and future residences in the vicinity of the facility have been conducted.
Cookson Plibrico (Wilkinson Murray, May 2003)
This assessment concluded that the noise levels emanating from the 24-hour Cookson Plibrico operation exceed the noise criteria recommended in the NSW Industrial Noise Policy over a large area of land in the vicinity, including the land currently being developed for residential use by Stockland. Operation of the plant is therefore in conflict with potential and current residential development in the area.
The conflict could be eliminated by: § Zoning the affected land for uses which are not sensitive to noise, that is not for residential use. § Treatment to the plant to reduce noise levels, although it is probably not practicable to reduce levels the required 15dBA.
Whilst treatment of new residential premises could provide acceptable internal noise levels, such treatment relies on closing windows, upgrading glazing, and some form of mechanical ventilation or air-conditioning. These treatments are not generally regarded as consistent with Australian suburban living and would not affect noise levels external to the dwellings.
This report noted that the results were consistent with the Heggie (July 2001) report in regard to maximum LAeq noise levels (54dBA-Heggie, 55dBA-Wilkinson Murray) and the amenity criterion
147 noise level of 40dBA. Furthermore, that the plant generally emits a fairly steady and continuous level of noise with few transient noise events. Continuous noise levels are higher than transient noise levels and are consequently the main determinant of potential impacts.
Stockland (Heggie, July 2001)
The main noise sources at the time of the measurements were two dust collectors at either end of the large warehouse building. Noise emissions from forklift and truck movements were also audible. The assessment concluded that noise attenuation measures would need to be implemented at the Cookson Plibrico facility in order to reduce the potential noise impact at approximately 42 lots to acceptable levels (allowing for the facility to operate up to 24 hours per day in accordance with its existing approvals). Noise levels exceeded the criteria at a lesser number of residential lots during the daytime (19) and evening (27) periods. Exceedances of the relevant noise level criteria were up to 3dBA during the daytime (7:00am to 6:00pm), 9dBA during the evening period (6:00pm to 10:00pm), and 14dBA at night time (10:00pm to 7:00am).
A detailed assessment would need to be undertaken to determine the items of plant that require noise mitigation; however, the minimum requirement would be to reduce the noise emissions from two dust collectors. The most effective noise control treatment would be to minimise the dust collector noise emissions via noise control treatment at the identified noise source. The erection of a noise barrier (fence or bund) along the site boundary, or near the residential receivers could also be required. Installation of noise control measures at residential receivers was also canvassed.
APT Peddle Thorp (Heggie, February 1996)
This assessment concluded that at a limited number of locations, the noise emission levels from local industry exceed the relevant noise emission limits recommended by the EPA. Suitable noise control measures could be designed for these dwellings.
The report refers to the nearest dwellings being located 150m towards the south and southeast, and that typical operational noise emissions from the facility of up to 55dBA may occur at future residential sites. Exceedances of daytime and night-time criterion by up to 10dBA and 15dBA respectively may occur.
This degree of noise control may be achieved by the design of an acoustic barrier along the property boundary of some noise control features contained within a selected number of residential dwellings. Such features may be the incorporation of slightly thicker glazing, seals on perimeter windows and doors, and orientation of habitable rooms away from the development. The specification of these noise control features would be a subject of further design, based in part on the practicality associated with the erection of the acoustical fence.
Commission’s Comments
The Commission considers it useful initially to set out a summary list of prior facts relating to the rezoning history, adjacent residential approvals, noise amenity issues and employment significance of the Cookson Plibrico site and operations: § Cookson Plibrico is an important local, regional, national and international industry; § Cookson Plibrico is a major employer in the northern Illawarra area with 80 full-time employees; § Cookson Plibrico’s land was rezoned 4(a) Light Industry from 4(c) Extractive Industry in 1997; § DIPNR(PlanningNSW) indicated that the Cookson Plibrico land was rezoned 4(a) Light Industry and not 4(b) Heavy Industry in 1997 in recognition of changing land use in the locality and the need for compatible land uses in the longer term;
148 § Noise from the Cookson Plibrico operations was known to be an issue at the time of land rezoning in 1997, including rezoning of nearby lands to 2(a) Low Density Residential; § Cookson Plibrico’s activities are Heavy Industry; § Cookson Plibrico have existing use rights; § Cookson Plibrico operates up to 24 hours per day; § The actual historical operating hours and the manufacturing activities conducted during the day time, evening and night time periods, and at weekends were not presented to the Commission; § Conditions of consent applying to Cookson Plibrico are not clearly defined; § Cookson Plibrico does not require an Environment Protection Licence from the EPA as Council is the responsible authorit y for noise matters; § Noise complaints are currently received by Council from nearby residents in relation to Cookson Plibrico’s operations; § The Land and Environment Court appears to have accepted that Cookson Plibrico operated from 7:00am to 3:00pm at the time the Court approved Stockland’s proposal to develop Stages 2 to 6 for residential use to within 60m of the Cookson Plibrico site; § Cookson Plibrico was not a party to that Land and Environment Court case and it appears no one informed the Court that Cookson Plibrico operated up to 24 hours per day; § Noise assessment information before the Land and Environment Court confirmed noise levels from the Cookson Plibrico activities exceeded residential criteria on portions of the land Stockland proposed for residential development, and which the Court later approved subject to noise mitigation measures; § A number of residences to be constructed on Stockland’s Stages 2 to 6 area at Sandon Point would be subject to noise levels from the Cookson Plibrico operation above the EPA’s residential criteria , as confirmed by a noise assessment submitted to the Commission by Cookson Plibrico; § Council, Stockland and Cookson Plibrico have been aware for some time that Cookson Plibrico’s activities generate noise at levels which are likely to annoy some nearby residents; § The need to mitigate potential noise impacts at some future residences in the Stages 2 to 6 area has been recognised by Council and Stockland; and § The local community generally supports the continuation of the Cookson Plibrico operations at Sandon Point.
The relevant environmental planning considerations for the Cookson Plibrico site have been carefully assessed by the Commission. They relate to ecological values, employment, noise generation, Aboriginal cultural heritage, visual amenity, site contamination, asset protection zones, and north- south road access. The following matters are relevant to the Commission’s findings and recommendations for the Cookson Plibrico site. Reference should be made to the sections in this report which address these issues in more detail.
Visual Amenity: The eastern portion of both sections of the site are proposed for residential apartment development. The Commission finds that residential apartment development is not suitable for this area of the CoI area at Sandon Point, due to visual amenity and landscape setting considerations relating to Aboriginal heritage and coastal planning (see Visual Amenity).
Ecological Value: The site can be considered in two main sections, namely the operations section and the Turpentine forest/cleared area section. The operations portion of the site has been filled on the northern bank of Tramway Creek to create a level area and the creek is constrained by this fill in high flow events. The factory site also is relatively close to the southern bank of Cooksons Creek in part, although the set back increases to the eastern and western ends of the factory area. Nevertheless, the ecological settings of both Tramway and Cooksons Creeks are constrained by development of the factory site. Development proposals before the Commission are that the full area of the factory site would be developed for residential use, roads and access. Little buffer for protection of the adjacent
149 threatened SCESFC would be available. And the likely impact of humans, domestic animals and a road crossing could not be considered minor in the long term. The Commission considers the current use of the site provides protection to the ecology of Tramway and Cooksons Creeks. Controlled light industrial development on the site could also offer a similar level of protection provided access to adjacent ecologically important areas was restricted. The area north-east of the Turpentine forest is prime bird habitat and the Commission concurs with the NPWS and the community that it should be retained.
Aboriginal Heritage: There is potential for Aboriginal heritage sites to be found on the property, especially within the factory area along the northern banks of Tramway Creek. This potential exists as the original ground surface remains relatively undisturbed, despite the fill on which the administration and operations buildings are constructed. There is consequently a level of uncertainty as to future use of the land if the industrial operations cease and a change in land use is proposed.
Asset Protection Zones: For residential development to occur on the present operations site, asset protection zones would be required given the surrounding vegetation. These could be up to 20m wide depending on the final requirements of the NSW Rural Fire Service. The area available for development on the site would be significantly reduced if asset protection zones 20m wide were required.
Traffic and Access: Council and Stockland propose a north-south access road through the site which would be constructed within the asset protection zone. Other parties recommend the access road should run parallel and adjacent to the Illawarra railway to reduce impacts on Tramway Creek. The location of an access road would also depend on whether the Cookson Plibrico facility remains or is relocated.
Site Contamination: Soil contamination which requires remediation has been located on the site. The level of contamination could be effectively treated on-site or removed to an approved landfill.
Employment: The Cookson Plibrico operations are a major employer in the northern Illawarra, operating an important refractory manufacturing facility. The continuation of the business and employment for its 80 employees is a primary issue for the Commission to consider.
Noise Generation: The activities conducted on the site are classified as Heavy Industry, and noise generation is a consequence. Current noise levels at nearby la nd zoned residential are above acceptable levels, although the operations do not produce high levels of noise. It has been recognised by Cookson Plibrico, and a consultant contracted by Stockland, that noise mitigation measures are available to reduce noise levels on adjacent lands.
Relocation
The argument presented to the Commission for relocation of the Cookson Plibrico facility, as it relates to the potential for conflict with approved surrounding land uses due largely to noise emissions, is compelling. The fact that it has arisen because of less than adequate earlier assessments does not mean this current assessment should be other than thorough in canvassing the many relevant issues concerning the Cookson Plibrico site. It is just one of the considerations the Commission must take into account in addressing the values and constraints of the land. Furthermore, the noise levels emitted from the Cookson Plibrico facility do not currently comply with the relevant criteria at long established residences in the locality, and consequently Cookson Plibrico already has some responsibility to reduce noise levels from its facility.
There is no question in the Commission’s mind that the Cookson Plibrico operation is a significant Australian industry of local, regional and national importance. Furthermore, it employs 80 people on a full-time basis in an area where similar employment is difficult to obtain. Protection of this industry and its jobs is a priority consideration of the Commission.
150 Cookson Plibrico would prefer to relocate given its location, which is now largely surrounded by land whose use is changing to residential, environment protection and open space.
For it to be economically feasible for Cookson Plibrico to relocate, Cookson Plibrico must be able to sell its land for the $9 million cost of relocating. But given the values and constraints of the land what is the likelihood of this occurring? The Commission has significant reservations as to the extent of the residential development of the Cookson Plibrico land detailed in Council’s draft DCP and Stockland’s Master Plan. Neither of these documents fully address the values and constraints of the Cookson Plibrico site, many of which are compromised by the proposals in these documents so as to provide a higher level of residential development. This is not to say that the development potential of the land is not a relevant value, it clearly is an important value to be considered.
Impacts of Proposed Residential Development
How then would the other values and constraints of the land be compromised if the levels of residential development in Council’s draft DCP and Stockland’s Master Plan were adopted?
Before any residential development could be considered on the areas under investigation further Aboriginal heritage study is necessary. This is due to the recognised potential for Aboriginal sites along the northern bank of Tramway Creek. Depending on the outcome of further study, there could be areas of the Cookson Plibrico site which are required to be conserved due to Aboriginal heritage significance. But this cannot be determined in the absence of further investigation. These are planned as part of the additional Aboriginal heritage investigations proposed for the CoI area.
Under Visual Amenity the Commission refers to the proposal in Stockland’s Master Plan to develop 3-storey apartments at the eastern end of both the Cookson Plibrico land and the portion of the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek owned by Stockland. The Commission finds that the visual impacts of apartment development in these proposed locations would have a significant impact on the visual amenity of the open space areas and on the setting for important Aboriginal heritage areas, including the burial site. Furthermore, this type of development is not consistent with SEPP 71 or the NSW Coastal Policy and is not appropriate in the proposed locations.
Ecological communities in Tramway Creek and in Cooksons Creek comprise SCESFC, an endangered ecological community. The evidence is that robust buffers need to be at least 30m wide, and preferably 40m wide, to provide long-term protection and effective functioning of wetlands and riparian corridors. This is clearly not possible for the above two creeks if viable residential development is to occur on the operations areas of the Cookson Plibrico site. An asset protection zone is also required, which based on evidence before the Commission from the NSW Rural Fire Service could be 20m wide (the draft DCP proposes 14m). If the current edge of the operations area is accepted as the limit of riparian lands, then 20m asset protection zones either side of the operations area would leave land about 40m wide for residential development. The long-term effects of human habitation with its domestic animals and likely desire for quick access to the beach through the immediately adjacent important ecological community, also need to be taken into account.
The nearby Turpentine forest area is an important ecological area which is listed as a local heritage item as well as by the National Trust. It needs to be protected with adequate buffer areas. Areas of the Cookson Plibrico site to the east of the Turpentine forest are prime bird habitat which the Commission finds should be retained.
The Commission considers the residential development potential of that site is substantially limited by the above environmental factors. What then are the options for Cookson Plibrico? Could potential land use conflicts of the existing operations with nearby residential development be largely mitigated?
A level of conflict, particularly due to noise, is considered inevitable by many as the manufacturing operation is a heavy industry adjacent to residential development. The Commission concurs that
151 significant conflict and complaint would occur if the Cookson Plibrico operation is to remain at Sandon Point without noise mitigation works. However, the evidence is that noise levels at nearby existing, approved and proposed residential areas could be substantially reduced through noise mitigation measures. Support for this position is contained in the noise consultants’ reports. In addition, the Commission considers that a thorough review of hours or operation and work practices would very likely result in improvements to the noise environment at the factory, especially those due to any intermittent noise events at night. These matters require further investigations by Cookson Plibrico including noise mitigation of fans, crushers, and vibrating equipment; review of the hours of operation of noisy equipment; and installation of a noise barrier along the southern and eastern boundaries of the site (which would be largely screened by existing vegetation). Given the benefit of these works for the Stage 7 area, which area the Commission considers could not be developed in their absence unless Cookson Plibrico relocates, negotiation with Stockland in relation to noise mitigation works is encouraged by the Commission.
The Commission acknowledges the potential value of the Cookson Plibrico site for residentia l development, including that the operations area is level and other areas of the site are cleared. However, the Commission has not been convinced nor has it been demonstrated by Council, Stockland or Cookson Plibrico, that the residential development values of the site should have precedence over ecological and coastal protection values, particularly those relating to the eastern portions of the site. Moreover, the mitigation of land use conflicts due to noise emissions from the refractory operations have not been fully explored, and the prognosis for significant improvement in the noise environment is encouraging. Especially as it is accepted by Cookson Plibrico that the factory operations are not particularly noisy.
The Commission also recognises that the 4(a) Light Industrial zoning of the Cookson Plibrico land effectively limits any further expansion of the existing operations as they would be classified as prohibited development, notwithstanding the existing use rights. The Commission does not cons ider an expansion of the area of development or the height of development, other than in minor ways, would be appropriate due to likely visual considerations. However, expansion of output or a change of process could potentially be acceptable , subject to thorough environmental impact assessment having due regard to the nearby residential development and other environmental matters.
The Commission’s overall findings and recommendations regarding the appropriate level of development in the CoI area also reduce support for road access to Point Street (see Access and Traffic). While the Cookson Plibrico site would still be crucial for such access the Commission does not consider it necessary for a Point Street access to service traffic for the reduced level of residential development it recommends for the CoI area.
The Commission supports rezoning areas of identified conservation significance on the Cookson Plibrico site 7(a), and bringing those areas into public ownership over time. The factory area and current access are recommended to remain zoned as 4(a) Light Industry, subject to the feasib ility and viability of effective noise mitigation to reduce noise levels to the relevant criteria at nearby residences.
Some compromise may be necessary to ensure the continuance of the Cookson Plibrico operations in the Illawarra if effective noise mitigation or light industrial use are not feasible and viable. In this case the Commission considers that the area along the Illawarra railway and the factory area, that is the area recommended to remain zoned 4(a) by the Commission, could be developed for 2(b) residential use. Road access to Point Street would need to be reconsidered in the light of the increased level of residential development, as it would if light industrial use of the site were contemplated. However, the Commission is not convinced on the evidence that an appropriate balance can be struck between environmental, economic and social considerations regarding the relocation of the Cookson Plibrico facility, without a significant injection of outside funds.
152 VISUAL AMENITY
The visual amenity of the CoI area after residential development of the western portions is indirectly addressed by the guidelines, controls and design concepts contained in Council’s DCP and Stockland’s Master Plan. But visual amenity is not directly assessed in relation to the relevant planning instruments. The NSW Coastal Policy 1997 includes that the principles of ESD provide a guiding and an integrating role. One of the nine equa lly important goals of the policy is a commitment to protecting and enhancing the aesthetic qualities of the coastal zone. Relevant objectives relating to this goal include: § To identify and protect areas of high natural and built aesthetic quality (such as the visual amenity of the environment); and § To design and locate development to complement the surrounding environment and to recognise good aesthetic qualities.
The aims of State Environmental Planning Policy No.71 (SEPP 71) include: § To ensure that the visual amenity of the coast is protected; and § To ensure that the type, bulk, scale and size of development is appropriate for the location and protects and improves the natural scenic quality of the surrounding area.
It also aims to further the implementations of the Coastal Policy. In meeting these aims, matters for consideration set out in SEPP 71 include: § The suitability of development given its type, location and design and its relationship with the surrounding area; § Any detrimental impact that development may have on the amenity of the coastal foreshore, including any significant overshadowing of the coastal foreshore and any significant loss of views from a public place to the coastal foreshore; and § The scenic qualities of the NSW coast, and the means to protect and improve these qualities.
A master plan prepared under SEPP 71 must illustrate and demonstrate, where relevant, proposals for the scale of the development and its integration with the existing landscape.
Visual Character of the Site
The Urban Design Advisory Service (UDAS) provided a brief visual characterisation of the site: The suburbs surrounding the site, North (Thirroul) and South (Bulli) have over time built on most of the land between the foreshore and the escarpment foothills to form continuous development along the coast within the local area.
The site contrasts with this pattern of development as it forms a visual and natural break, or greenbelt, between the urban areas of Bulli and Thirroul. This greenbelt is unique within the local area.
Over time industrial uses across the site have denuded much of the site. There are patches of vegetation, the Turpentine forest, the creek lines and the row of trees on the eastern end of the site. When viewed from the foreshore these patches of vegetation visually combine to form a continuous green visual connection from the foreshore to the escarpment behind. When analysed in plan view, the greenbelt extends mostly from south to north along the eastern end of the site closest to the foreshore rather than across the whole site.
Remnant vegetation is evident on the site as the former industrial uses had limited built form. These uses have ceased operation with many buildings having been demolished to allow the regrowth to occur. Built form that occurred on the site would also have been constrained by the four creeks flowing across the site to the ocean.
153 When viewed from locations along the foreshore the site reads as a wide, green valley sweeping up to the escarpment between the adjoining and higher urbanised areas of Bulli and Thirroul.
The centre of the valley is created by the line of Woodlands Creek and Cooksons Creek, with a spur of land rising in between the creek lines. This spur has some mature trees and vegetation which forms the visual connection between the flat open plain, adjacent to the frontal dune, and the escarpment rising up behind when viewed from the foreshore.
These elements combine together to form the visual character of the site within its local context when viewed from the foreshore. In summary the visual character [of the CoI area] includes: § The dominant visual character of vegetation sweeping up from the foreshore to join the escarpment; § The visually dominant valley with development forming an edge between urban and natural land, along the western and northern sides of the valley; and § The central vegetated spur rising at the centre (or mid-ground) of the valley (from east to west) and forming a green visual connection from the foreshore to the escarpment.
Residential Development
In assessing the impact of Stockland’s proposed residential development on the site, UDAS commented that it is inevitable urban development on the site will alter and transform the site’s visual character. This will be most apparent where development abuts the coastal foreshore.
UDAS considered that the most visually prominent location is between Woodlands Creek and Cooksons Creek because: § The topography rises above the level of the coastal foreshore (up to 10m); § This spur of land has mature trees and creates visual connection up the valley from the foreshore to the escarpment; and § The valley creates separation between the urban areas of Thirroul and Bulli.
It noted that the draft Master Plan indicates development within this location of up to 3-storeys. Development of this density is not common within the local area which is generally 1 to 2-storey detached dwellings, although Thirroul has more dense building types located in proximity to the main street. Moreover, placing tall and dense development adjacent to the foreshore and on elevated ground clearly increases and maximises the visibility of the development when viewed from locations along the coast and from the public foreshore reserve.
In addition the length, height and location of the proposed apartment buildings would fundamentally change the visual characteristics of the site by: § Breaking the visual connection of vegetation sweeping up from the foreshore to join the escarpment; § Forming continuous urban development across the valley from Bulli to Thirroul; § Removing vegetation and mature trees and building on the spur of high ground between Woodlands and Cooksons Creeks which would break the visual connection from the foreshore to the escarpment; and § Creating much higher density development and introducing buildings types not found elsewhere in the local area that are more appropriate to city or town centre areas, rather than between two low density residential areas.
Furthermore, the most prominent part of the site is the spur between the two creeks. It is the most visually sensitive part of the site and in combination with the proposed apartment buildings along the foreshore open space would visually dominate the valley and the local area.
According to UDAS providing visual and physical connection across the site (from west to east) to the foreshore is an important consideration for the future planning of the site. This may be most
154 effectively achieved along the creek corridors and along the streets. The street lined creeks would provide an accessible and connected network of streets across and through the site to the foreshore adding positively to the planning of the site. However, the width of the creek reserve is not great enough to maintain the visual connection of an open valley sweeping up to the escarpment.
UDAS concluded that the overall effect of development when viewed from the foreshore would be a wall of multi-storey buildings changing the site’s visual character from a wide open green valley to an enclosed bowl.
Recommendations made by UDAS were to maintain the dominant visual character of the green vegetated valley from the foreshore to the escarpment including the central vegetated spur, reducing or avoiding development on the central spur, provision of new corridors across the site, and careful location of buildings over 2-storeys.
Stocklands’s consultant considers the UDAS visual assessment misleading and based on a poor understanding of the Master Plan. The consultant provided two visual structure diagrams superimposed on two photographic montages, one taken from O’Brien Reserve and the other from the foreshore opposite the Stages 1 to 6 area. In addition, the consultant pointed out the high proportion of open space on the plan showing the general pattern of development, and the contrast with the inadequacies of nearby existing development. In summary: § The proposed residential development will not disturb the large area of foreshore between the beach and the development site; § The turpentine forest and the combination of retained and planted trees along the ridge line will be visually prominent and will provide visual links between the foreshore and the escarpment; § The residential development will replace the existing factories on the Cookson Plibrico site and recently demolished factories on Stockland’s site. The area to be developed has been subjected to significant industrial and quarrying development in the recent past and remains in a disturbed and partly developed state which could not be described as being of high scenic quality; § The buildings along the eastern boundary of the development will not form a continuous facade and will be designed to provide views from the buildings within the development over the foreshore and ocean, as well as to reduce or eliminate a hard edge between the development and the foreshore open space; § The proposed development is well set back from the beach and will maintain the existing green foreshore space; and § With one exception, the proposed development will be seen against the background of the existing suburbs below the escarpment. The one exception is development on the slope to the east of the Turpentine forest. In time, and with the embellishment of the proposed development, this area will be screened by the planting in Woodlands Creek and Cooksons Creek.
Stockland consider the development will have very little impact on views, mainly because the large foreshore area will remain as a green space and also because the areas proposed for development are generally not visible from the foreshore. In addition, much of the development will take place on areas which either are, or recently have been, industrial sites.
The impacts of the proposed development will be further reduced by appropriate design controls, particularly for the areas along the eastern boundary of the development, by retaining appropriate trees and by replanting, especially within the Tramway Creek and Cooksons Creek corridors.
The proposed Master Plan, provides a mechanism to rehabilitate the land, restoration of the creek corridors, and contributions to the acquisition of strategic areas for public open space would contribute to a net improvement to the visual quality of the CoI area.
In commenting on the UDAS submission, DIPNR pointed out UDAS in part concluded that with Stockland’s proposals “the width of the creek reserves is not great enough to maintain the visual
155 connection of an open valley sweeping up to the escarpment”. DIPNR noted that this comment accords with the objectives of the NSW Coastal Policy, which recognises visual impacts are an important consideration when assessing the impacts of development in the Coastal Zone.
Commission’s Comment
The Commission visited the site and surrounding areas a number of times, including a full day in the company of parties. The Commission has taken in the views, made notes and/or photographed the site from many locations in considering the site’s visual characteristics. These locations included: § O’Briens Reserve § Point Street railway bridge § Stages 2 to 7 area (site visit) § Sandon Point § Bicycle/pedestrian paths (many locations) § McCauleys Beach (many locations) § Foreshore dune area (many locations) § Backdune area (many locations) § Thomas Gibson Park area § Wrexham Road (east of railway) § Bulli Lookout (three locations)
As well, aerial photographs, orthophoto and topographic maps of the area have been studied by the Commission. The 2-dimensional visual representations prepared by UDAS and Stockland have been reviewed. In relation to the latter 2 representations, the Commission considers on-site assessment which takes in views from many locations including existing development provides a more realistic understanding of the likely visual impact of the proposed development.
The proposed development as presented to the Commission by Stockland involves substantial clearing and then reshaping the western portion of the CoI area. This includes the ridge and slopes between Woodlands Creek and Cooksons Creek, other than the Turpentine forest and riparian areas. Of particular relevance for views from the foreshore area (including the well used bicycle/pedestrian path) is that the built form would include 3-storey apartment buildings rising from the eastern edge of the land between Woodlands Creek and Cooksons Creek, as well as between Cooksons Creek and Tramway Creek. Views from many locations in the extensive lower foreshore and backdune areas, as well as creek lines, particularly that of Woodlands Creek, would be obscured by buildings. Apartment owners would also want to maintain their views to the ocean and so only limited tree screening is likely to occur, even in the longer term.
Stockland claims that “the development will have very little impact on views” because of the large foreshore area, topography and vegetation, the largely disturbed nature of much of the western area of the CoI area, residential design controls, retention and replanting of trees, restoration of creeks corridors, and additions to public open space. Stockland contends that on balance its proposal “would contribute to a net improvement to the visual quality of the CoI area and have no unacceptable impacts on views”. Stockland’s consultant specifically refers to the extent of public open space indicated on the Master Plan to support its position that the visual impacts of the proposed development would not detract from views in the locality. However, the Commission does not concur. The fact that a plan of the CoI area shows significant areas of open space does not overcome the visual dominance of the residential development proposed in Stockland’s Master Plan.
The Commission has inspected the more closely developed areas of Thirroul. It is not convinced 5-storey buildings are appropriate on any part of the site. Building height should be limited to 3 storeys to integrate with the scale of development in the Thirroul and Bulli localities. Buildings of
156 greater than 3 storeys would be uncharacteristic of the general locality, particularly away from the immediate surrounds of the Thirroul commercial area. They would be incongruous in the landscape and significantly detract from the visual amenity of the Sandon Point area.
A large portion of the western CoI area, particularly the AIR site is very disturbed and visually highly degraded. But significant areas of the site contain well established vegetation which Stockland proposes to clear and then regrade the landform. Other areas, notably the visually prominent eastern area between Woodlands and Cooksons Creeks would be developed with 3-storey apartments ranging upslope for effectively an 80m depth and 240m width as indicted in Stockland’s submission. These apartments would be a very dominating backdrop to the public open space foreshore/backdune area. These apartments would break the present green sweep up to the escarpment and from closer public open space locations they would break the skyline. As stated by UDAS this part of the development would change the visual character from “a wide open green valley to an enclosed bowl”. The Commission concurs with this assessment for the ridge which rises between Woodlands and Cooksons Creeks from the eastern foreshore/backdune area. The proposed apartments on the eastern end of the Cookson Plibrico site, between Cooksons and Tramway Creeks, would also dominate the immediate wetland areas but to a lesser extent given the flat topography in that area.
The Commission does not have the same concern for the visual amenity of the AIR site between Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks, the western portion of the area to the north of Hewitts Creek, the area to the south of Tramway Creek, or the western portion of the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek. These locations are visually screened from the more important viewing locations due to either topography or intervening vegetation. Nevertheless, the Commission considers restrictions on the built form of dwellings in these latter areas are necessary to protect the visual amenity and general ambience of the locality. As noted above, the Commission has visited a number of locations in and around the CoI area, some on several occasions. It finds that the height of buildings should be restricted to 2 storeys, other than on the western portion of the land between Woodlands and Hewitts Creek and the land north of Hewitts Creek between the access road and the Illawarra railway.
Aboriginal Heritage
The appropriateness of visual amenity relating to Aboriginal cultural and spiritual values was addressed in a very general way by some members of the Aboriginal community. Some other parties referred to the importance of the visual and landscape setting in protecting and preserving Aboriginal cultural values. It was not an issue given prominence during the Commission.
The importance of maintaining an appropriate visual setting for significant Aboriginal cultural and spiritual areas is referred to in the Burra Charter and in more recent guidelines and papers relating to Aboriginal heritage values (see Aboriginal Heritage). The full Aboriginal archaeological and cultural heritage significance of the CoI area at Sandon Point is still to be addressed. However, it is clear that the burial area, and to a lesser extent the tool-making site and artefact site on Hannah’s land, are significant to the local contemporary Aboriginal community. The burial site especially requires an appropriate visual setting. The proposed apartment buildings on the rising land between Woodlands and Cooksons Creeks would dominate areas to the east and compromise preservation of an appropriate visual setting and context for the significant Aboriginal sites in the foreshore/backdune area of the CoI area.
157 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT
The need for effective management and control of runoff water quality following rainfall events was raised in a number of submissions. These parties wish to ensure the downstream SCESFC and aquatic fauna are protected, particularly from excessive sediment and its associated pollutants should residential development be approved. They refer to what they consider design inadequacies of the stormwater detention basins for the Stages 1 to 6 residential development. Evidence to the Commission is that after several recent rainfall events a significant quantity of turbid water has overtopped these detention ponds and flowed to the otherwise relatively clear waters of Tramway Creek. These matters have reinforced residents’ concerns to ensure an adequate design for stormwater runoff controls should development be approved within the CoI area. The Commission understands that the detention ponds for the Stages 1 to 6 area were designed for a 1 in 1 year ARI storm event. Council has now required Stockland to undertake additional works and in addition will require individual builders to install sediment controls at each building site in the Stages 1 to 6 area.
Stockland addressed stormwater runoff design for future residential development on the CoI area in its submission at Appendix C. Stormwater treatment ponds, incorporating constructed wetlands for the final polishing of stormwater, would be designed and operated to be consistent with the relevant design guidelines. Publications which provide information on stormwater treatment systems are: § Treatment Techniques: Managing Urban Stormwater (EPA) § Urban Stormwater: Best Practice Environmental Guidelines (Vic . Stormwater Committee) § The Constructed Wetland Manual (DLWC) § Managing Urban Stormwater: Council Handbook (EPA)
Water sensitive urban design principle s would be adopted by Stockland as well as a range of options to reduce the quantity of stormwater runoff and to improve its quality. These would include the possible provision of rainwater tanks, rain gardens or bio filtration systems, vegetated swales, gross pollutant traps, and constructed wetlands. They would all be constructed on the western portion of the CoI area.
The EPAs design criteria for pollution retention post construction are: Suspended Solids 80 percent of the average annual load Nutrients 45 percent of the average annual load of nitrogen and phosphorus. Course Sediment All sediment >0.125mm for flows up to 25 percent of 1 year ARI peak flow
To estimate the quantity of stormwater, runoff coefficients used by Stockland in its water quality modelling were 0.24 for open space, 0.61 for urban land with raintanks and 0.67 for urban land with no raintanks; 0.80 for roads. By way of comparison the Wollongong Coastal Stormwater Management Plan adopted a value of 0.56 for urban development which is consistent with Managing Urban Stormwater: Council Handbook (EPA). Rainfall data was obtained from the Bureau of Meteorology for Bulli and Woonona.
Results of modelling conducted for pollutant loads from the site in a mean rainfall year for its present state (A), developed but with no pollution control devices (B), and developed with pollution control devices (C), indicated: Parameter A B C Reduction (B to C) Suspended Solids (kg/yr) 25,950 18,900 1,290 93% Nitrogen (kg/yr) 347 269 113 58% Phosphorous (kg/yr) 59.5 46.1 12.9 72%
Stormwater from areas other than the areas to be developed would not be treated. There are no requirements for easements through the site.
158 Council’s draft DCP sets out general objectives and principles, guidelines, performance measures, and additional requirements. These encourage improvement in water quality, harvesting and re-use of water, minimising pollution of receiving waters, protection of aquatic habitat and ecology, and adequate treatment of runoff. Controls for the potential impacts during the construction phases of development also need to be adequate, and no water quality facilities are to be constructed within or adjacent to the SCESFC. DIPNR has concerns that Stockland’s stormwater management proposals could adversely affect riparian corridor function if they are not adequately designed and sensitively constructed.
In an earlier letter to Council, the NPWS notes in relation to Clause 5(b) of DCP 94/17 that: This clause aims for no net increase in pollutant discharge at the points where the wetlands discharge into the ocean. This is premised on the view that the wetlands are available to be used as pollutant sinks to treat stormwater. It is likely that this type of use of wetlands has contributed to their incremental degradation and the need for the listing as an endangered ecological community.
A more appropriate provision would be to have sufficient on site treatment within the residential area to prevent any discharge of stormwater pollutants into the wetlands and buffer. Treatment should ensure use of the best available technology affordable to ensure that stormwater entering the buffer from the perimeter road contains minimal litter, sediment, oils and nutrients and approximates natural flow regimes.
NSW Fisheries provided a brief response to questions posed by the Commission relating to surface water quality issues, pointing out that: § Conversion of undeveloped land to urban use will undoubtedly impact on downstream aquatic environments, but the extent will depend on the magnitude of any conversion; § Conversion of land to urban use typically results in larger volumes of more polluted water reaching downstream habitats, the effects of which can be mitigated to some extent but often leaves a lot to be desired; § Tramway, Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks have limited capacity to assimilate additional nutrients and pollutants but the adjacent ocean has a large capacity; and § Provided the residential development is well planned and executed with regard to minimising the impact upon hydrology and water quality, the potential impacts upon aquatic habitats and fish in adjacent oceanic waters is likely to be negligible. The impact upon the estuarine lagoons and wetlands of the floodplain will be greater, but in the absence of specific on-site investigations and detailed modelling and analysis , it is impossible to assess the significance of these impacts.
The Aboriginal community, and Mr L Davis in particular, stated they had serious concerns that the aquatic environments would be polluted, pointing to the impacts of runoff from Stages 1 to 6. This runoff is already affecting the sources of traditional Aboriginal foods and cannot be satisfactorily controlled in their view.
Commission’s Comments
The Commission has noted the strong concerns which the community has raised in relation to potential impacts on surface water quality should residential development occur on the western portion of the CoI area. These concerns have been given greater prominence by the community as they consider there has been a serious failure of the surface water management ponds on the Stages 1 to 6 area. As evidence of failure they point both to the uncontrolled turbid water overflows from these ponds after recent rain events, and the need for Council to issue a direction in regard to rainwater runoff controls for individual lots during construction activity. Stockland’s flora and fauna consultant also noted that adequate management and control of surface water is essential to ensure that downstream water quality and aquatic habitats including the SCESFC are protected. The Aboriginal community
159 expressed particular concern for impacts on their traditional estuarine and marine food resources should future development have an adverse impact on water quality.
Stockland have committed to construction of surface water management controls which it states go beyond the published requirements of the relevant authorities. The Commission has noted the modelling results for the proposed facilities and that pollutant runoff would be significantly reduced from current levels following residential development on the western portion of the CoI area. However, Stockland’s flora and fauna consultant acknowledges that during construction activities wetland vegetation units may become contaminated due to the inability of most soil erosion control measures to manage moderate to major rainfall events.
Development on the western portion of the CoI area as proposed by Stockland would require extensive earthworks between Cooksons and Woodlands Creeks, on the AIR site, and north of Hewitts Creek. Between Cooksons and Woodlands Creeks much of the land would be recontoured to improve views. Consequently, during construction, restoration and residential development on the land there would be significant potential for erosion and sediment transport. Moreover, the site is adjacent to the threatened SCESFC and sensitive downstream aquatic habitats. A high standard of soil erosion and sediment management would be required to minimise the potential effects on important habitats. Strict implementation of measures required by the draft DCP would be essential.
Water pollution control features including constructed wetlands need to be located on-site but outside sensitive environmental areas such as the SCESFC and core riparian zones as well as vegetated buffer zones. The Commission considers that in general the appropriate location is within the asset protection zones.
Portions of the CoI area are currently disturbed and undoubtedly are subject to erosion following rainfall events, without the benefit of sediment controls to the standard proposed by Stockland. Following residential development and the implementation of the proposed management measures, the Commission recognises that sediment and nutrient levels would be reduced from present levels.
The Commission is satisfied that a high standard of erosion and sediment management can minimise downstream impacts to acceptable levels if rigorously designed and implemented. Once residential development is completed erosion and sediment issues would not be of the same magnitude as during the construction phases, but would still need to be controlled. As indicated, Stockland’s proposed water pollution control measures for sediment and nutrient would be designed to surpass the relevant guidelines. They need to be of a high standard in order to protect the adjacent threatened SCESFC and sensitive aquatic ecosystems immediately downstream. The proposed water pollution controls also need to be designed to treat runoff for the challenging rainfall conditions at Sandon Point and their effectiveness maintained in the long-term. Provided this occurs, water runoff from the proposed residential areas would be treated to a standard which should protect downstream ecosystems, including the traditional food resources of the Aboriginal community. This would be a marked improvement from the present situation for the AIR site. An ongoing water quality monitoring program would be necessary to give assurance that discharges from the site were complying with water quality objectives.
160 ACCESS AND TRAFFIC
The western portion of the CoI area at Sandon Point are considered suitable for residential development by Council, DIPNR(PlanningNSW), and Stockland. The community is overwhelmingly opposed to any residential development at all on the CoI area. These lands are zoned either 2(b) Residential, 4(a) Light Industry or 6(a) Open Space in Wollongong LEP 1990 (see Figure 3). All the land zoned 2(b) and 4(a) is within walking distance (300m to 1,000m) of either Thirroul or Bulli railway stations. DIPNR(PlanningNSW), Council and Stockland point out that this provides the opportunity for appropriate residential densities in the proposed urban area.
Public Access
Pedestrian and Cycle Paths
Council’s draft DCP addresses pedestrian and bicycle access as does Stockland’s Master Plan. According to Council the specific needs of pedestrians and cyclists must be given adequate consideration. The draft DCP and Stockland’s Master Plan contain diagrams showing existing and proposed pedestrian paths and cycleways. The CoI area are located at the northern end of Wollongong’s cycle network and a cycleway currently exists through the eastern beachfront area of the CoI area. An informal pedestrian path runs from the Sturdee Avenue railway bridge through land owned by Stockland and Cookson Plibrico to the eastern portion of the Sandon Point lands.
Bus Route
Both Council’s draft DCP and Stockland’s Master Plan refer to the need to provide a north-south bus route through the proposed western residential portion of the CoI area. DIPNR(PlanningNSW) and the RTA strongly support provision of a bus route to improve public transport in the locality and to comply with the government’s public transport policy initiatives. This would require the appropriate road design along the service route. All new dwellings would be within 400m walking distance of a bus stop.
Traffic Access
Council has conducted extensive analysis and study of the CoI area and surrounding areas, in relation to traffic and access. Submissions to the Commission clearly show that traffic access to and from the CoI area has been and remains one of the more contentious issues within the community. Matters raised in submissions related to the use of community land to gain access to the CoI area from Wrexham Road, the need for a north-south road link east of the Illawarra railway, the adequacy of the existing rail bridges, provision of signals at intersections with the Princes Highway and Lawrence Hargrave Drive which are used to access the CoI area, construction of stream crossings, redistribution of traffic away from the Princes Highway, and the need for a traffic impact statement.
Since April 1993, 8 traffic reports relating to the Sandon Point area have been commissioned by Council. Two of those were submitted to the Commission, one a Technical Report-Traffic (September 2002) and the other a Traffic Impact Study (November 2002).
The Technical Report was prepared to address traffic issues raised by local community groups for the Design by Inquiry Workshop held in September 2002. The report was a technical review of earlier reports and did not include any significant new analysis. The review considered the traffic analysis in the 1993 Local Environmental Study, access to the northern portion of the Sandon Point land from Wrexham Road, and a potential link to Station Street at Thirroul. It assumed a lot yield of 150 for Stages 1 to 6, a lot yield of 270 for the northern portion of the land, and a lot yield of 100 for the Cookson Plibrico site. The traffic generation rate for dwellings was addressed as were potential changes to dwelling densities, and a change in use of the Cookson Plibrico site to general industrial
161 activities. Traffic volumes and intersection functioning were modelled and the validity of the modelling supported.
The Technical Report noted that the Wrexham Road access had the following advantages and disadvantages: Advantages § Location for the northern access away from the critical intersection of Lawrence Hargrave Drive and Princes Highway; § Affects a minimum number of residents in existing local streets; and § Does not require duplication of existing rail overbridges.
When paired with an internal link through Sandon Point the Wrexham Road access: § Provides for local and some regional accessibility, as well as a sustainable transportation option; § Provides for all local through traffic and a significant reduction in traffic along the Princes Highway and Lawrence Hargrave Drive; § Provides for local bus services and stronger links between railway stations in line with RTA requirements; § Provides for safety and efficiency requirements through the signalisation of the intersection with Lawrence Hargrave Drive; and § Computer analysis (using the TRACKS model) and subsequent intersection design and modelling for the junction of Wrexham Road and Lawrence Hargrave Drive shows that the proposal provides a suitable traffic solution.
Disadvantages § Requires the use of public land. This is not a traffic issue, but is noted as a response that has emerged from the facilitation process; and § Affects few residents but to a greater extent.
If not paired with an internal link through Sandon Point: § Would direct a majority of trips through the two most sensitive traffic locations, being the intersection of Lawrence Hargrave Drive and Princes Highway and past the Bulli Public School; § Would not provide for sustainable public transport (specifically local bus services) as per RTA requirements (and good transport planning practice); § Would not provide the bus link required by the RTA; and § Would not provide for the preferred alternative route between Thirroul and Bulli in the event of a blockage at the Princess Highway and Lawrence Hargrave Drive intersection
The use of Wrexham Road for access, an internal north-south through link, and access to Point Street emerged from the 2000 and 2001 modelling processes as the preferred access option for the Sandon Point development proposals.
Council’s traffic and transport co-ordinator outlined the traffic modelling conducted in the Traffic Impact Study to assess the impact of development at Sandon Point up to 2016. A total of 71 traffic scenarios were modelled to assess the various access locations, time periods, traffic management options, and densities of development.
The Traffic Impact Study had regard to two land use options for the overall Sandon Point development as shown in Table 3.
162 The 520 household development (Option 1) is expected to generate 4,290 trips per day (2,145 in/2,145 out) of which 285 trips (91 in/194 out) will be during the AM peak period and 379 trips (223 in/156 out) will be during the PM peak period.
Option 2, the 655 household development, is expected to generate 5,348 trips per day (2,674 in/2,674 out) of which 355 trips (112 in/243 out) will be during the AM peak period and 469 trips (276 in/193 out) will be during the PM peak period.
Table 3: Proposed Future Dwelling Unit Development
Option 1 Option 2 Area Households Service Jobs Households Service Jobs Stockland North 270 16 405 24 Cookson 100 6 100 6 Stockland Stages 2 to 6 135 8 135 8 Stockland Stage 1 15 1 15 1 TOTALS 520 31 655 39 Note: Stockland now propose a potential dwelling yield of 503 units for Stages 7 to 11 and have approval for 103 units in Stages 1 to 6.
For a traffic access option with no north-south link (Option 01) the development is treated as four separate communities with no internal road linking between them (see Figure 13). Traffic signals are installed at the intersections of Wrexham Road/Lawrence Hargrave Drive and Point Street/Princess Highway to cater for the additional traffic entering the existing road network from the development. Access to the Princes Highway would also be gained from Beattie and Sturdee Avenues. Clearly there is little opportunity for traffic diversion from the existing road network into the development area.
The expected daily traffic generation from each section of the proposed development is Stockland North - 2,216 vehicles per day two-way, Cookson - 832 vehicles per day two-way, and Stockland Stages 2 to 6 - 1,116 vehicles per day two-way.
Approximately two-thirds of generated traffic travels south towards Wollongong. Whilst this is expected to increase flow on the Princes Highway south of Point Street by 2,600 vehicles per day, it amounts to only a 7.5 percent increase in traffic. Generated traffic is generally confined to the arterial network.
Intersection analysis was also conducted by Council’s consultant but the traffic access option with no north-south link was not modelled.
In a supplementary report on the Traffic Impact Study prepared by its Strategic Planning Division, Council noted that: The “Traffic Impact Study” report states that for the “probable” land use, (total 520 households/residential dwellings) some 4,290 vehicle movements per day (vpd) are generated and distributed across the road network in all directions. The model incorporating “real” demographic data reflects actual traffic distribution patterns and shows that approximately two-thirds of the traffic generated is to and from the south.
This volume of traffic generated by the “probable” new Sandon Point land use represents some 14 percent of traffic generated by all residences around Thirroul. The percentage would be substantially less than this if allowance was made for all traffic in Thirroul including traffic attracted from other suburbs to local commercial activities plus a significant through traffic volume. It is the distribution of this “new” Sandon Point traffic volume over the road network that
163 is shown in the TRACKS outputs which quickly dissipates away from its origin and results in generally minor traffic impacts (over and above the general background traffic).
The development option incorporating a “high” land use scenario (total 655 households/residential dwellings) generates some 5,348 vpd with the same distribution pattern as the lower land use option. This volume of traffic generated by the “high” Sandon Point land use option represents some 18 percent traffic generated by all residences around Thirroul. Again the percentage would be substantially less than this if allowance was made for all traffic in Thirroul. The distribution of this higher Sandon Point traffic volume over the road network also quickly dissipates away from its origin and likewise results in generally minor traffic impacts.
Figure 13: Traffic Access Option 01
For Option 01 with no north-south link Council stated that: In the absence of any internal road connections between the existing and future development stages, numerous adverse impacts would be inevitable. Apart from the social isolation arising from the separation of new residents from existing local shops and other services, there would also be some reduced integration of the new community with the existing community. Furthermore, the adverse traffic impacts arising from such a scenario would include additional traffic loadings at key intersections, (with resultant additional congestion and reduced safety) and significant additional traffic volumes having to travel north to eventually travel south through the Princes Highway/Lawrence Hargrave Drive junction. Any road network having reduced connectivity
164 results in additional vehicular travel distance which is contrary to all current transport policy targets for reduced total “vehicle kilometres travelled”. Without road connectivity, potential bus services are limited, again contrary to policies endorsed by all levels of Government.
The provision of a north-south road link has many benefits as it allows traffic to disperse in a way which minimises impacts or allows them to be managed.
The Strategic Planning Division recommended that: § The road network incorporating a north-south link between Wrexham Road and Point Street, the east-west link road between Wrexham Road and Surfers Parade together with the Station Street and Railway Parade links as modelled, are recommended for further planning, community consultation and detailed engineering investigation; § Further community consultation, detailed investigation and design is recommended to provide appropriate traffic route calming and landscaping treatments in the following areas: - Point Street, Blackall Street and Trinity Row traffic route calming, - Both the north-south and east-west link roads, - McCauley Street and Surfers Parade, and - Beattie and Sturdee Avenues; § Traffic signals incorporating pedestrian/cyclist features be provided at the junction of Lawrence Hargrave Drive and Wrexham Road; and § Pedestrian or cyclist facilities be planned and incorporated into all local road proposals.
Council concluded from this extensive analysis that although further detailed engineering assessment and comprehensive community consultation were needed, traffic impacts are manageable.
Following from these studies, the general objectives and principles now set out by Council in the draft DCP are to: § Provide safe, efficient and attractive access especially for sustainable transport modes; § Develop an access strategy that optimises connectivity, legibility and permeability both within the site and with surrounding areas, and which enhances accessibility for existing local residents; § Promote and enhance linkages to increase the use of existing public transport infrastructure including Thirroul Railway Station and local bus services; § Reduce total distance travelled by private vehicles; § Encourage walking and cycling; § Encourage public transport use; § Minimise impacts from increased traffic on adjoining streets and residential areas; and § Provide transit supportive residential densities in the appropriate locations.
The draft DCP includes objectives for road access and road hierarchy, as well as guidelines for north- south links.
Council also referred to the highly contentious issue of road access to the CoI area through the southwest corner of Thomas Gibson Park from Wrexham Road. Access at this location is currently included in DCP 94/17 which applies to the land. The community are overwhelmingly opposed to any access which alienates public lands, notwithstanding that there would be no direct impact on the active use of the park. Access from Wrexham Road would significantly impact on the residents living in Wrexham Road. But the analysis and studies undertaken confirm that from a technical traffic perspective the northern road access should be via Wrexham Road.
DIPNR(PlanningNSW) points out the cumbersome and inefficient local traffic circulation patterns in and around Thirroul. It notes that the CoI area has three potential access points which are at Point Street, Sturdee Avenue and Wrexham Road. It supports linking these access points to provide the
165 opportunity to better manage traffic circulation and create a more accessible urban area. Furthermore, the potential to create an additional north-south link providing flood free access should not be lost.
Stockland’s traffic consultant (Stapleton) reviewed earlier traffic studies noting that: § Modelling has shown that the most appropriate road network for the CoI area at Sandon Point would include a north-south link from Wrexham Road to Point Street, thus bypassing the congested intersection of Lawrence Hargrave Drive and the Princes Highway; § The proposed Stockland development incorporating a north-south link road would have no significant impact on local traffic flows or on local intersections, and impacts on the least number of existing residents; § Signalised intersections at Princes Highway/Point Street and Lawrence Hargrave Drive/Wrexham Road are proposed providing greater safety for turning movements; § Traffic increases in the eastern end of Point Street would be minor with local area traffic management but substantial in the western end; § The north-south link would provide excellent opportunities for public transport; § A link to the CoI area via the Sturdee Avenue rail bridge together with banned right turns from the Princes Highway to Beattie Avenue and Sturdee Avenue would increase flows in Beattie Avenue and Sturdee Avenue as well as increasing travel times for residents in those streets; and § The Sturdee Avenue/Beattie Avenue link, although supported by the RTA does not form part of the Master Plan due to the significant impacts on existing local residents.
Stockland stated that it understood a large part of the RTA’s and Council’s motivatio n for supporting a north-south link through Sandon Point is to relieve traffic pressure and to improve the safety record on Lawrence Hargrave Drive and the Princes Highway.
Council required that roads in the proposed development should be able to be accessed for flood events up to the probable maximum flood (PMF). However, several residents pointed out that the flood-free north-south access, which would be provided by Stockland’s proposed development at Sandon Point or by adopting Council’s draft DCP, would only be effective locally. This is because during most flood events access across creeks both north and south of the CoI area is also flooded, preventing other than limited local movement.
Should the Cookson Plibrico manufacturing facility remain, Council stated it is preparing a traffic access concept plan. Provision of a north-south link immediately east of the railway line would require the co-operation of Cookson Plibrico. The crossing of Tramway Creek would then be located as preferred by the NPWS, resulting in minimum disturbance to the SCESFC in Tramway Creek. In a report (Hallam, May 2002) submitted by Ms Slon it is stated that: § Many of the through traffic issues are removed with no north-south link; § Traffic signals at the intersection of Wrexham Road and Lawrence Hargrave Drive would operate satisfactorily for 427 dwellings and for 600 dwellings with no north-south link; and § Linking the Sturdee Avenue rail bridge with the site would reduce traffic at the Lawrence Hargrave Drive/Princes Highway intersection.
Commission’s Comments
The Commission strongly supports a comprehensive and integrated system of pedestrian paths and cycleways on the CoI area at Sandon Point. This system should link with existing roads and the beachfront cycleway. Although outside the CoI area, establishing a pedestrian and cycle connection from Wrexham Road to Station Street and/or Railway Parade would significantly improve safe public access to central Thirroul and Thirroul railway station.
It is noted by the Commission that additional traffic connections in the Wrexham Road area to the east and north are strongly opposed by the majority of the community. These road connections would
166 require further detailed study and effective community consultation before being further considered for implementation. However, consideration of road connections to the north and east is a matter for Council having regard to wider traffic issues outside the CoI area.
Council has undertaken substantial investigation of the traffic implications of the proposed residential development at Sandon Point. This intensive analysis has generally assumed traffic generation arising from residential development and densities proposed by Stockland of approximately 500 dwelling units on the CoI area. The preferred option includes a north-south link from Wrexham Road to Point Street which would relieve congestion at the Princes Highway/Lawrence Hargrave Drive intersection, provide flood-free access through the CoI area, and allow for a bus route. However, many local residents expressed strong concern for the additional traffic they considered would use Point Street and the coastal route. Nevertheless, for Stockland’s proposal and the area under investigation for development in Council’s draft DCP, a north-south linkage through the CoI area would provide significant advantages in relation to local traffic management and access.
The Commission recommends a smaller residential development potential for the CoI area. The portions of the CoI area which the Commission finds can be initially developed for residential use consistent with the land’s values and constraints are shown on Figure 16. There are four separate areas for which road access is required, namely: § Stage 7 to the south of Tramway Creek; § AIR and Dairy Farmers sites to the south of Woodlands Creek; § AIR site between Woodlands Creek and Hewitts Creek; and § Land to the north of Hewitts Creek.
The draft DCP and Stockland’s Master Plan propose bridge crossings of Hewitts, Woodlands and Tramway Creeks for road access. The Commission’s recommendations require road access across Hewitts Creek but not necessarily across Woodlands Creek or Tramway Creek. Nevertheless, the Commission considers that a pedestrian path and cycleway are required across Woodlands Creek to provide access to and from Thirroul. This access could be integrated with the railway culvert upgrading works or comprise a bridge structure with minimal affect on the riparian, ecological and flood functions of Woodlands Creek constructed further downstream. Given the Commission’s findings in relation to the Cookson Plibrico operations, access across Tramway Creek would require the co-operation of Cookson Plibrico. The Commission does not consider access across Tramway Creek is necessary for the extent of its recommended residential development areas, but further assessment of impacts is required for increased traffic use of Sturdee and Beattie Avenues.
Both the draft DCP and Master Plan recommend a road crossing of Tramway Creek near where the existing sewer main crosses the creek due to the reduced quality of the SCESFC in that location. NPWS prefers a crossing immediately east of the railway line to minimise impact on the SCESFC. As noted above the Commission’s position is that road access across Tramway Creek is not necessarily essential for its recommended development areas. If road access is required, then for the situation where the Cookson Plibrico operations also remain, the only feasible location is immediately east of the railway line. This would require Cookson Plibrico’s co-operation and would have significant implications for the development yield of Stockland’s Stage 7 area.
If Cookson Plibrico relocate, there is the opportunity for a road crossing further east near the existing sewer line crossing. The Commission recognises the localised impact this would have on the SCESFC. But there would be access benefits in having a more central crossing of Tramway Creek. In the Commission’s view informal pedestrian and cycle access through the Tramway Creek SCESFC would be less likely with a central bridge crossing.
The residential development areas recommended by the Commission would require improvements at both the Beattie Avenue/Princes Highway and Sturdee Avenue/Princes Highway intersections. Further consultation with the RTA would be required to resolve traffic and safety issues for these intersections.
167 Although traffic generation and distribution from the residential development areas recommended by the Commission have not been assessed in any detail, an indication of the impacts can be deduced from the extensive traffic studies undertaken by Council, its consultants and other informed submissions to the Commission. Clearly, the 2 areas for which further consideration of traffic matters is warranted are the areas between Hewitts Creek and Woodlands Creek, and between Woodlands Creek and the Cookson Plibrico land. Road access from the smaller areas north of Hewitts Creek and south of Tramway Creek are unlikely to have significant impacts based on the evidence.
Residential development in the area between Woodlands Creek and the Cookson Plibrico land is recommended to be limited to 2 storeys, as well as being restricted to a reduced area due to environmental planning considerations in relation to the eastern portion of that land. The number of dwelling units is therefore substantially reduced from the number contemplated by both Council and Stockland. Although traffic generation would also be substantially reduced, access would be via Sturdee Avenue or Beattie Avenue and the single lane Sturdee Avenue railway bridge. Further assessment of traffic management, including the duplication or widening of the Sturdee Avenue railway bridge, the potential conflict with vehicular movements associated with the Cookson Plibrico operations , and access to and from the Princes Highway need to be undertaken. The Commission has compared the likely relative number of traffic movements generated by this area if developed for residential use with existing traffic movements, as traffic from the Cookson Plibrico operation and existing residential development west of the Illawarra railway also use Beattie Avenue and Sturdee Avenue to access the Princes Highway. The Commission has reviewed the relevant evidence relating to traffic movements and is of the view that satisfactory traffic management is likely to be feasible for this proposed area of residential development, subject to further traffic management and safety impact assessment.
The major area recommended as suitable for residential development is located between Hewitts Creek and Woodlands Creek. It would require road access from Wrexham Road which the Commission supports, as well as widening the Wrexham Road railway bridge, construction of a bridge over Hewitts Creek, and signals at the Wrexham Road/Lawrence Hargrave Drive intersection. Access from Wrexham Road would be across the southwestern corner of Thomas Gibson Park as included in DCP 94/17 which currently applies to the land. While strongly opposed by residents who point out the access would alienate public land, it would not involve actively used park land because of the topography.
Wrexham Road would carry all traffic from this major area of the proposed residential development on CoI area, and the small portion of land north of Hewitts Creek recommended for development. The evidence before the Commission is that the likely traffic generation could be accommodated. The Wrexham Road/Lawrence Hargrave Drive intersection would function at a satisfactory level of service but there would be increased congestion at the Princes Highway/Lawrence Hargrave Drive intersection. While possibly three-quarters of the traffic would be expected to travel towards Wollongong, the increase in traffic flow south of Point Street amounts to a 7.5 percent increase for 520 dwellings (Option 01) as submitted by Council. The reduced number of dwellings the Commission recommends would significantly reduce this percentage increase. The Commission nevertheless recommends that potential impacts on the safety of school children attending Bulli Public School be assessed and appropriate mitigation measures adopted as required.
The traffic management regime referred to above does not comply with the traffic management principles considered desirable for the CoI area at Sandon Point as detailed in the draft DCP and Stockland’s Master Plan. But the Commission considers the values and constraints of the CoI area were not appropriately assessed in determining the level of residential development proposed by those documents. Traffic management, particularly the provision of a north-south link at this time, is not considered by the Commission of such importance to be a primary environmental planning determinant. The Commission recognises, however, that the provision of efficient public transport routes and alternative access points would be denied. The reasons for the Commission’s position in this regard are set out in other sections of the report.
168 LAND CONTAMINATION
Land contamination has occurred in the western portion of the CoI area due to past industrial activities. Prior to any residential development all contaminated land must be appropriately remediated. The NSW Government’s Contaminated Land Reform Package provides laws, guidelines and administrative arrangements for the management of site contamination and remediation. EPA intervention occurs when contamination poses “a significant risk of harm to public health or the environment”. Sites not in this category are administered by councils under the EP&A Act. The latter situation has applied at Sandon Point as the EPA assessed contamination on the land “as not being a significant risk of harm” and consequently the consent authority is responsible for ensuring that any contamination is appropriately remediated.
Council’s draft DCP included that development proposed on land known or reasonably suspected by Council to be contaminated must comply with Council’s Contaminated Land – Development Control Plan 94/25. Any land in proposed residential areas must undergo contamination assessment and remediation to the satisfaction of the EPA and Council. In this respect, once any remediation strategy is found acceptable to the EPA and Council, then remediation measures can be completed simultaneously with the earthworks required for infrastructure development.
Several resident submissions expressed considerable concern for the dangers that past contamination of the area could pose to any future development. They were doubtful that previous remediation was undertaken in a rigorous manner, and sought assurances that any land which was contaminated would be comprehensively remediated.
Diary Farmers Site
A preliminary site assessment of the former Dairy Farmers site found two areas of contaminated soil. One was sediment in a former soak pit, and the other slightly elevated levels of copper, zinc and lead in gravel. The consultant advised the soak pit sediment could be disposed offsite to an appropriate landfill and the gravel could be used as road base (or disposed offsite to an appropriate landfill).
Cookson Plibrico Site
Investigations have indicated that contamination of soil on this site is localised and confined to areas under and around the production facilities. There is significant contamination from PAH (polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons) at low concentration levels in the fill material used at the rear of the site. Some PAH contaminated fill is also located to the southern boundary line of the site along Tramway Creek. A limited area near the rear boundary of the site is also contaminated by petroleum hydrocarbons. Heavy metal concentration levels are below the relevant criteria for the current use of the land and are unlikely to pose a significant health risk for residential use with gardens and accessible soil.
Stockland’s consultant considers removal of the contaminated soil from the site is the most appropriate option, provided the material complies with the necessary criteria. The more expensive option of using chemical oxidation onsite would need to be used if the contaminated soil did not meet the landfill criteria. About 10,800 tonnes of contaminated soil requires remediation or disposal offsite at an approved landfill.
Brickworks (AIR) Site
The Brickworks site has been remediated, validated and reviewed by an auditor accredited by the EPA under the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997. The site was divided into 5 sub-areas for assessment and remediation. Stockland provided copies of the Site Audit Statements and Council provided copies of the Summary Site Audit Reports for each of the 5 sub-areas. Other reports referred
169 to in the audit reports included assessment reports, remedial action plans and validation reports. All areas of the site have been audited and confirmed to a standard suitable for residential development with gardens and accessible soil.
Area 1 – Car Park Landfill (North of Hewitts Creek) The remediation strategy for this land involved: § Excavating all fill material; § Stockpiling and classifying the excavated material which was transported to an approved landfill; § Validating the final excavated surface; and § Confirming the suitability of backfill material.
Area 2 – Western Southern Section (South of Woodlands Creek) No remedial work was considered necessary for Area 2.
Area 3 – Eastern Southern Section (South of Woodlands Creek – Farm Hill Landfill) This area was remediated by: § Excavating all fill material from the landfill; § Classifying the excavated material and disposing of material which did not meet validation criteria to an approved landfill; § Validating the final excavated surface; and § Backfilling the excavation with appropriate material.
Area 4 – Eastern Central Section (Between Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks) Bioremediation of soil containing hydrocarbons was conducted on site in 1994. Soil containing hydrocarbons, zinc and manganese contamination was removed to an approved landfill following further investigations from 2000. Residual/scrapings soil from beneath soils stockpiled on Area 4 during remediation work in other areas of the site was disposed of to an approved landfill.
Area 5 – Western Central Section (Between Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks) Remediation of this area of the site has involved: § Excavation of chromium contaminated soil and disposal at an approved landfill; § Onsite bioremediation or land farming of hydrocarbon contaminated soil; § Disposal of more heavily hydrocarbon contaminated soil to an approved landfill; § Removal of 4 underground storage tanks, and § Removal of asbestos contaminated soil to an approved landfill.
Stage 7 Area
This area has been assessed, remediated and validated as indicated in Summary Site Audit Reports (July 2001, November 2002). These reports, as well as the remedial action plan and the site validation report, describe the assessment, contamination which was considered relatively minor, and the remediation works conducted. The second of the audit reports concluded that the site is suitable for development as residential with gardens and accessible soil.
170 Audit Conditions
The site audit statements contained conditions which included: § An environmental consultant should inspect the site during any major earthworks; § If any suspect material is observed it should be investigated by an environmental consultant; § Any additional material used as fill should be appropriately validated; § For aesthetic reasons refactory material and coal waste should not be used as a surface layer; and § Where asbestos fibres were identified the existing surface should be raised by 0.5m.
Depending on the depth of earthworks to be undertaken further investigation and validation may be required according to Stockland.
Sydney Water Land
Sediment from near the upstream western boundary of the site contained concentrations of PAH (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) and zinc slightly above the Health Investigation Level Guidelines proposed by ANZECC (Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council). Stockland considers they do not pose a risk to human health, but may pose some risk to aquatic organisms. No interim remedial measures are considered necessary. The contamination is likely to have come from the Cookson Plibrico site and remediation of the sediments would be considered in conjunction with any future remediation of the Cookson Plibrico site.
Commission’s Comments
The Commission has reviewed the documentations submitted relating to site contamination and remediation. The remediation of the 5 areas of the AIR site have been completed to the satisfaction of the site auditor. The Commission finds these 5 areas, subject to the recommendations of the site auditor, can now be considered for residential development. The Commission notes, however, that in certain areas sampling was generally undertaken only to a depth of 2m. If reworking of fill to greater than 2m depth is contemplated then the Commission considers that further soil sampling and analysis would be required to ensure the soil does not require further remediation. Soil sampling would need to comply with the EPA’s guidelines for sampling. Concerns which certain residents have had with remediation activities, especially dust generation, are noted by the Commission but these activities on the AIR site occurred outside of the Commission process. Nevertheless, when the Cookson Plibrico and Dairy Farmers sites are remediated or any reworking of material below 2m depth on the AIR site is being undertaken, particular emphasis must be placed on the control of dust emissions.
Resident concerns that the Stage 7 area south of Tramway Creek was not investigated or remediated to adequate standards are not supported by the evidence before the Commission. However, the situation does highlight inadequacies in information flow to the community. While consultation was not obligatory, it could have assisted in alleviating the reasonable concerns of the community, which is clearly interested and involved in securing an environmentally sound future of the Sandon Point area.
In regard to the Sydney Water land, the Commission is satisfied that proven means of environmentally acceptable soil remediation are available. As the contamination is likely to have come from the Cookson Plibrico site and interim remediation is not considered necessary, remediation of the Sydney Water land could reasonably be deferred until the Cookson Plibrico site is remediated.
171 BUSHFIRE MANAGEMENT
Bushfire risk assessment and protection measures were addressed in a consultant’s report submitted by Stockland. The level of bushfire hazard and risk on the site of the proposed development and its surrounds was determined by reference to the maps and assessment methodology in the Wollongong Bush Fire Risk Management Plan. Appropriate bushfire protective measures were determined with reference to the NSW Rural Fire Service and DIPNR(PlanningNSW) document Planning for Bushfire Protection and Australian Standard 3959-1999, Construction of Buildings in Bushfire-Prone Areas. The Rural Fire Service considered the following planning principles appropriate for the site: § Asset protection zones (APZ) incorporating as a minimum: - An inner protection area bounded by a perimeter road or reserve that circumscribes the hazard side of the land intended for development, and has a building line consistent with the incorporation of an APZ within the property. The size of the APZ will be dependent upon the vegetation type and slope, however, 20m is considered a minimum width to provide a safe platform for residents and fire fighters to safely defend residences and to prevent direct flame impingement upon dwellings; § Provide for two-way road access to allow for evacuation of residents, if required, and egress for emergency vehicles; § Place controls on the location of combustible materials within the asset protection area (for example, brush matting fences); and § Provision of a reticulated water supply in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2419.
The report of Stockland’s consultant considered the level of bushfire hazard low, with a low level of bushfire threat and a minor level of risk. The following protection measures were recommended: § Establishment and maintenance of a 20m wide Inner Protection Area between any dwellings in the subdivision and the revegetated bushland along the creeklines, the turpentine forest and the remaining vegetated area to the east. Maintenance of the interior of the residential development as an Inner Protection Area; § Construction of the public roads, and the pathways/cycleways along the perimeter between bushland and residential areas, to the requirements for public roads and fire trails in Planning for Bushfire Protection; § Installation of fire hydrants to meet the requirements of Australian Standard 2419.1 1994, Fire Hydrant Installations; and § Consideration should be given to constructing future dwellings directly adjacent to bushland areas to Level 1 specifications in Australian Standard 3959 – 1999, Construction of Buildings in Bushfire-prone Areas, although this is not required in Planning for Bushfire Protection.
Stockland comments that for the purpose of the final detailed landscape design, a proportion of the 20m inner protection area required for bushfire management purposes, may be included in the riparian zone. In such cases, the landscape design would need to provide scattered trees and shrubs with a managed understorey to satisfy the performance criteria for the inner protection areas.
In this regard the consultant’s report notes that the Inner Protection Area should provide a fuel free space around the future buildings in the development, which would allow the buildings to be defended from bushfires. It would also reduce the risk of wind-blown burning debris from bushfires starting spot fires close to a dwelling. Landscaping within the proposed development should aim to achieve a living fuel component which is both discontinuous and of low flammability. General recommendations for landscaping to establish and maintain the Inner Protection Areas within the proposed development include: § Use only mown lawn, bare ground (driveways, paths) or non-flammable succulent ground cover plants immediately adjacent to buildings (within 2 to 5m);
172 § Incorporate non-flammable structures, such as pools and tennis courts, into the Inner Protection Area; § Maximum tree cover should be less than 30 percent, and maximum shrub cover less than 20 percent; § Trees and shrubs should be isolated or in small clumps and continuous canopies should be avoided; § Trees planted should be species that grow to over 5m in height to maintain separation between the lower canopy and the ground; § Trees should not be planted closer to buildings than their expected full height; § Avoid planting trees and shrubs with rough fibrous bark, or which retain shed bark in long strips; § Avoid planting trees and shrubs that deposit large quantities of litter in a short period, particularly in spring and summer; § Select plant species of relatively low flammability; § Canopies of trees and shrubs should not touch walls or overhang dwellings; § Avoid vines on walls and pergolas; § Avoid brush fencing as well as continuous areas of woodchips or other flammable mulches; § Locate any combustible materials, such as woodpiles and flammable fuel stores outside the Inner Protection Area.
Council’s draft DCP states it aims to prevent bushfire danger to existing and proposed developments due to their proximity to riparian corridors and natural vegetation by applying the following guidelines: § Bushfire hazard reduction setbacks (including inner and outer protection zones) are to be included within the Managed Buffer Zones and should be provided outside and adjacent to Vegetated Riparian Buffers; and § Any development application must submit a Bushfire Assessment and Management Study where Council or the Rural Fire Service determines that a site is within a bushfire hazard area.
Council proposed managed buffer zones generally 24m wide in its draft DCP, but reduced widths of 16m on the northern side of Hewitts Creek and 14m around the Cookson Plibrico site resulting from “some balancing with economic imperatives”.
Both Council and Stockland provided indicative cross-sections of core riparian protection zones, vegetated buffer zones and managed buffer zones. These are indicated in Council’s draft DCP and Stockland’s primary submission for selected locations on all four creeks.
Commission’s Comments
The Commission considers particular regard must be had for the ecological fundamentals of the site. It strongly supports Council’s guidelines that the bushfire hazard reduction setbacks should be provided outside the core riparian zones and the vegetated buffer zones. Stockland’s suggestion that asset protection zones could be included in riparian zones is not supported, especially given the requirements noted above for landscaping in an inner protection area. Stockland’s position does not have due regard to the important ecological functions and values of the riparian zone.
In most areas of the site the 20m asset protection zone could be accommodated with little effect other than reducing the developable area. However, for the Cookson Plibrico site, a 20m wide asset protection zone would substantially reduce the area potentially available for building development. It would result in a narrow strip of flat land some 40m wide flanked by roads or access areas. It would also be a virtual cul-de-sac surrounded on three sides by bushland/wetlands, unless a bridge is built
173 across Tramway Creek. The need to provide effective bushfire protection for any residential development on the site could further compromise the ecological values of the SCESFC in the core riparian zones of Tramway and Cooksons Creeks given their proximity to development and the minimal buffer likely to be available . Determination of the safe width of asset protection zones around the Cookson Plibrico factory site needs further consultation with the NSW Rural Fire Service if that land is to be developed for residential use.
NON ABORIGINAL HERITAGE
Council’s draft DCP lists 12 items of non Aboriginal heritage significance on or adjacent to the CoI area, together with a succinct statement relating to physical evidence, objectives, guidelines and performance measures: § Thirroul Refractory Brickworks: Brickworks demolished. A number of pieces of machinery such as brick presses and moulds were retained. Significant elements of the site, the raw materials processing area and the No 6 downdraught kiln were archivally recorded; § Bridge over Railway: Arched bridge constructed of brick. Still in use for vehicular and pedestrian traffic; § Woodlands Cottage Artefact Scatter: Fragments of pottery and other archaeological material. Full extent of deposit unknown; § Bulli Coke Works: The site was subject to an archaeological excavation and extensive remains including coke wharf, flues and bases of chimneys and ovens were uncovered. These were archivally recorded and demolished; § Bulli Saltworks: The site was excavated but no remains were found; § 19th Century Mine Tramway: Parts of the site were subject to an archaeological excavation. Archival records were made of the relics uncovered; § 1950s Rail Sidings: The embankments have been regraded during the subdivision excavation; § Bulli Jetty: No investigation has been undertaken to establish whether there is any physical evidence remaining; § Sandon Point Boatsheds: Rough utilitarian sheds built of a variety of materials including corrugated steel and timber; § Site of Captain Wesmacott’s Homestead: Investigation needs to be undertaken to establish whether there is any evidence of the homestead on this site; § Norfolk Island Pines: Stand of Araucaria heterophylla ; and § Turpentine Forest: Coastal wet sclerophyll forest dominated by Syncarpia glomulifera trees, ecologically interdependent on the adjacent wetland area.
Stockland’s non Aboriginal heritage consultant identified two items with potential heritage significance formerly on the site, namely:
Thirroul Brickworks
The Thirroul Brickworks, under a number of names, has significance as one of the largest refractory brickworks in Australia, having during its peak more than 300 workers. It is also significant for its association with the Port Kembla and Newcastle Steelworks as a supplier of refractory bricks and refractory materials for over seventy years. The Brickworks provides evidence, through a number of items of plant and machinery, of the change in brick making technology spanning over 50 years. The Brickworks, with its chimney stacks, was a visually important industrial feature located on a landmark site close to the village of Thirroul. The Brickworks was closely associated with the local area as a major employer drawing heavily from Thirroul for its workforce.
The Brickworks have been demolished with some machinery and equipment being retained. Significant elements and features of the site were recorded before demolition. A Heritage
174 Interpretation Plan sets out principles of how to inform future residents and visitors to the site about the history and significance of the place, its function and its importance to the community and how it will be integrated into the area’s redevelopment. The plan recommends a number of ways in which the site can be interpreted in a meaningful way, including displays, information brochures, and the use of historic fabric and historic names. The final plan would be adapted to suit the final development proposal.
Woodlands Cottage
Woodlands Cottage was associated with Captain Westmacott, a pioneer settler and amateur painter, who built the house in the early 1840s. Westmacott left the Illawarra area in 1947 but perpetuated the early cottage and its surroundings on one of his watercolors. The cottage occupied a prominent ridge and was probably a visually important element in the coastal landscape until the 1920s, when it was destroyed by fire.
Subsequent industrial activity has so altered the site that it can no longer provide evidence of the early cottage. Fragments of glass-ware and pottery exposed on the walkway towards the beach, however, may be associated with the 19th century cottage. The extent of the deposit should be investigated.
The location of the early cottage should also be recorded. Text and illustrations relating to Woodlands estate and the cottage should also be incorporated into interpretative measures proposed for the brickworks site to illustrate the historical context for the development.
Commission’s Comments
Many residents and community groups have expressed their utter dismay at the destruction of the non indigenous heritage at Sandon Point. These parties refer to the important built heritage previously on the lands including the gravitational tramway, coke ovens and brick kilns. Moreover, the number of local residents employed over the past century at these works contributed significantly to the social development of the northern Illawarra community. Residents vehemently argue that tangible aspects of this important heritage works should have been protected and conserved for future generations.
The Commission supports the community’s request for this important non indigenous heritage to be appropriately commemorated, including the coke ovens, brickworks, tramway and jetty to provide a comprehensive heritage perspective. The Commission strongly supports development of an interpretive centre and historic walking trail as have been suggested. The Commission encourages Council to continue involving local historians and the community in developing these facilities.
GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES
Stockland submitted a summary of geotechnical investigations on the land in the western portion of the CoI area which has an area of about 26 hectares. The land, which extends about 750m north-south and 350 to 400m east-west, has been extensively disturbed. Apart from brief comment in several submissions, the geotechnical investigations were not in dispute (see Remediation of Contaminated Lands for site contamination issues).
According to Stockland current and previous studies of the western portion of the CoI area indicate that about 90 percent of the Brickworks site has been extensively disturbed and that about 50 percent of the Cookson Plibrico site has been modified. Existing fill is indicated on Figure 14.
The Brickworks site contains two extensive areas of previous quarrying now backfilled with 5m to greater than 10m of fill. There are also extensive areas on the Brickworks site where existing fill
175 ranges from typically 2m to 5m depth, including areas within and adjacent to Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks. The existing buildings and infrastructure on the Cookson Plibrico site is assessed to be on typic ally 1m to greater than 2.5m depth of fill. Existing fill on both the Brickworks and Cookson Plibrico sites is assessed to be uncontrolled, but largely suitable for reworking to an engineered/controlled fill condition.
Whilst capped with 2m to greater than 4.5m of existing fill, the ridge separating the Brickworks and Cookson Plibrico sites is underlain by residual predominantly clay soils and then interbedded sandstone and siltstone. Similar residual soils and rock underlie the northwest corner and eastern portion of the Brickworks site north from Hewitts Creek.
Existing fill over the balance of the Brickworks site is underlain by predominantly stiff to very stiff predominantly clay alluvium. However, within and close to Hewitts and Woodlands Creek’s, the alluvium is assessed to be more geologically recent erosion infill comprising loose to medium dense interbedded but predominantly sandy alluvium to depths of 4.5m to greater than 9m. The east to southeast portion of the Cookson Plibrico site is also underlain by alluvial clays.
Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered at many of the test locations at the time of fieldwork. However, it appears that groundwater occurs at depths of typically 2m to 3m in the area between Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks. North from Hewitts Creek, groundwater was encountered at depths of about 5m to 10m within the area of deepest fill. Within the balance of the Brickworks site south from Woodlands Creek, groundwater was only encountered at 2m depth locally in the southeast corner. No groundwater was encountered within the maximum 3.3m investigation depth at the Cookson Plibrico site.
No contaminated groundwater was found during geotechnical investigations or site remediation according to Stockland. Future site works are not expected to require significant excavation below the watertable. A groundwater management plan would be developed and implemented if one is required.
Acid Sulphate Soils
Tests undertaken by Stockland have not identified any potential acid sulphate soils. According to Stockland this is consistent with similar testing undertaken recently for the nearby Stages 1 to 6 subdivision. However, DIPNR(DLWC) indicated that it had identified acid sulphate soil material in stockpiled soil near Tramway Creek. Stockland indicated that it intends to conduct further sampling and indicator PASS testing on alluvial and residual soils from low lying portions of the site during future geotechnical studies in relation to residential or other development.
Council would require any development application to be accompanied by an Acid Sulphate Soils Management Plan where a site is shown in Council’s records, or there are other reasons to suspect the site is affected by acid sulphate soils.
The Acid Sulphate Soils Management Plan would need to: § Be prepared by a suitably qualified geo-technical environmental consultant; § Include a site analysis from a registered NATA (National Association of Testing Authorities) laboratory; and § Be consistent with the Acid Sulphate Soils Management Advisory Committee Manual (1998).
Where appropriate any Master Plan, Integrated Management Plan or Development Application must incorporate the recommendations of the Acid Sulphate Soils Management Plan.
176 Figure 14: Map of Existing Fill Depths
Earthworks
Extensive earthworks would be required on the Brickworks site and to a lesser extent on the Cookson Plibrico site in order to rework existing fills to a controlled fill condition, suitable for residential and other development.
Numerous constraints would need to be considered in carrying out such work, namely: § The presence of 5m to greater than 10m of fill within the Brickworks site north of Hewitts Creek and extensive areas elsewhere on both the Brickworks and Cookson Plibrico sites where existing fill is in the depth range of 2m to 5m; § The presence of weak, saturated predominantly sandy alluvium beneath the existing fill within and close to Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks and probably also Cooksons Creek within the Cookson Plibrico site; and § A wide range of existing fill types comprising mostly clays but including sandy and gravely materials, some coal chitter and crushed concrete and bricks. The existing fills are also likely to be excessively wet at depth.
177 Based on the current study and recent experience at the Stages 1 to 6 subdivision, Stockland considers that existing fills at the Brickworks and Cookson Plibrico sites can be reworked to a controlled fill condition and that the majority of existing fills can be incorporated into such works. This assessment is on the premise that contamination studies by others have not identified issues of major concern. Earthworks methods should be finalised prior to the commencement of any works.
Residential Development
The broad ridge and associated side slopes within the northern portion of the Cookson Plibrico site and the southern portion of the Brickworks site, and the slopes north from Hewitts Creek are assessed to have a medium risk of overall slope instability. The balance of the site is assessed to have a low risk of overall slope instability. The steep batters of uncontrolled fill either side of Hewitts Creek are assessed to have a high risk of local instability. It is anticipated that following site earthworks and likely landscaping/remedial works along Hewitts Creek, the risk of local instability would be reduced to medium. A medium risk of slope instability is normally acceptable to Council according to Stockland.
Present site conditions include widespread disturbance/modification and extensive uncontrolled fill over almost the entire Brickworks site and about half of the Cookson Plibrico site. Stockland considers the site is suitable for residential development provided earthworks are carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical studies.
However, following site earthworks the majority of residential lots could be assessed as Class H or M. Conventional stiffened raft and other high level footing systems may be considered for such lots.
Commission’s Comments
The Commission is satisfied that well proven methods are available to ensure the soils on the site are goetechnically suitable for residential and associated infrastructure development. Compliance with Council’s requirements would be necessary. Particular attention will be required if reworking of soils is proposed below 2m in any areas on the AIR site where remediation has only been undertaken to 2m depth. Testing for acid sulphate soils would be necessary for any soil material excavated from low lying or alluvial areas.
OTHER RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS
Community Services and Infrastructure
DIPNR(PlanningNSW) noted that there is a range of community facilities and infrastructure available to service this area including schools, hospitals, community centres, childcare facilities and libraries. In addition: § The Department of Education has advised that the local primary and high schools are capable of receiving additional student numbers resulting from any development at Sandon Point through existing capacity or by providing supplementary school accommodation. § Wollongong City Council has plans to establish a regional community/multi-purpose centre at Thirroul that will contain a regional library including music and children’s library, function rooms, space for cultural activities and other services. § There appears to be adequate facilities in the northern suburbs to support additional development after discussion with relevant agencies. It is expected that any pressure for services resulting from future development will be addressed through Section 94 developer contributions.
178 Residents expressed significant concern that the proposed level of residential development would severely strain existing infrastructure including medical facilities, schools, roads, utilities, and Council services.
Community Facilities
The increased demand for community facilities was taken into account when developing the draft DCP for Sandon Point according to Council. The demand for facilities will be dependent on the final number of housing units to be developed at the site which has not been determined at this time. However, if the yield for the site was in the order of 500 units it is expected that the demand for additional community facilitie s (child care facilities) would not be in excess of the capacity for such facilities already planned for the area under Wollongong City Council Section 94 Plan No. 1. This plan currently provides for a district level multi purpose community facility to be located at Thirroul (The Thirroul Multi Purpose Centre).
As any development at Sandon Point would be in the catchment of the proposed Thirroul Multi Purpose Centre, Section 94 Contribution towards the construction and ongoing operation of the Centre would be required. This facility would have the capacity to provide a range of community facilities, including child care facilities as circumstances demand.
Council does, however, acknowledge that further investigation of the demand for additional community facilities result ing from the development of Sandon Point is required. This work will be undertaken when further information on the development yield of the site is known. Council has the capability to either adjust its existing Section 94 Plan or introduce a new Section 94 Plan for Sandon Point if demand for additional facilities exceeds those already planned.
Sydney Water has indicated to DIPNR(PlanningNSW) that its water supply and sewage infrastructure is adequate to support the overall proposed level of development at Sandon Point.
The Commission is satisfied the evidence establishes community services and infrastructure would be adequate or could be reasonably provided for the increased demand which its recommended level of residential development on the CoI area would generate.
Aquatic Resources
Several members of the Aboriginal community, as well as residents expressed concern that further residential development on the Sandon Point land would adversely affect the aquatic ecology, both in the creeks flowing through the site and in the adjacent ocean waters and rock shelves. Moreover, that no detailed studies of the potential impacts have been completed.
In answer to questions from the Commission, NSW Fisheries stated that: § Conversion of undeveloped land to urban use will undoubtedly have an impact upon downstream aquatic environments. Whether that impact will be significant depends upon several factors including the proportion of the catchment that is converted; the inherent capability/suitability of the land to support urban development (slope, soil type, climate); the design and planning of the development; the implementation of the development; and the size, nature and condition of the downstream environments (which governs their “robustness” or assimilative capacity). § Conversion of land to urban use typically results in larger volumes of water reaching downstream habitats (due to the creation of impermeable surfaces – roofs, paths, roads). That water will typically be more polluted with sediment, nutrients, pesticides and gross pollutants. These impacts can be ameliorated to some extent by planning and design (buffer strips, avoidance of steep and erosion prone land) and execution (construction and maintenance of sedimentation ponds, silt-stop fencing). In our experience, implementation often leaves a lot to be desired and is rarely as effective as predicted. Having said that, we
179 also recognise that existing land uses can be having a severe adverse impact upon downstream aquatic habitats especially where heavy grazing pressure occurs across and within drainage lines. In some cases, conversion to urban use could be “the better of two evils”. § Tramway, Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks are small waterways which are already affected by existing catchment and waterway uses. As such they have limited capacity to assimilate additional nutrients and pollutants. On the other hand, the adjacent ocean waters have a large capacity to assimilate additional nutrients/pollutants. Also, the estuarine lagoons of these creeks are only infrequently open to the sea. As such, pollutants carried downstream by small rainfall events will tend to accumulate in these areas. The adverse impacts will therefore be greater than if the lagoons were frequently flushed with oceanic water. § The conservation values of these systems are poorly known. We are aware of reports of undescribed species of mayflies in the wetlands associated with these creeks. However, the significance of this species remains unassessed. Similarly, these systems have only minor value for recreational and commercial fishing.
NSW Fisheries did not attempt to quantify the impacts on aquatic habitats, stating that judgements of this type are generally speculative because they rely on predictions of potential changes to hydrology and water quality. These predictions are in turn, based upon numerous assumptions which cannot be easily verified.
The Commission’s recommendations in relation to the quality of water discharged from residential development on the CoI area would require an appropriate standard of treatment to protect downstream water quality. The Commission considers aquatic resources would be adequately protected by the water pollution control measures which are required by the Commission’s recommendations, especially given the current state of much of the AIR site.
Noise Assessment
A noise and vibration impact assessment associated with road and rail traffic was conducted by Stockland’s acoustic consultant (Heggie, February 2003). Computer modelling was used to establish the degree of rail noise impact on the western side of the site. The noise consultant stated that the EPA LAeq (24 hour) goal of 55dBA would be the controlling criterion when there is no barrier on site, as compliance with this goal would result in compliance with the EPA LAmax goal of 80dBA.
The western boundary of the AIR site along the Illawarra railway between Hewitts and Woodlands Creeks, and the western boundary on the existing Cookson Plibrico site would be affected. These two areas are separated by a slight hill in the centre of the western boundary where the rail line is in cut.
The area affected by train noise is predicted to extend 90m from the rail line on the northern section of the area and 65m on the Cookson Plibrico section of the area. Noise control measures would be needed to mitigate noise at future residential receivers. Options for the control of noise consist of buffer zones, alternative land uses in noise affected zones, noise barriers, treatment of dwellings , or a combination of these measures.
One option is to use a noise barrier in the order of 3.5m high in combination with acoustic treatment of residences within 35m of the nearest rail line. Other options include constructing a 4.5 to 5m barrier on the northern side of the site and a 3.5 to 4m barrier on the Cookson Plibrico section of the site to ensure that the acoustic amenity of that site is satisfactory for residential development.
Stockland pointed out that once a barrier is adopted in the design to control the rail LAeq (24 hour) noise to acceptable levels then it is the LAmax noise level that has the greatest impact on site. This is due to the elevated source height of the freight train locomotives. The number of freight locomotives are relatively small when compared with passenger trains and the options to address this noise source include localised treatment of buildings or a barrier.
180 The consultant’s initial review of likely vibration levels from trains at the western site boundary indicated that acceptable vibration levels would be achieved at a distance of about 15m from the Illawarra railway. They would be contained within railway land. Therefore, it is likely that the entire site would be acceptable for housing in relation to vibration impact. It is recommended that vibration monitoring be conducted to confirm this finding at the development application stage.
Traffic noise associated with the preferred north-south road link was assessed with respect to EPA traffic noise goals. It was found that noise associated with traffic on this preferred north-south route would meet EPA traffic noise goals.
The road and rail traffic noise assessment undertaken by Stockland indicates noise levels would not exceed criteria subject to the inclusion of mitigation strategies and measures in the design of the residential development. Noise issues associated with the continued operation of industrial activities at the Cookson Plibrico facility are canvassed under Cookson Plibrico Operations.
Employment
The 1991 Illawarra Employment Lands (IEL) Programme concluded that zoned industrial areas within the 1993 Local Environmental Study area should be seriously considered for retention as future light industrial land. This included the western section of the CoI area. The IEL Programme ascertained there was a shortage for this kind of industrial land in Wollongong’s northern suburbs.
DIPNR(PlanningNSW) stated there is a clear conflict that exists between the current Cookson Plibrico heavy industrial operations and the proposed residential development on adjoining land. Furthermore, the information currently available on the amount of industrial land in the Illawarra is over 10 years old and an audit of employment lands in the Illawarra is required.
Stockland indicated the total value of its project for residential development within the CoI area would be approximately $110 million over 4 years. The Housing Industry Association (HIA) provided the following information using multiplier effects: § 192.5 direct construction jobs per annum; § 110 direct jobs per annum in secondary industries that supply the building and construction sector such as materials manufacturers; and § 55 further indirect jobs in primary industries per annum.
According to the HIA, the project would also require: § $1.12 million worth of mining products; § $4.12 million worth of wood and wood products; § $8.94 million worth of non-metallic mineral products; § $6.18 million of fabricated metal products; § $5.44 million of other machinery and equipment; § $9.75 million of property and business services; and § $2.55 million of transport and storage services.
Operation of a mixed business, café and convenience store was proposed by Stockland within its development. Stockland suggested 7.5 permanent equivalent full time positions would be created. For its proposed long day care centre, it estimates there would be 9.5 permanent equivalent full time positions. And for the cultural interpretive resource centre 7.5 permanent equivalent full time positions. During construction of these facilities Stockland stated up to 22 equivalent full time positions would be generated for 6 months. Other employment generating activities would be landscaping, revegetation, rehabilitation and maintenance which would create 15 short term and 1 long term equivalent full time positions. In addition, there would be a need for home and retail services as well as teachers. Indirect jobs would also be generated according to Stockland.
181 Residents contend, however, that the relocation of the Cockson Plibrico operations which employ 80 full time staff would result in a net loss of employment from the northern Illawarra region.
The Commission notes the significant employment opportunities arising from development of portions of the CoI area for residential use. However, following construction, employment opportunities would be largely limited to service roles. Employment provided by Cookson Plibrico is referred to under Cookson Plibrico Operations.
Tourism
The tourist potentia l of the CoI area at Sandon Point was referred to in many resident submissions. Mr Miller and Mr Van Wijk provided extensive submissions on the future development of walking trails linking Sandon Point to other locations along the coast and on the escarpment. Many submissions also referred to the indigenous and non indigenous heritage of the immediate CoI area and nearby locations leading to the escarpment as well as on the escarpment itself. A proposal to establish walking and biking trails for visitors was noted. Evidence of the iconic status of Sandon Point as a surfing location of national and international repute was submitted.
In relation to tourism, Council submitted that: During the community workshops conducted for the preparation of the draft DCP, Council was asked to consider the possibility of undertaking tourism related land uses on the site which included a motel or other type of tourist accommodation. Beyond this very preliminary investigation there has been no thorough analysis of this opportunity. When Council considered its submission to the CoI it sought to ensure that any tourist related uses be considered in the finalisation of the draft DCP or master plan for the site.
While acknowledging the importance of tourism-related activities within the Local Government Area, and the coastal location of this site, the development of such a use needs to be considered against the environmental and master planning principles established for the site. There is a need to achieve an integrated development consistent with the unique scenic and environmental conditions of the site.
The data relating to demand for tourism-related development is scant and the potential has not been developed past a very preliminary stage at this time. The Commission’s recommendations do not preclude appropriate tourism related development for the CoI area.
Private Certification
Council stated it has experienced “significant difficulty with the use of Private Certification in the case of Stages 1 to 6”. In relation to Stages 1 to 6 Council submitted: As the Commission will be aware, the legislation allows for Private Certificate of Construction Certificates following granting of consent by the Consent Authority. Wollongong City Council has experienced significant difficulty with the use of Private Certification in the case of Stages 1 to 6. This has involved approval of elements of the Subdivision Construction Certificate without adequate consultation with Council. There also has been significant dissatisfaction regarding the adequacy of some infrastructure such as water quality facilities and questions over the legality of fill on Lot 235 (Stage 7). These lengthy disputes could have been avoided if Wollongong City Council was involved as the certifying authority. The net impact has been the impact on Council resources and lengthy delays in issuing Subdivision Certificates. It is Council’s strong recommendation to the Commission that with a site as controversial and as complex as Sandon Point, the Private Certification not be allowed. The alternative is to establish a process by which Wollongong City Council is involved in each step of the process. This is documented in Figure 2.1 of the draft DCP. That process provides for adequate consultation with Council by the Private Certifier, prior to issuing of certificates.
182 DIPNR(PlanningNSW) stated that it was reviewing the operation of private certification in relation to the Stages 1 to 6 and Stage 7 areas at Sandon Point. Furthermore, that: The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act does not allow the Minister or any other body to ‘suspend’ the operation of accredited certifiers for particular development consents or applications. On this basis it is not possible for the Council’s request to be met. However, DIPNR(PlanningNSW) believes that the certification process for any potential future development on the site could be improved through better development consent conditions and a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities between the Council, the developer and the certifier.
DIPNR(PlanningNSW) has consistently argued in publications such as Guiding Development:Better Outcomes and its submissions to the Parliamentary Inquiry on the Quality of Buildings that the effectiveness of the certification process relates directly to the quality of the development consent and its conditions. It is possible to use a well structured development consent and conditions to ensure a quality regulatory regime for the constriction of buildings and subdivisions. A well structured consent will: § Be clear about what development has been approved; § Identify the issues to be addressed before the issue of the construction certificate; § Group conditions on the basis of the staging of the development: before work commences, during construction, before the commission of roads and infrastructure, before the completion of works; § Identify the key elements of works and construction and the standards that the Council expects those elements or works to meet; § Identify the conditions and issues that must be satisfied before a subdivision certificate is issued; and § Contain a specific condition that identifies how disputes are to be resolved.
A draft guideline on the structure of conditions is currently being prepared by DIPNR(PlanningNSW). That guideline will provide assistance to councils and certifiers on how to frame and interpret conditions.
A well structured consent is an effective means of establishing the regulatory expectations for the construction of development because the consent both binds the certifier and establishes the bounds of their enforcement powers. A certifier cannot issue a construction certificate until they are satisfied that the requirements of the development consent have been met. Similarly, a principal certifying authority cannot issue a subdivision certificate until all relevant conditions of consent have been satisfied.
The certification and enforcement action on the existing construction site point to some misapprehension of the roles of the Council and the certifier. While it is possible for a certifier to issue a construction certificate for the subdivision works, only the Council (or the consent authority) can take on the role as the principal certifying authority and issue the subdivision certificate. In taking on the role of the principal certifying authority, the Council can rely on compliance certificates issued by an accredited certifier, but they are not beholden to the certifier to accept those certificates.
In order to clarify the Council’s role as the principal certifying authority it is recommended that a service agreement be entered into with the developer and the accredited certifier who may issue the construction certificate so that it is clear as to who has responsibility for the oversight of the regulatory elements of construction. This service agreement could allow an accredited certifier to inspect the construction works, but it would be under the direction of the Council how many inspections occurred and how any breaches would be identified and reported.
For further information on these issues it is suggested that the Council consult the publication Guiding Development: Better Outcomes. In addition, DIPNR(PlanningNSW) is happy to work with the Council to address these issues for Sandon Point.
The Commission encourages Council to work with DIPNR to resolve issues concerning private certification. DIPNR would need to ensure it heeds its own advice in relation to State significant development on the CoI area.
183 Community Liaison Committee
Council pointed out that for the construction stages: One of the biggest concerns expressed by the community as a result of the implementation of Stages 1 to 6 has been the adequacy of site management during construction, and the provision of information about these processes. The draft DCP makes specific reference to this issue by requiring the developer to establish a Community Liaison Committee or process, and for monthly site audit reports to be provided to that group and to Council for its review, and where appropriate, approval. This requirement is proposed to provide a practical way to improve relationships and provide a transparent provision of information to interested parties.
The Commission supports Council forming a Community Liaison Committee to address community concerns and ensure the community is well informed. The Committee should be funded by the developer.
184 PREFERRED LAND USES, PLANNING OUTCOMES AND FUTURE MANAGEMENT (OPTIONS)
The values and constraints of the CoI area including Abor iginal heritage values, ecological and riparian functions, floodplain management, employment considerations, urban development opportunities, traffic management and a wide range of other matters are canvassed in the previous section of this report.
The terms of reference of the Commission require it to make recommendations on preferred land uses, planning outcomes and management options for the identified land having regard to its values and constraints in the broader context of the surrounding urban and non urban environment (Appendix 1). This section of the report focuses on issues relating to preferred land uses, planning outcomes and management options for the CoI area.
The CoI area is currently zoned under Wollo ngong LEP1990 (as amended) part 2(b) Medium Density Residential, 4(a) Light Industrial, 6(a) Public Recreation, and 7(a) Special Environmental Protection (Figure 3). Most of the land was rezoned in February 1997, except that part of the Hannah property which was rezoned in April 2002 (previous ly deferred) following a round-table meeting and a report by former Commissioner Simpson. It also needs to be noted that the draft Sandon Point DCP recently prepared by Council has no current status for the purposes of considering development applications under Section 79C of the EP&A Act as DCP 94/17 still applies to the CoI area.
In October 2002, the Minister for Planning advised Council that all residential, industrial, commercial and/or tourism developments on the western half of Sandon Point, mainly land zoned 2(b) and 4(a), are State Significant Development under Section 76A(7) of the EP&A Act (Figure 15). This makes the Minister the consent authority for any future development proposed for these lands.
Figure 15: State Significant Development Area
Also in October 2002, the Minister directed Wollongong City Council, under Section 88A, to refer Stockland’s development application (Council DA No. 1168/00) for residential development north of Hewitts Creek on Lot 2 DP595478 Wrexham Road, Thirroul (known as Stage 11) for his determination.
185 LAND USES
In terms of preferred land uses, submissions to the Commission can be broadly summarised as follows: § Stockland and Council consider the western half of the CoI area could be developed for residential uses as it is currently zoned 2(b) Medium Density Residential. The riparian corridors, Turpentine forest and the eastern half of the land could be reserved for open space purposes. However, their views differ as to the appropriate width of riparian corridors and zoning of the Hannah land. DIPNR(PlanningNSW) also considers portions of the site are suitable for a range of urban uses. § Most residents and community groups consider the whole CoI area including Stages 1 to 6 should be reserved for a coastal regional park and rezoned for conservation purposes. § A few residents consider limited residential development could occur on part of the AIR site to pay for rehabilitation of the land for conservation as a regional park. § Many residents support the retention of the Cookson Plibrico factory as it provides 80 jobs for the region. Others support the development of recreation/tourism facilities on the Cookson Plibrico factory site if it is to be relocated, and use of part of the AIR site for job creation. § The land is also considered ideal for a cultural heritage centre and/or a convention centre as it has been a traditional meeting place for Aboriginal groups.
The terms of reference require the Commission to consider the land in its broader context of the surrounding urban and non urban environment. The Commission in determining the preferred land uses of the CoI area must have regard not only to the ecological, environmental, Aboriginal heritage and developmental values and constraints of the land, but also to the various regional and local environmental plans, policies, strategies and guidelines directed to planning and development within the Wollongong Local Government Area.
Of particular relevance for the Commission’s consideration are the Illawarra Regional Environmental Plan No. 1, Illawarra’s Action for Transport Strategy, Metropolitan Development Program, and Draft Housing Strategy for Wollongong. In recommending certain areas within the CoI area for residential development the Commission has had regard to the objectives detailed in these plans and strategies (see Environmental Planning and Related Legislation and Policy).
There is a very limited supply of residential land in the northern Wollongong area except for redevelopment in older residential and former industrial areas at higher density. Residents confirmed that Thirroul is already in the process of changing from mainly low density, single dwellings to medium density, multi-unit townhouses and villa type development. They believe the proposed medium density housing on Sandon Point would also link Thirroul with Bulli, thus removing the “village” ambiance and open space visual amenity of the area.
The Metropolitan Development Program as it relates to the Illawarra (formerly the Illawarra Urban Development Program) includes 2 greenfield sites for the northern Illawarra area. Sandon Point is one and is stated as having the potential to supply 390 lots over a 5-year period (2002/03 to 2006/07).
Some submissions contend that development at Sandon Point should not be considered until a detailed planning strategy is prepared for the northern suburbs and proper investigation carried out to rectify deficiencies in data. Only when all the information is available can development options be planned. They consider development can be ruled out for some portions of the CoI area at this stage, including development on the Hannah property, as well as on the Cookson Plibrico site to the east of the Turpentine forest. Development of the AIR site should not be permitted at the intensity anticipated in Stockland’s draft Master Plan. The various stands of trees which exist, particularly in and around the southern part of the AIR site, and north of Hewitts Creek should be protected and augmented to form a regional habitat network.
186 On the evidence, the Commission considers there is sufficient information for an informed decision to be made on the preferred land uses for the CoI area, but additional studies are required. The Commission concurs that further Aboriginal archaeological and cultural heritage study, detailed mapping of existing and potential habitats, and targeted surveys of specific areas and species are required to assist in the preparation of a conservation management plan from which would form part of the integrated plan of management for the CoI area. This issue is further canvassed in Future Management (Options).
The desire of residents to maintain the existing character and environment of the area is understandable. However, the pressure for more housing in Thirroul is inevitable having regard to the limited supply of residential land and the changing housing market demand. This pressure needs to be channelled to suitable areas. The location of the CoI area is in close proximity to Thirroul Town Centre and Thirroul railway station. The Commission finds there is a need to ensure efficient and economic development of suitable available land as well as existing physical infrastructure and community services. It recommends residential uses for part of the CoI area.
The Commission’s recommended preferred land uses for the CoI area are as follows: § Extension of Wrexham Road to provide access to the AIR site south of Hewitts Creek; § Development of the area west of the Wrexham Road extension (north of Hewitts Creek) for residential uses. However, the area east of the proposed road should be conserved for its habitat value and to provide a habitat corridor linking lower Hewitts Creek to Thomas Gibson Park; § Residential development of the AIR site between Woodlands Creek and Hewitts Creek, subject to the recommended riparian corridor reserves. § Rehabilitation/restoration of the eastern portion of the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek to preserve visual amenity consistent with the SEPP 71, as well as linking the expanded Turpentine forest to the Woodlands Creek corridor. The western portion could be developed for residential uses. § Residential development on part of the Dairy Farmers site. § Protection of the Turpentine forest as well as the area to its east due to ecological, visual amenity and Aboriginal heritage values. § Retention of the Cookson Plibrico factory at this time to maintain its employment, subject to the implementation of effective noise mitigation measures. § Development of Lot 235 (Stage 7) for residential uses subject to further noise assessment related to Cookson Plibrico’s operations and effective noise mitigation measures . § Protection of the Hannah property and the balance of the CoI area for conservation purposes, except Lot 1 DP231244 which is to remain public recreation. § Location of the suggested Aboriginal Information/Cultural Centre in the proposed rehabilitated/restored area on the eastern part of the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek, subject to visual amenity considerations and if considered appropriate by the Aboriginal community. § Development of the 3 lots in Stages 2 to 6 as approved by the Land and Environment Court. § Purchase of the small area of 6(a) land at the northern end of Hill Street by Council under a Section 94 Contributions Plan.
187 PLANNING OUTCOMES
Local Environmental Plan (LEP) Approach
As referred to in earlier sections of this report, Council considered Sandon Point would benefit from an LEP based Master Plan. However, due to the extended time required to undertake this task Council resolved to prepare a draft DCP to replace DCP 94/17, and require a DCP based Master Plan for its consideration of development proposed for the CoI area. The draft Sandon Point DCP stated that although the proposed development areas were primarily determined by environmental factors, they are generally located within areas that are currently zoned for residential use or on private land which requires rezoning. The 6(a) zone would also require extension. Thus, if the draft DCP is adopted, an amendment to Wollongong LEP 1990 is required for the proposal contained in the draft DCP to be implemented.
Stockland is of the view that its draft Master Plan proposal is based on areas that are currently zoned for residential development, though it also involves rezoning of the Cookson Plibrico property for residential development, the Hannah property for public recreation, and adjustment to 6(a) and 2(b) zone boundaries to permit the draft Master Plan to be implemented.
A number of residents contend that a residential zoning provides no guarantee that development could occur. They directed the Commission’s attention to the previous rezoning of the Cookson Plibrico and Hannah properties without their owners’ consent. Some residents also consider it is reasonable to expect the AIR site to be rezoned to accord with it being in a floodplain.
Others pointed out that Section 73 of the EP&A Act provides a statutory basis for a review of the planning instrument in light of new information. They argue that it is open to the Commission to recommend a new LEP be made for Sandon Point based on information presented to the Commission as the current zoning of the land is inappropriate.
DIPNR(PlanningNSW) considers the current zonings for Sandon Point do not adequately reflect the environmental and heritage values of the site. Subject to the outcomes of this Commission, an amendment to Wollongong LEP 1990 would be appropriate. DIPNR(DLWC) also considers the new information that has become available since the land was last rezoned should be integrated into the LEP, as this is the most appropriate mechanism to delineate land uses, including those necessary for natural catchment functioning.
Based on the evidence, there is strong justification for the preparation of a new/amended LEP for Sandon Point. This is particularly so having regard to the listing of the endangered SCESFC under the TSC Act, the identified Aboriginal archaeological and cultural heritage significance of certain parts of the land and the Riparian Land Management Study which categorises the whole of Woodlands Creek as an environmental corridor. The draft DCP prepared by Council provides the basis for appropriate development control guidelines in these matters, subject to the Commission’s recommendations.
Stockland could revise its draft Master Plan in accordance with the Commission’s recommendations, SEPP 71 requirements, the Coastal Design Guidelines and the draft DCP as its draft Master Plan does not satisfy the requirements of these documents. However, the Commission recommends Council concurrently prepare a new/amended LEP based on the Commission’s recommended preferred land uses and finalise the draft DCP. This would enable both documents to be placed on public exhibition at the same time. The community could then review the proposed future uses of the land and associated development controls, as well as the environmental management measures for the protection of the ecological, environmental and heritage values of the land.
188 Land Use Zones
Most submissions from residents and community groups believe the whole CoI area including the Cookson Plibrico factory and Stages 1 to 6 area should be rezoned 7(a) Special Environmental Protection. All land tenures and zonings should then be consolidated into National Parks and Wildlife Service ownership, and managed as a regional park. They do not support the zoning of all open space land to 6(a) Public Recreation as such zoning does not provide specific environmental protection measures. Some recommended that the criteria used to determine the 7(a) zoning of the Hannah property be applied to determine the appropriate zoning for adjacent areas. Many residents object to the proposed rezoning of part of Thomas Gibson Park to 2(b), and its reclassification to Operational Land to enable the development of the Wrexham Road extension.
The National Parks and Wildlife Service recommended: § All areas of biodiversity and Aboriginal heritage conservation value including SCESFC, buffer areas, the Turpentine forest, as well as Woodlands Creek and its original watercourse should be rezoned 7(a) Special Environmental Protection to reflect the values identified in the relevant studies. § The 7(a) zone objectives should be amended to include areas of known Abor iginal heritage significance. Furthermore, roads, stormwater control structures, leisure areas of high impact, and utility installations should not be permitted in this zone at Sandon Point to ensure consistency with the primary objective of managing these areas for conservation purposes. § Other zones adjoining the proposed 7(a) zoned land should allow only a level of development that does not significantly affect the values within the Special Environmental Protection zone.
DIPNR(DLWC) supports any land that is identified as Core Riparian Zone (CRZ) being considered for a 7(a) Special Environmental Protection zoning, and the permissible uses better defined to exclude urban development. Furthermore, consideration should also be given to the acceptable uses of land adjoining the CRZ, including land that is referred to as vegetated riparian buffer and riparian corridor in Stockland’s draft Master Plan, as well as any adjoining open space. Acceptable uses could include stormwater management controls and passive recreation features, provided that they do not detract from the integrity of the CRZ and any associated vegetated buffer zone.
DIPNR(PlanningNSW) considers: § Areas identified as having high conservation value (such as the SCESFC, the Turpentine forest, and riparian and coastal vegetation) should be zoned to reflect those values and managed for conservation purposes. § Riparian and wetland areas should be zoned to reflect their role in environmental protection and/or enhancement and appropriate buffers implemented to protect these areas. § Places and items of known archaeological or cultural significance should be zoned and managed appropriately. § Sites of Aboriginal cultural or ecological significance should be protected through appropriate zoning and management. § Urban development adjoining open space should be designed to reduce conflict, improve surveillance, and improve visual impact when viewed from the foreshore and open space areas. § The Cookson Plibrico property should be considered for alternative appropriate uses, with employment generating, tourism, educational and residential development to be explored. Commercial development in direct competition with the nearby Thirroul centre would not be desirable. § Areas close to retail centres and transport routes should be assessed for medium density development. § The use of Wrexham Road for access is appropriate as it would not have a significant impact on the use of public land.
189 Council submitted that the current 2(b) zone boundaries do not represent the area suitable for development as the boundaries of the development areas proposed in the draft DCP are set back from existing zoning boundaries to meet ecological requirements. The existing Cookson Plibrico factory is considered suitable for residential use subject to resolution of various issues including employment and relocation cost. The Turpentine forest would be conserved and rezoned 6(a). The majority 7(a) zoned part of the Hannah property would be maintained and the small area of the 2(b) zoned land adjusted to accord with the draft DCP proposals.
Stockland submitted that its proposed development would be on land that is currently zoned for residential development. It proposes to increase the area of land zoned 6(a) to encompass the riparian corridors as proposed in its Master Plan. The Hannah property currently zoned 7(a) should be rezoned 6(a). The currently zoned 2(b) portion of the Hannah property should be adjusted to reflect the actual development area as shown in the draft Master Plan. Zone boundaries between urban development and future open space should be adjusted to accurately reflect the proposed development area. The small portion of land to the northwest of the CoI area should be rezoned 2(b), and reclassified Operational Land under the Local Government Act 1993 to facilitate the preferred Wrexham Road connection. This would also provide for the orderly use of this small area of Council owned land which would lie between the road access and the Illawarra railway. The zoning provisions should also be reviewed to facilitate the provision of locally based community and retail facilities to meet the needs of the future incoming population in the locality, preferably in the form of mixed use developments.
The objectives of the 6(a) Public Recreation zone and 7(a) Special Environmental Protection zone under the Wollongong LEP 1990 are detailed in Environmental Planning and Related Legislation and Policy. They are stated here again for ease of reference and discussion: The objectives of Zone No. 6(a) (Public Recreation Zone) are: a) To identify areas where recreation facilities for the general use of the community for active and passive recreation may be developed; and b) To cater for the development of a wide range of facilities for the benefit of nearby communities.
The objectives of Zone No. 7(a) (Special Environmental Protection Zone) are: a) To protect environmentally important lands having special aesthetic, ecological or conservational value; b) To identify and protect the foreshore environment, which enhances the visual amenity and possesses ecological or conservational value; c) To identify and protect lands forming part of the catchment areas for water supply; and d) To allow some diversity of activities on degraded land which will not prejudice the objectives referred to in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) from being achieved or significantly detract from the environmental or visual quality or character of the locality or the amenity or operation of any existing or proposed development in the locality.
In considering whether a 6(a) or 7(a) zone should apply to the lands that are not recommended for residential development, the Commission finds that their identified environmental and heritage values should be the primary determining factors. The evidence is the eastern half of the CoI area, the Turpentine forest and the area to its east, the eastern part of the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek, the eastern part of the area north of Hewitts Creek and the proposed riparian corridors have aesthetic, ecological, conservation and/or heritage values. The land is also in a foreshore environment. These attributes warrant their inclusion in the 7(a) Special Environmental Protection zone. The Commission is mindful that these areas may also be considered to meet the objectives of the 6(a) zone for passive recreation facilities. However, many of the permissible uses with consent in a 6(a) zone are not compatible with the objective of conserving these areas for their ecological, environmental and heritage values. Potential impacts from these uses are a major concern to the NPWS and the community, notwithstanding the proposed preparation of a management plan. The NPWS and most
190 residents consider any proposed management plan would not provide sufficient measures to protect the land if it remains zoned 6(a).
Even if a management plan for a 6(a) Public Recreation zone includes environmental protection as one of its objectives, the level of environmental protection would not be the same as if the plan were for a 7(a) Special Environmental Protection area. When in conflict, the objectives of the zone prevail over a management plan which is a tool to assist the achievement of the zone’s objectives.
Having regard to the identified values of the lands and the conservation objectives required for their protection, the Commission recommends all land not recommended for residential development be rezoned 7(a) Special Environmental Protection, except Lot 1 DP231244 (see Figure 2) which is to retain its 6(a) Public Recreation zoning. A conservation management plan directed towards their protection should be prepared in consultation with the NPWS, DIPNR, landowners and the Aboriginal and local communities. As canvassed in other sections, it is the Commission’s view that these 7(a) zoned lands should, in the long term, be brought into public ownership for their long-term environmental and cultural protection and conservation.
Amendment of the objectives of the 7(a) Special Environmental Protection zone to include the protection of areas of known Aboriginal heritage significance is recommended by the Commission. In addition, high impact activities should not be permitted within the 7(a) zone in the Sandon Point locality having regard to the significance of the SCESFC and its vulnerability.
The Commission considers the 2(b) Medium Density Residential zone is appropriate for the areas recommended for residential development. Under Wollongong LEP 1990 this zone permits a wide range of housing types including residential flats, dual occupancy development, dwelling houses, recreation areas and other specific uses. Subdivision would be permissible with consent after advertising and subject to satisfying Clause 11 of the LEP, which outlines a number of matters for consideration prior to the granting of consent (see Environmental Planning and Related Legislation and Policy).
Stockland recommends a mixed use zone to be provided within the land for community facilities and retail development. The 2(b) zone already permits community facilit ies with development consent. However, the Commission is not convinced that a café/restaurant and retail development would be necessary to service the new residents. Any such proposal should be assessed when a master plan is prepared. Regard should be given to the availability of existing community facilities, the potential impact on Thirroul Town Centre, and whether the development would negatively impact on the integration of new residents with the existing community.
Figure 16 shows the Commission’s recommended zones for the CoI area. It should be noted that the boundaries are indicative and would be subject to refinement when detailed design of the riparian corridors is available.
Flexible Zone
Clause 38A(1) of Wollongong LEP 1990 provides for a flexible zone. It states: Development that (in the absence of this clause) would be prohibited in a zone may be carried out with development consent within 50m of the boundary between that zone and another zone if it is permitted in the other zone either with or without development consent.
However, Clause 13 of State Environmental Planning Policies No. 71 removes this provision as it includes that: A provision of an environmental planning instrument that allows development within a zone to be consented to as if it were in a neighbouring zone, or a similar provision, has no effect.
191 Figure 16: Recommended Land Use Zones
192 To facilitate the implementation of its draft Master Plan, Stockland recommends the reinstatement of a flexible zone provision via an amendment to SEPP 71 to allow for zone boundary flexibility in situations where a master plan has been prepared.
DIPNR(PlanningNSW) does not support the use of flexible zone boundaries and advised that an LEP prepared by Council to remove flexible zone boundary provisions is currently with the Minister.
The Commission is not persuaded there is sufficient justification to support a flexible zone provision.
Built Form – Development Density, Building Height and Site Coverage
The resultant built form of a development is a reflection of its development intensity. Floor Space Ratio (FSR) is one of the measures to control the intensity of a development. Other controls include building height restrictions, maximum site coverage, boundary set back standards and minimum landscaped area. As mentioned earlier, LEP 1990 provides a density control in the form of FSR for residential 2(b) zoned land. Other controls are detailed in Council’s draft DCP which also includes guidelines and standards concerning subdivision pattern, lot size dimension for each type of development, and parking requirements.
In an area where residential development is considered an appropriate land use, the focus would then be on the intensity and type of development. The height and scale of a development determines whether it would harmonise with or overpower its neighbours, represent a satisfying contrast, or be visually inconsistent. The bulk of the building is also important, for if it is too big it would be out of character with the adjacent residential environment, which is predominantly 1 and 2-storey houses. Building height influences the visual character and environment of an area whether viewed from close range or from further away. Site coverage is a control generally used to illustrate the outcome of the building footprint so as to assess the bulk of a building.
The Commission’s comments focus on development density (FSR), building height, site coverage and landscaping requirements as these are the critical controls that will determine the resultant built environment of any residential development.
Development Density – Floor Space Ratio Control
Clause 12(2) of LEP 1990 specifies that an FSR of 0.5 to 1 applies to a 2(b) Medium Density Residential zone. The LEP makes no provision for building height restriction except for land referred to in Schedule 2A, which is not relevant to Sandon Point.
Council, in its primary submission, submitted that the 0.5 FSR “blanket” control provided in the LEP, is unlikely to produce an optimum built form that is responsive to the site. That is, higher densities closer to the railway station or in areas that optimise site qualities, views to escarpment and the coast, and lower densities in other locations. Council is of the view that an agreed development yield is better than FSR control to guide the subdivision pattern.
Stockland recommends that Clause 12 of LEP 1990 be amended to remove the application of the maximum FSR provision where a master plan is prepared in accordance with SEPP 71. To support its position Stockland stated that: § It is appropriate to achieve increased densities near to areas of public transport and in locations which afford higher residential amenity. § The imposition of a standard FSR control for individual allotments would discourage the provision of the significant areas proposed as public open space. The public open space lands are proposed to be subdivided from the remaining residential lands, and therefore, would not contribute to forming part of the site area in the calculation of FSR. An alternate scenario would be, for example, to produce a Master Plan which incorporates the areas identified as public open space within future residential allotments and, even though not
193 utilised for development purposes, could be used for the purposes of determining site area in the calculation of FSR. § The application of the FSR control contained within LEP 1990 was assumingly not envisaged in the situation of land subject to a Master Plan, as it provides an undesirable restriction on achieving an appropriate outcome of a Master Plan, and is superfluous in a Master Plan achieving its objective where it appropriately allocates density and building form.
DIPNR(PlanningNSW) acknowledged that achieving good urban design may require a change to existing planning controls , and that specifying a maximum FSR is one mechanism to control development densities. However, this approach provides limited opportunity to address built form and design issues. A master plan as required under SEPP 71, is considered by DIPNR(PlanningNSW) to provide a more holistic and versatile approach that allows both environmental and design issues to be addressed to achieve better visual outcomes.
Neighbourhood Committee 3 opposes Stockland’s proposed amendment of Clause 12 of LEP 1990 to remove the FSR provision as it considers this the only effective control on density to prevent overdevelopment.
The Commission sought further clarification of Council’s position on FSR control. Council advised that there are really two issues relating to built form controls, namely: 1. Gross and net yields; and 2. Development standards as they relate to development on individual allotments.
In Council’s view, the 0.5 to 1 FSR control in a 2(b) zone can be applied in two ways: 1. To determine the amount of floor space on a single lot, which is a general statement about the form and bulk of a building; or 2. To assess the gross floor space for a larger area (this gives an indication of the potentia l yield of a large site).
According to Council the real issue is the development types that Stockland has proposed and that the variation in them means an FSR of 0.5 to 1 across the entire Sandon Point site would be difficult to achieve. Stockland’s Master Plan proposes a range of housing types which have an FSR greater than 0.5 to 1 on a lot-by-lot basis (town houses, apartments). The draft Master Plan proposes an FSR of 0.72 to 1 for townhouses but no FSR is indicated for apartments and houses. The likely amount of floor space that would be achieved across the site is not clear, hence it is impossible to verify a gross FSR achieved across the site.
Another consideration is whether or not the 2(b) zoning is the appropriate mechanism for determining the development yield for the site. Council considers there may be merit in revising the zonings to permit the type of development that Stockland is proposing if the Commission is of the view that such approach is warranted.
Council considers that if there is merit to increasing building heights and floor space ratios to permit residential flat buildings greater than 2 or 3 storeys, and town houses with FSRs greater than 0.5 to 1 (townhouses with FSR 0.7 to 1, height limit 2 storeys, maximum site coverage in the range of 60 to 70 percent) then at the Master Plan stage, more appropriate design controls would be required.
The draft Master Plan proposed by Stockland (Figure 5) depicts where the different types of housing (detached houses, townhouses, apartments) are proposed. Section 3 of the Master Plan detailed the design objectives, design/architectural principles and architectural elements.
The only design/architectural principle stated which relates to building density is the location of higher density housing in the northern portions of the site closest to Thirroul Railway Station. This is inconsistent with Figure 5 which shows that apartments are also proposed on the eastern end of both
194 the Cookson Plibrico factory site and the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek. The principles detailed in the Master Plan at Section 3.3.6 (Housing Form), reinforce this inconsistency: It is noted that the current zoning of lands identified for housing development in the draft Master Plan is presently Residential 2(b) pursuant to Wollongong LEP 1990, which provides for various housing development forms inclusive of residential flat buildings. Rather than maximise overall dwelling yield, a distribution of housing density has been proposed by the draft Master Plan which reflects the following principles: § Maximising density within the proximity to the Thirroul Railway Station to maximise opportunities for walking to the station and Thirroul Village. § Allowing for relatively greater densities in areas of higher amenity, associated with potential views or proximity to open space lands….
Stockland provided its proposed development density in the form of gross density yields. It proposes approximately 17 dwellings/hectare excluding the eastern CoI area which is recommended for public open space.
No reference is made to building height in the descriptive text. The only reference that can be found is in the notes to a Stockland diagram showing Typical Streetscapes – Apartments. It states “4 to 5-storey apartment buildings in the vicinity of Thirroul railway station, 3-storey elsewhere with underground parking”.
The Commission agrees with Council that the draft Master Plan: …is more an indicative land use plan. It is not suitable for analysing the impacts of the proposed Stockland development. It is very open ended and the location of some proposed apartments is questionable from an urban design perspective.
In its current form, the draft Master Plan does not meet the requirements of SEPP 71, and does not demonstrate it has been developed to be consistent with theCoastal Design Guidelines of NSW.
The gross density yield is a mechanism generally used to estimate the number of future residents that would be accommodated in a proposed development area. It is not a tool for built form assessment. The Commission is not convinced the proposed gross density yield alone, without other details such as gross floor area and site coverage, is sufficient for impact analysis.
The lack of details concerning landscape area, the layout of apartment buildings and the extent of the site covered by buildings makes it difficult to visualise the resultant development on the land.
In considering the FSR control, the Commission also notes the definition of gross floor area as contained in Wollongong LEP 1990, which states: Gross floor area means the sum of the areas of each floor of a building where the area of each floor is taken to be the area within the outer face of the external enclosing walls as measured at a height of 1400 millimetres above each floor level, excluding – (a) columns, fin walls, sun control devices, awnings and any other elements, projections or works outside the general lines of the outer face of the external wall; (b) lift towers and cooling towers on the roof, machinery and plant rooms and ancillary storage space and air-conditioning ducts; (c) car parking needed to meet any requirements of the Council and any internal designated vehicular or pedestrian access thereto; (d) space for the loading and unloading of goods; and (e) internal public arcades and thoroughfares, terraces, balconies, atriums and verandahs with outer walls less than 1400 millimetres high, and the like.
195 Given the exemptions, the FSR control under Wollongong LEP 1990 does not accurately reflect the building bulk that would be realised in a development proposal, particularly for residential flat type buildings.
It should also be noted that the stated FSR is a maximum permissible under Wollongong LEP 1990. It does not guarantee each development site can be developed to the maximum permissible FSR as other development controls and environmental considerations would dictate the final development outcome.
The Commission does not consider the FSR control is an impediment to the provision of variety of hous ing forms for the site or good urban design. There is insufficient justification to remove the FSR control for the CoI area at Sandon Point. This is particularly so having regard to Council’s advice that “if the area is to be characterised by 2 to 3-storey development, there is no reason to change the controls applicable under the current 2(b) zone”.
As canvassed in the following section, the Commission is not convinced that buildings higher than 3 storeys are compatible with the existing and future environment of the area.
Building Bulk – Height, Site Coverage and Landscaping Requirement
The draft DCP sets out site coverage, building heights and open space requirements for each type of dwelling as detailed in the following Tables. However, it was pointed out that these numerical controls are provided as a guide only and are subject to review and confirmation.
Table 4: Maximum Site Coverage
Dwelling Type Maximum Site Coverage Single Detached Dwelling Less than 600m2: 40% Attached Dual Occupancy Greater than 600m2: 35% Detached Dual Occupancy 35% Residential Flat Buildings/Multi Unit Development 40%
Table 5: Maximum Building Heights
Dwelling Type Maximum Height Single Dwelling (including villas) 2 storeys – 7m (within 16m of the front Attached Dual Occupancy property boundary) Detached Dual Occupancy 1 storey – 3.5m (beyond 16m from the front property) 10m to ridge Residential Flat Buildings (including Townhouses) 2 storeys – 7m to ceiling of top floor and 9m to ridge 3 storeys – 10m to ceiling of top floor and 12m to ridge.
196 Table 6: Open Space Requirements
Dwelling Type Private Open Space (Adjoining Communal Open Impervious a living area of each dwelling) Space Area of Site Single Dwelling A minimum area of 25sqm with a 50% Dual Occupancy minimum dimension of 4m. 50% Townhouses in 2(b) 40sqm at ground level with a Minimum 50sqm per 55% Zone minimum dimension of 4m. dwelling. Minimum Optional additional 12sqm roof total area 75sqm. or balcony with minimum Minimum dimension dimension of 3m. of 6m. Residential Flat Balcony minimum area of 15sqm 55% Building with minimum dimension of 3m.
As mentioned earlier, there is a lack of detail in Stockland’s draft Master Plan in relation to building height, bulk, scale, depth, and separation; street, side and rear setbacks; and site coverage to enable assessment of whether the resultant built form would be compatible with the surrounding areas.
The Commission notes residents and community groups are concerned that Thirroul is under extreme pressure to have building heights increased. They advised that the draft Thirroul Town Centre DCP proposed 3 to 4 storeys on commercial lots. Most residents object to buildings more than 2 storeys high so as to preserve Thirroul’s current character and village atmosphere.
As referred to in Environmental Planning and Related Legislation and Policy the Coastal Design Guidelines for NSW provide a framework for analysing and understanding the important relationships between new settlements and the local, urban and natural areas, as well as between neighbouring settlements and reserves. Of particular relevance for the Commission’s considerations are the following comments in the Guidelines: § The existing character of towns can easily be lost to suburban sprawl or tall buildings. § Heights are generally up to 4 storeys in town centres and 2 storeys in suburban areas. They are subject to place-specific urban design studies. New development is appropriate to the predominant form and scale of surrounding development (either present or future), surrounding landforms and the visual setting of the settlement.
The Commission considers that if residential development on the CoI area is to be consistent with the Coastal Design Guidelines as well as having regard to the existing and future built and natural environments, building heights should be limited to predominantly 2 storeys. To permit 5-storey buildings on the land as sought by Stockland in its draft Master Plan would not only overpower the adjacent area, but also move the focus from the existing Thirroul town centre towards the development area.
In recommending that 3-storey apartment type buildings be permitted on the western part of the AIR site north of Woodlands Creek, the Commission has had regard to the topography of the locality, the resultant visual environment, and the Coastal Design Guidelines which state that “where visual prominence is not apparent three story buildings may be appropriate”. However, the extent to which 3-storey buildings could be developed in the CoI area should be subject to detailed design, and be consistent with the development controls, design guidelines and desirable housing mix for the locality.
The area west of the Wrexham Road extension north of Hewitts Creek could also be developed for apartment buildings. However, a 2-storey height restriction (measured from the highest point on the adjacent road) should apply to minimise visual impact when viewed from areas to the north across Thomas Gibson Park. Tree planting on the north side of the extended Wrexham Road would be important to improve the visual setting of the development.
197 A maximum 2-storey height restriction should apply to the remaining residential area. The proportion of different types of housing should be well balanced and not dominated by one specific type of housing, particularly on the proposed 2(b) area south of Woodlands Creek. Residential density in this area must be assessed having regard to the road access for this area which would be via Sturdee and Beattie Avenues.
The proposed maximum site coverage in the draft DCP is a concern to the Commission, particularly the 40 percent maximum for residential flat buildings when taken into consideration with the private open space requirement of a minimum balcony area of 15m2 for each dwelling. This requirement is to provide some outdoor private open space to apartment residents. However, as advised by Council, balcony areas are not included in the site coverage calculation. In the circumstances here, the minimum balcony area requirement would increase the resultant building bulk significantly, in the range of 5 to 20 percent depending on the size of units and the design and layout of the building.
Past experience indicates that for residential flat building type development, if site coverage is greater than 35 percent, satisfactory landscaping to soften the visual impact of the development has been difficult to achieve. The role of landscaping becomes important as the scale of building bulk increases and the ratio of landscaping area to built area decreases. When landscaping is of the correct scale, it improves the appearance of the development and it also plays an important role in determining the micro-climate and overall amenity within a development.
The Commission observed that existing townhouses, villas and dual occupancy developments in the surrounding areas leave little peripheral area for open space or landscaping purposes to assist in softening the bulk of the development. Having regard to the resultant built environment created by these developments, the Commission is not convinced that Stockland’s proposed 60 to 70 percent site coverage for townhouse development (as advised by Council) would result in a satisfactory built environment.
The Commission considers the maximum site coverage proposed in the draft DCP should be all inclusive with no exemptions. The minimum area of 15m2 of balcony per dwelling should be reviewed having regard to the size of the proposed units and its contribution to the overall building bulk.
In the Commission’s view, it is of critical importance to maintain the visual landscape of the coast. Good building design (layout, height and bulk) and landscaping are the major if not the determining factors in terms of a visually satisfying built environment. Thus a detailed landscape plan rather than a conceptual plan should be submitted with any development application/master plan. The landscape plan should be prepared by a qualified person. It should detail all hard and soft landscaping; planting details including location, type, extent of foliage pattern when mature; as well as maintenance requirements and programs.
Reference to the basic design principles enunciated in the Coastal Design Guidelines indicates a minimum of 30 percent of the development area should be maintained as a deep soil zone for landscaping and stormwater management (infiltration/detention) purposes.
Affordable Housing
On 4 February 2003 Council resolved to develop a further submission to the Commission on the need for an affordable housing component to be established within the Commission’s terms of reference. Concerning affordable housing Council stated that: In order to maintain an appropriate social mix and to improve the affordability of housing across the Wollongong Local Government Area it would be appropriate to consider the provision of Affordable Housing Units at Sandon Point. There are a number of ways in which affordable housing could be provided including:
198 § Making development incentives available for the dedication of affordable housing units to be managed by a community housing trust (with the trust to manage the units in perpetuity as affordable housing); § Requiring up to 4 percent of the housing units be dedicated as affordable housing units by way of an LEP Amendment (units to be managed by a community housing trust); § Ensuring that in the subdivision and packaging of the land that integrated housing lots are created that offer small lot land and housing packages at reduced costs.
However, before determining any requirement for affordable housing, demand for such housing would need to be addressed on a needs basis against the amount of affordable housing already provided in the region by the Department of Housing. Further investigations are required at the present time to assess the need for affordable housing units in this area. This remains an unresolved issue at this time and is an issue that the CoI needs to consider and if appropriate give direction on.
The Commission recommends that Council consult with the Department of Housing to determine the need for affordable housing at Sandon Point prior to finalising the new amended LEP and draft DCP.
Other Issues
In Bushfire Management the Commission notes that the NSW Rural Fire Service refers to provision of a 20m asset protection zone adjoining native vegetation areas. To minimise problems associated with private properties which back onto public conservation/recreation areas, the Commission considers from a planning and access point of view, a peripheral road system and/or cycle way/pedestrian walkway should be provided in the Asset Protection Zone.
As canvassed in Cookson Plibrico Operations, residential development on Lot 235 (Stage 7) would be affected by industrial noise from the Cookson Plibrico factory if the operations are not relocated. The Commission recommends that in the first instance its preference is for Cookson Plibrico not to relocate and that mitigation measures be implemented on the factory site to minimise the noise affected area. The Commission also recommends that residential development be set back as far from Tramway Creek as possible. A review would be required to assess whether the noise level on the proposed Stage 7 development area then meets the relevant noise level criteria. If not, additional mitigation measures on individual houses could be required to further reduce the internal noise levels. If the noise levels are still likely to be above the relevant guideline levels when all practical mitigation measures are implemented, the only options would be for the Stage 7 site not to be developed for residential uses, or the impact of industrial noise noted on the Section 149 certificate so as to forewarn future residents, or for Cookson Plibrico to be relocated.
FUTURE MANAGEMENT (OPTIONS)
The terms of reference require the Commission to recommend management options for the CoI area at Sandon Point. Land ownership is a critical issue that needs to be considered prior to resolving future management options and requirements.
Land Ownership
Much of the land in the CoI area is privately owned as shown in Figure 3. Although some of the land is currently zoned 6(a) Public Recreation, Wollongong LEP 1990 makes no provision for land owners to require Council to acquire 6(a) zoned private land for open space purposes.
Council agrees in principle that public ownership of land zoned 6(a) and 7(a) is the best way to ensure the protection and management of the heritage and environmental values of these lands. However, it considers creek corridors are part of the stormwater drainage infrastructure associated with residential subdivision and a Section 94 Contribution Plan is not an appropriate mechanism to acquire these
199 lands , particularly having regard to their long term maintenance cost. Council is willing to accept riparian corridors as “a dedication to Council for public open space” following restoration and “a reasonable maintenance period”.
Stockland disagrees with Council’s view that the 6(a) zoned creek corridors constitute part of the stormwater drainage infrastructure associated with a residential development. It contends that the creek corridors provide a much wider function than stormwater drainage, including improvement of ecological and riparia n values. If the corridors were solely for drainage purposes, they would be significantly narrower, with large sections in pipes and channels. Stockland is of the view that any increase in corridor width beyond that determined in the 1993 Local Environmental Study should be the subject of a Section 94 Contributions Plan for acquisition and embellishment.
According to Stockland, the transfer of land zoned open space or identified as part of a riparian corridor open space system within Stages 2 to 6 is yet to be resolved between Council and Stockland. Stockland also believes that a definitive mechanism for the acquisition of riparian corridors should be established at the outset, as this would have implications in regard to determining any relevant economic constraints in defining the extent of the riparian corridors. The preferred mechanisms include: § The establishment of a broader Section 94 Contributions Plan applicable to the Wollongong local government area which seeks a proportional contribution for the acquisition of the corridors due to their regional significance. § The balance of the funds required for the acquisition of the lands (and ongoing management) be committed to by Council and/or the State Government. § An appropriate clause be inserted into the Wollongong LEP 1990 (or other applicable instrument) allowing land owners whose lands are zoned for public purposes (such as 6(a) Public Recreation or 7(a) Special Environmental Protection) to require that their lands to be acquired on just terms by a relevant public authority.
DIPNR(PlanningNSW) considers public ownership of land that has heritage and environmental values is one option for protection and management of these lands. But that management plans and incentives may also need to be considered.
Given the identified environmental and cultural values of the lands recommended for 7(a) zoning, the Commission strongly supports equitably bringing these lands into public ownership over time. Dedication by the owners or negotiation for purchase by Council are considered appropriate mechanisms by the Commission. Other avenues of funding for acquisition particularly the Woodlands Creek corridor should be explored in consultation with DIPNR and NPWS having regard to the environmental benefits of a riparian corridor linking the escarpment to the coast.
The Commission considers that the Woodlands Creek corridor, the Turpentine forest and the eastern portion of the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek should be accorded the highest priority for public acquisition for reasons set out in the report.
Acquisition Cost
Residents and community groups strongly recommend the CoI area at Sandon Point be acquired and reserved for a regional park to ensure the protection of the environmental and heritage values of the area. A wide range of land valuations has been suggested by various parties.
Stockland has placed a valuation on its lands of about $115M, comprised of $76M for residential lands based on the residual valuation method, $25M for open space and trunk drainage lands, and $14M for earthworks and infrastructure. DIPNR(Planning NSW) considered that acquisition costs for privately owned lands in the CoI area could approach the upper end of Stockland’s estimate. It also pointed to
200 the current selling price of land in the approved Stages 1 to 6 area of $465,000 to $1.38M per lot, concluding that the total acquisition price of this land would be extremely high.
Residents argued that the value of Stockland’s lands in the CoI area would be substantially lower than Stockland’s estimate. An estimate submitted by the Thirroul Action Group, which it stated was complied by a professional valuer, estimated the acquisition costs of Stockland’s land within the CoI area to be between $14M and $23M. Mr Van Wijk and Ms Merrin both provided analyses of land costs derived from previous sales. They calculated an acquisition cost (including the Hannah land) of between $17M and $25M, noting that Council’s rating value on Stockland’s land is $21M. Other residents suggested an acquisition cost in the order of $10M.
Mr Van Wijk also referred to correspondence from Dr Refshauge, the former Minister for Planning to Mr Campbell, the local member, which indicated an acquisition cost above $30M. Dr Refshauge also stated that “any possible acquisition by the State Government would have to be justified not only on social, economic and environmental grounds, but also against other acquisition priorities across the State”.
In another letter to Mr Campbell, Dr Refshauge stated that: As you would be aware the State Government recently allocated $11.8 million to implement a coastal protection package. Park of this package includes a comprehensive coastal assessment. I consider that the need and suitability of creating a Regional Park at Sandon Point would best be considered following the completion of the regional assessment. The State Government has also contributed significant funding for a range of strategic studies for the long term planning and management of the Illawarra Escarpment. A key component of the studies will be an investigation of the linkages between the escarpment and the coastline. I expect Sandon Point to be included in these investigations and play a significant role in the establishment of future regional habitat and open space networks.
However, DIPNR(Planning NSW) stated in correspondence before the Commission that: The Coastal Land Acquisition Fund… has been established to purchase sites along the NSW coast that are of outstanding environmental significance. Sandon Point has not been considered as suitable for acquisition under this scheme.
Furthermore, that it supports an equitable approach to bringing land into public ownership as provided for in the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act.
The evidence is that the cost to purchase the whole of the CoI area together with Stages 1 to 6 as requested by the majority of residents would be prohibitive. To purchase the CoI area would also be prohibitive based on any reasonable assessment of the information before the Commission and taking the Commission’s recommendations into account. Resumption is not supported by government agencies or Council.
As noted elsewhere in this report, the Commission considers the values and constraints of the CoI area do not preclude residential development in the western section, albeit at a reduced level. It recommends a 2(b) zoning for this reduced area other than for the relevant portion of the Cookson Plibrico site for which it recommends the 4(a) zoning remain for the present. All other land is recommended to be rezoned 7(a), except for the Council owned land currently zoned 6(a) in the southeast section of the CoI area.
201 Management Options and Requirements
Eastern Portion of the CoI Area
The eastern portion of the CoI area is proposed to remain as open space, other than for Sydney Water’s sewage pumping station. The majority is recommended by the Commission to be zoned 7(a) Special Environmental Protection to protect its Aboriginal heritage, coastal protection and ecological values. Some Council owned portions in the southeast corner would remain zoned 6(a) Public Recreation. Values and constraints of the eastern portion are canvassed in the preceding section of the report, especially Aboriginal cultural and archaeologic al heritage.
This eastern area currently provides and will continue to provide the main areas of public access and use of the CoI area. It includes McCauleys Beach and the well used pedestrian and cycle path. The Commission recommends that improved access in an east-west direction be provided in any residential development of the western portion of the CoI area. It is also essential that the significant visual amenity of the CoI area which provides a green sweep from the foreshore area up to the escarpment is preserved (see Visual Amenity). Other issues relevant for the eastern section of the CoI area are: Aboriginal Heritage: Significant Aboriginal cultural and archaeological heritage value is present on the eastern CoI area as addressed in Aboriginal Heritage. Appropriate protection and conservation of those values is essential through the Plan of Management and a Voluntary Conservation Agreement with landowners.
Coastal Processes: The Plan of Management should address coastal processes and provide for contingency responses in the event of significant impacts. In this regard the Commission refers to the potential for landslip in the foreshore areas opposite Stockland’s Stage 1 development.
The Hannah Land: Council has attempted to bring this land into public ownership without success. The Commission recommends that negotiations continue in light of the recommendations in this report. The remaining portion of the land which is zoned 2(b) is recommended to be rezoned 7(a).
The Commission recommends that the mound of soil on the Hannah land be removed to improve flood management and possibly for use in restoration works on the western portion of the CoI area, subject to assessment of Aboriginal heritage and environmental issues as well as land ownership negotiations.
Hewitts Creek : The Commission supports restoration of the meander to Hewitts Creek east of its current junction with Woodlands Creek subject to land ownership negotiations. The evidence is that the meander would improve the ecological value of the creek. Removal of the gabion walls on the southern side of the creek in this area would be required as is proposed by the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan.
Hill Street North : The Commission notes that a small portio n of land at the northern end of Hill Street is to be purchased from Stockland by Council in accordance with a Section 94 Contribution Plan.
Woodlands Creek : Rediversion of Woodlands Creek from Hewitts to Tramway Creek is recommended, subject to further consultation with the Aboriginal community in relation to concerns that the rediversion would damage burial and midden sites. If significant earthworks are contemplated they would require assessment to ensure Aboriginal heritage and the SCESFC are protected. Any earthworks should be assessed having regard to local knowledge that since 1998 significant water from Woodlands Creek flows to Tramway Creek in any case.
Sydney Water Infrastructure: The sewage pumping station located to the north of Tramway Creek must be adequately protected from flooding. This is particularly so having regard to the proposals to increase the size of the culverts under the Illawarra railway on Tramway and Woodlands Creeks and the proposal to divert Woodlands Creek to Tramway Creek. A short sewer connection from the
202 proposed residential development to the sewage pumping station is required through the eastern portion of the CoI area.
Water Pollution Control: Council is aware of issues relating to overflow of the water pollution control ponds constructed for the Stockland’s Stages 1 to 6 development. Water quality issues resulting from existing and proposed residential and other development in the catchment would need to be addressed by the Plan of Management for the CoI area.
Regional Park Proposal
Community submissions overwhelmingly support a regional park for the CoI area at Sandon Point. They strongly argue that the NSW Government should rezone the site and purchase the land, as well as the Stages 1 to 6 land. Mr Miller submitted a detailed and extensive submission proposing a regional park. He pointed out the environmental, ecological, tourism and employment benefits which could flow from such a visionary concept and that it would particularly attract residents from southwestern Sydney. In addition, a regional park would: § Reduce flooding impacts; § Be visually attractive as opposed to the medium density residential development proposed; § Protect and enhance Aboriginal heritage by educating visitors as well as providing tangible evidence of reconciliation; § Preserve the remaining non indigenous heritage; § Ensure conservation of the threatened SCESFC and other important flora and fauna; § Maintain water quality; and § Not increase traffic to an unmanageable extent.
The site is also close to public transport at Thirroul railway station. It could act as a focal point for ecotourism linked with trails in the Illawarra Escarpment and along the coast. In this respect Mr Miller refers to the development of Epic Walking Trails that follow former Aboriginal trade routes. Mr Van Wijk pointed out that the Tramway Creek corridor already has walking tracks linked to Grevillea Park, the Old Bulli Mine Heritage Area, the Throsby Track and the State Recreation Area. The Commission visited these areas on a field inspection in the company of interested parties.
The Commission considers the regional park concept could be meaningfully developed even with the recommended level of residential development on the CoI area at Sandon Point. The Commission encourages Council to prepare and implement management plans for the area and to advance the provision of coast to escarpment environmental corridors. The suggestions made by Mr Miller should be taken into account by Council as relevant.
Management Requirements
Stockland considers the key to the long term management and sustainability of the riparian corridors involves: § The provision of a mechanism (such as the economic development of the urban zoned land) to allow for the construction and embellishment of the riparian corridors; § The design of the corridors to reasonably ensure they will be ecologically sustainable ; and § Provision of a mechanism to ensure these lands are acquired from current owners on just terms so as to secure them as public open space and provide for their long-term maintenance and management.
Stockland’s submissions include a summary of major management recommendations for its land including the finalisation of its draft vegetation management plan (VMP) proposed in the 2001 and 2003 Connell Wagner reports. This plan would be integrated with the management measures required for Tramway Creek in association with the Stages 2 to 6 development, and implemented in
203 conjunction with the proposed residential development on the CoI area. It would form the base for the preparation of a Plan of Management (PoM) for the long-term management of the public open space lands at Sandon Point. A similar vegetation management plan for the eastern portion of the CoI area should also be prepared and integrated with Stockland’s vegetation management plan and incorporated into the PoM for Sandon Point.
The draft Master Plan proposes the establishment of an 88B zone along selected properties on Woodlands and Hewitts Creek to increase the width of the vegetated buffer zone. The 88B zone would vary from a minimum width of 3m (side boundaries) to a minimum width of 6m (front/rear boundaries).
Stockland also proposed and committed to enter into a Voluntary Conservation Agreement (VCA) with the NPWS. This would also involve the local Aboriginal community and Wollongong City Council as the ultimate land owners. It would cover the Aboriginal burial site, the midden on McCauleys Beach, and areas identified along Tramway Creek. Any significant archaeological sites that are identified through future investigation would, where possible, be protected through an extension of the VCA arrangement.
Stockland is also of the view that there is a need to establish an overall catchment management approach to ensure the long term ecological sustainability of the creek systems. In this regard, Stockland considers it is important to minimise the maintenance burden and enhance the consequent sustainability of the creek systems within the CoI area by reducing potential weed sources and improving the quality of water leaving the CoI area.
Council recognises there is a need for a Plan of Management (PoM) to be prepared for the land at Sandon Point when the land is vested with Council. More specifically, Council stated that if it resolved to classify land as Community Land, a PoM must be prepared under the Community Land Management Act. Depending on the categorisation of the land under the Local Government Act 1993, the following three alternatives are available for a PoM: 1. Amending the appropriate Generic Plan of Management for Community Land categorised as General Community Use, Sportsgrounds, Natural Areas, or Park. 2. Preparing a site specific plan of management if the land is categorised as culturally significant or has signif icant natural features or is an area affected by threatened/endangered species or critical habitat of threatened/endangered species. 3. Preparing a site specific plan of management that includes all Community Land at Sandon Point as directed by Council resolution.
An Integrated Management Plan as proposed in the draft DCP would form a good base for the preparation of a PoM for all public lands at Sandon Point according to Council.
The draft Sandon Point DCP requires the preparation of an Integrated Management Plan (IMP) with any master plan submitted for the Minister’s approval under SEPP 71. The IMP is aimed at providing an environmental management framework for the development of Sandon Point and the protection of ecologically sensitive areas. It should include management responses, actions, responsibilities and reporting requirements for all key issues. The purpose of the plan is to provide a holistic approach to the management of: a) Riparian Corridors; b) Bushfire Management; c) Flood Management; d) Stormwater Management; e) Acid Sulphate Soils; f) Endangered Ecological Communities; g) Remediation of Contamination;
204 h) Coastal Areas and Systems; i) Open Space and Recreational Uses; j) Pedestrian and Cycle Access; k) Natural, Aboriginal and Cultural Heritage; and l) Site Environmental Management.
The Plan may also include, but not limited to the following strategies: 1) Riparian Corridor Management Strategy; 2) Floodplain Management Strategy; 3) Stormwater Management Strategy; 4) Vegetation Management Strategy; 5) Open Space Management Strategy; and 6) Site Environmental Management and Implementation Strategy.
It is also a strong view of Council that Stockland should contribute to the preparation of these documents and provide additional financial support to assist the achievement of their long-term management objectives. The long-term maintenance cost associated with managing land vested with Council is a major concern to Council. In view of the need to ensure adequate restoration and management of the site resulting from the land subdivision process, Council believes the developer needs to fund and/or implement the proposed restoration works and maintain the works for a period of 10 years prior to Council assuming control. Council also supports Stockland’s proposal for a Voluntary Conservation Agreement to enhance and protect Aboriginal heritage and ecological values of the site.
DIPNR(PlanningNSW) supports the preparation of a PoM to protect the natural, heritage and aesthetic values of the open space areas. Relevant State Agencies and the Aboriginal community should be consulted in relation to conservation management of natural areas and Aboriginal heritage areas. Management of the coastal open space land needs to take into account the interim and long-term flood regimes for this land, with encouragement for the reopening of the original course of Woodlands Creek. Urban development adjoining open space should be designed to address and manage the interface, reduce conflict, improve surveillance and improve the visual impact when viewed from the foreshore and open space areas.
The NPWS recommends a PoM be prepared for the conservation areas to ensure they are managed primarily for the protection of native fauna, flora and Aboriginal heritage. Detailed information indicatin g known or anticipated areas of habitat for vulnerable or endangered species, communities or populations recorded on site would be useful in the preparation of the PoM. Buffer areas should be managed in the same manner as the SCESFC habitat. Landscaping should be planned on an ecological basis for the express purpose of protecting and enhancing the wetlands and should be sensitive to any Aboriginal cultural heritage values. The Aboriginal community should be consulted in the preparation of the PoM and the NPWS should be provided the opportunity to comment.
It also recommends a comprehensive Aboriginal Community Consultation Strategy be developed to inform the rezoning/DCP/Master Plan process and that the Aboriginal community be consulted early in the process in a comprehensive and meaningful way.
As canvassed in earlier sections, the Commission is not convinced that Stockland’s proposed vegetation buffer together with an 88B zone would be sufficient to protect the environmental values of riparian corridors. However, the Commissio n considers the 88B zone could still apply in circumstances where extra protection is required in addition to the Commission’s recommended widths for riparian corridors and asset protection zones.
205 The Commission also strongly support the proposed Voluntary Conservation Agreement between Stockland, NPWS, the Aboriginal community and Council, particularly in circumstances where the lands would not be brought into public ownership in the foreseeable future.
The Commission considers the preparation and implementation of a PoM is critical to ensure the long term protection of the environmental and cultural values of all recommended 6(a) and 7(a) zoned lands. Given these lands are mostly in private ownership and would be brought into public ownership over an extended period of time, the preparation and implementation of a PoM could be a long process. Effective involvement of Council, government agencies, landowners, residents and the Aboriginal community would be critical in developing an acceptable PoM. The Commission recommends that DIPNR assist Council, in partnership with landowners and the Aboriginal and local communities to develop and implement a management plan for all 6(a) and 7(a) zoned lands in the CoI area.
Stockland’s draft Vegetation Management Plan should be revised and finalised in accordance with Guidelines for the Preparation of a Vegetation Management Plan (former DLWC). If Stockland’s residential development proposal proceeds, Stockland would also need to prepare and implement an Integrated Management Plan for its land. The Commission finds that these plans should fit within the framework for the PoM.
In Flora and Fauna, the Commission recognises further studies are required for the preparation and implementation of the PoM. The Commission recommends Council in consultation with NPWS, landowners and the community, particularly the Tramway Wetlands Planning Committee, to determine the types and extent of works that need to be carried out to assist development of conservation management plans.
An overarching PoM would be essential for the areas zoned 6(a) and 7(a) within the CoI area given its special attributes. The PoM would also need to be consistent with any catchment management plan relevant to Tramway, Woodlands and Hewitts Creeks.
206 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The relevant strategic planning issues, Aboriginal heritage values, ecological and riparian functions, floodplain management, employment considerations, urban development opportunities, traffic management and a wide range of other matters are canvassed in the previous sections of this report. The Commission’s terms of reference required a comprehensive assessment of the values and constraints of the site in developing the preferred land uses, planning outcomes and management options. The Commission has also had due regard to government policies relating to coastal protection and development. It recognises that its recommendations have significant implications for the substantial planning undertaken to date by Council, Stockland, government agencies and the community.
The residential developments proposed in Stockland’s draft Master Plan and Council’s draft DCP are largely confined within areas currently zoned 2(b) Medium Density Residential under Wollongong LEP 1990. Council’s draft DCP also revises DCP 94/17 which currently applies to the land, resulting in wider riparian corridors and a lesser area available for residential development. Stockland’s draft Master Plan is claimed to exceed the requirements of DCP 94/17 and provide significant environmental benefits while yielding an appropriate level of residential development. Other environmental planning considerations have also been relevantly taken into account according to Council and Stockland.
A stated goal of Council has been to achieve a balance between residential development and restoration/rehabilitation of the riparian corridors as well as other open space lands at Sandon Point. DIPNR(PlanningNSW) generally supports such an approach to resolving the ongoing land use conflicts. The Commission does not disagree in principle with this goal. But the values and constraints of the CoI area must be thoroughly canvassed and assessed with due regard to the relevant environmental planning principles and policies as the Commission has done in its report.
Neither Council nor Stockland have satisfied the Commission that they have given appropriate weighting to important environmental planning considerations. Neither the draft DCP nor the draft Master Plan provide the necessary balance between the cultural, ecological, social and developmental values of the CoI area. These plans favour development, albeit in accordance with the current environmental planning requirements applying to the CoI area. This approach would also achieve early restoration for much of the western part of the CoI area. However, it would not provide the level of important Aboriginal cultural, ecological and environmental benefits which the Commission’s assessment of values and constraints of the CoI area indicates are achievable in the long term with a reduced level of residential development. The Commission recognises in making its recommendations that restoration and rehabilitation of land at Sandon Point is unlikely to be completed in the short term and that Council would need to commit funds for ongoing restoration works. Nevertheless, the major sustainable environmental planning requirements of implementing coastal planning policies, protecting Aboriginal heritage, maintaining visual amenity, pr oviding for appropriate riparian corridor functions, conserving and enhancing the endangered SCESFC and the Turpentine forest, and developing certain areas of the land for residential use would be achieved.
The whole CoI area is considered significant to many in the local Aboriginal community. The significance of Aboriginal heritage within and adjacent to the eastern section of the CoI area has been reinforced by the Kuradji burial, the likelihood of there being other burials , the tool-making site and the archaeological finds on the Hannah land. The Commission recommends that the eastern section of the CoI area be largely zoned 7(a) Special Environmental Protection and the objectives of the 7(a) zone amended to include protection of Aboriginal heritage significance. The further development of a voluntary conservation agreement is strongly supported by the Commission.
207 The western section of the CoI area which is also stated to be of significance to the local Aboriginal community at present lacks the necessary supporting archaeological evidence. Nevertheless, oral evidence indicated that the area would have been used for hunting and gathering, and possibly as an ochre source. Recently, artefacts from the Stages 2 to 6 areas have been placed on Stage 7 and the AIR site in soil stockpiles, after Stockland received Consents to Destroy for its Stages 2 to 6 development.
In addition, large portions of the western section of the CoI area have suffered major disturbance by earlier industrial and extractive deve lopments. On balance, the specialist evidence is that the likelihood of intact Aboriginal archaeological evidence being found is limited to those locations where the topsoil remains largely undisturbed. However, Aboriginal archaeological sites and/or artefacts could still be found in disturbed areas notwithstanding that some archaeological investigation has been undertaken on these areas without locating significant Aboriginal sites or artefacts. Discovery of Aboriginal sites and artefacts would reinforce the Aboriginal significance of the western section. This cannot be finally determined until further Aboriginal archaeological investigations as recommended by the Commission are completed.
The Commission is satisfied it has sufficient specialist Aborig inal heritage evidence to find that the likelihood of significant Aboriginal archaeological sites or artefacts being discovered on the western section of the CoI area is low , but cannot be ruled out in the absence of further study. Aboriginal heritage also needs to be relevantly considered with other values and constraints of the CoI area. The Commission has weighed and balanced all the available evidence. It is satisfied that there is currently adequate information regarding the Aboriginal significance of the western section of the CoI area to make strategic planning decisions for that land. Unless the proposed further Aboriginal archaeological studies indicate compelling evidence that the western section of the CoI area is likely to have increased Aboriginal significance, the Commission finds some residential development appropriate in the western section. The reduced level of residential development recommended by the Commission would ensure that Aboriginal significance on the CoI area would be protected.
The Commission has assessed the values and constraints of the Cookson Plibrico site. It has concluded that while some residential development could be accommodated on that site, it would be at a reduced level from that anticipated by Council or proposed by Stockland. Coastal planning considerations relating to visual amenity, ecological values and the need to protect Aboriginal heritage prevent development on the eastern and northeastern portions of the site. The Turpentine forest must also be protected and adequate provisions made for riparian and buffer zones as well as asset protection zones on Tramway and Cooksons Creeks.
The current refractory manufacturing and handling procedures result in noise emissions which exceed the relevant noise level criteria on nearby residential lands. However, although heavy industry is generally not a suitable land use adjacent to residential development, the Cookson Plibrico operations are not inherently noisy nor do they generate excessive traffic. The results of three noise impact assessments for the Cookson Plibrico operations were tendered to the Commission. A level of uncertainty remains as to the exact extent of noise mitigation which could be achieved. Nevertheless, it is clear from the three assessments that worthwhile improvements to the present noise levels emitted could be achieved. It is likely that noise criteria could be met at most of the approved residential lots in Stages 2 to 6 and also in Stage 7, subject to installation of noise mitigation measures and a review of operating hours and procedures.
Additional noise assessments are required to resolve this issue. It also needs to be recognised that any expansion of the operations is prohibited development and would very likely generate higher noise levels. In these circumstances the Commission acknowledges that the continuation of Cookson Plibrico’s operations at Sandon Pont could be considered unsustainable in the longer term. An option encouraged by Cookson Plibrico, Council, DIPNR(PlanningNSW) and Stockland is relocation of the factory, although residents object due to the loss of 80 jobs from the northern Illawarra. But given the values and constraints to development of significant areas of the Cookson Plibrico site the
208 Commission considers it is unlikely that sufficient revenue would be raised from sale of the remaining developable area to fund the relocation cost of $9 million.
Should Cookson Plibrico need to relocate, further consultation with DIPNR(PlanningNSW) and Council would be necessary regarding the balance between environmental, economic and social considerations. Financial support may be appropriate if Cookson Plibrico are to relocate within the Illawarra. However, relocation should not be at the expense of important Aboriginal heritage, coastal planning and ecological values at Sandon Point.
The Commission has found in this report that certain land within the CoI area has significant ecological value. This includes the endangered SCESFC and the Turpentine forest. Parties to the Commission generally recognise that these natural features of the land require ongoing protection by suitable buffer areas. A buffer 40m wide is recommended for the SCESFC. The Turpentine forest would have a small buffer to the north and west increasing significantly to the south and east due to the Commission’s recommendations to zone those latter areas 7(a) Special Environmental Protection.
Effective riparian corridors are also required to ensure that the ecological function within the creek systems is enhanced and maintained. Among other reports, planning initiatives for the Illawarra region set out in the Illawarra Escarpment Commission report resulted in the recently published Riparian Corridor Management Study. This Study provides guidance on the ranking of streams within the Illawarra for their environmental values as well as recommending protection zones and vegetated buffers. However, for Stockland’s lands, the former DLWC(now DIPNR) has signed a Deed of Agreement relating to riparian corridor widths. The widths set out by the Deed of Agreement are considerably narrower than the widths recommended in the above Study. The Commission has reviewed the extensive relevant submissions which address riparian corridor issues. It finds that to protect the present and future ecological values and functions of the creeks flowing through the CoI area that greater weight needs to be placed on providing wider rather than narrower corridors. This particularly applies to Woodlands Creek which in the Study is classed as a Category 1 – Environmental Corridor stream for its entire length, notwithstanding that it is currently partially piped in the CoI area (the piped section is to be replaced by a rehabilitated creek). Reinforcing the ecological potential for Woodlands Creek is that land uses in its catchment are comprised of native forest (79 percent), rural (16 percent) and urban (5 percent) which is clearly indicated on Figure 12. This provides substantial opportunity to develop an important environmental corridor from the coast to the escarpment which the Commission strongly endorses.
The Commission supports Council’s adoption of the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan. This study shows that the portion of the CoI area between Hewitts Creek and Woodlands Creek is floodpr one as it would be inundated by a PMF flood. The flood risk on this land is considered to be medium but residential development is not precluded subject to it complying with the relevant guidelines. The Commission concurs that the habitable floor levels of residential development on the floodprone land should be 0.5m above the 1 in 100 year flood level to provide a safety margin. The Commission also supports reconstruction of the creek corridor of Woodlands Creek to convey the 1 in 100 year ARI flood in a way which is consistent with maintaining ecological functions. However, Stockland’s proposal places too great an emphasis on flood conveyance, may inadequately represent peak design flood flows and compromises the aims of the Riparian Corridor Management Study.
Significant portions of the western sections of the CoI area are degraded as can be seen on the cover photograph. The AIR site between Hewitts and Woodlands Creek and the eastern portion of the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek are substantially degraded. Other areas of the AIR and Dairy Farmers sites, while containing stands of established vegetation, also have sections which have been degraded and are now partially revegetated. The CoI area would benefit substantially from restoration. In these circumstances it is relatively easy to conclude that even with the level of residential development proposed by Council and Stockland, there would be a net benefit. The Commission’s recommendations for restoration of larger areas than proposed by either Council or Stockland and their
209 inclusion within a 7(a) Special Environmental Protection zone would achieve a more sustainable level of ecological function on the CoI area in the longer term.
Visual amenity and coastal planning matters are especially relevant to the CoI area. At present the land provides a green sweep from the coast to the escarpment as well as an appropriate visual setting for the important identified Aboriginal heritage values on the eastern portion of the CoI area. Residential development as proposed in both the Council’s draft DCP and Stockland’s draft Master Plan would severely compromise the visual amenity of the CoI area. The Commission considers the construction of apartment buildings on the eastern edges of the AIR and Cookson Plibrico sites particularly inappropriate as they would severely impose on the eastern portion of the CoI area, dominate the Aboriginal heritage values of the foreshore areas, and effectively remove the visual green sweep from the coast to the escarpment when viewed from many foreshore and backdune areas. This would not be consistent with current government coastal planning initiatives.
In all these circumstances, the Commission does not support the extent of residential development proposed by Council or Stockland, notwithstanding the importance of providing for increased residential development and Council’s stated goal of guiding “any development in a way that provides for restoration of the remainder of the site”. The level of residential development these parties propose would severely compromise the significant heritage and ecological values on the CoI area. Values which if not fully restored at the present time could be developed in co-operation with the community in the future. The Commission finds this opportunity should not be lost or substantially restricted. Any residential development must be consistent with conserving and enhancing the important heritage and ecological values of the CoI area as recommended in this report.
As referred to above, the Commission’s recommendations mean that the CoI area would not be fully rehabilitated for some time given the reduced residential development potential. But adoption of the recommendations would ensure the values of the CoI area are protected and conserved in the long term, and the land’s appropriate development potential realised to assist in initially funding the required works from an early stage.
The matters which the Commission has canvassed cover both strategic and local planning considerations. The Commission recommends an LEP approach in the first instance to set appropriate land use zonings, among other planning requirements. Significant detail would then need to be provided in development control plans and a master plan as required by SEPP 71.
The Commission recommends bringing certain land within the CoI area into public ownership over time. Dependent on the zoning, this could occur by dedication to Council for public open space, or through inclusion in a Section 94 Contribution Plan, or negotiation between Council and the landowner, or compulsory acquisition. However, as the zoning recommended by the Commission would not result in any privately owned land within the CoI area being zoned 6(a), acquisition through a Section 94 Contribution Plan is not relevant to the Commission’s recommendations. The Commission recommends Council pursue the options of dedication and negotiation.
It is generally agreed by parties that a plan of management for the open space areas at Sandon Point needs to be prepared and implemented, whether these areas are zoned 6(a) or 7(a). The Commission recommends open space areas of the CoI area largely be zoned 7(a) due to the ir existing and potential cultural, ecological, and social values. A plan of management is essential to ensure the protection of these areas. Community consultation is an acknowledged component in developing an acceptable plan of management. Effective involvement of Council, government agencies, la ndowners, residents and the Aboriginal community would be essential. This report refers to the many issues which the plan of management would need to address.
The main findings and recommendations which the Commission sets out below are derived from its comprehensive review in previous sections of the report.
210 Aboriginal Heritage § Aboriginal cultural and archaeological values of the CoI area are significant to the Aboriginal community and the community generally. § The Kuradji burial site, foredune midden, tool-making site, and the artefact site on the Hannah land are significant sites in the eastern portion of the CoI area and should be protected. § Further Aboriginal archaeological investigations and Aboriginal cultural significance assessment are necessary on the CoI area as detailed in the report. § Funding should be made available to the Aboriginal community so that it can obtain independent advice in relation to the Aboriginal heritage significance of the CoI area. § Aboriginal archaeological investigations should include an appropriate level of early investigation of disturbed western portions of the CoI area. § Unless compelling evidence of Aboriginal archaeological significance in the western section of the CoI area is found, the Commission is satisfied reduced residential development in the western section could occur. § Aboriginal archaeological investigations and Aboriginal cultural study and assessment must include meaningful and continuing involvement of interested members of the Aboriginal community. This involvement should commence from the initial preparation of a brief for the scope of further investigation, study and assessment. § The conservation and rehabilitation of the portions of the CoI area recommended by the Commission, including the eastern portions of the AIR and Cookson Plibrico sites as well as the core riparian corridors, would begin to re-establish an important traditional Aboriginal dreaming track and trade route between the coast and the escarpment. § Preparation and implementation of conservation management plans and voluntary conservation agreements in consultation with the Aboriginal community are available mechanisms to protect Aboriginal heritage.
Flora and Fauna § Flora and fauna habitat having high conservation value such as the Sydney Coastal Estuary Swamp Forest Complex (SCESFC), the Turpentine forest, and core riparian areas and appropriate buffer zones should be rezoned 7(a) Special Environmental Protection. § The buffer zoned for the SCESFC should be a minimum of 40m wide. § High impact infrastructure should not be constructed in high conservation value areas including the SCESFC, Turpentine forest, environmental corridors, core riparian zones, and vegetated buffer zones.
Riparian Corridor Function and Planning § Riparian corridors be restored to reasonably reflect their former natural state consistent with the categories set out in the Riparian Corridor Management Study. § Woodlands Creek be restored to reasonably reflect its former natural state and profile consistent with the Riparian Corridor Management Study. § Woodlands Creek be restored and maintained to ensure ecological function consistent with a major coast to escarpment wildlife corridor. § Core riparian and wetland areas, together with appropriate buffer zones, be zoned 7(a) Special Environmental Protection. § The Deed of Agreement between Stockland (Constructors) Pty Limited and the former Department of Land and Water Conservation (now DIPNR) concerning development setbacks from creeks not be used to determine riparian corridor widths , other than the south bank of Tramway Creek, as the Deed would not provide for sufficiently effective wildlife corridor function or adequate protection of high conservation value areas. § Water pollution control ponds and/or wetlands should not be constructed in wetland areas, core riparian zones, or vegetated buffer zones but could be developed in asset protection zones.
211 § Council prepare and implement a Development Control Plan specifically to address the development, protection and maintenance of environmental corridors. § The developer of land for residential use should provide maintenance of riparian corridors adjacent to residential development to Council’s satisfaction for a minimum period of 10 years from the date of the subdivision certificate, or such longer period until the land comes into public ownership. § DIPNR, NPWS, RTA and Council consult on the development of an Environmental Corridor along Woodlands Creek from the Coast to the Escarpment.
Floodplain Management § Development on the CoI area must be consistent with the Hewitts Creek Flood Study and Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan. § The flood conveyance role of riparian corridors must be consistent with, and not compromise the ecological function of riparian corridors. § Flood assessment in relation to development on the CoI area must assume the enlargement of the Tramway Creek and Woodlands Creek culverts under the Illawarra railway line. § The spoil pile on the Hannah land should be removed subject to the owner’s agreement and protection of the Aboriginal heritage values of the land. § All habitable floor levels of residential dwellings are to have 0.5m freeboard/safety margin above the 1 in 100 year ARI flood level. § Development between Hewitts Creek and Woodlands Creek is supported subject to compliance with the Floodplain Management Manual (2001), the Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Plan, and Council’s draft DCP Managing Our Flood Risks.
Cookson Plibrico § DIPNR, Council and Cookson Plibrico consult with each other regarding the future operation of the Cookson Plibrico facilities at Sandon Point or at another location in the Illawarra. § If Cookson Plibrico relocate, 80 local jobs would be lost to the northern Illawarra. § The industrial activities at the Cookson Plibrico factory have resulted in little impact on the conservation value of the remaining land and adjacent riparian areas and have probably assisted in its protection by limiting intrusion by third parties. § The land owned by Cookson Plibrico has conservation, visual amenity, Aboriginal heritage and residential development values. § The conservation, visual amenity and Aboriginal heritage values should not be compromised by residential development. § The areas of the Cookson Plibrico site with residential development potential are those areas occupied by the factory and administrative buildings, roadways, and the largely cleared area in the western portion of the site. § The Cookson Plibrico operations currently result in noise complaints from nearby residents. § Three preliminary noise assessments have concluded that the relevant noise level criterion for some adjacent residentially zoned land are exceeded. § Noise mitigation measures would result in a reduction in noise levels at adjacent residentially zoned land but some uncertainty remains as to whether mitigation measures would reduce noise levels to below the relevant criteria. § Measures to mitigate noise impacts from the existing operations should be independently assessed to determine their effectiveness and whether the relevant criteria can be complied with on adjacent land zoned residential. § If the Cookson Plibrico operations are to be relocated light industrial uses for the Cookson Plibrico land should be considered to maintain employment in the northern Illawarra prior to considering residential use of the land.
212 Visual Amenity § The visual amenity of the CoI area at Sandon Point is an important environmental value which requires substantial protection to be consistent with recent government coastal protection initiatives. § The visual setting is a significant attribute for the Aboriginal cultural and spiritual heritage of the eastern section of the CoI area. § The location, built form and density of residential development proposed in both Council’s draft DCP and Stockland’s draft Master Plan for the eastern portion of the western section of the CoI area would substantially detract from the visual amenity of the locality. § Vegetation to the south and east of the disturbed eastern portion of the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek must not be cleared as it is required to provide visual screening of residential development when viewed from Aboriginal heritage and public areas to the east as well as to preserve the visual green sweep to the escarpment.
Water Quality Management § The quality and quantity of water runoff from the portions of the CoI area developed for residential uses can be managed to protect downstream ecosystems. § The quality of water runoff would be significantly improved with the development of portions of the CoI area compared with current runoff from degraded areas. § Water runoff quality treatment facilities should be located outside areas of core riparian zones, high conservation value areas and the vegetated buffer zones, but may be located in asset protection zones. § Council and DIPNR should review design requirements for runoff water pollution control facilities for sensitive lands such as the CoI area in the light of relevant current local knowledge and events. § An effective water quality monitoring program is required to ensure downstream ecosystems are being protected.
Access and Traffic § Wrexham Road be developed as the northern road access to the CoI area with a signalised intersection at Wrexham Road/Lawrence Hargreaves Drive. § Sturdee Avenue and Beattie Avenue be developed as road access to the CoI area subject to a traffic and road safety study being undertaken for these roads and their intersections with the Princes Highway. § Creek crossings not be provided at Tramway and Woodlands Creeks at this time having regard to the reduced level of residential development recommended by the Commission as well as the conservation and wildlife corridor values of these locations. § A north-south access through the CoI area from Wrexham Road to Point Street should not be constructed at this time as access benefits do not outweigh the conservation values which would be compromised. § Pedestrian paths and cycleways should be constructed in the CoI area linking with existing access in the east and south and to Thirroul railway station/Thirroul commercial centre.
Land Contamination § The majority of the land within the CoI area which was contaminated has been remediated consistent with the EPA’s and Council’s requirements. § Land which is contaminated could be remediated using well accepted and safe methods. § Land which has been remediated should not pose a significant risk to human health or the environment, subject to the recommendations of the site auditor.
213 Bushfire Management § Asset protection zones up to 20m wide are required to protect residential development. § Vegetated buffer zones are inappropriate for inclusion in asset protection zones. § Residential safety must not be compromised by restricting the width of asset protection zones to achieve increased residential development. § Peripheral roads, pedestrian paths, cycleways and water pollution control ponds could be located in asset protection zones.
Community Liaison § The developer should be required to establish and fund a Community Liaison Committee, which includes representation from the Aboriginal community. The Committee should meet at least monthly, and distribute information concerning planning and construction activities on the CoI area, including site audit reports, to the community. The Committee should also receive community comment and relay that information to the developer in a timely manner.
Private Certification § DIPNR should review the operation of private certification in relation to complex staged developments such as proposed at Sandon Point, in consultation with Council. § DIPNR should ensure that controls placed on development of the CoI area are effective in protecting the environment, particularly during development construction and until residential use is established; and that the intended environmental planning outcome is clear and cannot be compromised by private certification.
Land Uses and Planning Outcomes § The land use zones shown on Figure 16 would ensure the appropriate balance between cultural, environmental, ecological and developmental values and constraints is achieved on the CoI area. § An LEP approach should be adopted to set zone boundaries. § The developable area on the AIR site south of Woodlands Creek should be set back a nominal 80 to 100m from the cadastral boundary between the AIR site and the Hannah land. § The area of the Cookson Plibrico site recommended to remain zoned 4(a) Light Industrial is also the area the Commission finds would be suitable for residential development, subject to further Aboriginal heritage study. § Land which has Aboriginal heritage, ecological and environmental corridor values should be zoned 7(a) Special Environmental Protection to ensure these values are appropriately protected. § The objectives of the 7(a) zone should be revised to include the protection of both Aboriginal heritage and environmental corridor values. § Flexible zone provisions should be excluded from any amended LEP. § The maximum height of residential development on the CoI area should be restricted to 2 storeys, except for apartment development on the western portion of the AIR site north of Woodlands Creek which should be restricted to a maximum of 3 storeys. § The FSR for land zoned 2(b) Medium Density Residential should remain at 0.5 to 1. § The site coverage calculation should be all inclusive with no exclusions. § A minimum 30 percent of each lot should be retained as deep soil areas to ensure there are adequate areas to plant vegetation. § No apartment buildings are to be constructed south of Woodlands Creek. § Apartment buildings may be constructed on the western portions of the AIR site north of Woodlands Creek.
214 Future Management (Options) § To ensure the values of the land zoned 6(a) and 7(a) are protected a plan of management prepared by Council is required to include, but not be limited to: - An Aboriginal heritage protection plan - A flora and fauna conservation plan - An environmental corridor development plan - A riparian corridor vegetation management plant - A foreshore management plan - A revegetation management plan § Vegetation in core riparian zones must be managed to ensure floodin g impacts above design levels do not occur. § An integrated management plan must be prepared with any master plan submitted for the Minister’s approval under SEPP 71. § Integrated management plans must be consistent with any plan of management prepared and implemented by Council for the CoI area. § Land zoned 7(a) should be brought into public ownership over time either by dedication or through negotiation.
215
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 MINISTER'S DIRECTION
A1-1 Attachment A
Land subject to COMMISSION OF INQUIRY under Section 119 of the Environmental Planning and Scale: 1:8000 AssessmA1-1 ent Act, 1979 shown thus Date: November 2002
A1-2 APPENDIX 2 INSTRUMENT OF APPOINTMENT
A2-1 Attachment A
Land subject to COMMISSION OF INQUIRY under Section 119 of the Environmental Planning and Scale: 1:8000 Date: November 2002 Assessment Act, 1979 shown thus
A2-2 APPENDIX 3 LIST OF SUBMISSIONS
1. Environment Protection Authority 1.1 Letter re no submission to the Commission 1.2 Questions from the Commission 1.3 Response to Commission’s questions re Contamination Policy 1.4 Response to Commission’s question re the Cookson Plibrico site
2. Department of Land and Water Conservation 2.1 Primary submission 2.2 The NSW State Rivers & Estuaries Policy 2.3 The NSW Wetlands Management Policy 2.4 Principles for Urban Stream Management 2.5 Presentation notes 2.6 Article “Torrents of Terror: the August 1998 Storm and the Magnitude, Frequency and Impact of Major Floods in the Illawarra Region of New South Wales” 2.7 Riparian Corridor Management Study, July 2002 by DLWC for Council (see 2.15) 2.8 Floodplain Management Manual: the management of flood liable land, Jan 2001 2.9 Questions from the Commission 2.10 Answers to Commission’s questions 2.11 Answers to ques tions from Cookson Plibrico 2.12 Answers to questions from Thirroul Action Group 2.13 Answers to questions from Stockland Pty Ltd 2.14 Fax re Cross Section of Woodlands Creek 2.15 Riparian Corridor Management Study, April 2003 by Department of Sustainable Natural Resources for Council 2.16 Submission in reply
3. National Parks and Wildlife Service 3.1 Primary submission 3.2 Amendment to primary submission 3.3 Presentation notes 3.4 Questions from the Commission 3.5 Answers to questions from Mr Alex Peterson by NPWS and Minister for the Environment 3.6 NPWS draft Aboriginal Heritage Impact Assessment Guidelines 3.7 Answers to questions from the Commission, Cookson Plibrico, Stockland Development Pty Ltd, Thirroul Action Group, Dr Jo Davis, Ms Jill Merrin, the Illawarra Local Aboriginal Land Council, Mr Alex Peterson, Mrs Jan and Mr Robert Miller, Ms Jill Walker 3.8 Draft Sandon Point Aboriginal Place Investigation Report, June 2001 (The Nightingale report) 3.9 Waterway Corridor Methodology Background Study, Dec 2002 3.10 Aboriginal Place Declarations Brochure 3.11 Bioregional Assessment Study Parts 1 & II – Native Vegetation of the Illawarra Escarpment and Coastal Plain, Aug 2002 by NPWS. 3.12 Additional information re question from the Commis sion 3.13 Biodiversity Planning Guide for NSW Local Government
4. PlanningNSW 4.1 Primary submission 4.2 Illawarra Regional Overview – 2002 Housing Forecast Forums 4.3 Illawarra’s Action for Transport 4.4 Illawarra Regional Environmental Plan No. 1 4.5 Illawarra Coast Draft Planning Strategy – Discussion Paper 4.6 Questions from the Commission
A3-1 4.7 Answers to questions from Dr Joseph Davis 4.8 Answers to questions from Mr Robert & Mrs Jan Miller 4.9 Answers to questions from Stockland 4.10 Answers to questions from Thirroul Action Group 4.11 Answers to questions from Ms Bonita Martin 4.12 Answers to questions from Cookson Plibrico 4.13 Answers to questions from Ms Jill Merrin 4.14 Answers to questions from Ms Jill Walker 4.15 Answers to questions from the Commission 4.16 Coastal Design Guidelines for NSW (one copy only, held in the CoI Office) 4.17 Submission in reply 4.18 Appendix to submission in reply
5. Sydney Water Corporation 5.1 Primary submission
6. Wollongong City Council 6.1 Primary submission with 5 attachments including 6.1.1 Draft Sandon Point DCP (2 vols), 6.1.2 Draft Sandon Point Aboriginal Heritage Assessment 6.1.3 Sandon Point Traffic Impact Study 6.1.4 Sandon Point Technical Report – Traffic 6.1.5 Executive Summary of Hewitts Creek Flood Plain Risk Management Study and Plan 6.2 Schedule 4 of Hewitts Creek Floodplain Management Plan 6.3 Presentation notes by Dr M Mouritz 6.4 Presentation notes by Mr Rick Farley 6.5 Presentation notes by Mr M Therrin 6.6 Presentation notes by Mr Pas Silveri 6.7 Presentation notes by Ms Lisa Miller 6.8 Presentation notes by Mr Ted Collins 6.9 Presentation notes by Dr M Mouritz Re Policy and Response 6.10 Questions from the Commission 6.11 Article : “More than Archaeology: Developing Comprehensive Approaches to Aboriginal Heritage Management in NSW” by A English 6.12 Draft Scope for Further Archaeological Work by Therin Archaeological Consulting 6.13 Hewitts Creek Flood Study 6.14 Hewitts Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study & Plan 6.15 Bulli Coke Works, Salt Works and Rail and Tramway Embankments 6.16 Macauleys Beach Area – Preliminary Heritage Assessment by Godden Mackay 6.17 Report on the Archaeological Zones within the site of BHP Re fractories Ltd 6.18 Location of archaeological sites, Bulli Coke Comp any’s coke ovens and salt works 6.19 Archival Record of No. 6 Downdraught Kiln, BHP Refractories, Thirroul 6.20 Heritage Impact Assessment, McCauley’s Beach, Sandon Point 6.21 Archaeological Assessment, Thirroul Bric kworks site 6.22 Thirroul Brickworks - Conservation of Significant Items 6.23 Local Environmental Plan 1990 amended to 5 July 2002 6.24 McCauleys Beach Development, Hill Street, Bulli – Summary Site Audit Report 6.25 Air site Area 1 - Site Audit Statement 6.26 Air site Area 2 - Site Audit Statement 6.27 Air site Area 3 - Site Audit Statement 6.28 Air site Area 4 - Site Audit Statement 6.29 Air site Area 5 - Site Audit Statement 6.30 Area 5 - Site Audit Statement 6.31 Draft Plan of Management for Thomas Gibson Park, December 2000 6.32 Council resolution on Draft Plan of Management for Thomas Gibson Park, 17 June 2002 6.33 Generic Plan of Management for Community Land Categorised as Natural Areas 6.34 Draft Housing Strategy for Wollongong 6.35 Draft Managing our Flood Risks DCP 6.36 Landownership plan 6.37 Current zoning map between Bulli and Austinmer
A3-2 6.38 Adam vegetation map of Sandon Point 6.39 Contour map of Sandon Point (BHP Engineering 1993) 6.40 Map of Aboriginal heritage areas – Sandon Point 6.41 Answers to Commission’s questions 6.42 Answers to questions from Dr Joe Davis 6.43 Answers to questions from Ms Jill Walker 6.44 Answers to questions from Neighbourhood Committee 3 6.45 Answers to questions from Ms Jill Merrin 6.46 Answers to questions from Cookson Plibrico 6.47 Answers to questions from Stockland 6.48 Answers to supplementary questions from Ms Jill Walker 6.49 Answers to questions from Thirroul Action Group 6.50 Answers to questions from NIRAG Inc 6.51 Email from WCC to CoI dated 8 May 2003 Re Location of PAH impacted soil 6.52 Answers to questions from Mr William Tibben 6.53 Answers to questions from Mr Robert Miller 6.54 Submission in reply
7. Australian Industry Group 7.1 Primary submission
8. Cookson Plibrico Pty Ltd 8.1 Primary submission 8.2 Supplementary submission 8.3 Questions to Stockland Development Pty Ltd 8.4 Questions to Wollongong City Council 8.5 Questions to National Parks and Wildlife Service 8.6 Questions to Department of Land and Water Conservation 8.7 Questions to PlanningNSW 8.8 Questions from the Commission 8.9 Email re Council’s LEP Amendment 139 8.10 Noise Emission Measurements and Assessment, May 2003 8.11 Submission in reply 8.12 Noise report on Sandon Point Residential Subdivision, Thirroul, February 1996
9. Stockland Development Pty Limited 9.1 Primary submission 9.2 Presentation notes 9.3 Questions to Wollongong City Council 9.4 Questions to Sandon Point Aboriginal Tent Embassy 9.5 Questions to Planning NSW 9.6 Questions to NPWS 9.7 Questions to North Illawarra Residents Action Group 9.8 Questions from the Commission 9.10 Responses to issues arising from the CoI submission and oral presentation 9.11 Memo from Don Fox Planning 9.12 Questions to Department of Land and Water Conservation 9.13 Questions to Mr Allan Carriage 9.14 Questions to the Illawarra Local Aboriginal Land Council 9.15 Answers to questions from Mr Alex Peterson, Ms Bonita Martin, Cookson Plibrico, The Illawarra Local Aboriginal Land Council, DLWC, Mr Garry Caines, Ms Jill Merrin, Ms Jill Walker, Ms Karen Reid, Mr Marcel Van Wijk, 9.16 Answers to questions from the Commission 9.17 Sandon Point Development Noise Impact Assessment, July 2001 9.18 Letter re Contamination of Sydney Water Land 9.19 Submission in reply
10. Surfer Magazine 10.1 Primary submission
A3-3 11. Association of Surfing Professionals International Ltd 11.1 Primary submission
12. Coast & Wetlands Society Incorporated 12.1 Primary submission
13. Illawarra Local Aboriginal Land Council 13.1 Primary submission 13.2 Summary of Presentation to the CoI 13.3 Photographs 13.4 Questions to the CoI into Sandon Point 13.5 Further questions to NPWS 13.6 Answers to questions from Stockland 13.7 Additional information to Mr GE Simpson’s primary submission
14. Illawarra Greens 14.1 Primary submission
15. McCauley Park Progress Association 15.1 Primary submission
16. National Parks Association of NSW 16.1 Primary submission
17. National Parks Association of NSW (Illawarra Branch) 17.1 Primary submission 17.2 Response to questions from Dr Davis 17.3 Submission in reply
18. National Trust of Australia (NSW) 18.1 Primary submission
19. Nature Conservation Council of NSW Inc 19.1 Primary submission
20. Neighbourhood Committee Area 3 20.1 Primary submission 20.2 Presentation notes by Mr Ross Dearden 20.3 Questions to Wollongong City Council 20.4 Addendum to Questions to Wollongong City Council 20.5 Email re Water quality and drainage certification at Sandon Point 20.6 Submission in reply
21. Neighbourhood Committee Area 5 21.1 Primary submission
22. Northern Illawarra Residents Action Group 22.1 Primary submission 22.2 Presentation notes by Mr Max Ackerman 22.3 Questions to Wollongong City Council 22.4 Answers to questions from Stockland
23. Sandon Point Aboriginal Tent Embassy 23.1 Primary submission 23.2 Video “Kuradji” and cassette tape”Awaye” 23.3 “Belonging to me … an Aboriginal Oral History”
24. Sandon Point Bushcare Group 24.1 Primary submission 24.2 Questions to Stockland Trust Group 24.3 Map illustrates the Throsby’s Track and other heritage related documents
A3-4 24.4 Supplementary submission re 40m creek setbacks 24.5 Supplementary submission re the CoI’s Terms of Reference 24.6 Letter to Council re Stormwater impacts on Tramway Creek Wetlands and SCESFC 24.7 Letter to Council re Stormwater Runoff Hewitts Creek Catchment 24.8 Letter re Catchment and surrounding site walk 24.9 Letter re Sea of hands 24.10 Letter re Spiritual significance 24.11 Submission in reply
25. South Coast Labour Council 25.1 Primary submission
26. The Illawarra Escarpment Coalition 26.1 Primary submission
27. Thirroul Action Group 27.1 Primary submission 27.2 Questions to Wollongong City Council 27.3 Questions to Sydney Water 27.4 Questions to Planning NSW 27.5 Questions to NPWS 27.6 Questions to EPA 27.7 Questions to Department of Land and Water Conservation 27.8 Submission in reply
28. Total Environment Centre Inc 28.1 Primary submission
29. Korewal Eloura Jerrungarah Aboriginal Corporation 29.1 Primary submission 29.2 Article-“There was to be a great ceremony at Thirroul” 29.3 Map showing Illawarra and South Coast language boundaries
30. Mr Max F Ackerman 30.1 Primary submission 30.2 Photographs of Sandon Point during storm event
31. A/Prof Paul Adam 31.1 Primary submission
32. Ms Cheryl Akhurst 32.1 Letter to Mr David Campbell, MP 32.2 Primary submission
33. Mrs Joy Akhurst 33.1 Primary submission
34. Mr Doug Andersen 34.1 Primary submission
35. Mrs Narelle Anderson and Mr Colin Anderson 35.1 Primary submission
36. Mr Paul Baker 36.1 Primary submission
37. Mr David Beswick 37.1 Primary submission
A3-5 38. Ms Christine Bird 38.1 Primary submission 38.2 Supplementary submis sion 38.3 Supplementary information
39. Ms Cathy Bloch 39.1 Primary submission
40. Ms Lisa Byleveld 40.1 Primary submission
41. Wadi Wadi Coomaditchie Aboriginal Corporation 41.1 Primary submission 41.2 Various quotes submitted by Mr Lyle Davis 41.3 Letter re Mr Lyle Davis appearing 41.4 Letter re Stop all work on Stage 1 and Stages 2 to 6 41.5 Letter re Further archaeological study 41.6 Letter re NSW Fisheries’ response to Commission’s question 41.7 Letter re Planting in Stages 1 to 6 and no more work on the land 41.8 Letter to Mr Carriage re Cessation of work on Stages 1 to 6 41.9 Letter to Council, re Draft Scope for Further Archaeological Work 41.10 Letter re Meeting between Stockland and Aboriginal communities 41.11 Letter to Council re Aboriginal heritage Study at Sandon Point 41.12 Letter re Directing all water to Tramway Creek 41.13 Letter re Sandon Point CoI 41.14 Letter to the Mayor re Sandon Point subdivision certificates 41.15 Letter to NPWS re Return of cultural property
42. Ms Alice Cartan 42.1 Primary submission
43. Mr Stephen Carter 43.1 Primary submission
44. Mrs Robyn Cashman 44.1 Primary submission
45. Mr Leonard G Chamberlain 45.1 Primary submission 45.2 Letter re Council’s State of the Environment Report
46. Ms Alicia Chilby 46.1 Primary submission
47. Ms Kerrie Anne Christian 47.1 Primary submission
48. Mr Frank Church 48.1 Primary submission
49. Mr Ian Cobban 49.1 Primary submission
49a. Ms Karen Cobban 49a.1 Primary submission 49a.2 Submission in reply 49a.3 Email re Contamination of the AIR site
50. Vimala Colless 50.1 Primary submission
A3-6 51. Mr Greg Cook 51.1 Primary submission
52. Mr Michael Crighton 52.1 Primary submission
53. Mrs A Cunningham 53.1 Primary submission
54. Dr Joseph Davis 54.1 Primary submission 54.2 Presentation notes 54.3 Photographs 54.4 Questions to National Parks and Wildlife Service 54.5 Questions to National Parks Association (Illawarra Branch) 54.6 Questions to Planning NSW 54.7 Questions to Wollongong City Council 54.8 Email re Clarification regarding questions 54.9 Submission in reply
55. Ms Lyle J Davis 55.1 Primary submission
56. Ms Maureen Davis 56.1 Primary submission 56.2 Supplementary submission 56.3 Letter re Additional information pertaining to Louisa Walker (Bolloway) 56.4 Letter re Additional information pertaining to the names of Duren, Sutton and Bloxom. 56.5 Letter re Discussion on issues raised in previous submissions 56.6 Letter re Stockland’s ongoing consultancy with Indigenous community 56.7 Letter re Draft scope for further archaeological work 56.8 Letter re Questions to those authorities responsible 56.9 Letter re Hayward Bay Estate Yallah south of Dapto 56.10 Letter re Resolution – Consultation and Protection of Aboriginal Heritage 56.11 Letter to Minister re Appraisal by Professor Peter Hiscock and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 56.12 Submission in reply 56.13 Terms of Appointment – Illawarra Local Aboriginal Land Council Investigator
57. Mr Ross Dearden 57.1 Primary submission 57.2 Presentation notes 57.3 Article in Illawarra Business 57.4 Article “Evidence for Pleistocene and Holocene raised marine deposits, Sandon Point, New South Wales”
58. Ms Cynzia Dei-cont 58.1 Primary submission
59. Mr Ken and Mrs Carole Dixon 59.1 Primary submission
60. KJ Dowling 60.1 Primary submission
61. Ms Sonia Dutka 61.1 Primary submission
62. Ms Joanne Fletcher 62.1 Primary submission
A3-7 63. Mr Frank Gallagher 63.1 Primary submission
64. Ms Karen Gough 64.1 Primary submission
65. Ms Gayle Grey 65.1 Primary submission
66. Mr Daniel Hagan 66.1 Primary submission
67. Terry Hagan 67.1 Primary submission 67.2 Request to appear at the Hearing 67.3 Letter re Bulli Shire Restoration Group
68. Mr Tony Hagan 68.1 Primary submission
69. Mrs Fay Haines, JP 69.1 Primary submission
70. Mr RA Heath 70.1 Primary submission
71. Mr Rob Hindle 71.1 Primary submission
72. Mr Tim Hoban 72.1 Primary submission
73. Mr Stephen Hodgson and Ms Robin McKinlay 73.1 Primary submission
74. Mr Stephen Hyland 74.1 Primary submission
75. Mr David Isaacs 75.1 Primary submission
76. Ms Lynette Jacona 76.1 Primary submission
77. Mr Ray Jaeger 77.1 Primary submission
78. Ms Joan Mary Johnston 78.1 Primary submission
79. Mrs Lynne and Mike Jones 79.1 Primary submission
80. Mr Stephen Jones 80.1 Primary submission
81. Mr Ryan Kerr 81.1 Primary submission
A3-8 82. Mr Karl Koschutzke 82.1 Primary submission
83. Mrs Beryl and Mr John de Kroon 83.1 Primary submission
84. Ms Fiona Lock 84.1 Primary submission
85. Mrs Janice Lum 85.1 Primary submission
86. Mrs Vanessa and Mr Glenn Marks 86.1 Primary submission
87. Cr Dave Martin 87.1 Primary submission
88. Ms Bonita Martin 88.1 Primary submission 88.2 Questions to Stockland 88.3 Questions to PlanningNSW
89. JM McCann 89.1 Primary submission
90. Mr John McCarthy 90.1 Primary submission 90.2 Video tape taken by Mr Tony Stephenson 90.3 Supplementary submission
91. Mr David McEvoy 91.1 Primary submission 91.2 Presentation notes
92. Mr Peter and Mrs Kathy McKenzie 92.1 Primary submission 92.2 Supplementary submission
93. Mr Ian McKinlay 93.1 Primary submission
94. Mr Steven G McNally 94.1 Primary submission
95. Ms Jill Merrin 95.1 Primary submission 95.2 National Trust listing 95.3 Letter from Birds Australia 95.4 Estimated cost of Stockland site 95.5 Map 2 – Site Assessment Zones 95.6 Questions to NPWS 95.7 Questions to PlanningNSW 95.8 Questions to Stockland Trust Group 95.9 Questions to Wollongong City Council
96. D Miller 96.1 Primary submission
A3-9 97. Mr Robert Miller 97.1 Primary submission 97.2 Presentation notes 97.3 Questions to NSW Fisheries 97.4 Questions to NPWS 97.5 Questions to PlanningNSW 97.6 Questions to Council 97.7 Photographs 97.8 Letter re Surface water quality 97.9 Submission in reply 97.10 Photographs 97.11 Proposed Mitigation Works – Slacky/Tramway Creeks 97.12 Best Practice Guidelines – Part 5 of the EP&A Act 97.13 Determination of the Scientific Committee to list SCESFC 97.14 Bushfire Affected Development Fact Sheet 97.15 Mission Statement 97.16 Final submission
98. Ms Jill Molan 98.1 Primary submission
99. Mr John Edward Moore 99.1 Primary submission
100. Mr Mark Newsham 100.1 Primary submission
101. Mr Alexander J Notzon 101.1 Primary submission
102. BJ Olive 102.1 Primary submission
103. Ms Danie Ondinea and Mr Jeff Brown 103.1 Primary submission 103.2 Submission in reply
104. Mr Michael Organ, MHR, Member for Cunningham 104.1 Primary submission 104.2 Form letter with comments
105. Ms Margaret O’Riordan 105.1 Primary submission
106. Mr Hans and Mrs Margaret Paduch 106.1 Primary submission
107. NS and L Patchett 107.1 Primary submission
108. Kerry Pedersen 108.1 Primary submission
109. Mr David Perram 109.1 Primary submission
A3-10 110. Mr Alex Peterson 110.1 Primary submission 110.2 Presentation notes 110.3 Questions to Stockland 110.4 Questions to NPWS 110.5 Further questions to Stockland 110.6 Further questions to NPWS 110.7 Questions to Wollongong City Council 110.8 Questions to Mr Rick Farley via WCC 110.9 Questions to Ms Sharalyn Robinson 110.10 Response from Environment Australia 110.11 Email re Water and Creeks conditions 110.12 Letter re Private Certification 110.13 Submission in response to NPWS answers 110.14 Response to Stockland’s answers 110.15 Submission in reply 110.16 Statement from Mr John Pagett
111. GR Phillips 111.1 Primary submission
112. Mr Jeffrey John Pountney 112.1 Primary submission
113. Mr Alan and Mrs Karen Reid 113.1 Primary submission 113.2 Questions to Stockland Trust Group
114. Ms Sharralyn Robinson 114.1 Primary submission 114.2 Presentation notes
115. Mr Anthony Ryan 115.1 Primary submission 115.2 Australia’s Oceans Under Threat by John Foss 115.3 Supplementary submission
116. Ceri Ritchie 116.1 Primary submission
117. Pat Roe 117.1 Primary submission
118. Dr D Russell 118.1 Primary submission
119. Mr Bevan Skinner 119.1 Primary submission
120. Ms Christina Franczeska Slon 120.1 Primary submission 120.2 401 signed form letters - 34 with additional comments 120.3 Questions to Wollongong City Council 120.4 Submission in reply
121. Ms Deborah Smith 121.1 Primary submission
122. Mr John Smith 122.1 Primary submission
A3-11 123. Ms Carol Speechley and Mr Paul Hickman 123.1 Primary submission
124. Mr Jake Spooner 124.1 Primary submission
125. Mr Paul Stephenson 125.1 Primary submission
126. Kim Stephenson 126.1 Primary submission
127. Mr Tony Stephenson 127.1 Primary submission 127.2 Video tape – 2 hours 127.3 Video tape - 4 hours 127.4 Video tape - 2 ½ hours
128. Ms S Steyn 128.1 Primary submission
129. Ms Elsa Story 129.1 Primary submission
130. Ms Jane Taylor and Mr Jim Keski-nummi 130.1 Primary submission
131. Ms Jennifer Tibben 131.1 Primary submission
132. Mr William Tibben 132.1 Primary submission 132.2 Questions to Wollongong City Council 132.3 Submission in reply 132.4 Video of Hobart and Point Streets
133. Ms Kaye Tomlinson 133.1 Primary submission
134. Mr Josef Trunecke 134.1 Primary submission
135. Dr Deborah Truneckova 135.1 Primary submission
136. Ms Marcia Mary Turner 136.1 Primary submission
137. Ms Jill Walker 137.1 Primary submission 137.2 Letter re children’s presentation of petition by children 137.3 Presentation notes 137.4 Letter re moratorium to works on site 137.5 Questions to PlanningNSW 137.6 Questions to NSW Heritage Office 137.7 Questions to Mr David Campbell, MP 137.8 Questions to Wollongong City Council 137.9 Questions to Minister Kim Yeadon 137.10 Questions to Minister Andrew Refshauge 137.11 Questions to Minister Carl Scully
A3-12 137.12 Questions to Mr Nick Greiner, Director, Stockland Constructors 137.13 Questions to Minister Bob Debus 137.14 Questions to Minister Bob Debus 137.15 Questions to BHP Billiton 137.16 Questions to Minister John Aquilina 137.17 Questions to Mr Terry Gibson 137.18 Questions to Lord Mayor Alex Darling 137.19 Questions to Mr Nick Duncan 137.20 Questions to Premier Bob Carr 137.21 Questions to Lord Mayor and Councillors 137.22 Questions to Connell Wagner and Sainty 137.23 Questions to Wollongong City Council 137.24 Questions to Police Minister Michael Costa 137.25 Further questions to Mr David Campbell, MP 137.26 Questions to the Governor, Marie Bashir, AO 137.27 Sabotaged again by Council 137.28 Email re CoI’s Terms of Reference 137.29 Letter re Fisheries/Invalid DA/BHP etc 137.30 Letter to NPWS re Draft Aboriginal Place report 137.31 Submission in reply 137.32 Sandon Point – Kuradji Petition with approximately 3000 signatures 137.33 Comments re PlanningNSW’s submission in reply 137.34 Email from CoI re Clarification of “Independence of Commission”
138. Mr Mitchum Walters 138.1 Primary submission
139. Mr Neil Wilcock 139.1 Primary submission
140. Ms Shauna Wilkinson 140.1 Primary submission
141. Ms Cecilie Anne Yates 141.1 Primary submission
142. Form letters from Mr Scott Williams & Ms Nicola Varley, Mr Peter Heath, Mr Alan Coombs, Ms Anne Maree Lawless, Ms Lesley Gordon, M Jamieson, Mr John & Mrs Anne Dening, Ms Rosalind Batten, E Metcalf, Mrs Anne and Mr Warren Kain, Ms Lis Rust, Mr Paul Grey, Ms Nadine Tong & Mr Paul Tardent, Ms Bronwyn Watkins, Ms Sue Andersen, Mr Adrianus Leonardus van Wyk, Mr David Bell, Mr Karl and Mrs Maija Upenieks, Ms Susan Fawaz, and Ms Diane Feneley
143. Form letters from Mr Mark J Schipp, Mrs Dorothy Lloyd Sefton, Mr Donald Bray, Mrs Di and Mr Barry Curtin, Ms Julie Clifford, Ms Vicki Cleaver, Ms Rachael Woodcock and Mr Mark Miklas, Ms Sylvia Burrows, Mr Ian Menzies Dow, G Vozza, Mr Alex Peterson, Mr Graham & Mrs Elly Castle, Mr Kerry Frank Hawke, Ms Joan Mary Johnston, Ms Anne- Margaret Vassallo, L McCann, Ms Betty Walsh, Ms Nita Borland, Mr Bob and Mrs Sandra Cole, Mr Michael London, Mr Ronald K Smith, Mr Jayne Carrothers, Mr Michael Momsen, Mrs Michele and Mr Bill Harvey, PA Atkins, Mr Thomas John Ronan, Mr Robert and Mrs Christine Kocal, Ms Cheryl Akhurst, Mrs Angela and Mr Donald Hannan, Mr John Edwards, Mrs D Moore, Mrs DC Morand, Kerry Air, Mrs Barbara Hatch, Mr Guy C Slater, Mr David and Mrs Lynne Wright, Ms Heather Sainsbury, Ms Sharlene Booth, Ms PS Andersen, Mr Max and Mrs Marjorie Allan, Mr James Hopkins, Ms Kathy Parsons-Young, Ms Patricia Cadogan, Mr Mark Hoyl, Ms Stephanie Robinson, Ms Gillian Fletcher, and Mr Joseph R Battersby
144. Ms Irene Tognetti 144.1 Primary submission
A3-13 145. Mr John and Mrs Robyn Cashman 145.1 Primary submission
146. Mr John and Mrs Susan Cropper 146.1 Primary submission
147. Ms Elizabeth Perey 147.1 Primary submission
148. Ms Barbara Meyns 148.1 Primary submission
149. Form letter from Mr Les and Mrs Marie Pallister
150. From letter from Ms Maria Hulbert
151. Ms Kelly Cumming 151.1 Primary submission
152. Dr Karla Sperling 152.1 Primary submission 152.2 Supplementary submission 152.3 Article: “21st Century Challenges for Urban Planning”
153. Ms Helen Wilson 153.1 Primary submission
154. Ad Hoc North Illawarra Peoples Movement for Reconciliation 154.1 Primary submission 154.2 Comments on the Draft NSW Aboriginal Heritage Impact Assessment Guidelines 154.3 Correction to comments in 154.2 154.4 Letter re Koori cultural heritage 154.5 Oral presentation notes 154.6 Submission in reply 154.7 Development and Indigenous Land – A Human Rights Approach 154.8 Comments on Aboriginal Heritage Study scoping document
155. NSW Fisheries 155.1 Questions from Commission 155.2 Answers to Commission’s questions
156. NSW Rural Fire Service 156.1 Letter from CoI to NSW Rural Fire Service re Asset Protection Zone 156.2 Response to 156.1
157. Dr Peter Hiscock 157.1 Letter from CoI to Dr Hiscock re Hiscock Report 157.2 Response to 157.1
A3-14 APPENDIX 4 LIST OF APPEARANCES
Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources Former Planning NSW Mr Neil McGaffin Mr Mark Parkder Ms Louise Wells
Former Department of Land and Water Conservation Mr John Bucinskas Dr Ivars Reinfelds
National Parks and Wildlife Service Ms Lou Ewins Ms Teresa Gay Ms Tanya Koeneman Dr Kathryn Przywolnik
Wollongong City Council Dr Mike Mouritz Mr Rick Farley Mr Ted Collins Ms Lisa Miller Mr Michael Therin Mr Pas Silveri
Australian Industry Group Ms Debra Murphy
Cookson Plibrico Pty Ltd Mr David Evans Mr Paul Kunkler
Stockland Development Pty Ltd Mr Nick Duncan Mr Paul Hedge Mr Paul Grech, Don Fox Planning
Illawarra Local Aboriginal Land Council Mr Geoffrey Simpson Mr Garry Caines
Illawarra Greens Mr Michael Sergent
Nature Conservation Council and Coast & Wetlands Society Mr C Morrison
Neighbourhood Committee Area 3 Mr Ross Dearden
North Illawarra Reconciliation Group Mr Bruce Reyburn
Northern Illawarra Residents Action Group Mr Max Ackerman
Sandon Point Aboriginal Tent Embassy Mr Roy Kennedy
A4-1 South Coast Labour Council Mr Arthur Rorris
Thirroul Action Group Ms Cate Wilson
Wadi Wadi Coomaditchie Aboriginal Corporation Mr Alan Carriage Mr Lyle Davis
Ms Christine Bird
Mr Stephen Carter
Ms Kerrie Anne Christian
Dr Joseph Davis
Ms Maurine Davis
Mr Ross Dearden
Mr Terry Hagan
Mr David McEvoy
Ms Jill Merrin
Mr Robert Miller
Mr John Edward Moore
Mr Michael Organ
Mr Alex Peterson
Ms Sharralyn Robinson
Mr Anthony Ryan
Ms Christina Slon
Dr Karla Sperling
Mr Tony Stephenson
Mr William Tibben
Ms Jill Walker
A4-2 APPENDIX 5 LIST OF BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS
1. City of Wollongong Local Environmental Plan 1990 (Amendment No 139)
2. City of Wollongong Local Environmental Plan 1990 (Amendment No 194)
3. Wollongong City Council Development Control Plan 94/17
4. Local Environmental Study Sandon Point by Gutteridge Haskins & Davey Pty Ltd, April 1993
5. Ministerial Direction and Instrument of Appointment
A5-1 APPENDIX 6 ABORIGINAL HERITAGE STUDY – PRELIMINARY BRIEF
Sandon Point Aboriginal Heritage Study
Draft Scope for Further Archaeological Work and Cultural Heritage Assessment
Introduction
Therin Archaeological Consulting (TAC) has been asked by Wollongong City Council (WCC) to provide a detailed scope for further archaeological investigation at the Sandon Point site. The bounds of the Sandon Point site are defined as the current bounds of the Sandon Point Commission of Inquiry. Planning NSW (PNSW) and WCC are currently seeking advice from the Sandon Point Commission of Inquiry commissioners as to the expected limits of further archaeological investigation to be undertaken at this stage. The Sandon Point Commission of Inquiry has requested that the recommendation for further archaeological testing at the Sandon Point site made by Therin (2003) be undertaken as soon as possible so that the results of the further investigation may be incorporated into the Commission. Therin (2003) recommended that further archaeological investigation was required over the site to determine the distribution of Aboriginal heritage across the site and to provide a detailed understanding of the archaeological significance of the Aboriginal heritage identified.
This scope is based upon Section 12.7.3 of WCC’s draft Development Control Plan (DCP) for Sandon Point, a meeting held of the 11th of March 2003 between PNSW and WCC, a meeting held between Michael Therin (TAC) and Kathryn Przywolnik (NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service archaeologist) on the 13th March 2003 and a meeting held on the 17th March 2003 between Michael Therin (TAC), Susan McIntyre-Tamwoy (archaeologist for Stocklands Pty Ltd) and the NSW NPWS.
Scope
During the meeting held of the 11th March 2003 between PNSW and WCC nine basic steps required to undertake the study were drafted. These steps are loosely based upon the steps detailed by WCC in the draft Sandon Point (DCP).
1) Consultation with Illawarra Aboriginal community 2) Preparation of a brief for the Study 3) Consultation with the Illawarra Aboriginal community and landowners 4) Commissioning of the archaeologist to undertake the investigation and application for a section 87 PRP (NSW NPWS Act 1974) from the NPWS 5) Archaeological Investigation 6) Final Report 7) Plain English Report and community presentation of the results 8) Discussion of recommendations resulting from the archaeological investigation with the Illawarra Aboriginal community, landowners, WCC, PNSW and NSW NPWS 9) Preparation of a Final report incorporating the discussion held during Point 9 (above)
A6-1 1) Consultation with the Illawarra Aboriginal Community (2-3weeks)
Consultation with the groups representing the Illawarra Aboriginal Community is required prior to the formulation of the brief for the study. The aim of the consultations will be to: § Identify, detail and incorporate Aboriginal community concerns for the scope of the study § Identify, detail and incorporate Aboriginal community interests in the research aims being addressed. For example, what questions would the communities like to see answered by the archaeological investigation? § Identify, detail and incorporate Aboriginal community interests in the methodological approach to be employed in addressing the research aims. For example, are there any specific field-based or analytical techniques or methods that the communities like to see employed during the archaeological investigation? TAC suggests that the consultation also include informing the Illawarra Aboriginal groups of the capabilities of archaeologists. At present the Aboriginal community does not have a very good understanding of what archaeologists do, the types of analysis the archaeologists can undertake and the information that archaeologists can provide to the community. This lack of understanding regarding the abilities of current archaeological methods limits the community’s inputs and requirements from archaeological investigations.
2) Preparation of a brief for the Study (1 week)
Following consultation with the Aboriginal community groups, a detailed brief will be devolved for the further archaeological investigation of Sandon Point. This brief will attempt to accommodate the requirements of the Illawarra Aboriginal community, landowners WCC, PNSW and the NSW NPWS. As a minimum the brie f will require that: Methods § archaeological excavation will provide an adequate sample of all landform units present across the site § archaeological excavation will provide an adequate sample of degree and nature of perceived disturbance over the whole study area § the methodology will address relevant research questions, both archaeological and Aboriginal community based § archaeological excavation will test the models Aboriginal occupation and use of the study area as proposed by both Navin Officer Heritage Consultants and Therin Archaeological Consultants in previous archaeological assessments § archaeological excavation will be undertaken in a manner sensitive to the retrieval of organic remains, both macro- and microscopic materials, in order to provide a representative sample § if sufficient carbon or carbonate is retrieved, radiometric dating should be undertaken. If no charcoal or other suitable materials are recovered, alternative forms of dating should be considered, such as Tl or OCR Analysis § Organic remains be retrieved from either the excavated squares and trenches or from bulk soil samples § Detailed stone artefact analysis § Raw materials analysis, including some degree of raw material sourcing § Analysis of all excavated cultural material from the study area from previous excavations, including stages 1-6 and McCauleys Beach Midden with the aim of providing comparative data § Analysis techniques aimed at the identification of the kinds of activities that were undertaken on the site in general and differences in activities undertaken between areas of the site.
A6-2 § Undertake any other techniques or methods to enable the research questions, both archaeological and community based, to be adequately addressed Report Requirements § Interpretation of the archaeological excavations results within a local and regional context § Archaeological values within the study area § Aboriginal community heritage values in the study area Reporting § Technical report of the field component, analysis results and recommendations § Plain English summary of the field component, analysis results and recommendations TAC suggests that the minimum amount of excavation required in each area be finalised as part of the brief.
3) Consultation with the Illawarra Aboriginal community and landowners (1 week)
A second consultation will be held with the Aboriginal communities during which the draft brief developed as part of Point 2 (above) will be presented. The community will be given the opportunity to comment of the brief and make reasonable alterations. The draft brief will also be presented to the various landowners represented on the study area. The landowners will be given the opportunity to comment on the brief and make reasonable alterations.
4) Commissioning of the archaeologist to undertake the investigation and application for a section 87 PRP (NSW NPWS Act 1974) from the NPWS (4-12 weeks)
The archaeologist who will undertake the archaeological investigation set out in the brief will be engaged. The archaeologist engaged to undertake the investigation will be required to write a detailed methodology for the proposed investigation based upon the provided brief. The methodology will need to be reviewed by all Aboriginal organizations requiring representation at Sandon Point. Each of these Aboriginal organizations will be required to provide a letter agreeing or disagreeing with the methodology. During this stage the archaeologist undertaking the investigation will need to determine the level of involvement that each of the Aboriginal organizations consulted require during the field work. A work schedule allowing equal representation by each groups requiring representation will need to be submitted with the methodology. A completed Section 87 PRP application, the methodology and letters of agreement from each of the Aboriginal organizations consulted need to be submitted to the NSW NPWS. The NSW NPWS commonly take between 4-8 weeks to process PRP applications.
5) Archaeological Investigation (4-5 weeks)
Upon being granted the PRP by the NSW NPWS it is envisioned that it will take up to 1 week to organize the field work. The field work is likely to take between 3-4 weeks depending on the methodology.
6) Final Report (6 weeks)
The final report will incorporate the results of the various analyses undertaken during the course of the fieldwork and on the Aboriginal artefacts recovered from the excavations. The report should: § Provide an interpretation of the Aboriginal use of the entire study area based upon the results of the excavation and analyses. § Place the results within a region context.
A6-3 § Provide recommendations for any further archaeological works required over the Sandon Point area as part of further development or works. § Provide an indication of the relative archaeological signific ance of the various geographic contexts tested as part of the investigation, including their suitability for conservation. The report should fulfil the requirements for archaeological report writing set out in the NSW NPWS Draft Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Standards and Guidelines Kit (1997)
7) Plain English Report and community presentation of the results (2 weeks)
A public presentation of the results of the archaeological investigation should be made to the community; primarily to the Illawarra Aboriginal community. The community presentation should be accompanied by a Plain English report presenting the results of the archaeological investigation in a format that is easily understandable to the general public. The Plain English report and public presentation should focus of questions raised by the Aboriginal community as part of the initial consultation as being of interest to the community.
8) Discussion of recommendations resulting from the archaeological investigation with the Illawarra Aboriginal community, landowners, WCC, PNSW and NSW NPWS (2 weeks)
Further consultation with the Illawarra Aboriginal community should be held to discuss the archaeological recommendations resulting from the archaeological investigations. This consultation should include discussions regarding the cultural significance of the areas investigated and determine if the results of the archaeological investigations have altered the cultural significance of the Sandon Point area. The recommendations made as part of the report on the investigation should be presented to and discussed with landowners, WCC, PNSW and the NSW NPWS. This discussion should cover the implications of the investigation results on the future development of the Sandon Point area, the requirement for conservation of areas based upon archaeological and cultural heritage values and requirements for further archaeological investigation as part of future development.
9) Preparation of a Aboriginal Heritage Management Plan for Sandon Point (2 weeks)
The results of the discussion with the Aboriginal community, landowners, WCC, PNSW and the NSW NPWS should be incorporated into the recommendations of the archaeological report to form a management plan for Aboriginal Heritage on Sandon Point.
A6-4