The Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 30—St Marys is a planning instrument that has guided the development of the ADI site at St Marys since 2001.
It provides key provisions such as zones, development controls and the requirement for the adoption of precinct plans prepared by Penrith and Blacktown city councils. The proposed amendments outlined in the Explanation of Intended Effect mainly relate to land identified as the Central Precinct and Regional Park.
They are rezoning of approximately 38.4 ha of land within the Central Precinct from Employment to Urban.
This is expected to create approximately 500 additional lots for housing.
Explanation of Intended Effect and Supporting Documents
Explanation of Intended Effect and Supporting Documents
- Explanation of Intended Effect St Marys SREP 30
- St marys employment development strategy review SGS April 2015 final report lend lease 20180228
- Sydney regional environmental plan 30 St Marys amendment 3 planning report 2017 11
- appendix 03 aims and performance objectives 2017 11
- appendix 04 environmental planning strategy 2017 11
- appendix 05 employment development strategy 2017 11
- appendix 05 employment development strategy review final report 2015 04
- appendix 06 flooding and evacuation report 2017 11 03
- appendix 07 internal road and intersection assessment 2017 11 part 1
- appendix 07 internal road and intersection assessment 2017 11 part 2
- appendix 07 internal road and intersection assessment 2017 11 part 3
- appendix 07 internal road and intersection assessment 2017 11 part 4
- appendix 07 internal road and intersection assessment 2017 11 part 5
- appendix 07 internal road and intersection assessment 2017 11 part 6
- appendix 08 water soil and infrastructure report 2017 09 20 part 1
- appendix 08 water soil and infrastructure report 2017 09 20 part 2
- appendix 08 water soil and infrastructure report 2017 09 20 part 3
- appendix 08 water soil and infrastructure report 2017 09 20 part 4
- appendix 09 bushfire protection assessment update 2017 10 27
- appendix 10 contamination report 2017 10 27
- appendix 11 ecological assessment 2017 10 30
- appendix 12 utility infrastructure letter 2017 10 11
- appendix 13 blacktown and penrith heritage map 2017 11 09
- appendix 13 blacktown and penrith structure map 2017 10 19
- appendix 13 blacktown and penrith zoning map 2017 11 09
- appendix 14 central precinct community plan update rezoning report 2017 05 31
Revising the size and location of land zoned Drainage to reflect the stormwater management strategy for the site rezoning of approximately 1.2 ha of land within Jordan Springs in the western precinct from Urban to Regional Park that is currently identified for use as Local Open Space.
More information can be found on the NSW legislation website.
Submissions
| ID# | Content |
| 253017 | Do not let more destruction of this beautiful land happen! This area is a treasure for Western Sydney and the community, housing the last natural habitat for emus and kangaroos in Sydney. Don’t turn the whole of this beautiful natural environment into more ugly, generic housing. There is so much opportunity to use this space for education and natural preservation. Most importantly leaving a space for these beautiful animals to live. Humans already take up far too much room, just leave a small pace for the animals. |
| 253033 | I,Graham Wallis, object to the St Marys rezoning proposal SREP30 on the grounds Lend Lease has continually changed the original zonings on the old ADI site to increase the number of dwellings. Employment in the area has not been catered for as per the original proposal for the site. There is not enough open space for the increasing population to create a healthy life style. Please say no so the people of Jordan Springs have the chance to work, live and play in their suburb |
| 253050 | More houses is ridiculous to move around our area now there is so much traffic. Everyone uses dunheved road which is now a standstill in the afternoon and this is a result of jordan springs. Our street is also busier as people use it to go around the traffic and use back streets. The cars are speeding down our street and now i dont let my kids play out the front. |
| 253056 | My objection relates to this proposal include- Before the ADI site was approved the argument by politicians who supported Lend Lease developing the site was that it would not be a dormitory suburb whereby people left home each day to travel outside Penrith for work but would be a model development with homes and jobs on site. This is clearly not the case, and this proposal with make this problem worse. One of the Arguments put forward at the approval processes from Lend Lease for more housing on the ADI site each time they apply for Amendments to already set plans for the site - is usually they bring jobs and employment to the area - well this is only short term, while the houses are being built, - once the development is completed and the builders/trades move on. The Residents are left to travel on already congested roads and public transport, that has not improved as fast as housing in the west, and as it is improving the added traffic puts us back to square ONE. We and left with little infrastructure that is not ready to cope with an even larger population with no more local industry as promised and few local jobs already. The re-zoning would put a strain on the already fragile flood plain in the Central Precinct - with the tons of fill brought into the ADI site , this raises- the salinity levels in the surrounding areas of Central Precinct - we are getting brick work re done on our house for the second time because of salt damage to brickwork. Hopefully have found a solution with a salt treatment and brick sealer after having spent over $20,000 on repairs and my house is not the only one with this problem and having repairs done. (salinity levels in soil rising) This will only get worse if more houses are approved and the flood plain is altered yet again with more additional fill. Also there will be an extra stain on an already straining sewer and water and electricity system. So this proposal for an additional 500 homes should DENIED in my opinion. We need - Employment/Industry not more housing. |
| 253089 | I disagree with further development of Jordan Springs. The Penrith area is already congested, there is not enough jobs or infrastructure to support additional housing in Jordan Springs. The Northern Road is a nightmare to drive along. Also please take into account the displacement of our native animals which is already evident when numerous Emu's and Kangaroos are wondering around Jordan Springs, Werrington, Cambridge Park etc. Also note the further destruction of habitats for beetles, most notably the obvious reduction in Christmas Beetles. Further more the displacement of snakes putting the community at risk as well as our pets. For the love of community, do not do this. |
| 255624 | Again, it seems that Len Lease wants to take more of the land we fought for to build houses, 500 of them. This is not a good idea as there will be horrendous drainage problems that could pollute the existing parklands, also pollution created by people who buy houses, they are not exactly the type of people who are conservation minded. The other fact is Lend Lease will be again destroying valuable threatened Cumberland plains woodland. Making a place for employment might be a better option, so long as its not going to pollute the area. The fact that a lot of us fought for many years to try and save this land for a park and see what has happened to this land is heart breaking. Lend Lease does what it wants. I am against more houses been built because of loss of bushland again. |
| 255834 | I propose that the bus access via Werrington County needs to be made into an all-vehicle access point. The proposed maps clearly show that there is adequate entry points for cars on all sides of the new developments, with the exception of the Werrington County side. In case of an emergency (such as bushfire), evacuation points are far too restricted in the Woodland Plains district. |
| 255838 | As a local resident about to move into the central precint, it is already bad enough that there is no direct connection to Dunheaved road. Also the current main entrance is a 50km road via Jordan Springs which is already getting busy with residents moving in and construction vechicles around. Coming from Stage 2 it takes 10 minutes just to reach the Northern Road. Lendlease and Council need ro provide another access point in and out of the area with a particular focus on Dunheaved Rd. Even if it means allowing light vechiles i.e. cars use the current exit designated for buses only. This would limit the traffic going through Werrington county but make it easier for residents. This access would also allow children to attend Werrington County PS (our closest school with no access to it) and also easier access to M4, train station and hospital. Access plans need to be put into place urgently. |
| 255859 | N/a |
| 255889 | direct access to Dunheaved Rd needs to be completed due to increased residents, to allow better access to M4, schools and hospital. |
| 256797 | SREP30 Submission I wish to object to the Rezoning of Industrial Land to Housing in Central Precinct under SREP30 From the point of view of a Resident, we have watched and endured many changes, backdowns and backflips during the development process of the ADI site under SREP30. With Lendlease not having met their obligations for Road Improvments and Traffic Lights etc, Lendlease have at stages successfully lobbied Council for them to be able to actually build less affordable housing lots in their Jordan Springs Development, Not More. In turn they would then honour their obligations to put infrastructure in place for Traffic and the Northern road. All of which was part of their obligation in developing this lot in the first place anyway, but they were pushing back against. Lendlease lobbied for a revision in 2016 which was approved and has already seen them allowed to add another 470 Houses into Jordan Springs and Central Precinct. Now they want to add another 500 on top of that, to an already impending traffic nightmare on local roads that already can’t cope. With todays modern families 500 Houses equals approx 1000 more vehicles & 1,000-3,000 more people. This on top of the other 940 odd extra Vehicles already added with the addition of the last 470 Lots. In 2009 in what I believe was a well Pre-Meditated move, Lendlease successfully lobbied to have the 2 Industrial Areas in the ADI site development moved from the Practical West and East ends of the Development that have good Traffic Access, into the less Practical Central Precinct. In a move that was clearly thought out well in advance they now say that this Central Precinct area is impractical for Industrial Land due to a lack of Major Traffic Infrastructure & citing Affordable Housing as a need. This is Laughable, as the only key factor driving this is that house lots are worth a lot more than an industrial park. This has nothing to do with Affordable Housing & everything to do with profits. In Lendlease’s independent Studies undertaken for this proposal they say that that People living in these developments don’t work in these areas, but leave the area for work. The clear reason for this is common sense! - Housing developments are being built with No Opportunity for residents to be able to seek local employment. - People have no choice other than to travel when Housing Developments continue to be built without infrastructure for employment. - Given the opportunity, I guarantee that almost everyone in our local areas would like to work closer to home if the opportunities existed. - The proposed Employment Industrial Zone backs almost adjacent to Existing Industrial Zone, so extending this Industrial Park would be beneficial in the area. - Attracting Businesses to the area can only be Beneficial in the overall growth of the Penrith area. With the increase in Traffic entering Jordan Springs as it has grown over the past few years, we have seen huge issues arise in Traffic in peak times. An Industrial application generates much smaller amounts of Traffic over the entire day, not just in peak times like Housing does. For an example one of one seriously overstressed road, the Trip from the Great Western Highway at Werrington along Werrington Road and then on to Dunheved Road up to Werrington County shops is approx. 4.5kms From 3pm Weekdays to 6.30pm Weekdays this 4.5kms can often take 25mins to 35mins to traverse. This has been bought about directly by the large volumes of vehicles now using this road for access across to Jordan Springs. With Central Precinct being built now & using the same access roads, I am very worried to think how bad this is going to get. The Northern Road/ Great Western Highway Intersection is another every bit as bad as this for the same reasons. With everybody leaving for work and coming home at similar times to travel "outside" for work, this can only decline further. I really do not believe that we cannot just continue to jam in more and more housing with no consideration to employment & better opportunities for the people living in the areas just for the sake of builders profits. We need to stand up and ask why these obligations are not being met by Lendlease. |
| 256830 | The plan was originally approved with this employment Precinct. No factors have changed. If there is no employment Precinct then all those employees will have to travel daily outside of the suburb, increasing already bad congestion. If you put another 500+ houses it will be even worse. This is not quality suburban building. |
| 257217 | I oppose Lendlease's proposed amendment to SREP 30 to have the employment zoning changed to urban. Our local area needs the jobs and employment lands not more housing and associated traffic congestion. |
| 257238 | I oppose Lendlease's proposed amendment to SREP 30 to have the employment zoning changed to urban. Our local area needs the jobs and employment lands not more housing and associated traffic congestion. |
| 257384 | This proposal is contrary to the aims of the Three Cities Sydney strategy. That strategy envisages an economic corridor between Western Sydney Airport and St Mary's along a new rail line. To support economic development in this corridor, employment land will be needed and given priority. Rezoning of the employment land in the Central Precinct to residential will reduce the chances of significant economic development in the WSA-St Mary's corridor and generally exacerbate the jobs/population imbalance across western Sydney and increase commuting flows into eastern Sydney. |
| 257404 | I oppose Lendlease's proposed amendment to SREP 30 to have the employment zoning changed to urban. Our local area needs the jobs and employment lands not more housing and associated traffic congestion. I would like to be able to work close to my home and not have to travel 50 minutes each way to get to work. |
| 258244 | I do not support the conversion of employment land to residential given traffic concerns. I have concerns about the excess peak directional traffic being generated (which would have had opposite balanced flows had this been an employment zone). There will also be a loss of self-containment of traffic with the precinct as the loss of jobs means residents will have to travel outside the precinct. Intersections along The Northern Road (between Great Western Highway and Andrews Road) already operate well above capacity and the extra directional flows generated by converted low density housing will intensify this issue. I also have concerns about open space land being rezoned to regional park which is not accessible for residents/visitors. The plans indicate higher density residential (south of the retail) in the western precinct near this land. Therefore, with the loss of this land and higher intensification of residents in the whole area, I have concerns that open space will be more in demand and not easily accessible. |
| 258773 | Hello, The maps and information provided on the website is not clear or detailed. I have a home on Emmaus Road, Jordan Springs and need to know the following information: Why is the zoned drainage being done across the road in the bush? Where is the exact location? (map does not show streets, hard to know distance from house, etc) The size of the zoned drainage? Why wasn't this planned during development stage and ready before land sales? When will it start? Will it be maintained? (I have been here since August 2017 and never seen anyone maintain the bush area which has rubbish in it) What is the purpose of the dam? How will the mosquito/insect issue it brings be dealt with? Please respond to my questions. Regards, Sandra. |
| 258933 | please provide access to Dunheaved Rd, needed for the increase residents, etc. Also better access to M4, School and hospital |
| 259315 | I oppose Lendlease's proposed amendment to SREP 30 to have the employment zoning changed to urban. Our local area needs the jobs and employment lands not more housing and associated traffic congestion. Traffic is a major issue in this area and this proposed amendment will only add to this problem. Lowering the employment rate in the area by adding more housing and less employment opportunities will increase the local crime rate, another problem that is getting worse. |
| 259780 | Will there be any road works undertaken to off-set the impacts of the additional population? |
| 259905 | I oppose Lendlease's proposed amendment to SREP 30 to have the employment zoning changed to urban. Our local area needs the jobs and employment lands not more housing and associated traffic congestion. |
Final Documents
- Finalisation Report
- Appendix A - Ministers Approval to Amend the Plan
- Appendix B - Lendlease Request to Amend the Plan
- Appendix C - Employment Development Strategy
- Appendix D - Rec Location of Outer Sydney Orbital
- Appendix E - Maps
- Appendix F - Response to Submissions
- Appendix G - Revised Flood Modelling and Evacuation Report
- Appendix H - Strategic Bush Fire Study
- srep 30 st marys amendment 3 response to submissions 2018 08 03
- srep 30 st marys amendment 3 response to submissions appendix 4
- srep 30 st marys amendment 3 response to submissions appendix 5
- srep 30 st marys amendment 3 response to submissions appendix 6