Land gets rezoned (upwards) all the time...is it possible to be downgraded?

I've never heard about this before so maybe I'm just ignorant on the topic.

Anyway I noticed this block is zoned R4 on the NSW govt website:



However in the council's strategic plan which was published not long ago, it's listed as low density:



So my question is:

1) Can zones be downgraded? Or;

2) Can councils override state government zoning...and this is what I'm seeing?

As I said I've always heard about land being rezoned from low to high but I've never seen it the other way around. Is this a normal thing or have I totally misunderstood what I'm seeing here?

 

The council plan becomes irrelevant if the state change things.

The Sutherland Shire council fought development for years, state gov said anywhere in a certain radius can now be high density up to 6-7 storey..........

Regarding down zoning, yes this can also happen with changes to flood mapping, the result being that you may no longer be able to obtain a building permit.
If it is a change to flood zoning there probably isn't compensation for the change either....

 

This isn't a flood zone though.

What I'm talking about is the opposite. The state plan has this as R4. It's the council that has a totally different plan. Canterbury-Bankstown strategic plan calls for massive zoning changes, with lots being downgraded from R4 to what appears to be...R2 or R3.

 

Did it actually change zoning, ie is it still R4 but simply now has a more stringent height restriction on it so it's labled as low rise housing.

In Perth I can confirm that areas have had density reduced between various town planning schemes by Councils. Often it's to fix up some poor planning decisions in the past and offer a more targeted density. For example they may have rezoned a large area all medium density and then in more recent times rezoned it again with some high density at epicentre (train station, shopping centre) then a ring of medium density and then a ring of low density. The line between medium and low may change.

We also have a council that I have developed with a block that was high density which govt defined as up to 4 storeys but the council had a policy which limited it to 2 storeys.

They also have a policy to cater for a transition in density or heights next to blocks with a lower zoning. It looks like that block in particular might be next to another lower zoning? In Perth some councils would put lower height limits on those blocks to help transition heights to the lower density next door to reduce the impact on them.

 

Yes, this is what I had a feeling might be happening. I think you're right.

So maybe it's still R4 zoned, but they're making it more strict what R4 really means in THEIR council area?

Why not just move it to R3 or R2 then? Isn't leaving it R4 but with a bunch of restrictions that effectively make it an R3 or R2 a super confusing way to do it?

My (totally ignorant guess) is that getting it changed properly is really, really hard to do even for the council as they have to battle it out with the state and get through lots of red tape, so it's just easier to leave it and put in a bunch of caveats?

 

It certainly is easier for councils to put height restrictions on than to change the zoning BUT there are also other upsides
- have a policy where it's a 2 storey limit but if you amalgamate blocks then it might be 3 storey
- the higher density allows smaller blocks but together with the height restrictions means that developers create a more diverse type of housing. For example instead of putting in a 3 storey apartment block at current density or lowering density and building 3 three bedroom townhouses, the developer instead builds 5 of two bedroom townhouses giving an affordable entry point into the area without being in an apartment
- height restriction policies can be changed ad hoc whereas zoning can take years

 

All makes a ton of sense, thanks! This explains why after a short round of public consultation they were so easily / freely able to just tweak things around. I remember thinking...that seemed too easy? But now I can see why based on what you said.

E.g.

 

The SEPP is a broadbrush approach by the State to mandate controls over density - it will say that X is a higher density zone. That doesn't mean all of the area is a higher density but that the area must provide sufficient land to achieve that density.

The Council is responsible to deliver on the density via the LEP which is a more locally honed document. It requires a planning and rezoning proposal, community consultation, then Ministerial Consent. It is then published on the State Government Planning or Legislation Portals.

 

Brilliant, that explains it very nicely! Thanks

 

Im no expert on this, but have followed land dynamics in a few Sydney areas.

Theres a few proposals for this around Sydney that I know of:

- Moorebank; has a lot of zoning proposed from R4 to R3. The feasibilities don't work as well for apartments, but the feasibilities are great for townies. Interestingly similar block sizes with DA's for apartments (20+) trade at ~20% discounts to similar R3 sites (10-15 townies). Liverpool Council's planning documents show pockets of Moorebank allowed for rezoning back down to R3 to improve feasibilities.

- Canterbury council is doing a merger of LEP's between Bankstown and Canterbury. Canterbury has a LOT of R3, which is the same as R2 in Bankstown. The merger of LEP is triggering lots of rezones there. I'd be pretty upset about this (if I were a landowner), as R3 lots are quite powerful under the housing code now and have seen big uplifts in 'productivity' of land as a result.

Separately, an R3 lot in Bardwell/Turrella vs Arncliffe is < half the actual dwelling density (they are neighbouring suburbs with the same council). I.e. its very different. Arncliffe got rezoned a couple years ago under SEPP and their medium density was refreshed to 2021 definitions (i.e. 3-6 levels). There'd be examples of similar differences in dwelling productivity across the city.

R2, R3, R4 mean very different things in different LEPs. Its very high level, and the specifics of Building Heights, FSR (and to a lower extent, DCP's etc) are more important in determining what is actually achievable on a site.

The R4 in the current LEP may actually allow for lower dwelling density than the SEPP plan (medium density).