There has been an ongoing debate in one sector of the Palerang rural residential community over whether or not the proposed E4 (Environmental Living) zoning in the Palerang Local Environmental Plan is appropriate, the alternative being the R5 (Large Lot Residential) zone. You can read more about specific issues in other posts (Rural Residential Zoning Objectives, Much Ado About Nothing, Lost in Translation, PLEP Land Use Zones). All manner of hypothetical arguments have been presented, but they all skirt the real issue. So let’s cut to the chase.
What people must decide, before jumping on this bandwagon, is whether or not they are willing to curtail their present rural activities, when it is determined that these activities are incompatible with residential amenity, or whether they feel that any residential development in the area should be consistent with the preservation or enhancement of the existing character of the area.
Today, in the YLEP 1(d) zone, residential development is constrained by several zone objectives, so that the development must be consistent with the existing character of the area. E4 zoning provides a similar level of protection for the existing character of the area. R5 zoning, however, would involve a paradigm shift to a development model where residential amenity prevailed, so that where there was conflict between residential amenity and the existing character of the area, residential amenity would hold sway.
All other arguments are peripheral to this central issue. Pretty much any other problem can be resolved, one way or another, either now or in the future, but once this basic die is cast, the direction for future planning and development in the rural residential areas is set.
Quite simply:
| E4 | → | Existing character prevails over residential development or amenity |
| R5 | → | Residential development or amenity prevails over existing character |