Table 22: Constrained and non-constrained vacant land stocks (ha

Table 21: Industrial lands future lands needs assessment (2021-2041)

Precinct Net increase (sqm) Net demand for land (ha)

Low Medium High Low Medium High

Ashby working waterfront Goodwood island - working waterfront Harwood island industrial Harwood island working waterfront Harwood island working waterfront, River St Ilarwill industrial Iluka industrial Iluka waterfront Junction Hill industrial Koolkhan North Grafton South Grafton industrial Townsend industrial Tyndale industrial Yamba industrial Yamba waterfront

Total

Source: HillPDA 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

107 142 185 0.0 0.0 0.1

69 138 218 0.0 279 538 845 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

3,035 4,129 5,473 1.0 615 826 1,086 0.2 465 1,227 2,125 0.2 12,982 18,264 24,694 4.3 1.4 1.8 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.7 6.1 8.2

5,957 8,829 12,299 2.0

2.9 4.1 25,675 40,189 57,643 8.6 13.4 19.2 4,327 6,577 9,292 1.4 333 482 662 0.1 2.2 3.1 0.2 0.2

9,605 13,406 18,042 3.2 0 0 0 0.0

4.5 6.0 0.0 0.0

63,449 94,745 132,564 21 32 44

7.6 Industrial lands capacity gap assessment

A capacity gap assessment has been completed for the Clarence Valley LGA. Clarence Valley is projected to require a total of between 21 and 44 hectares of appropriately zoned industrial land to accommodate its forecast floorspace demand. Currently Clarence Valley contains approximately 111 hectares of land that is zoned for industrial purposes and is currently identified as being vacant land. However, the suitability of that land for development is mixed, with some land being constrained. HillPDA undertook a high-level constraints assessment to better understand the amount of vacant land that is unconstrained and considered available for development. This assessment excluded land which was either flood prone, not serviced by water or sewer services, powerlines, environmentally sensitive or its typography is unsuitable for industrial development. This assessment found that of the 111 hectares of vacant land, around 56 hectares or 50% was not constrained and considered available for development. The amount of constrained and non-constrained vacant land stocks for each employment can be seen in Table 22.