What is the issue?
The draft Northern Beaches LEP proposes minimum lot-size controls for the deferred lands that are substantially larger than the controls applying to comparable land elsewhere in the Northern Beaches.
NSW State Land Use Plan (State Plan) has been published in August 2026. It is the NSW Government's first state-wide land use plan that provides the overarching planning vision for the growth of NSW over the next 20 years. It can be found at: NSW State Land Use Plan (State Plan)
WUFA considers that the minimum lot sizes applied to the deferred lands should take into consideration the State Plan and match the standards applying to equivalent zoned land elsewhere in the Northern Beaches, rather than continuing an outdated control that effectively sterilises otherwise developable land.
History
The restrictive planning regime of approximately one dwelling per 20 hectares (200,000m2) was introduced as an interim planning measure through Interim Development Order No. 51 (IDO 51) in 1974, in the context of planning for the Narrabeen Lagoon catchment. The Deferred Lands have now remained under a special or interim planning regime for more than 50 years.
IDO 51 originally covered approximately 5,900 acres. Two of the major landholdings within that area were:
- Hawker-Siddeley – approximately 2,394 acres (969 ha)
- Department of Lands – approximately 2,096 acres (848 ha)
Those two holdings alone represented approximately 4,490 acres (1,817 ha) of the original IDO 51 area.
Hawker-Siddeley's proposal to subdivide its land into five-acre lots appears to have been an important catalyst for the introduction of IDO 51. Subsequently, as part of the arrangements associated with the development of what became Austlink Business Park, the majority of the Hawker-Siddeley holding was transferred into public ownership. Much of that land ultimately became part of Garigal National Park.
A substantial proportion of the land that the original interim controls sought to protect from subdivision is now permanently protected in public ownership. Yet the remaining privately owned land continues to be subject to a planning regime derived from an interim control introduced more than 50 years ago.
What does the planning evidence show?
Two planning authorities have already assessed the appropriateness of the historical controls — in their own words.
1. Council's own assessor — DA2018/0401 (2018)
"…no discernible public benefit in maintaining the planning controls adopted by this plan."
— Northern Beaches Council Assessment Report, DA2018/0401
2. NSW Department of Planning — concurrence for DA2013/0587 / MOD2019/0226, Bundaleer Street, Belrose (9 July 2020)
"…there is no public benefit in maintaining the maximum of 1 dwelling per 20-hectares of site area development standard."
— Department of Planning concurrence letter, 9 July 2020
Where the public-benefit test comes from
The historic housing density control for Locality C8 – Belrose North under the Warringah Local Environmental Plan 2000 provides:
Housing density
The maximum housing density is 1 dwelling per 20 hectares of site area.
Development consent may nevertheless be granted for development that exceeds that standard. Where the proposal exceeds the standard by more than 10%, the consent authority must consider:
- the impact of the resulting housing density on State or regional environmental planning; and
- the public benefit of maintaining the planning controls adopted by this plan.
Where the standard would be contravened by more than 10 per cent, consent also requires the concurrence of the Director.
Why this is important
The Warringah LEP 2000 does not require the one dwelling per 20-hectare standard to be applied in every circumstance. Instead, it expressly requires the consent authority to consider whether there is a public benefit in maintaining that planning control.
This is a significant distinction. It recognises that planning controls should only be retained where they continue to achieve a legitimate planning objective.
These two separate decisions demonstrate that the relevant planning authorities have each accepted that the historic control should not automatically continue to apply where it no longer serves a genuine planning purpose.
What are the current minimum lot sizes in the Northern Beaches?
WUFA recommends applying to the deferred lands the principles outlined in the State Plan and utilise the same minimum lot-size standards that apply to equivalent zones elsewhere in the Northern Beaches under the current Local Environmental Plans.
WUFA recommends consistent controls for the deferred area
To maintain consistency with the existing Local Environmental Plans across the Northern Beaches, WUFA recommends that the draft Northern Beaches LEP adopt the following minimum lot sizes for land within the deferred area.
| Zone | Proposed minimum lot size |
|---|---|
| RU4 | 20,000 m² (As proposed for RU4 zoned land in Terrey Hills/Duffys Forest) |
| R5 | 1,000 m² (Currently 4,000m^2 in Pittwater LEP but make it 1,000m^2 as per the direction in the new State Plan) |
| R2 | 600 m² (As proposed for R2 zoned land in Belrose) |
What does the State Plan require?
Page 81 of Appendix D — Housing and Employment Guidance (Northern Beaches) states:
“While medium and high-density development should be focused in well-located areas, the Northern Beaches, with its larger lot sizes across the suburbs of its LGA, lower density profile and its higher feasibility, make it a prime LGA for additional low-rise diversity including dual occupancies, terraces, town houses and small apartment buildings. Council must review its permissibility and planning controls, including smaller lot size controls, in areas outside the LMR Housing Areas for low-rise housing typologies to encourage this type of development in its LGA.”
Why does this matter?
- Minimum lot sizes affect subdivision, boundary adjustments and the future development potential of land.
- Unnecessarily large standards can prevent practical development even where environmental and infrastructure constraints can be addressed through the development assessment process.
- Comparable land should be subject to comparable controls unless Council identifies a clear, site-specific planning reason for different treatment.
- Consistent controls improve fairness, planning certainty and confidence for landowners.
- Minimum lot-size mapping can materially affect property value and should therefore be supported by transparent evidence.
- Northern Beaches Council must follow the strategic direction provided by the Department of Planning in the State Plan.