Springside Hill planning panel decision

Published on 23 September 2024

Kiama Council has today been notified the Southern Regional Planning Panel (SRPP) has recommended several amendments to the Kiama West (Springside Hill) planning proposal.

Kiama Council expresses its strong concern that the SRPP decision is in fact not in accordance with the Local Environmental Plan Making Guidelines of 2023 that govern such matters.

Council respectfully requests Hon Minister of Planning Paul Scully “immediately intervene in the SRPP decision, call in the matter and to allow time for the polls to be declared and the elected body of Kiama Municipal Council to take office”.

Once this occurs the sensible outcome should be that the applicant provides a new planning proposal to council, completing all steps and addresses concerns raised by council and the SRPP.

Council is currently in caretaker mode and the date issued by the SRPP for action aligns with the date of the election polls being declared (4 October 2024).

This means our new council will not have been sworn in prior to the proponent agreeing or refusing to make amendments required by SRPP, and the Council will not have an ordinary meeting to allow it to provide any formal comment on the matters.

Council’s concerns centre on the following facts:

• The Record of Decision is that the Planning Proposal should proceed to Gateway with a total of 14 broad areas of significant change that require further work by the applicant prior to proceeding to gateway. This is a highly unusual request for a revised PP.
• The 14 broad deficient areas / unresolved issues which beyond “qualifying changes” and are substantial in nature.
• The Guidelines insist that before the SRPP makes this type of decision it should seek the Council’s and the proponent’s view at the panel meeting – this did not occur and there will be no opportunity for this occur.
• If the SRPP comes to the view that recommendations for changes are required post the Panel meeting, the Guidelines specify that:

• The SRPP may reconvene the meeting. This has not occurred, and the Panel has failed to engage council in this process.
• Alternatively, if the SRPP appoints itself as the Planning Proposal Authority (PPA) (as is the case in this matter) it can vary the planning proposal but only if it is substantially the same as the proposal or provides reduced impact. This decision significantly varies the proposal, does not reduce it, and instead lists a long shopping list of broad and significant changes that need to be made for the panel to “reconsider” and already made decision.

• The SRPP minutes do not reflect the breadth and diversity of concerns that Kiama Council communicated to the panel. The minutes fail to even make mention of Council’s expressed enduring concerns of sewerage and water among many other issues.

Kiama Council CEO Jane Stroud said “Any time planning decisions and powers are taken out of the hands of local government, planning as a profession is embarrassed by the system. Instead, it puts the decisions in the hands of others.

“We have over 300 recent submissions on our draft housing strategy that we are currently working through and many focus on this development. Local voices are not being listened to in this process.”

“Our previous council voted unanimously against this proposal, for virtually for the same reasons that SRPP now wants 14 issues addressed.”

“Council when presenting to the SRPP noted real concerns with issues like roads, water and sewerage, schools, a lack of childcare, shortages of employment lands and flooding issues.”

“Today’s SRPP decision throws those concerns to the wind. Instead, the community is left pondering a decision on its future being made by a panel, whose views were split, with the ultimate chairman’s call.” 

“Like a lot of people, I am curious, that even when the applicant refused to submit a basic scoping proposal or provide essential reports that adequately address issues as geotech, flooding and bushfire, it still gets a green light.”

“We have sufficient growth outlined in our draft housing strategy to meet our housing targets set down by the State government. This large greenfield development will scar the green rolling hills, rides rough shod over the regional plan, squeezes in over 1500 lots and sends thousands of cars onto the existing road network every single day. That is not the legacy that good planning seeks to leave.”

“The creation of communities is more than just housing and target numbers, it’s about schools, water, sewerage, parks, open spaces, good urban outcomes supported by essential funded infrastructure.”

“I realise Kiama is one of the most highly desirable, unaffordable coastal communities in all of NSW, but grabs for land and cash shouldn’t come at the expense of sensible planning for new greenfield communities.

“I have personally met the applicant several times and will continue to collaborate with them professionally in the interests of the whole community.”

“I understand the proponent has done much good work here and in other LGA’s, but it is essential that due process and political representation is afforded on this decision too.”

“All developments have merit, but balance must be found.”

“Without an elected body, without community engagement, I worry that it’s simply agreeing to growth at all costs and I hope the Minister helps ends this most unusual circumstance”.

The relevant planning documents for PP, including the decision of the SRPP are available here:

www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/rezoning-reviews/under-assessment/planning-proposal-rezone-land-long-brush-road-jerrara-and-greyleigh-drives-and-jamberoo-road