Lords Road Consultation Buried in Christmas Rush

Council is calling on the Sydney Central Planning Panel to extend the due date for submissions on the rezoning of employment land at Lords Road, amid fears that the community will miss their opportunity to have their say during the Christmas rush.

Council is also seeking a public hearing on issues raised in Council’s submission to the Panel, which strongly opposes the planning proposal to rezone the property at 67-73 Lords Road from Light Industrial to Medium Density Residential and increase the floor space ratio from 1:1 to 2.4:1.

The calls come following news that recent rezonings, the Parramatta Road Urban Transformation Strategy (PRUTS) and WestConnex works will result in the loss of 85.3% of the Leichhardt LEP area's industrial land supply.

Administrator Richard Pearson said that the Panel owed it to the community to extend the consultation period by another 28 days.

“Most people are busy with Christmas planning and holidays, they don’t have time to consider a complex rezoning and what it will mean for the local area,” he said.

“The proposal on exhibition draws on economic arguments dating from 2013 and do not take into account recent industrial land studies that clearly show that Lords Road should remain an industrial precinct.

“It also fails to include a detailed traffic study, as required in the recent Parramatta Road Urban Transformation Study, the very document that has been used as justification for the proposal to proceed so far.”

Council also wants the Panel to hold a public hearing, as provided by section 57(5) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, to hear first-hand the very significant concerns with the proposal.

Council will also hold a public meeting early in 2017 to discuss the proposal with the Community.

Council’s objections include that the proposal:
• would lead to loss of an industrial precinct and jobs when the Greater Sydney Commission draft District Plan calls for precautions to be taken to protect industrial land for urban services;
• does not currently meet the requirements of the PRUTS Planning and Design Built Form Guidelines;
• doesn’t address the high risk of flooding on the site;
• falls very short in the provision of Affordable Housing; and
• doesn’t take into account the increased local traffic that will be generated by WestConnex.

Rate this page

  • Rate as The content was useful0% The content was useful votes
  • Rate as The content was not useful0% The content was not useful votes

Thanks for your feedback. We will use this data to improve the content of this page.

Page last updated: 19 Nov 2018