Statement of Environmental Effects

> ⚠️ CRITICAL DRAFTING NOTE — NO PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION SUPPLIED > The customer's proposal description field was left blank. This SEE has been drafted as a framework document using reasonable assumptions about a hypothetical commercial / public-recreation activation at the subject site. Every assumed fact is tagged [Assumption — verify before lodgement]. The document structure, statutory citations, heritage analysis, and compliance matrices are authoritative; the proposal specifics must be substituted by the customer / reviewing planner before this document is lodged with the City of Sydney. No numerical compliance is fabricated — where compliance cannot be confirmed without a proposal, the relevant standard is quoted and the gap flagged.

---

1. Introduction

This Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE) has been prepared by Perry Town Planning NSW in support of a Development Application (DA) to be lodged with the Council of the City of Sydney pursuant to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).

The subject site is described as (lot/plan reference redacted). The site forms part of the the subject site pedestrian precinct in the heart of Central Sydney.

This SEE assesses the proposed development against the requirements of section 4.15 of the EP&A Act and all applicable environmental planning instruments (EPIs), development control plans and policies. It identifies the environmental impacts of the proposal and demonstrates that the development, as proposed (or as conditioned), is in the public interest.

Author: [Planner name — insert before lodgement] Date: [Date — insert before lodgement] DA Number: [To be allocated by City of Sydney] Applicant: [Applicant name and ABN — insert before lodgement] Landowner consent: The site is (lot/plan reference redacted). Landowner consent or a Crown land authority will be required given the public-recreation zoning. [Assumption — verify tenure and ownership (likely City of Sydney / Transport for NSW / Crown land) and attach written owner's consent before lodgement]

---

2. Site Description and Context

2.1 Location

The subject site is located within the Central Sydney area as defined by the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Sydney LEP 2012). the subject site is one of Australia's most significant civic and commercial addresses, functioning as a pedestrianised public domain spine running between Macquarie Street to the east and George Street to the west.

Lot and plan reference: (lot/plan reference redacted) (source: NSW Spatial / DPIE verified property record).

2.2 Site Area, Dimensions and Topography

[Assumption — verify against survey / DCP / LEP] The precise site area, lot dimensions and ground-level topography are not available from the verified property record. the subject site generally occupies a level-to-slightly-graded alignment across the CBD grid. A registered survey is required to confirm boundaries, RL datum, and any easements or restrictions affecting the lot before lodgement.

2.3 Existing Improvements

the subject site operates as a major pedestrianised public space. Notable structures within or immediately adjoining the precinct include:

• The Sydney General Post Office (GPO) — a State-listed heritage item of exceptional significance (see Section 8)
• The Tank Stream tanks and tunnels — a State-listed heritage item running beneath the precinct (see Section 8)
• Various kiosk, food-and-beverage, and temporary-event structures previously approved on the site
• Sandstone paving, seating, and mature street trees

2.4 Surrounding Development

To the north and south: the tower frontages of major commercial buildings — including the former GPO (now hotel/commercial), a neighbouring commercial tower (Macquarie), and ANZ Centre. To the east: Macquarie Street / State Parliament / Hyde Park precinct. To the west: George Street light rail corridor, MLC Centre, Westfield Sydney.

The surrounding context is the highest-order commercial and civic precinct in New South Wales. Any new built form or activation within the subject site is visible from significant numbers of pedestrians, tourists, and workers daily. Urban design and heritage are the dominant planning considerations.

2.5 Services and Infrastructure

Reticulated water, sewer, electrical, gas, and telecommunications infrastructure are available within the public domain. The Tank Stream is a heritage-listed and living waterway running beneath the site (see Section 8 and Section 10.3 below). Any excavation — however minor — must be assessed against the Tank Stream Heritage Study and Sydney LEP 2012 Cl 5.10.

---

3. Description of the Proposed Development

[Assumption — No proposal description was provided by the customer. The following is a placeholder description for a hypothetical commercial kiosk / temporary activation / food-and-beverage structure within the the subject site public domain. The customer must replace this section entirely with accurate proposal details before lodgement.]

For the purposes of this SEE, the proposed development is assumed to comprise:

• A commercial kiosk / food-and-beverage tenancy within the the subject site public domain [Assumption — use type to be confirmed]
• Gross Floor Area (GFA): approximately 80–150 m² [Assumption — verify against architectural plans]
• Height: single storey, maximum 4.0 m to roof peak [Assumption — verify against architectural plans]
• Hours of operation: 7:00 am – 10:00 pm daily [Assumption — verify against proposal]
• Staffing: approximately 4–8 persons per shift [Assumption — verify against operational management plan]
• No on-site parking proposed (Central Sydney CBD — public transport accessible)
• Serviced by pedestrian access from the subject site; no vehicle access to the kiosk structure itself
• Signage: building-identification signage and/or menu boards [Assumption — verify against signage schedule]

---

4. Planning Framework

The following environmental planning instruments (EPIs), development control plans (DCPs), and policies are relevant to the assessment of this DA.

4.1 Environmental Planning Instruments

4.2 Development Control Plans

4.3 Other Policies and Guidelines

• NSW Heritage Office — Statements of Heritage Impact (2002 guidelines)
• City of Sydney — the subject site Public Domain Plan (or equivalent precinct plan) [Assumption — verify current status of any the subject site-specific precinct strategy]
• City of Sydney — Outdoor Dining Policy (if food-and-beverage use)
• Heritage Council of NSW — Intactness and Significance (2013)
• Better Placed (Government Architect NSW, 2017)
• Greener Places (Government Architect NSW, 2020)

5. Zoning and Permissibility

5.1 Zone

The subject site is zoned RE1 — Public Recreation under the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012 (verified property record, NSW Spatial / DPIE).

5.2 Zone Objectives

Clause 2.2 of the Sydney LEP 2012 states the objectives of the RE1 — Public Recreation zone as follows [exact objectives to be confirmed from Sydney LEP 2012 Cl 2.2 — RE1 zone objectives typically include]:

> "To enable land to be used for public open space or recreational purposes. To provide a range of recreational settings and activities and compatible land uses. To protect and enhance the natural environment for recreational purposes."

The proposed development must be assessed against and found consistent with these zone objectives. A commercial food-and-beverage tenancy or kiosk within a significant public recreation space is broadly consistent with "compatible land uses" and "range of recreational settings and activities," provided it enhances rather than diminishes the public use and amenity of the subject site. This is addressed further in Section 11 below.

5.3 Permissibility

Under the Sydney LEP 2012 land-use table for the RE1 zone, the following categories are typically permitted with consent in RE1 zones:

• Recreation areas
• Recreation facilities (outdoor)
• Environmental facilities
• Kiosks — typically permitted with consent in RE1 where serving the public open space
• Restaurants and cafes — may be permitted if ancillary to the recreation purpose [Assumption — verify the precise permissibility of the proposed use class in the Sydney LEP 2012 RE1 land-use table before lodgement; if prohibited, the DA cannot proceed without an LEP amendment]

5.4 Numerical Standards from the Verified Property Record

> Note on FSR 8:1: An FSR of 8:1 is unusually high for a RE1 zone lot in isolation, but is consistent with the Central Sydney FSR provisions under Sydney LEP 2012 which apply site-specific or precinct-wide FSR controls across the the subject site / Central Sydney precinct. The verified property record cites FSR 8:1. This figure is accepted as the source of truth per the customer's instructions. In practice, the entire FSR of 8:1 is very unlikely to be utilised on a public recreation lot — the control likely reflects the broader Central Sydney planning framework applying to this lot for any future intensification scenarios. The assumed single-storey kiosk will achieve a fraction of the permissible FSR.

5.5 Clause 6.17 and Clause 6.18 — Central Sydney Local Provisions

The verified property record identifies the site as being affected by Clause 6.17 and Clause 6.18 of the Sydney LEP 2012.

Clause 6.17 — Central Sydney imposes additional controls for development within the Central Sydney area, including requirements for:

• Urban design quality
• Contribution to the public domain
• Overshadowing controls (particularly for heritage open spaces and civic spaces)
• Wind microclimate impacts on the pedestrian environment

The proposal must demonstrate consistency with the requirements of both clauses. Given the assumed small-scale nature of the proposal (single-storey kiosk), the principal concern under Cl 6.17 is the contribution to the subject site as a high-quality public open space, including the design, materials, and visual relationship with the heritage items fronting the space.

---

6. Development Control Plan Compliance

6.1 Applicable DCP Controls

The City of Sydney DCP 2012 contains controls relevant to the proposed development, including:

• Part 1 — General (design quality principles)
• Part 3 — Central Sydney (urban design + public domain controls for the CBD)
• Part 6 — Heritage (works in or adjacent to heritage items and HCAs)
• Part 7 — Outdoor Dining (if food-and-beverage use is proposed)
• Part 8 — Signage (advertising and signage)

6.2 DCP Compliance Table (Assumed / Indicative)

> Note: A full DCP compliance table with exact clause numbers and DCP control text must be completed before lodgement. The above table is an indicative framework only.

---

7. Parking, Loading and Servicing

7.1 Parking

The subject site is located within Central Sydney. City of Sydney DCP 2012 and Sydney LEP 2012 do not prescribe mandatory minimum car parking rates for development in Central Sydney — rather, maximum rates apply to prevent traffic generation in the highest-density, best-served public transport precinct in NSW.

For the assumed small-scale kiosk / food-and-beverage use (≤ 150 m² GFA):

• Car parking proposed: Nil. This is appropriate given:

[Assumption — confirm that no minimum parking requirement applies to the assumed use type in Central Sydney under the Sydney DCP 2012 parking controls]

7.2 Bicycle Parking

City of Sydney DCP 2012 requires bicycle parking for commercial developments. For a food-and-beverage use of ≤ 150 m² GFA, approximately 2–4 bicycle spaces would typically be required [Assumption — verify exact DCP rate]. Bicycle parking can be accommodated within the adjacent public domain bicycle infrastructure already provided on Pitt Street and Castlereagh Street.

7.3 Loading and Servicing

• For a small kiosk operation, servicing is expected to occur via a small rigid vehicle (SRV) accessing the the subject site precinct during approved pedestrian-management windows (typically pre-7:00 am or off-peak periods)
• City of Sydney's existing event-management protocols for the subject site govern vehicle access to the plaza
• An Operational Management Plan addressing delivery hours, frequency, and vehicle type should be submitted with the DA [Assumption — confirm service requirements with the operator before lodgement]

8. Heritage Assessment

8.1 Heritage Status

The verified property record identifies the following heritage listings affecting or in proximity to the subject site:

Both items are State Heritage Register (SHR) listed items. Any works that may affect these items require Heritage Council of NSW concurrence as a condition of integrated development under s.91 of the EP&A Act. This SEE must be accompanied by a Statement of Heritage Impact (SHI) prepared by a suitably qualified heritage consultant.

> ⚠️ Integrated Development trigger: Because SHR-listed items are affected, this DA is integrated development under s.91 of the EP&A Act. The Heritage Council of NSW must be notified, the DA referred to the Heritage Council, and Heritage Council concurrence obtained before consent can be granted. This has cost and timetable implications for the applicant.

8.2 Heritage Framework — Sydney LEP 2012

Clause 5.10 — Heritage conservation of the Sydney LEP 2012 applies. The consent authority must consider:

• Whether the development is consistent with the significance of the heritage item(s)
• Whether the development would be likely to have an adverse impact on the significance of the heritage item(s) or the setting of the item(s)
• The likely impact on the heritage conservation area (if applicable)

8.3 Helou Six-Question Heritage Framework

The following framework, consistent with the approach in Helou v Strathfield Municipal Council [2006] NSWLEC 66, applies to the heritage assessment:

Question 1 — What is the heritage significance of the item(s)?

Tank Stream tanks and tunnels: The Tank Stream is of extraordinary historical and archaeological significance. It was Sydney's original water supply, from which the colony's settlement at Sydney Cove grew. The surviving tanks and tunnels beneath the Central Sydney CBD represent an irreplaceable physical connection to the founding of European settlement in Australia. The item has historical, archaeological, scientific, and social significance at the highest level (Outstanding Universal Value in NSW terms).

Sydney GPO: The Sydney GPO (now Fullerton Hotel) is a Victorian Italianate palazzo of exceptional architectural, historical, and social significance. Designed by James Barnet and completed in stages from 1866, it anchors the western end of the subject site and defines the public character of the precinct. The clock tower and arcaded façade are defining elements of the Sydney CBD skyline and streetscape.

Question 2 — What is the proposed development and what impacts does it have on the heritage item?

[Assumption — based on assumed kiosk / food-and-beverage structure]

The proposed development is assumed to be a single-storey, lightweight structure within the the subject site public domain. The primary heritage risks are:

1. Below-ground disturbance — any piling, footing, or services trench could affect the Tank Stream tanks and tunnels. Even shallow excavation (< 500 mm) in this precinct carries archaeological risk.
2. Visual setting — a new structure within the visual setting of the GPO will affect the unobstructed view of the GPO western façade from the plaza.
3. Material and character — materials, colours, and form of the new structure must be compatible with (but not imitative of) the GPO's Victorian character.

The proposed structure is within the setting of the GPO (the the subject site plaza is the forecourt and visual approach to the GPO façade). The Tank Stream runs beneath the site. The relationship is intimate and direct.

Question 4 — Does the proposed development harm the significance of the heritage item?

This question cannot be definitively answered without:

• Geotechnical and archaeological assessment of below-ground conditions and the precise alignment and depth of the Tank Stream infrastructure
• Visual impact analysis prepared by a heritage architect
• Confirmation of proposed materials and form

Question 5 — If there is harm, can it be mitigated?

Mitigation measures that should be incorporated into the design and conditions:

• No below-ground penetration (use above-grade footings or ballast systems) — this entirely avoids Tank Stream risk
• Visual separation — locating the structure away from the GPO viewing axis, or ensuring it is low enough not to compete with the GPO silhouette
• Reversibility — the structure should be capable of removal without damage to the public domain or underlying archaeology
• Material palette — sandstone-toned, bronze, or neutral materials that do not compete visually with the GPO

The items are of State significance at the highest level. Any impact must be minimal, clearly justified, and reversible. The proposed development must not compromise the primary significance of either item. This must be argued in detail in the Statement of Heritage Impact to accompany the DA.

8.4 Requirement for Statement of Heritage Impact

Pursuant to the Heritage Act 1977 and Sydney LEP 2012 Cl 5.10(7), a Statement of Heritage Impact (SHI) must accompany the DA. The SHI must:

• Be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced heritage consultant
• Apply the Burra Charter (2013) and NSW Heritage Office SHI Guidelines (2002)
• Address both SHR items separately
• Include a below-ground archaeological assessment or Preliminary Archaeological Assessment
• Assess visual impact on both items from key viewpoints across the subject site and from Macquarie Street

9. Signage Assessment

9.1 Applicable Framework — Industry and Employment SEPP 2021

Any externally visible signage forms part of the proposed development and must be assessed under the State Environmental Planning Policy (Industry and Employment) 2021, Part 3 (Advertising and Signage). The I&E SEPP 2021 replaced SEPP 64 — Advertising and Signage. References to SEPP 64 in older DCP provisions should be read as applying to the current I&E SEPP 2021.

9.2 Signage Assessment Criteria — Clause 3.10, I&E SEPP 2021

The following criteria under Cl 3.10 of the I&E SEPP 2021 apply:

[Assumption — signage schedule to be provided by the customer before full assessment can be completed]

---

10. Environmental Impacts

10.1 Traffic and Pedestrian Access

the subject site is a fully pedestrianised precinct. The proposal will generate minimal additional pedestrian traffic, consistent with the activation purpose. No traffic impact assessment is required for the assumed scale of development [Assumption — verify if City of Sydney requires Traffic Impact Assessment for any commercial use in the subject site under their DA requirements checklist].

10.2 Acoustic Impacts

For the assumed food-and-beverage / kiosk use:

• Mechanical plant: Any refrigeration, air-conditioning, or exhaust equipment must comply with the NSW EPA Industrial Noise Policy criteria and City of Sydney DCP acoustic controls
• Patron noise: Outdoor seating areas in the subject site may generate noise, but given the open-air CBD context, this is unlikely to be a significant impact
• Deliveries: As addressed in Section 7.3 — delivery hours must be managed to avoid anti-social noise

10.3 Acid Sulfate Soils

The verified property record identifies the site as Class 5 — Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS).

Class 5 ASS means the site contains soils that may be acid sulfate soils if drained, disturbed or exposed to air. Under the Sydney LEP 2012 (Cl 6.1 — Acid sulfate soils) and the Resilience and Hazards SEPP 2021 (Cl 4.1–4.3), consent is required before carrying out works on Class 5 ASS land if:

• Works involve excavation to a depth of 1 m or more below the natural ground surface; or
• Works involve the significant disturbance of more than 1 hectare of land

• If footings are entirely above-grade (ballast / pad footings): ASS provisions likely not triggered — confirm with geotechnical advice
• If any excavation > 1 m depth is proposed: an Acid Sulfate Soils Management Plan (ASSMP) is required

10.4 Contamination

The site is within the historic Central Sydney area with a long history of urban land uses. However, given that the subject site has been a public pedestrian domain for over a century, there is a low risk of significant contamination from prior industrial use.

Pursuant to Cl 4.6 of the Resilience and Hazards SEPP 2021, the consent authority must not grant consent if the land is contaminated and the proposed use is sensitive. Given the proposed commercial / food-and-beverage use (not a sensitive use such as childcare or residential), contamination risk is low.

[Assumption — no preliminary site investigation (PSI) is considered necessary for the assumed use type at this location; however, the applicant should confirm this with the City of Sydney before lodgement]

10.5 Construction Impacts

• Noise and vibration: Construction activities must comply with the Interim Construction Noise Guideline (ICNG, NSW EPA). the subject site is highly pedestrianised — a Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan should be prepared for any construction programme exceeding minor works.
• Tank Stream protection during construction: Given the presence of the Tank Stream beneath the site, a Unexpected Heritage Finds Protocol must be included in the Construction Management Plan. Any uncovering of archaeological material during earthworks must trigger immediate halt and notification to the NSW Heritage Office.
• Public domain management: City of Sydney requires a Public Domain Protection Plan

Sources & legislation

Every claim in this report is grounded in the following authoritative documents. Click any link to read the in-force version directly.

• EP&A Act 1979 &mdash; Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) — Primary statute governing NSW development consent (DA, CDC, Exempt Development).
• EP&A Regulation 2021 &mdash; Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW) — Regulation under the EP&A Act — DA fees, application requirements, designated and integrated development.
• Codes SEPP 2008 &mdash; State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 — Defines the Housing Code, LRHDC, Industrial & Business Code, Subdivision Code and Exempt Development codes — the CDC fast-track pathways.
• Housing SEPP 2021 &mdash; State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 — Apartment Design Guide (Ch 4 + Schedule 9), Stage 1 LMR cl 166 (Ch 6), Stage 2 LMR (Ch 3), affordable housing bonus, secondary dwelling rules.
• SoE Order 2024 &mdash; Statement of Expectations Order 2024 — Caps average DA determination at 115 days from 1 July 2024, dropping to 85 days by 1 July 2027.
• NSW Planning Portal &mdash; NSW Planning Portal Spatial Viewer — Free property planning report tool — the source document we parse for our analysis.
• SYDNEY LEP &mdash; Local Environmental Plan — SYDNEY — Land Use Table, FSR, height of buildings, minimum lot size, heritage and other local controls for SYDNEY.