Decision on rules around secondary dwellings in Hills rural areas imminent

A decision on a long running push to allow secondary dwellings to be built on rural properties in The Hills district is set to be made by the Independent Planning Commision.

Hills Councillors (L to R) Robyn Preston and Mayor Michelle Byrne with landowner, Mr Rocco Polistina at his Annangrove property. Mr Polistina would like the rules to be changed around secondary dwellings.

• Man accused of violent break and enter appears in court
• Hills guide to what’s open from July 1
• Glenhaven artist rules the reno on House Rules

The Independent Planning Panel is set to make a decision on whether to allow secondary dwelling to be built on rural properties in The Hills.

The change would remove the allowance for the second building to be 20 per cent of the total floor area of the main building. The construction of dwellings would be up to 130sq on a rural property.

This week the Independent Planning Panel met with The Hills Shire Council and the Department of Planning and it is believed a decision is imminent.

Hills Councillors Robyn Preston and Mayor Michelle Byrne with landowner, Mr Rocco Polistina looking over his D/A on his Annangrove property. Picture: Simon Bullard

The State Planning Panel knocked back the proposal in February but the Hills Shire Council subsequently appealed the decision.

Mayor Michelle Byrne said the proposal is a “more reasonable and an equitable outcome that responds to the demand for a greater diversity of housing choices in our rural areas”.

Cr Brooke Collins said the amendment would be a “game changer” for residents in rural suburbs.

“The people that benefit from this are from all walks of life,” he said.

“Young people, old people and everyone in between will be able to call The Hills home.”

Cr Collins said he was encouraged by the meeting with the Independent Planning Commission.

An example of a secondary dwelling that would be allowed under the proposed new rules. Picture: Hills Shire Council

The Department of Planning, Industry and Environment issued a Gateway Determination rejecting the proposal in February because it did not demonstrate “sufficient strategic or site specific merit” or “ bushfire protection”.