Development Assessment Panel

 

Business Paper

 

date of meeting:

 

Thursday 26 April 2018

location:

 

Function Room

Port Macquarie-Hastings Council

17 Burrawan Street

Port Macquarie

time:

 

2:00pm

 


Development Assessment Panel

 

CHARTER

 


 

 

1.0     OBJECTIVES

 

To assist in managing Council's development assessment function by providing independent and expert determinations of development applications that fall outside of staff delegations.

 

 

2.0     KEY FUNCTIONS

 

·                To review development application reports and conditions;

·                To determine development  applications  outside  of staff delegations;

·                To  refer development  applications to  Council for  determination  where necessary;

·                To provide a forum for objectors and applicants to make submissions on applications before  the Development Assessment Panel (DAP);

·                To maintain transparency in the determination of development applications.

 

Delegated Authority of Panel

 

Pursuant to Section 377 of the Local Government Act, 1993 delegation to:

·                Determine development applications under Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 having regard to the relevant environmental planning instruments, development control plans and Council policies.

·                Vary, modify or release restrictions as to use and/or covenants created by Section 88B instruments under the Conveyancing Act 1919 in relation to development applications for subdivisions being considered by the panel.

·                Determine Koala Plans of Management under State Environmental Planning Policy 44 - Koala Habitat Protection associated with development applications being considered by the Panel.

 

Noting the trigger to escalate decision making to Council as highlighted in section 5.2.

 

 

3.0      MEMBERSHIP

 

3.1      Voting Members

 

·                Two independent external members. One of the independent external members to be the Chairperson.

·                Group Manager Development Assessment (alternate - Director Development & Environment or Development Assessment Planner)

 

The independent external members shall have expertise in one or more of the following areas: planning, architecture, heritage, the environment, urban design, economics, traffic and transport, law, engineering, government and public administration.

 

3.2      Non-Voting Members

 

·                Not applicable

3.3      Obligations of members

 

·                Members must act faithfully and diligently and in accordance with    this Charter.

·                Members must comply with Council's Code of Conduct.

·                Except as required to properly perform their duties, DAP members must not disclose any confidential information (as advised by Council) obtained in connection with the DAP functions.

·                Members will have read and be familiar with the documents and information provided by Council prior to attending a DAP                                              meeting.

·                Members must act in accordance with Council's Workplace Health and Safety Policies and Procedures

·                External members of the Panel are not authorised to speak to the media on behalf of Council. Council officers that are members of the Committee are bound by the existing operational delegations in relation to speaking to the media.

·                Staff members shall not vote on matters before the Panel if they have been the principle author of the development assessment report.

 

3.4      Member Tenure

 

·                The independent external members will be appointed for the term of four (4) years maximum in which the end of the tenure of these members would occur in a cascading arrangement.

 

3.5      Appointment of members

 

·                The independent external members (including the Chair) shall be appointed by the General Manager following an external Expression of Interest process.

·                Staff members of the Panel are in accordance with this Charter.

 

 

4.0     TIMETABLE OF MEETINGS

 

·                The Development Assessment Panel will generally meet on the 1st and 3rd Wednesday each month at 2.00pm at the Port Macquarie offices of Council.

·                Special Meetings of the Panel may be convened by the Director Development & Environment Services with three (3) days notice.

 

 

5.0      MEETING PRACTICES

 

5.1      Meeting Format

 

·                At all Meetings of the Panel the Chairperson shall occupy the Chair and preside. The Chair will be responsible for keeping of order at meetings.

·                Meetings shall be open to the   public.

·                The Panel will hear from applicants and objectors or their r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s .

·                Where considered necessary, the Panel will conduct site inspections which will be open to the public.

 

5.2      Decision Making

 

·                Decisions are to be made by consensus. Where consensus is not possible on any item, that item is to be referred to Council for a decision.

·                All development applications involving a proposed variation to a development standard greater than 10% under Clause 4.6 of the Local Environmental Plan will be considered by the Panel and recommendation made to the Council for a decision.

 

5.3      Quorum

 

·                All members (2 independent external members and 1 staff member) must be present at a meeting to form a quorum.

 

5.4      Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson

 

·                Independent Chair (alternate, second independent member)

 

5.5     Secretariat

 

·                The Director Development &n Environment is to be responsible for ensuring that the Panel has adequate secretariat support. The secretariat will ensure that the business paper and supporting papers are circulated at least three (3) days prior to each meeting. Minutes shall be appropriately approved and circulated to each member within three (3) weeks of a meeting being held.

·                The format of and the preparation and publishing of the Business Paper and Minutes shall be similar to the format for Ordinary Council Meetings.

 

5.6      Recording of decisions

 

·                Minutes will record decisions and how each member votes for each item before the Panel.

 

 

6.0     CONVENING OF “OUTCOME SPECIFIC” WORKING GROUPS

 

Not applicable.

 

 

7.0     CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST

 

·                Members of the Panel must comply with the applicable provisions of Council’s Code of Conduct. It is the personal responsibility of members to comply with the standards in the Code of Conduct and regularly review their personal circumstances with this in mind.

·                Panel members must declare any conflict of interests at the start of each meeting or before discussion of a relevant item or topic. Details of any conflicts of interest should be appropriately minuted. Where members are deemed to have a real or perceived conflict of interest, it may be appropriate they be excused from deliberations on the issue where the conflict of interest may exist. A Panel meeting may be postponed where there is no quorum.

 

 

8.0     LOBBYING

 

·                All members and applicants are to adhere to Council’s Lobbying policy. Outside of scheduled Development Assessment Panel meetings, applicants, their representatives, Councillors, Council staff and the general public are not to lobby Panel members via meetings, telephone conversations, correspondence and the like. Adequate opportunity will be provided at Panel inspections or meetings for applicants, their representatives and the general public to make verbal submissions in relation to Business Paper items.


Development Assessment Panel

 

ATTENDANCE REGISTER

 

 

 

Member

14/02/18

28/02/18

14/03/18

28/03/18

11/04/18

Paul Drake

P

P

P

P

P

Robert Hussey

P

       A

A

P

P

David Crofts

(alternate member)

 

P

P

 

 

Dan Croft

(Acting Director Development & Environment)

Clinton Tink

(Acting GM Development Assessment

(alternates)

- Director Development & Environment

- Development Assessment Planner

P

 

P

 

P

 

 

P

 

 

P

 

 

P

 

Key: P =  Present

         A  =  Absent With Apology

         =  Absent Without Apology

 

 

 


Development Assessment Panel Meeting

Thursday 26 April 2018

 

Items of Business

 

 

Item       Subject                                                                                                      Page

 

01           Acknowledgement of Country............................................................................ 8

02           Apologies......................................................................................................... 8

03           Confirmation of Minutes.................................................................................... 8

04           Disclosures of Interest..................................................................................... 13

05           DA2017 - 1023.1 Agricultural Produce Industry Lot 4 DP 738164, No 511 Fernbak Creek Road, Fernbank Creek............................................................................................... 17

06           Section 4.55 Modification DA2010 - 577.4 - Modification To Subdivision Lot Layout Including Addition Of One (1) Torrens Title Lot - Lot 2 DP 1231106, No. 72 Lorne Road, Kendall    125

07           DA2017 - 1125.1 Two Lot Subdivision and Erection of Four Semi-Detached Dwellings with Strata Subdivision and Two Jetties - Lot 1 DP 833585, 78 Commodore Crescent, Port Macquarie..................................................................................................................... 163

08           DA2018 - 75.1 Two (2) Semi-Detached Dwellings At Lot 132 DP 1229250, 11 Sandy Shores Avenue, Lake Cathie...................................................................................... 261

09           DA2017 - 1110.1 Demolition Of Dwelling And Construction Of New Dwelling - Lot 27 DP 20480, No. 24 Bundella Avenue, Lake Cathie.............................................................. 293

10           DA2017 - 1084.1 Clubhouse - Lot 7054 DP 1074173, No. 12 Maritime Lane (Oxley Oval), Port Macquarie..................................................................................................... 315

11           DA2017 - 1138.1 Dwelling And Secondary Dwelling At Lot 61 DP 1226839, No. 33 Summer Circuit, Lake Cathie........................................................................................ 347

12           Section 4.55 Modification DA2004 - 687.5 To Modify The Hours Of Operation For Existing Sawmill At Lot 1 DP 1065577, Old Kempsey Road, Gum Scrub........................ 365

13           DA2018 - 74.1 Dwelling - Lot 2 DP 1237933, No 122B Camden Head Road, Dunbogan   424  

14           General Business

 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      26/04/2018

Item:          01

Subject:     ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

 

"I acknowledge that we are gathered on Birpai Land. I pay respect to the Birpai Elders both past and present. I also extend that respect to all other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people present."

 

 

Item:          02

Subject:     APOLOGIES

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the apologies received be accepted.

 

 

Item:          03

Subject:     CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Development Assessment Panel Meeting held on 11 April 2018 be confirmed.

 


MINUTES

Development Assessment Panel Meeting

                                                                                                                                  11/04/2018

 

 

 

 

PRESENT

 

Members:

Paul Drake

Robert Hussey

Clinton Tink

 

Other Attendees:

Patrick Galbraith-Robertson

Dan Croft

David Troemel

Andrew Rock

 

 

The meeting opened at 2:05pm.

 

 

01       ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

The Acknowledgement of Country was delivered.

 

 

02       APOLOGIES

Nil.

 

 

03       CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

CONSENSUS:

That the Minutes of the Development Assessment Panel Meeting held on 28 March 2018 be confirmed.

 

 

04      DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

 

Paul Drake tabled a Non-Pecuniary – Less than Significant Interest for Item 06 being DA2018 - 48.  As per the Development Assessment Panel Charter, Paul Drake declared that he had a professional history as a friendly acquaintance of the consultant for the Development Application. Given the nature of the interest, Paul Drake still participated in consideration and voting.

 

 

05       DA2017 - 1116.1 Secondary Dwelling - Lot 4 DP 37760, No. 9 Hastings Street, Port Macquarie

 

Speakers:

Nil.

 

CONSENSUS:

 

That DA 2017 – 1116.1 for a secondary dwelling at Lot 4 DP37760, No. 9 Hastings Street, Wauchope by determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions as amended below:

 

Amend Condition E(4) to state:

 

E(4)     A privacy screen or fence is to be installed on or adjacent to the lot boundary of 9 and 11 Hastings Street. The fence or privacy screen is to extend from the south-western corner rear of the existing dwelling to the south-eastern corner of the proposed secondary dwelling. The fence    or screen is to be a minimum of 1.8m above existing ground level and of solid construction.

 

 

06       DA2018 - 48 - Demolition Of Existing Structures And Erection Of Emergency Services Facility (Ambulance Station) And Lot Consolidation - Lots 26 & 27 DP 37531, 94 - 96 High Street, Wauchope

Paul Drake declared a Non-Pecuniary – Less than Significant Interest in this item, remained in the room and participated in consideration and voting.

 

Speakers:

Stephen Kerr (a)

Matthew McNamara (a)

 

THE PANEL WAS UNABLE TO REACH A CONSENSUS.

 

FOR: Paul Drake and Clinton Tink

 

That DA2018 – 48.1 for demolition of existing structures and erection of emergency services facility (ambulance station) and lot consolidation at Lot 26 & 27, DP 37531, No. 94 - 96 High Street, Wauchope, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions as amended in accordance with the agreement of the applicant:

 

Add Condition D(10) to state:

 

D(10)   Prior to occupation, a 1.5m high solid screen is to be erected along the outer edge kerb of the western exit driveway, commencing at the edge of the building and ceasing at the point, where the driveway changes and starts to narrow. The screen is to minimise vehicle headlight glare impacting on the adjoining neighbour to the west.

 

AGAINST: Robert Hussey

 

The dissenting recommendation was:

 

That DA2018 – 48.1 for demolition of existing structures and erection of emergency services facility (ambulance station) and lot consolidation at Lot 26 & 27, DP 37531, No. 94 - 96 High Street, Wauchope, be determined by refusing consent for the following reasons:

  1. The overall approval is not supported with the inclusion of the charged stormwater and onsite detention (OSD) requiring mechanical pump out to High Street when a more environmentally acceptable system is likely via a gravity discharge system via a drainage easement to Bruxner Street. This outcome would be in the public interest.
  2. The visual impact of the bulk and scale of the skillion roof, which could be reduced on the southern elevation.

 

IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 5.2 OF THE DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT CHARTER, THIS ITEM IS NOW REFERRED TO COUNCIL FOR A DECISION.

 

 

 

07       GENERAL BUSINESS

 

 

07.01     On-site Inspection Access Cards

 

Clinton Tink undertook to follow up on identity/access cards for Panel Members when inspecting sites.

 

 

07.02     Non-consensus of Applications

Clinton Tink provided copies on how previous non-consensus Development Assessment Panel applications were reported to Council.

 

 

 

The meeting closed at 3:30pm.

 

 

 

 

 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      26/04/2018

Item:          04

Subject:     DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Disclosures of Interest be presented

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST DECLARATION

 

 

Name of Meeting:     ………………………………………………………………………..

 

Meeting Date:           ………………………………………………………………………..

 

Item Number:            ………………………………………………………………………..

 

Subject:                      ………………………………………………………………………..

                                    …………………………………………………….……………...…..

 

 

I, ..................................................................................... declare the following interest:

 

 

        Pecuniary:

              Take no part in the consideration and voting and be out of sight of the meeting.

 

 

        Non-Pecuniary - Significant Interest:

              Take no part in the consideration and voting and be out of sight of the meeting.

 

        Non-Pecuniary - Less than Significant Interest:

              May participate in consideration and voting.

 

 

For the reason that:  ....................................................................................................

 

.......................................................................................................................................

 

Name:  …………………………………………………….

 

Signed:  .........................................................................  Date:  ..................................

 

 

Growth Bar b&w(Further explanation is provided on the next page)


 

Further Explanation

(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)

 

A conflict of interest exists where a reasonable and informed person would perceive that a Council official could be influenced by a private interest when carrying out their public duty. Interests can be of two types: pecuniary or non-pecuniary.

 

All interests, whether pecuniary or non-pecuniary are required to be fully disclosed and in writing.

 

Pecuniary Interest

 

A pecuniary interest is an interest that a Council official has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to the Council official. (section 442)

 

A Council official will also be taken to have a pecuniary interest in a matter if that Council official’s spouse or de facto partner or a relative of the Council official or a partner or employer of the Council official, or a company or other body of which the Council official, or a nominee, partner or employer of the Council official is a member, has a pecuniary interest in the matter. (section 443)

 

The Council official must not take part in the consideration or voting on the matter and leave and be out of sight of the meeting.  The Council official must not be present at, or  in sight of, the meeting of the Council at any time during which the matter is being considered or discussed, or at any time during which the council is voting on any question in relation to the matter.  (section 451)

 

Non-Pecuniary

 

A non-pecuniary interest is an interest that is private or personal that the Council official has that does not amount to a pecuniary interest as defined in the Act.

 

Non-pecuniary interests commonly arise out of family, or personal relationships, or involvement in sporting, social or other cultural groups and associations and may include an interest of a financial nature.

 

The political views of a Councillor do not constitute a private interest.

 

The management of a non-pecuniary interest will depend on whether or not it is significant.

 

Non Pecuniary – Significant Interest

As a general rule, a non-pecuniary conflict of interest will be significant where a matter does not raise a pecuniary interest, but it involves:

(a)   A relationship between a Council official and another person that is particularly close, for example, parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descendant or adopted child of the Council official or of the Council official’s spouse, current or former spouse or partner, de facto or other person living in the same household.

(b)   Other relationships that are particularly close, such as friendships and business relationships. Closeness is defined by the nature of the friendship or business relationship, the frequency of contact and the duration of the friendship or relationship.

(c)   An affiliation between a Council official an organisation, sporting body, club, corporation or association that is particularly strong.

 

If a Council official declares a non-pecuniary significant interest it must be managed in one of two ways:

1.     Remove the source of the conflict, by relinquishing or divesting the interest that creates the conflict, or reallocating the conflicting duties to another Council official.

2.     Have no involvement in the matter, by taking no part in the consideration or voting on the matter and leave and be out of sight of the meeting, as if the provisions in section 451(2) apply.

 

Non Pecuniary – Less than Significant Interest

If a Council official has declared a non-pecuniary less than significant interest and it does not require further action, they must provide an explanation of why they consider that the conflict does not require further action in the circumstances.

SPECIAL DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST DECLARATION

 

 

By

[insert full name of councillor]

 

 

In the matter of

[insert name of environmental planning instrument]

 

 

Which is to be considered at a meeting of the

[insert name of meeting]

 

 

Held on

[insert date of meeting]

 

 

PECUNIARY INTEREST

 

 

Address of land in which councillor or an  associated person, company or body has a proprietary interest (the identified land)i

 

 

Relationship of identified land to councillor

[Tick or cross one box.]

 

Councillor has interest in the land (e.g. is owner or has other interest arising out of a mortgage, lease trust, option or contract, or otherwise).

 

Associated person of councillor has interest in the land.

 

Associated company or body of councillor has interest in the land.

 

MATTER GIVING RISE TO PECUNIARY INTEREST

 

 

Nature of land that is subject to a change

in zone/planning control by proposed

LEP (the subject land iii

[Tick or cross one box]

 

The identified land.

 

Land that adjoins or is adjacent to or is in proximity to the identified land.

Current zone/planning control

[Insert name of current planning instrument and identify relevant zone/planning control applying to the subject land]

 

Proposed change of zone/planning control

[Insert name of proposed LEP and identify proposed change of zone/planning control applying to the subject land]

 

Effect of proposed change of zone/planning control on councillor

[Tick or cross one box]

 

Appreciable financial gain.

 

Appreciable financial loss.

 

 

 

Councillor’s Name:  …………………………………………

 

Councillor’s Signature:  ……………………………….   Date:  ………………..


 

 

Important Information

 

This information is being collected for the purpose of making a special disclosure of pecuniary interests under sections 451 (4) and (5) of the Local Government Act 1993.  You must not make a special disclosure that you know or ought reasonably to know is false or misleading in a material particular.  Complaints made about contraventions of these requirements may be referred by the Director-General to the Local Government Pecuniary Interest and Disciplinary Tribunal.

 

This form must be completed by you before the commencement of the council or council committee meeting in respect of which the special disclosure is being made.   The completed form must be tabled at the meeting.  Everyone is entitled to inspect it.  The special disclosure must be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i.   Section 443 (1) of the Local Government Act 1993 provides that you may have a pecuniary interest in a matter because of the pecuniary interest of your spouse or your de facto partner or your relativeiv or because your business partner or employer has a pecuniary interest. You may also have a pecuniary interest in a matter because you, your nominee, your business partner or your employer is a member of a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter.

ii.  Section 442 of the Local Government Act 1993 provides that a pecuniary interest is an interest that a person has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to the person. A person does not have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the interest is so remote or insignificant that it could not reasonably be regarded as likely to influence any decision the person might make in relation to the matter or if the interest is of a kind specified in section 448 of that Act (for example, an interest as an elector or as a ratepayer or person liable to pay a charge).

iii.   A pecuniary interest may arise by way of a change of permissible use of land adjoining, adjacent to or in proximity to land in which a councillor or a person, company or body referred to in section 443 (1) (b) or (c) of the Local Government Act 1993 has a proprietary interest..

iv.   Relative is defined by the Local Government Act 1993 as meaning your, your spouse’s or your de facto partner’s parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descendant or adopted child and the spouse or de facto partner of any of those persons.

 

 

 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      26/04/2018

 

 

Item:          05

 

Subject:     DA2017 - 1023.1 Agricultural Produce Industry Lot 4 DP 738164, No 511 Fernbak Creek Road, Fernbank Creek

Report Author: Steven Ford

 

 

 

Applicant:               G A & M A Cuttell

Owner:                    G A & M A Cuttell

Estimated Cost:     $15,000

Parcel no:               18169

Alignment with Delivery Program

4.3.1  Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2017 – 1023.1 for agricultural produce industry (apple cider) at Lot 4 DP 738164 No. 511 Fernbank Creek Road, Fernbank Creek, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

Executive Summary

 

This report considers a development application for an Agricultural Produce Industry (Apple Cider) at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Following exhibition of the application, multiple submissions have been received from the one household.

 

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 2.031 hectares.

 

The site is zoned RU1 Primary Production in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=2298e787-34bd-4c39-8d3f-0812ce0eba6d&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=15771588-1cb2-4171-a522-fc9a648ec6c6&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

 

·    Construction of a new shed for the purposes of an Agricultural Produce Industry (Apple Cidery).

·    The proposed development is not considered Designated Development as defined in Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

·    The applicant proposed to have from 2,000L of cider made onsite depending on demand and will process no more than 1,000 tonnes of agricultural produce per year by methods listed in the Statement of Environmental Effects (SOEE), such as washing, grinding, pressing, bottling etc.

·    Estimated that the property can support an orchard of up to approximately 200 apple trees. However, apples will be sourced as a mixture of onsite and offsite grown produce.

·    Waste will be stored appropriately and either used as compost or sold as animal feed.

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    23 November 2017 – Application lodged.

·    29 November 2017 to 12 December 2017 – Neighbour notification of proposal

·    26 November 2017 – Submission received

·    12 December 2017 – Site inspection with Applicant

·    20 December 2017 – Additional information requested – Confirmation of location of existing aerated wastewater treatment system and irrigation system, confirm production quantity, opportunity to relocate the proposal to create greater separation between adjoining properties, provide an acoustic report by a suitably qualified person in regards to existing and expected plant equipment noise levels, how waste will be managed, landscaping plans, clarify hours of operation.

·    27 December 2017 – Additional information received

·    5 January 2018 – Updated Site Plan Received

·    22 January 2018 – Applicant enquiring about alternatives to ordering a consultant to prepare an Acoustic Report.

·    24 January 2018 – Additional information provided to the Applicant regarding noise assessment. Provided option to relocate the proposal as noise mitigation measure as suggested in the submission

·    25 January 2018 – Noise statement from Applicant

·    19 February 2018 – Additional submission received

·    20 February 2018 – Submission forwarded to Applicant

·    05 April 2018 – Amended site plans and shed elevations and Noise Impact Assessment submitted

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Section 79C(1) Matters for Consideration

 

In determining the application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters as are relevant to the development that apply to the land to which the development application relates:

 

(a)     The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i)      any Environmental Planning Instrument:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No.30 - Intensive Agriculture

 

Rural industry not triggered under this instrument

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 33 - Hazardous and Offensive Development

 

The subject SEPP was introduced to clarify the definitions for hazardous and offensive industries and to apply guidelines for the assessment of industries that have the potential to create hazards or an offence. Having considered the SEPP and with the imposition of conditions, the proposed development is not considered to be hazardous or offensive industry and will create no significant risk.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

 

With reference to clauses 6 and 7, the subject land is greater than 1 hectare (including any adjoining land under same ownership) and therefore the provisions of SEPP must be considered.

 

The application has indicated that one tree will be removed as it poses a risk to the existing building. The application was considered by Council’s Natural Resources Section who raised no objection to the proposal or need for any additional information. Therefore no further investigations are required.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

 

Following an inspection of the site and a search of Council records, the subject land is not identified as being potentially contaminated and is suitable for the intended use.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

 

Given the nature of the proposed development and proposed stormwater controls the proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impact on existing aquaculture industries within the Hastings River.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Rural Lands) 2008

 

The following assessment table provides an assessment against specific requirements of this SEPP:

 

Applicable clauses for consideration

Comments

Satisfactory

The existing uses and approved uses of land in the vicinity of the development - 10(3)(a)

Agricultural Produce Industry is a permissible land use within a rural zone. Adjoining properties consist of rural dwellings on undersized/smaller rural land holdings. The proposal does present a different use to surrounding properties but there is a vineyard further down Fernbank Creek Road (ie Cassegrains). Nonetheless, the type of use has the potential to create impacts that will need to be considered, such as noise and air pollution, especially due to the proximity to this adjoining dwelling. These potential impacts have been considered throughout this report and deemed capable of being managed via conditions.

Acceptable

Whether or not the development is likely to have a significant impact on land uses that, in the opinion of the consent authority, are likely to be preferred and the predominant land uses in the vicinity of the development – 10(3)(b)

Refer to above comment.

Acceptable

Whether or not the development is likely to be incompatible with a use referred to in paragraph (a) or (b) – 10(3)(c)

Through the design and conditions, the proposed use is considered to be compatible with the adjoining area.

Acceptable

If the land is not situated within a rural residential zone, whether or not the development is likely to be incompatible with a use on land within an adjoining rural residential zone – 10(3)(d)

The land is an undersized rural lot and adjoins a similar sized parcel of land. Providing the size of the existing lots, they have the characteristics of rural residential zones. The proposed use is considered to be compatible with appropriate mitigation measures to be conditioned.

Acceptable

Any measures proposed by the applicant to avoid or minimise any incompatibility referred to in paragraph (c) or (d) – 10(3)(e).

The proposed development has been relocated to the northern property boundary, away from the nearest adjoining dwelling, limitations will be imposed on the amount of fruit processed, hours of operation; to ensure no adverse impact.

Acceptable

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

The proposal is consistent with the LEP having regard to the following:

·    Clause 2.2, the subject site is zoned RU1 Primary Production. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the RU1 zone landuse table, the proposed development for Agricultural Produce Industry is a permissible landuse with consent.

 

          The objectives of the RU1 zone are as follows:

To encourage sustainable primary industry production by maintaining and enhancing the natural resource base.

To encourage diversity in primary industry enterprises and systems appropriate for the area.

To minimise the fragmentation and alienation of resource lands.

To minimise conflict between land uses within this zone and land uses within adjoining zones.

 

In accordance with Clause 2.3(2), the proposal is consistent with the zone objectives having regard to the following:

The proposal is a permissible landuse.

The proposal does not specifically impact on the resource base.

The proposal encourages diversity by providing an alternate primary industry.

Conditions will be utilised to reduce conflict with neighbouring properties.

The proposal does not fragment land or alienate a resource base.

·    Clause 4.2A, no dwelling proposed.

·    Clause 5.9, one listed trees in Development Control Plan 2013 are proposed to be removed. The removal of the tree will create no adverse impact.

·    Clause 7.13, satisfactory arrangements are in place for provision of essential services including water supply, electricity supply, on-site sewage management, stormwater drainage and suitable road access to service the development.

 

Designated Development

Agricultural produce industries

Agricultural produce industries (being industries that process agricultural produce, including dairy products, seeds, fruit, vegetables or other plant material):

a) that crush, juice, grind, mill, gin, mix or separate more than 30,000 tonnes of agricultural produce per year, or

b) that release effluent, sludge or other waste:

i.    in or within 100 metres of a natural waterbody or wetland, or

ii.    in an area of high watertable, highly permeable soils or acid sulphate, sodic or saline soils.

 

The applicant has advised that the development will process 1,000 tonnes of agricultural produce per year by way of the methods listed in the SOEE, such as washing, grinding, pressing, bottling etc.

 

The applicant has also advised that the development does not propose to release effluent, sludge or other contaminated waste associated with the industry on to the site. It should be noted that effluent from the toilet, sink, waste water, etc will be disposed of via an approved onsite waste management system. However, it is considered that the reference to effluent relates more specifically to the industry, not the ancillary facilities used by the operator when onsite. In particular, refer to the definition below of effluent taken from the dictionary in the designated development section of the Regulations.

 

effluent includes treated or partially treated wastewater from processes such as sewage treatment plants or from treatment plants associated with intensive livestock industries, aquaculture or agricultural, livestock, wood, paper or food processing industries.

 

(a)(ii) Any proposed instrument that is or has been placed on exhibition

No draft instruments apply to the site.

 

(a)(iii) Any DCP in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013:

 

DCP 2013: Chapter 3.5 - Industrial Development

DCP Objective

Development Provisions

Proposed

Complies

3.5.3.1

Minimum setbacks are provided as follows:

·  10m from a classified road;

·  7.6m from any other road boundary;

·  3m from any secondary road frontage.

Development is setback over 10m from Fernbank Creek Rd.

Yes

3.5.3.2

Elevations of building which are visible from a public road, reserve or adjacent or adjoining residential areas are to be constructed using:

· brick, masonry, pre-coloured metal cladding, or

· appropriately finished ‘tilt-slab’ concrete; or

· a combination of a number of these materials.

Standard metal construction to be used, which is consistent with surrounding materials of rural sheds within the area.

 

Yes

Large unrelieved expanses of wall or building mass are not favoured, and as such should be broken up by the use of suitable building articulation, fenestration or alternative architectural enhancements.

The shed will contain a number of openings and is consistent with other sheds in surrounding rural areas.

Yes

3.5.3.3

Material storage/work areas and volumes to be provided with application.

No open storage area nominated. However, outdoor storage is considered inevitable but also capable of being managed by conditions. In particular, conditions will be imposed to maintain free of vermin and odours at all times.

The new shed location will also provide for better separation between the nearest adjoining neighbour and the development.

Yes

Open work and storage areas to be located at rear of premises and screen from view by landscaping and/or fencing minimum 2m high.

No outside storage nominated and conditions will be used to manage this aspect.

Yes

3.5.3.4

Detailed landscaping plan submitted.

Based on the siting of the development, additional landscaping is not required. In particular, the proposal is not adjoining the road or adjoining neighbouring dwellings.

Yes

Landscaped strip 3m wide for 2/3 of each road frontage.

Refer to above comment.

N/A

No fencing in front setback unless for display items. High quality fencing and landscaping.

None proposed.

N/A

3.5.3.5

An onsite recreation area is provided for staff that:

· Includes seating, tables and rubbish bin.

· If outside, is adequately protected from the weather

· Is safely accessible to all staff.

· Is separate private from public areas.

· Is located away from noisy or odorous activities.

Site contains large amounts of unused outside area that could be used, along with the principle dwelling.

Yes

3.5.3.6

Provide onsite facilities for changing, showering and secure bike storage.

Bathroom facilities contained in the existing dwelling

Yes

3.5.3.7

Development complies with NSW Industrial Noise Policy.

See comments on Noise and Vibration later in this report.

Yes

Building openings located to minimise noise impacts if within 400m of residential zone.

Main openings facing south (inwards) and not adjoining neighbouring dwelling.

Yes

External plant such as generators, air conditioning plant and the like, should be enclosed to minimise noise nuisance and located away from residences.

None indicated on plans. Conditions applied to manage.

 

Yes

External and security lighting should be directed and shielded to avoid light spillage to adjoining residential areas.

No security lights proposed.

Yes

Driveways should be arranged or screened to avoid headlight glare on residential windows.

Existing driveway, no adverse impacts.

Yes

3.5.3.8

Office space ancillary to the industrial use is permissible with consent, subject to satisfaction of the following matters:

· That the office component of a proposed development is ancillary to the functions carried out in the factory, warehouse or other industrial use.

· That the office area is not leased to a separate company or entity.

· That parking facilities are adequate to cater for the size of the office development.

No office proposed.

Yes

3.5.3.9

The site should be serviced by reticulated water (and dual reticulation where this is available), sewer and telecommunications.

The site is not serviced by reticulated water.

Acceptable

3.5.3.10

Garbage storage areas are not visible from a public place.

To be conditioned.

Yes

3.5.3.11

Stormwater management strategy prepared.

Site contains suitable area to deal with stormwater. No adverse impacts to adjoining properties.

Yes

Rainwater tank and dual reticulation for non-potable uses on the site.

Development will contain both rainwater and water storage tanks.

Yes

 

DCP 2013: General Provisions

DCP Objective

Development Provisions

Proposed

Complies

2.7.2.2

Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline:

· Casual surveillance and sightlines

· Land use mix and activity generators

· Definition of use and ownership

· Lighting

· Way finding

· Predictable routes and entrapment locations

The site does not contain any concealment or entrapment areas.

Yes

2.3.3.1

Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls

None proposed

Yes

2.3.3.2

1m max. height retaining walls along road frontages

None proposed.

N/A

Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structural engineer

None proposed.

N/A

Combination of retaining wall and front fence height

None proposed.

N/A

2.6.3.1

Tree removal (3m or higher with 100m diameter trunk and 3m outside dwelling footprint

One tree is required to be removed and is within 3m of the proposed shed.

Yes

2.4.3

Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater

Refer to main body of report.

Noted

2.5.3.2

New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads. Existing accesses rationalised or removed where practical

No new access proposed off Fernbank Creek Road.

Yes

Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking.

No additional driveway crossings are proposed. No adverse impact foreseen.

Yes

2.5.3.3

Off-street parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. Reduction possible if supported by parking demand study.

No parking proposed. The site is more than capable of providing onsite parking.

Yes

2.5.3.4

Changes of use or redevelopment of existing buildings provide parking required for new use, less any credits.

Not a re-development.

N/A

2.5.3.5

On-street parking permitted subject to justification.

No on-street parking proposed.

N/A

2.5.3.6

On-street parking includes streetscape improvements.

No on-street parking proposed.

N/A

2.5.3.7

Customer parking to be easily accessible.

The development will be conditioned to not allow sale to the general public from the site. However, informal parking areas are possible onsite for wholesale inquiries, inspections, maintenance crew etc

Yes

Way finding signs provided for parking areas.

Not required for development of this type and scale.

N/A

Parking in accordance with AS 2890.1.

Capable of complying.

Yes

2.5.3.8

Aged and disabled persons and persons wheeling prams or trolleys are provided with suitable access and parking in accordance with AS 2890.1 and AS 2890.2.

Capable of complying.

Yes

2.5.3.9

Bicycle and motorcycle parking considered and designed generally in accordance with the principles of AS 2890.3

Capable of complying.

Yes

2.5.3.10

Parking concessions possible for conservation of heritage items

Not a heritage item.

N/A

2.5.3.11

Section 94 contributions

Refer to main body of report.

Noted

2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13

Landscaping of parking areas

Existing vegetation will provide suitable landscaping.

Yes

2.5.3.14

Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified

To be conditioned.

Yes

2.5.3.15

Driveway grades for first 6m of ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade

(Note AS/NZS 2890.1 permits steeper grades)

Capable of complying. To be conditioned.

Yes

2.5.3.16

Transitional grades min. 2m length

Capable of complying. To be conditioned.

Yes

2.5.3.17

Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.

Parking areas will not create any adverse runoff.

Yes

Vehicle washing facilities – grassed area etc available.

Area exists onsite if required.

Yes

No direct discharge to K&G or swale drain

None proposed.

N/A

2.5.3.18

Car parking areas drained to swales, bio retention, rain gardens and infiltration areas

Capable of complying.

Yes

2.5.3.19

Off street commercial vehicles facilities are provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.2

None proposed or required. Capable of complying with informal loading facilities.

Yes

Loading bays will be provided in accordance with the following requirements;

Minimum dimensions to be 3.5m wide x 6m long. (This may increase according to the size and type of vehicle).

Vertical clearance shall be a minimum of 5m.

Adequate provision shall be made on-site for the loading, unloading and manoeuvring of delivery vehicles in an area separate from any customer car parking area.

A limited number of ‘employee only’ car parking spaces may be combined with loading facilities.

Loading areas shall be designed to accommodate appropriate turning paths for the maximum design vehicle using the site.

Vehicles are to be capable of manoeuvring in and out of docks without causing conflict with other street or on-site traffic.

Vehicles are to stand wholly within the site during such operations.

None proposed or required. Area exists in driveway for loading and unloading vehicles associated with this type of development.

Yes

For external bays, one bay is required for 500m² of floor space or 1000m² of site area.

Not required - refer to comments above.

N/A

Commercial development having a floor space less than 500m² need not provide a loading bay.

Not required - refer to comments above.

N/A

Other commercial development shall provide one loading bay for the first 1,000m² floor space and one additional bay for each additional 2,000m².

Not required - refer to comments above.

N/A

If parcel pickup facilities are provided on-site they shall be located so as to avoid conflict with general traffic flow within parking areas. Parcel pickup lanes shall be separate from through traffic lanes in major shopping developments.

Not proposed or required.

N/A

2.5.3.20

The location and design of loading bays should integrate into the overall design of the building and car parking areas.

Suitable area exists within the driveway.

Yes

Where visible from the public domain, loading bays are located behind the building.

Due to existing vegetation screening, loading areas will not be readily visible from public domain.

Yes

Where loading bays are located close to a sensitive land use, adequate visual and acoustic screening is provided.

Loading is not located close to any sensitive receivers.

Yes

2.5.3.21

Plans to confirm vehicular access, circulation and manoeuvring in accordance with AUSTROADS and AS 2890.

Vehicle access capable of complying.

Yes

Adequate area provided for loading/unloading and manoeuvring of B-Doubles where access is available from approved B-Double routes.

B-doubles not utilised for a development of this type.

N/A

Ingress and egress in a forward direction.

Site is capable of ingress and egress in a forward direction.

Yes

Driveways >6m from tangent point of kerb radius and >1.5m from common side boundary with another lot.

N/A

N/A

Driveways not locate within intersection or restricted areas, and adequate sight distance available.

Driveway location/design accepted by Council Engineers.

Yes

 

iv)     any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

 

Demolition of buildings AS 2601:

Demolition of the existing building on the site is capable of compliance with this Australian Standard and is recommended to be conditioned.

 

v)      any coastal zone management plan (within the meaning of the Coastal Protection Act 1979), that apply to the land to which the development application relates:

 

·  No Coastal Zone Management Plan applies to the subject site.

 

(b)     The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, social and economic impacts in the locality:

 

The site has a general street frontage orientation to Fernbank Creek Road.

Adjoining the site to the north is rural bushland and dwelling (not visible).     

Adjoining the site to the east is rural grazing paddock and dwelling (not visible).

Adjoining the site to the south is a dwelling (closest to the proposed development).

Adjoining the site to the west is a rural property (not visible).

The proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties and satisfactorily addresses the public domain.

The proposal adequately addresses planning controls for the area.

The proposal does not have a significant adverse impact on existing view sharing.

The proposal does not have significant adverse lighting impacts.

There are no significant adverse privacy impacts.  Adequate building separation and tenancy is proposed/existing.

There is no adverse overshadowing impacts. The proposal does not prevent adjoining properties from receiving 3 hours of sunlight to private open space and primary living areas on 21 June.

 

Roads

The site has road frontage to Fernbank Creek Road.

 

Adjacent to the site, Fernbank Creek Road is a sealed public road under the care and control of Council.  Fernbank Creek Road is rural collector road with a 7.2m Road Formation Width within a 23m road reserve. 

 

Traffic and Transport

The increase in traffic associated with the development is unlikely to have any adverse impacts to the existing road network within the immediate locality.

 

Site Frontage & Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed though one access driveway to Fernbank Creek Road. All accesses shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards, and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements. 

 

Parking and Manoeuvring

Parking and driveway widths on site can comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements. 

 

Water Supply Connection

Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application. Refer to relevant conditions of consent.

 

Sewer

Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application. Refer to relevant conditions of consent.

 

Council’s Environmental Health Officer has advised that: The land application area will be sufficient for the disposal of the wastewater.

 

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards the road frontage and is currently not serviced by the public piped drainage system.

 

A detailed site stormwater management plan will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application and prior to the issue of a CC. Overall, stormwater can be managed onsite

 

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

 

Heritage

Following a site inspection, no known items of Aboriginal or European heritage significance exist on the property. No adverse impacts anticipated.

 

Other land resources

The site is within an established urban context and will not sterilise any significant mineral or agricultural resource.

 

Water cycle

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on water resources and the water cycle.

 

Soils

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on soils in terms of quality, erosion, stability and/or productivity subject to a standard condition requiring erosion and sediment controls to be in place prior to and during construction.

 

Air and microclimate

The construction and/or operations of the proposed development will be unlikely to result in any adverse impacts on the existing air quality or result in any pollution. Standard precautionary site management condition recommended.

 

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will not require any removal/clearing of any significant vegetation and therefore will be unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on biodiversity or threatened species of flora and fauna. 

 

Waste

Solid waste is to be disposed of or reused within two days and is not to be stockpiled on the premises, create an adverse odour impact on adjoining properties and are also to be kept free of pests at all times.

 

Satisfactory arrangements are in place for proposed storage and collection of waste and recyclables. No adverse impacts anticipated. Standard precautionary site management condition recommended.

 

Energy

No adverse impacts anticipated.

 

Noise and vibration

The existing property is zoned RU1 Primary Production. The noise in the area is dominated by natural sounds, traffic noise from nearby Hastings River Drive and residential noise.

 

The Applicant has submitted a Noise Impact Assessment prepared by Philip Thorton of Matrix Thornton Consulting dated 5 April 2018. See attached Report for detailed assessment.

 

The revised site plan and noise impact assessment has been reviewed by Council’s Environmental Health Officer and determined as acceptable with noise impact found to comply with the EPA guidelines.

 

Mitigation measures by the Applicant, include;

·        Relocating the proposed shed to the other side of the property creating greater separation.

·        Conceal all noise generating machinery within the proposed shed.

·        Limit the hours of operation to 8am to 5pm weekdays only. Noting that the main noise source will only operate intermittently during the milling process.

 

These mitigation measures have satisfied the Part 3 – Assessment of industrial noise impacts in the EPA 2017 Noise Policy for Industry.

 

Recommendation that the development is to comply with the Noise Impact Assessment and consent conditions.

 

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

 

The proposed shed is to be constructed of non-combustible materials and located greater than 10m from the nearest dwelling. Under Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006, the shed does not require bushfire attack construction levels being implemented.

 

Safety, security and crime prevention

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area.

 

Social impacts in the locality

Given the nature of the proposed development and its’ location the proposal is unlikely to result in any adverse social impacts.

 

Economic impact in the locality

No adverse impacts. A likely positive impact is that the development will create interest within the construction industry, local food and drink industry, locally source products and small business which will lead to flow impacts such as employment and expenditure in the area.

 

Site design and internal design

The proposed development design satisfactorily responds to the site attributes and will fit into the locality.

 

Construction

No potential adverse impacts identified to neighbouring properties with the construction of the proposal.

 

Cumulative impacts

The proposed development is not expected to have any adverse cumulative impacts on the natural or built environment or the social and economic attributes of the locality.

 

(c)     The suitability of the site for the development:

 

The proposed use is permissible within the RU1 Primary Production zoning and any potential impacts can be managed by consent conditions.

 

(d)     Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the Regulations:

 

Multiple submissions were received from the one household following public exhibition of the application.

 

Key issues raised in the submissions received and comments in response to these issues are provided as follows:

 

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Noise pollution - Noise impacts from the proposed development (ie from machinery including Apple Mill, hydraulic press, etc during the manufacturing process)

 

The submitted manufacturer’s manual has been falsified. We have requested a copy of the manual from the manufacturer and it doesn’t include a noise rating. The Manufacturer has emailed me that the mill has a LWA of  80 db (twice as loud as compared to the written submission and not including the additional noise added by actually crushing apples)

The applicant has submitted additional information regarding noise for the Apple Mill, which was reviewed by Council staff – see comments on Noise and Vibration above.

 

To satisfy any confusion due to the discrepancy in the information originally provided, the Applicant has had a Noise Impact Assessment completed for the proposed development.

 

The amended site plan and noise assessment has shown that the proposed development is capable of complying with the NSW Noise Policy for Industry and NSW Environment Protection Authority guidelines.

 

This DA applies for operation 8-5pm, not infrequent use and once granted will allow him to use this offending machine all this time during his hours of operation.

It is agreed that this statement is correct, as operating periods of the offending machine could be for the total operation hours and not limited to infrequent use.

 

The Applicant, as part of the justification, describes the nature of the Apple Mill as infrequent use only and it is not continuous use every day.

 

Mitigation measures will be conditioned to ensure no adverse impact.

 

In addition, the operation hours have been reduced to week days and are considered reasonable. The hours of operation will be managed by conditions in the consent. In the event hours are to be extended due to demand, additional development approval will be required.

Development does not comply with the objectives of the zone.

The proposed development is permissible within the zoning. It is considered that the proposal does comply with the zoning objectives – refer to comments on zoning in the LEP 2011 section of this report.

The development will impact on the streetscape.

The proposed development is unlikely to impact on streetscape as it is setback over 40m from the road. No advertising signage is proposed and the building will have the appearance of a rural shed. The expected traffic generated by the proposed development will be minimal. No adverse impacts are anticipated.

Impact on character and amenity. The industry along Fernbank Creek road is primarily rural – cattle and horses.  The neighbour has no apple trees planted in the ground

The proposal is for a use with linkages to the rural environment. The building also presents as a rural shed consistent with others in the area. Conditions will manage impacts to ensure the development does not impact on the character of the area.

 

The proposal is also not prohibited within the zoning and the Applicant proposes to plant an apple orchard with the aim to complement the Cidery.

Odour pollution – foul odours from waste products, storage and fermentation.

Consideration has been provided to the storage and reuse of any by-product and waste produced during the production process. Conditions have been recommended regarding all solid waste is to be repurposed within two days of processing, not to be stockpiled on the premises creating adverse odour impacts to adjoining properties and to be kept free of pests at all times. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer has considered this as an acceptable measure.

Stormwater and ground water impacts.

Refer to comments on Stormwater above in this report. Capable of being managed without increasing pre-development flows onto adjoining properties. Ground water is unlikely to change.

Loss of Privacy – location of the proposed Cidery is adjacent to adjoining living areas (kitchen and verandah)

Issues of loss of privacy have been mitigated by the Applicant relocating the proposed development approximately 130m from the nearest adjoining dwelling.

The approval also does not allow any sales or tastings by the general public.

This has satisfied any privacy concerns.

Visually prominent – proposed building is much larger than the current stables and a 3.7m high factory on our boundary will be a major eyesore to our home which is designed to appreciate the northerly aspect and rural aspect

The proposed shed will not overshadow the adjoining dwelling or private open space, the footprint of the shed is approximately 100m² and the height is consistent with rural sheds. No adverse impacts will occur.

Removal of trees further reduces our privacy.

This has been resolved by relocating the development.

Increase traffic on an extremely narrow road.

Concerns raised have been noted, however, the increased traffic proposed due to deliveries is unlikely to adversely impact on the existing traffic movements within the immediate area.

Bushfire risk.  The application falsely claims that it is not an area of bushfire risk.  Our area is a bushfire prone and a cider factory will store significant quantities of alcohol which is a highly flammable liquid.  Thus increasing the fire risk to my house due to its close location.  A bushfire analysis was not included

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

The proposed shed is to be constructed of non-combustible materials and located greater than 10m from the nearest dwelling. Under Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006, the shed does not require bushfire attack construction levels being implemented.

Further proposal for cellar door.  I believe the neighbour will eventually plan a cellar door with cider tasting in the future.  This is extremely concerning as I have 3 young children who walk along this road daily from school.  Cellar door tasting results in drivers who have reduced driving judgement on an already hazardous road.  It also promotes alcohol consumption which our young children will see.  A cellar door will also impact our privacy when customers visit and people will be walking around looking toward our living spaces and interfering with our alpacas and horses

Approval to operate a cellar door premises does not form part of this Development Application. Conditions have been included to not allow any retailing from the premises.

Attraction of vermin /odour spills and washing which will obviously seep downhill into our property causing more nuisance.  Watering the gardens with the waste will attract vermin. There is no waste water report.  Storing apples and product will also attract vermin which is close to our kitchen.  The current unkempt state of the neighbouring property concerns us as they will be unable to maintain a clean environment close to our house.

These concerns have been noted. If approved, the operation of the Cidery will require compliance with food safety regulations. Conditions have also been included regarding waste, which is either to be repurposed or disposed of appropriately within 2 days to avoid attracting vermin or causing air pollution to adjoining properties.

Furthermore we have 3 young impressionable children and having an alcoholic industry next door is extremely unfavourable and unsavoury in a residential area

Concerns have been noted. However, the applicant is not seeking approval for a cellar door premise or general sales to the public.

We are both Doctors with irregular hours including night shifts with a young family.  We chose to live here 7 years ago for the peaceful quiet outlook.  We often need to sleep during the day and enjoy our natural surrounds

Concerns have been noted. As a mitigation measure, the Applicant has reduced operating hours to between 8am – 5pm Monday to Friday, as well as limited production volume.

Condition limiting the noise of the cider manufacturing activities to not exceed 40dB, when measured at the southern boundary has also been recommended.

Relocating the proposed development an approximately 100m further away from the original site has reduced any perceived impacts on the adjoining dwellings outlook.

Please note that the application includes false and misleading information in order to try to blindside and get passed.  It is a bushfire prone region, it has Acid Sulfate soil, it will cause loss of privacy, it is out of character with surrounding area, it will be visually prominent on our landscape, it may impact our endangered green frogs, it will produce odour.  We did not have any communication about this proposal until after it was submitted. The application also states the minimum use not maximum to appear less impacting.

Concerns have been noted.

Insulation is not adequate soundproofing

Noted, Insulation not proposed or required.

The mill which will run at 85db will cause damage to the hearing of my children and myself and we do not deserve this threat to our health

Refer to comments on Noise and Vibration earlier in this report.

The submission falsely claims that our dwelling is 50m from the mill when in fact it is only 34m.

This has been noted.

No vermin control policies and waste/wash policies as our property is downstream(lower) are considered. Vermin such as rats, mice, fruit fly will be attracted to the stored apples and waste product which will be in close proximity to our kitchen

Concerns have been noted and appropriate conditions have been recommended to address the issues.

Odour /fumes emission from the crushing, fermenting, cleaning and storage process

Concerns have been noted and appropriated conditions have been recommended, to address the issue.

This Industry is out of character and not in keeping with the planned and current use of the quiet rural residential exclusive area.

The proposed development is permissible within RU1 primary agriculture zoning. Concerns of the ambient noise level and the adjoining existing uses have also been considered during the assessment and deemed acceptable.

Simple research shows that our climate and Acid Sulfate soils are not favourable to apple growing. The plan to import apples proves that the mill is an industrial commercial full time enterprise that should be located in an industrial/commercial zone not in a residential one.

Agricultural produce industries are not limited to processing produce grown and sourced from the same property.

The LEP 2011 definition; agricultural produce industry means a building or place used for the handling, treating, processing or packing, for commercial purposes, of produce from agriculture (including dairy products, seeds, fruit, vegetables or other plant material), and includes wineries, flour mills, cotton seed oil plants, cotton gins, feed mills, cheese and butter factories, and juicing or canning plants, but does not include a livestock processing industry.

The proposed use is permissible within the land zoning.

If the proposed location was on the other side (opposite boundary) of his property I would not object to this development as our major concerns of noise, privacy, odour will be reduced

The Applicant has accepted this mitigation measure and relocated the proposed building to the northern boundary and completed a Noise Impact Assessment for clarity. Perceived impacts have now been reduced.

 

(e)     The Public Interest:

 

The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls and is unlikely to impact on the wider public interest.

 

 

4.       DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

 

No contributions are applicable

 

 

5.       CONCLUSION

 

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the application have been considered in the assessment of the application. Where relevant, conditions have been recommended to manage the impacts attributed to these issues.

 

The site is suitable for the proposed development, is not contrary to the public's interest and will not have a significant adverse social, environmental or economic impact. It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to the recommended conditions of consent provided in the attachment section of this report.

 

 

Attachments

 

1View. DA2017 - 1023.1 Plans

2View. DA2017 - 1023.1 SOEE

3View. DA2017 - 1023.1 Manual Instruction for Mill

4View. DA2017 - 1023.1  Noise Impact Assessment

5View. DA2017 - 1023.1 Additional Information

6View. DA2017 - 1023.1 Recommended Conditions.

7View. DA2017 - 1023.1 Submission - King A

8View. DA2017 - 1023.1 Submission - King A 21012018

9View. DA2017 - 1023.1 Submission - King D

10View.           DA2017 - 1023.1 Submission - King D 19022018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      26/04/2018

 

 

Item:          06

 

Subject:     Section 4.55 Modification DA2010 - 577.4 - Modification To Subdivision Lot Layout Including Addition Of One (1) Torrens Title Lot - Lot 2 DP 1231106, No. 72 Lorne Road, Kendall

Report Author: Patrick Galbraith-Robertson

 

 

 

Applicant:               Jojeni Investments Pty Ltd CARE GEM Planning Projects

Owner:                    Jojeni Investments Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost:     N/A

Parcel no:               66659

Alignment with Delivery Program

4.3.1  Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That Section 4.55 modification to DA 2010 - 577 for a modification to subdivision layout including addition of one (1) torrens title lot at Lot 2, DP 1231106, No. 72 Lorne Road, Kendall, be determined by granting the modified consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report considers a Section 4.55(2) modification of consent application at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Being a Section 4.55 modification, the modified proposal has only been assessed against the legislation and related planning guidelines in place at the time of the original assessment.

 

Following exhibition of the application, one (1) submission has been received.

 

The proposal has been amended during the assessment of the application.

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 13.11 hectares.

 

The section of the site to which the modification application relates to is zoned 1(r1) Rural Residential in accordance with the Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2001 (as in force at the time), as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

 

The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:

 

 

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

The current approved development, as modified is for a staged 13 lot subdivision. A copy of the current approved modified plans are shown below:

 

 

 

The development is physically commenced with Lots 1 and 2 already created/released.

 

Key aspects of the modification proposal include the following:

 

·    Modify previous approved staged subdivision to realign boundaries and add an additional one (1) allotment at the northern end of the subdivision (where Lot 9 and 10 are shown above). This will increase the total lot numbers from 13 to 14.

 

The proposal has been also amended during the assessment of the application to incorporate compliant cul-de-sac sections of road with a 12m radius. This has also resulted in minor changes to boundaries to retain compliant minimum 1 hectare lot sizes.

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    7 December 2017 – Modification application lodged with Council

·    13 December 2017 – Referral of modification application to NSW Rural Fire Service

·    18 December 2017 to 12 January 2018 - Neighbour notification of proposal

·    12 February 2018 – Additional information requested – submission issues and on-site sewage capacity

·    19 February 2018 – NSW Rural Fire Service issued Bushfire Safety Authority

·    20 February 2018 – Clarification sought on cul-de-sac radius required by NSW Rural Fire Service

·    13 March 2018 – Confirmation of 12m radius on cul-de-sac required

·    16 March 2018 – Updated on-site sewage management report received

·    24 March 2018 – Updated on-site sewage management report forwarded to submitter for consideration

·    12 April 2018 – Amended plans received including enlarging radius of cul-de-sac head to comply with 12m radius required by the NSW Rural Fire Service

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Section 4.15(2) Matters for Consideration

 

In determining the application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters as are relevant to the development that apply to the land to which the development application relates:

 

(a) Is the proposal substantially the same?

 

Section 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 enables the modification of consents and categorises modifications into three categories - S.4.55(1) for modifications involving minor error, mis-description or miscalculation; S.4.55(1A) for modifications involving minimal environmental impact; and S.4.55(2) for other modifications. Each type of modification must be considered as being substantially the same to that which was originally consented to.

 

The subject application is being considered under the provisions of Section 4.55(2).

 

The Applicant has submitted the following details to justify that the proposal is substantially the same development:

·    The proposal seeks to modify minor aspects of the approved subdivision but does not alter the servicing capacity, the environmental principles nor the character of the approved development.

·    One additional x 1 ha allotment will result in the northern location and it does alter the intersection location or road access principles.

·    The modified proposal conforms to the requirements of existing Rural Fire Service S100B authority.

 

Having regard to the above, the proposed modification is not considered to alter the fundamental essence of the original development and is considered to be substantially the same to the original development and therefore within the scope of a modification application.

 

(b)  Are there any condition(s) of consent imposed by a Minister, government or public authority that require modification?

 

The application has been referred to the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS). The RFS have reviewed the proposal and issued an amended Bushfire Safety Authority for the modified proposal. The Applicant has also submitted amended plans to provide details of the required minimum 12m radius cul-de-sacs required by the RFS.

(c)  Does the application require notification/advertising in accordance with the regulations and/or any Development Control Plan?

 

Neighbour notification has been undertaken in accordance with the DCP.

 

(d)  Any submissions made concerning the modification?

 

One (1) written submission has been received following public exhibition via neighbour notification of the application.

 

The issues raised in the submission received have been forwarded to the Applicant during the assessment of the application.

 

Key issues raised in the submission received and comments in response to the issues are provided as follows:

 

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Concerns relate to the onsite sewage management of this modification referring specifically to the three blocks 9, 10 and 11 having common boundary with our property Lot 65.

 

The Applicant has submitted additional specialist information during the assessment of the application to address site specific on-site sewage management for the proposed additional lot and boundary reconfiguration. A copy of this report is attached.

The additional report submitted has been assessed by Council Staff as being satisfactory.

The latest proposed modification of the subject site could significantly increase environmental effects such as potential for seepage/runoff to our creek immediately adjacent to our South boundary, any contemplation that another method of disposal of septic waste, secondary or not, within the 40 metre zone would mean leakage into our creek.

Concerns of how overland stormwater runoff will be channelled away from this development considering the slope characteristics of the site and in particular regard to the proposed roads 1 and 2.

Refer to the comments provided later in this report to address stormwater.

 

(3)  Any matters referred to in section 4.15/79C (1) relevant to the modification?

 

Taking into consideration of the reasons for approval of the original development, the following areas of the original assessment impacted by the changes or with revised comments are addressed below:

 

North Coast Regional Environmental Plan

 

In accordance with clause 2, the modified proposal remains consistent with the aims of this REP.

 

In accordance with clause 12, the modified proposal is unlikely to adversely impact on the use of any nearby adjoining or adjacent agricultural land and the proposed subdivision will be unlikely to result in a significant loss of prime crop or pasture land. In particular, given the section of the site had a previous zoning change (that has occurred) to become 1(r1) now known as R5 Large Lot residential.

 

In accordance with clause 43, the modified proposal remains satisfactory with regard to:

·    the density of the proposed lots has been maximised without adversely affecting the environmental features of the land,

·    the proposed road widths are not excessive for the function of the road, and

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2001

 

The above LEP was in place at the original time of assessment and determination of this DA.

 

In accordance with clause 9, the subject site (in total) is zoned part 1(a1) Rural, 1(a3) Rural – Agricultural Protection, 1(r1) Rural Residential and 7(h) Environment Protection - Habitat. The modification to the remaining subdivision lots to be constructed and released are entirely within the 1(r1) zoned section of the site.

 

The objectives of the 1(r1) zone are as follows:

 

Zone 1 (r1) Rural Residential

Zone objectives

(a) To enable the development of land within this zone for rural residential purposes.

(b) To enable appropriate development where allowed with consent.

 

The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives, particularly as the proposal will not result in any unnecessary land fragmentation and based upon appropriate conditions recommending fencing off the 7(h) zoned land.

 

In accordance with clause 13, satisfactory arrangements are available for water supply and facilities for removal/disposal of on-site sewage and drainage to the proposal (as amended).

 

Note that Stage 1 will not require/propose extension of water supply servicing to proposed Lot 2 within Stage 1.

 

In accordance with clause 17, the Lot sizes proposed within the 1(r1) zoned part of the site remain compliant with the minimum 1 hectare land area requirement, will provide for satisfactory land area to enable on-site disposal of effluent and bushfire risk has been satisfactorily addressed.

 

The requirements of this LEP are therefore satisfied.

 

Development Control Plan 17 – Subdivision Code

 

The modified proposal remains to comply with all applicable development provisions relating to recommended lot servicing and design requirements of this DCP.

 

Context and setting

The modified proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties and satisfactorily addresses the public domain.

 

The desired character for the site has been set by the change in zoning to rural residential and with the 1 hectare lot size adopted. The modified proposal is considered to be consistent with the desired character for future and existing rural and rural residential development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area.

 

There are no identifiable adverse impacts to neighbouring properties.

 

Access, transport and traffic

The subject property has frontage to Lorne Rd which is a dedicated bitumen sealed rural road maintained by Council. Lorne Rd carriageway is approximately six (6) metres wide.

 

The proposed subdivision has already been approved to produce 91 additional daily trips, the addition of one extra allotment will not have any significant effect on the proposed development or the surrounding road network.

 

On-site sewage management

The Applicant has submitted additional specialist information during the assessment of the application to address site specific on-site sewage management for the proposed additional lot and boundary reconfiguration. A copy of this report is attached. The additional report submitted has been assessed as being satisfactory.

 

Stormwater

The proposal does not include a stormwater management plan and instead notes that the subdivision will be constructed in accordance with the plan prepared as part of the rezoning of the site. The original assessment raised no objections towards this approach in principal noting that detailed design and remodelling of all elements will be required to be undertaken prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

There is a Stormwater Management Plan dated March 2007 which includes the use of infiltration trenched/basins and buffer strips on private property, appropriate easements and positive covenants/restrictions as to user will be required to be placed on relevant lots at time of subdivision and maintenance access/rights are provided.

 

Such instruments will also be required to be created over flowpaths through the properties to both enable future access and to alert purchasers/landowners to their rights and obligations with respect to the flow of waters through the site.

 

There is a condition already imposed to create a positive covenant for maintenance of the existing overland flowpath over the site. This condition will also apply to the new layout.

 

Water

Water Supply for this modified development can remain to be provided from the 100mm AC water main on the same side of Lorne Road.

 

Fire service coverage to the building envelope of each lot to AS 2419 is to be provided wherever there is reasonable prospect of coverage from a street hydrant.

 

The subdivision plans with suitable Section 88B instruments are to show building envelopes that can be covered by street hydrants to AS 2419. This information is to be shown on the engineering plans for assessment by Water Supply Section before linen release but is deemed capable of complying.

 

Water cycle

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on water resources and the water cycle.

 

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone. The Applicant has submitted a revised bushfire report, which was forwarded to the NSW Rural Fire Service. The NSW Rural Fire Service have assessed the application and issued an amended Bushfire Safety Authority for the modified development. A copy is attached to this report.

 

The proposal has been also amended during the assessment of the application to incorporate compliant cul-de-sac sections of road with a 12m radius. Section H of the development consent is recommended to be deleted and replaced with a more current standardised condition to reference the amended bushfire authority.

 

4.       DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

 

·    Additional development contributions for the additional lot will be required towards augmentation of local water supply head works under Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993.

·    Additional development contributions for the additional lot will be required under Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 towards roads, open space, community cultural services, emergency services and administration buildings.

 

5.       CONCLUSION

 

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the application have been considered in the assessment of the application.

 

The site is suitable for the proposed modified development, is not contrary to the public's interest and will not have a significant adverse social, environmental or economic impact. It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to the recommended conditions of consent provided in the attachment section of this report.

 

Attachments

 

1View. DA2010 - 577.4 Plans

2View. DA2010 - 577.4 Recommended Amended DA Conditions.

3View. DA2010 - 577.4 Buffers Sewage Management Onsite

4View. DA2010 - 577.4 Onsite Report

5View. DA2010 - 577.4 NSW Rural Fire Service  Recommendations

6View. DA2017 - 577.4 Submission - Guy

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      26/04/2018

 

 

Item:          07

 

Subject:     DA2017 - 1125.1 Two Lot Subdivision and Erection of Four Semi-Detached Dwellings with Strata Subdivision and Two Jetties - Lot 1 DP 833585, 78 Commodore Crescent, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Benjamin Roberts

 

 

 

Applicant:               White and Dickson Architects

Owner:                    Port J V Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost:     $1,140,408

Parcel no:               4989

Alignment with Delivery Program

4.3.1  Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2017 - 1125 for a two lot subdivision and erection of four semi-detached dwellings with strata subdivision and two jetties at Lot 1, DP 833585, No. 78 Commodore Crescent, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

 

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a two lot subdivision and erection of four semi-detached dwellings with strata subdivision and two jetties at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Following exhibition of the application, three (3) submissions have been received.

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 968.3m2.

 

The site is zoned R1 General Residential in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=4166c571-9ecf-4582-ac39-234e2adb0e96&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=4686c026-5240-4dee-9e2b-24e2d761a148&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

 

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

·    Two lot Torrens title subdivision

·    Construction of four semi-detached dwellings and two jetties

·    Strata subdivision of dwellings

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    15 December 2017 – Application lodged.

·    4 January 2018 – Additional information request (land owners consent and BASIX certificate).

·    8 January 2018 – BASIX certificate provided.

·    8 January 2018 – Additional information request (Draft strata plan).

·    10 to 23 January 2018 – Public exhibition via neighbour notification.

·    10 January 2018 – Additional information request (plan amendments necessary to address finished floor levels requirements for flooding).

·    11 January 2018 – Draft strata plan provided.

·    2 February 2018 – Amended plans with revised finished floor levels provided.

·    7 February 2018 – Advice to applicant suggest plan be revised to provide required off-street parking.

·    9 February 2018 – Landowners consent provided.

·    15 March 2018 – Amended plans provided with visitor parking and driveway width increased.

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

 

In determining the application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters as are relevant to the development that apply to the land to which the development application relates:

 

(a)     The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i)      any Environmental Planning Instrument:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

There is no Koala Plan of Management on the site. Additionally, the site is less than 1ha in area. Therefore, no further investigations are required.

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

Following an inspection of the site and a search of Council records, the subject land is not identified as being potentially contaminated and is suitable for the intended use.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

Given the nature of the proposed development and proposed stormwater controls the proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impact on existing aquaculture industries.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

A BASIX certificate has been submitted demonstrating that the proposal will comply with the requirements of the SEPP.  It is recommended that a condition be imposed to ensure that the commitments are incorporated into the development and certified at Occupation Certificate stage.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 (LEP 2011)

The proposal is consistent with the LEP having regard to the following:

·    Clause 2.2, the subject site is zoned R1 General Residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table, the proposed subdivision and semi-detached dwellings, is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

To provide for the housing needs of the community.

To provide for a variety of housing types and densities.

To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

In accordance with Clause 2.3(2), the proposal is consistent with the zone objectives as it is a permissible landuse, will contribute to the range of housing options available and is compatible with the residential locality.

·    Clause 4.1, does not apply to a multi dwelling housing development – see Clause 4.1A below.

·    Clause 4.1A allows an integrated housing application whereby construction and subdivision are included in the one application. When both construction and subdivision are included in the one application, Clause 4.1A allows the minimum lot size standard to be varied/reduced. The Torrens title subdivision proposed in stage 1 will result in proposed lots 1 and 2 being 484.5m2 and 483.6m2 in area, respectively. The proposed Torrens title lots meet the minimum lot size provision of 450m2 applicable to the land in any event. The minimum lot size provision does not apply to the strata subdivision of the dwellings as proposed in stage 2.

The intent of the clause is to encourage housing diversity without compromising residential amenity. This overall assessment shows that the development will have limited impact on adjoining properties. The surrounding area also contains a mixture of low and medium to high density residential development. This proposal will be consistent with this density and character.

·    Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the buildings above ground level (existing) is 8m, which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

·    Clause 4.4, the floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.64:1.0, which complies with the maximum 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

·    Clause 5.9, there are no trees to be removed from the site.

·    Clause 5.10, the site does not contain or adjoin any known heritage items or sites of significance.

·    Clause 7.13, satisfactory arrangements are in place for provision of essential services.

 

(ii)     Any draft instruments that apply to the site or are on exhibition:

 

None relevant to the proposal.

 

(iii)    any Development Control Plan in force:

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

 

DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

3.2.2.1

Ancillary development:

4.8m max. height

Single storey

60m2 max. area

100m2 for lots >900m2

24 degree max. roof pitch

Not located in front setback

Drying areas are appropriately located behind the front building line.

Bin areas capable of being located behind building line.

Yes

3.2.2.2

Articulation zone:

Min. 3m front setback

An entry feature or portico

A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah

A window box treatment

A bay window or similar feature

An awning or other feature over a window

A sun shading feature

Covered pedestrian entry features proposed on front boundary. Entry stairs and front porch located approximately 3m from boundary at closest point. The covered pedestrian entries, stairs and porch will support an attractive streetscape consistent with that existing in the locality.

No but considered acceptable.

Front setback (Residential not R5 zone):

Min. 4.5m local road or within 20% of adjoining dwelling if on corner lot.

Front building line setback requirements are complied with. The closest point to front boundary is dwelling 1 with a 5m setback.

Yes

3.2.2.3

Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade.

Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided

Parking is located underneath the dwellings, orientated away from the street and adequately setback.

Yes

 

 

6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building

No garage doors proposed and basement parking orientated away from street.

Yes

Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width

5.5m crossover proposed. Less than 1/3 of site frontage. While the driveway crossing width exceeds 5m width. The variation is considered acceptable as the minor increase in width will enable two cars to pass on the driveway.

No, but considered acceptable.

3.2.2.4

4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space

Greater than 4m rear setback proposed to boatsheds.

Yes

3.2.2.5

Side setbacks:

Ground floor = min. 0.9m

 

First floor = min. 3m

                       

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Building wall set in and out every 12m by 0.5m

Ground floor side setbacks 1m.

 

First floor side setbacks 1m. Shadows diagrams have been provided which demonstrate adjoining property primary living areas and private open space areas will not be adversely overshadowed for more than 3 hours between 9am – 3pm on 21 June. 

 

The wall articulation is compliant and satisfies the objectives of the development provision.

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

3.2.2.6

35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade

Each dwelling has a rear north-facing deck of 17m2 in area measuring 4.2m x 4m with direct access from the ground floor living area. Access is also provided to the open space area in the rear setback adjoining the canal. These areas provide a greater than 35m² open space in one area. In addition, each dwelling contains an internal courtyard of 12m2 measuring 3m x 4m

Yes

3.2.2.10

Privacy:

Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed

Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m

Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc. which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m

The development will not compromise privacy in the area due to a combination of either lack of living room windows and/or providing highlight windows to living areas facing side boundaries. Specifically there are no first floor deck or living areas with windows. The ground floor deck areas will be separated by existing 1.8m boundary fencing. This will protect privacy between adjoining properties.

Yes

 

DCP 2013: General Provisions

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

2.7.2.2

Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline

No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available. Fencing defines property boundaries.

Yes

2.3.3.1

Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls

No cut or fill greater than 1m proposed outside the perimeter of external building walls.

Yes

2.5.3.2

New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads

No new access proposed to arterial or distribution road.

N/A

Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking

Single driveway crossing proposed of sufficient width and retains street parking.

Yes

2.5.3.3

Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1.

Multi dwelling

1.5 spaces per 3+ bedroom occupancies

0.25 spaces per occupancy for visitor parking.

Proposal involves 4 x 3 bedroom units. Therefore, 4 x 1.5 spaces + 4 x 0.25 visitor spaces = 7 spaces required. The development proposes 8 basement style spaces inclusive of 2 visitor parking. The proposal exceeds the requirements of the DCP.

Yes

2.5.3.11

Section 94 contributions

Contributions apply - refer to ET calc and NOP.

Yes

2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13

Landscaping of parking areas

Suitable landscaping areas proposed.

Yes

2.5.3.14

Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified

Sealed driveway areas proposed.

Yes

2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16

Driveway grades first 6m or ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade with transitions of 2m length

Driveway grades capable of satisfying Council standard driveway crossover requirements. Condition recommended for section 138 Roads Act permit

Yes

2.5.3.17

Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.

Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed.

Yes

 

(iiia)  any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 7.4, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 7.4:

 

No planning agreement has been offered or entered into.

 

iv)     any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

 

New South Wales Coastal Policy:

 

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives and strategic actions of this policy.

 

v)      Any coastal zone management plan (within the meaning of the Coastal Protection Act 1979), that apply to the land to which the development application relates:

 

None relevant.

 

(b)     The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, social and economic impacts in the locality:

 

Context and setting

•     The proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties and satisfactorily addresses the public domain.

•     The proposal is considered to be consistent with other residential development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area. Specifically there are a number of dual occupancy developments located in the area with a mixture of both single and two storey buildings.

•     There are no adverse impacts on existing view sharing.

•     There are no adverse privacy impacts.

•     There are no adverse overshadowing impacts. The proposal does not prevent adjoining properties from receiving 3 hours of sunlight to private open space and primary living areas on 21 June.

 

Roads

The site has road frontage to Commodore Crescent.

Commodore Crescent is a sealed public road under the care and control of Council. Commodore Crescent is a local road with variable formation width, being 7m along the site frontage, within a 20m road reserve. 

 

Traffic and Transport

The traffic associated with the development is unlikely to have any adverse impacts to the existing road network within the immediate locality.

 

Site Frontage & Access

Access shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards, and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements. 

 

Parking and Manoeuvring

Parking and driveway widths on site can comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements. 

 

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site has an existing 20mm sealed water service form the 200mm AC water main on the opposite side of Commodore Crescent. Each proposed unit requires an individual metered water service with the meter located at the property frontage. Water meter locations are to be shown on the plans and submitted to Water and Sewer Section for approval. Details required with S.68 application. Suitable condition recommended.

 

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is connected to Sewer via junction to the existing sewer line that runs inside the southern boundary of the development lot. Each lot requires an individual connection to Council’s sewer system. A sewer reticulation strategy must be submitted to the Water and Sewer Section for approval and designed in accordance with Council’s development design specification D12.

Details required with S.68 application. Suitable condition recommended.

 

Stormwater

Stormwater from the proposed development is planned to be disposed via a relocated piped drainage through the middle of the property. An engineering solution to appropriately manage stormwater is considered capable of being achieved. A detailed site stormwater management plan will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application and prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

In accordance with Councils AUSPEC requirements, the following will be required to be incorporated into the stormwater drainage plan:

·    On site stormwater detention facilities

·    Provision of interallotment drainage to allow the proposed development to drain to the nominated point of discharge via a single suitably sized conduit

 

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

 

Other land resources

No adverse impacts anticipated. The site is within an established urban context and will not sterilise any significant mineral or agricultural resource.

 

Water cycle

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on water resources and the water cycle.

 

Soils

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on soils in terms of quality, erosion, stability and/or productivity subject to a standard condition requiring erosion and sediment controls to be in place prior to and during construction.

 

Air and microclimate

The construction and/or operations of the proposed development will be unlikely to result in any adverse impacts on the existing air quality or result in any pollution.

 

Flora and fauna

There are two trees located on the site with a further four trees located in the road reservation. The application was supported by an Arborist report which concluded that construction of the proposed development will not require removal/clearing of any trees. However it clearly identified that works are proposed within tree protection zones and that further investigations i.e. root mapping will need to be undertaken prior to construction to ensure that long term retention of all trees is possible. A condition has been recommended that all trees be retained and that further root mapping be undertaken by a suitably qualified Arborist prior to release of any Construction Certificate. Should root mapping identify further impacts that may necessitate tree removal a section 96 modification would be necessary. As no trees are to be removed there will be unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on biodiversity or threatened species of flora and fauna. 

 

Waste

Due to the insufficient frontage of the development to support conventional kerbside collection. A condition has been recommended requiring a restriction on the title of the allotments requiring owners to enter into a private waste management agreement.

 

Energy

The proposal includes measures to address energy efficiency and will be required to comply with the requirements of BASIX.

 

Noise and vibration

No adverse impacts anticipated. Condition recommended to restrict construction to standard construction hours.

 

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

 

Safety, security and crime prevention

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area.

 

A suitable level of surveillance of the area will be retained by the design.

 

Social impacts in the locality

Given the nature of the proposed development and its’ location the proposal is unlikely to result in any adverse social impacts.

 

Economic impact in the locality

No adverse impacts. Likely positive impacts can be attributed to the construction of the development and associated flow on effects (ie maintained employment and expenditure in the area).

 

Site design and internal design

The proposed development design satisfactorily responds to the site attributes and will fit into the locality. No adverse impacts likely.

 

Construction

No potential adverse impacts identified to neighbouring properties with the construction of the proposal. Standard conditions will be imposed to control demolition, erosion, noise etc.

 

Cumulative Impacts

The proposed development is not expected to have any adverse cumulative impacts on the natural or built environment or the social and economic attributes of the locality.

 

(c)     The suitability of the site for the development:

 

The proposal will fit into the locality and the site attributes are conducive to the proposed development.

 

Site constraints have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

 

(d)     Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the Regulations:

 

Three (3) written submissions have been received following public exhibition of the application.

 

Key issues raised in the submissions received and comments in response to these issues are provided as follows:

 

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Four units on a block originally designed for one home is excessive, especially as the road narrows in this point.

The proposal is considered to be consistent with other residential development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area. Specifically there are a number of large two storey dwellings and dual occupancy developments within in the area.

Why should the last block to be developed be grossly overbuilt and inconsistent with the original building guidelines for regatta cove?

The proposal adequately addresses the relevant planning controls and specifically it meets the building height and floor space ratio controls. Councils planning controls prevail to the extent of any inconsistency with any old building guidelines.

The area is characterised by single family units with a modern increase in duplex development built on blocks with a minimum 20m road frontage. The proposal is not comparable to the scale and density of the neighbourhood and is not sympathetic or consistent with the character of the area.

The proposal is considered to be consistent with other residential development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area. Specifically there are a number of large two storey dwellings and dual occupancy developments within in the area.

If approved the proposal will set a precedent for future high density housing.  Vehicle parking on the street will be an issue for visitors.

The proposed development is a permissible land use within the zone and meets the relevant planning controls. Off-street parking in excess of that required is proposed.

The proposal is more along the lines of inner city terrace housing and would be much more suited to a double block i.e. with 40m frontage.

The proposal is considered to be consistent with other residential development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area. Specifically there are a number of large two storey dwellings and dual occupancy developments within in the area.

The proposal is non-compliant with Council’s Development Control Plan specifically the required 3m setback for first floors. The 1m setback will result in overshadowing, loss of privacy and noise issues to the residents at 76 Commodore Crescent. 

Refer comments in Development Control Plan assessment table. The reduced 1m first floor setback satisfies the development provision. Having regard to the building design, no adverse overshadowing, privacy or noise impacts would result.

The proposal doesn’t have visitor parking. The street narrows at this point and parking is at a maximum already. The required visitor parking should be provided.

The proposal was amended during assessment to provide the required visitor parking consistent with the planning controls within the basement.

 

(e)     The Public Interest:

 

The proposed development will be in the wider public interest with provision of appropriate additional housing.

 

The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls and is not expected to impact on the wider public interest.

 

 

4.       DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

 

·    Development contributions will be required towards augmentation of town water supply and sewerage system head works under Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993.

·    Development contributions will be required under Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 towards roads, open space, community cultural services, emergency services and administration buildings.

 

 

5.       CONCLUSION

 

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the application have been considered in the assessment of the application. Where relevant, conditions have been recommended to manage the impacts attributed to these issues.

 

The site is suitable for the proposed development, is not contrary to the public's interest and will not have a significant adverse social, environmental or economic impact. It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to the recommended conditions of consent provided in the attachment section of this report.

 

 

Attachments

 

1View. DA2017 - 1125.1 Plans

2View. DA2017 - 1125.1 Arborist Report

3View. DA2017 - 1125.1 BASIX Certificate

4View. DA2017 - 1125.1 Tree Data

5View. DA2017 - 1125.1 Recommended Conditions

6View. DA2017 - 1125.1 Submission - Lacey

7View. DA2017 - 1125.1 Submission - Little

8View. DA2017 - 1125.1 Submission - Robertson

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      26/04/2018

 

 

Item:          08

 

Subject:     DA2018 - 75.1 Two (2) Semi-Detached Dwellings At Lot 132 DP 1229250, 11 Sandy Shores Avenue, Lake Cathie.

Report Author: Fiona Tierney

 

 

 

Applicant:               J G Bazouni

Owner:                    J G & M Bazouni

Estimated Cost:     541080

Parcel no:               66496

Alignment with Delivery Program

4.3.1  Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2018 - 75.1 for two semi-detached dwellings at Lot 132, DP 1229250, No. 11 Sandy Shores Avenue, Lake Cathie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report considers a development application for two semi-detached dwellings at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Following exhibition of the application, one (1) submission has been received.

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 517.5m2.

 

The site is zoned R1 General Residential in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

 

The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:

 

 

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

 

·    Construction of  two (2) x three (3) storey semi-detached dwellings.

·    Torrens title subdivision.

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    8 February 2018 – DA lodged with Council.

·    20 February 2018 to 5 March 2018 – Neighbour notification of proposal.

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

 

In determining the application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters as are relevant to the development that apply to the land to which the development application relates:

 

(a)     The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i)      any Environmental Planning Instrument:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

 

Following an inspection of the site and a search of Council records, the subject land is not identified as being potentially contaminated and is suitable for the intended use.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

 

Given the nature of the proposed development and proposed stormwater controls, the proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impact on existing aquaculture industries.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

 

A BASIX certificate has been submitted demonstrating that the proposal will comply with the requirements of the SEPP. It is recommended that a condition be imposed to ensure that the commitments are incorporated into the development and certified at Occupation Certificate stage.

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

 

The proposal is consistent with the LEP having regard to the following:

·    Clause 2.2, the subject site is zoned R1 General Residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table, the semi-detached dwellings and subdivision is a permissible landuse with consent.

       The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

o To provide for the housing needs of the community.

o To provide for a variety of housing types and densities.

o To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

In accordance with Clause 2.3(2), the proposal is consistent with the zone objectives as it is a permissible landuse and consistent with the developing residential locality.

·    Clause 4.1, the standard minimum lot size requirements do not apply to this proposal. In this instance, Clause 4.1A is to be utilised and allows an integrated housing type application whereby construction and subdivision are included in the one application. When both construction and subdivision are included in the one application, Clause 4.1A allows the minimum lot size standard to be varied/reduced.

The intent of the clause is to encourage housing diversity without compromising residential amenity. This overall assessment shows that the development will have limited impact on adjoining properties. The surrounding area also contains a mixture of low and medium to high density residential development. This proposal will be consistent with such a density.

·    Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the buildings above ground level (existing) is 8.2m, which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

·    Clause 4.4, the floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.648:1.0, which complies with the maximum 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

·    Clause 5.9, no listed trees in Development Control Plan 2013 are proposed to be removed.

·    Clause 5.10, the site does not contain or adjoin any known heritage items or sites of significance.

·    Clause 7.13, satisfactory arrangements are in place for provision of essential services.

 

(ii)     Any draft instruments that apply to the site or are on exhibition:

 

No draft instruments are considered relevant to the application.

 

(iii)    any Development Control Plan in force:

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

 

DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

3.2.2.1

Ancillary development:

•      4.8m max. height

•      Single storey

•      60m2 max. area

•      100m2 for lots >900m2

•      24 degree max. roof pitch

•      Not located in front setback

Water tanks are appropriately located.

Yes

3.2.2.2

Articulation zone:

•      Min. 3m front setback

•      An entry feature or portico

•      A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah

•      A window box treatment

•      A bay window or similar feature

•      An awning or other feature over a window

•      A sun shading feature

The development contains balconies with a 3.0m setback to Sandy Shores Ave.

Yes

Front setback (Residential not R5 zone):

•      Min. 6.0m classified road

•      Min. 4.5m local road or within 20% of adjoining dwelling if on corner lot

•      Min. 3.0m secondary road

•      Min. 2.0m Laneway

Front building line setback is compliant with the minimum 4.5m front setback requirements in Sandy Shores Avenue

 

Yes

3.2.2.3

Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade.

Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided

Garage door setback requirements are complied with.

Yes

 

 

6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building

Whilst the widths comply they do not technically comply with the 50% requirement. The aim of the provision is to reduce impact of garages on the streetscape. As the dwellings are 2 storey and the upper floor extends forward of the garage doors this reduces the visual dominance of the garages and therefore meets with the objectives of this clause.

No - however meets objectives and considered acceptable.

Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width

Approximately 45% width of site. Stack parking will be available in driveways, which offsets the minimal impact on loss of street parking.

No - however meets objectives and is considered acceptable.

3.2.2.4

4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space

Min. 3.0m rear setback to patio posts and 6.46m to main body of building

No - however meets objectives and is considered acceptable.

3.2.2.5

Side setbacks:

•         Ground floor = min. 0.9m

•         First floors & above = min. 3m setback or where it can be demonstrated that overshadowing not adverse = 0.9m min.

•         Building wall set in and out every 12m by 0.5m

The minimum side setback requirements are complied with and where less than 3m shadow diagrams have been submitted demonstrating compliance.

The wall articulation is compliant and satisfies the objectives of the development provision.

Yes

3.2.2.6

35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade

Each occupancy contains 35m² open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m area.

Yes

3.2.2.7

Front fences:

•      If solid 1.2m max height and front setback 1.0m  with landscaping

•      3x3m min. splay for corner sites

•      Fences >1.2m to be 1.8m max. height for 50% or 6.0m max. length of street frontage with 25% openings

•      0.9x0.9m splays adjoining driveway entrances

•      Front fences and walls to have complimentary materials to context

No fencing proposed

Yes

3.2.2.10

Privacy:

•      Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed

•      Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m

•      Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m

No direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. Standard side and rear fencing will provide screening.

No dwelling on rear lot at present.

Upper rear windows are bedroom and associated rumpus area.

Yes

 

DCP 2013: General Provisions

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

2.7.2.2

Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline

No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.

Yes

2.3.3.1

Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls

Cut 1-1.3m unit 1 outside the perimeter of the external building walls

No - however considered acceptable

2.3.3.2

1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage

None proposed

N/A

Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer

Condition recommended to require engineering certification for retaining walls within close proximity to existing property boundaries.

Yes

Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway

None proposed

Yes

2.3.3.8

Removal of hollow bearing trees

No hollow bearing trees proposed to be removed

N/A

2.6.3.1

Tree removal (3m or higher with 100m diameter trunk at 1m above ground level and 3m from external wall of existing dwelling)

None proposed.

N/A

2.4.3

Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater

Refer to main body of report.

Noted

2.5.3.2

New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads

No new access proposed to arterial or distribution road.

N/A

Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking

Considered acceptable.

Yes

2.5.3.3

Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1.

Multi dwelling

1 space per 1 & 2 bedroom occupancies

1.5 spaces per 3+ bedroom occupancies

0.25 spaces per occupancy for visitor parking.

Double garages for both units.

Yes

2.5.3.11

Section 94 contributions

Contributions apply.

Yes

2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13

Landscaping of parking areas

Suitable landscaping proposed around driveway/parking locations.

Yes

2.5.3.14

Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified

Sealed driveway areas proposed.

Yes

2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16

Driveway grades first 6m or ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade with transitions of 2m length

Driveway grades capable of satisfying Council standard driveway crossover requirements. Condition recommended for section 138 Roads Act permit

Yes

2.5.3.17

Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.

Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.

Yes

 

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to the garage door width occupying more than 50% of building width

 

The relevant objectives are:

 

·   To minimise the impact of garages and driveways on the streetscape, on street parking and amenity.

·   To minimise the visual dominance of garages in the streetscape.

 

Having regard for the development provisions and relevant objectives, the variation is considered acceptable for the following reasons:

·        The garage doors proportional to the overall elevation to the front boundary is significantly less than the recommended 50%.

·        The visual dominance is reduced as the upper elevation extends forward of the garages and strategic use of landscaping assists with integration into the overall streetscape.

 

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to recommended 4m rear setback. The proposal includes sections of the rear of the units with open patio areas within the 4m area.

 

The relevant objectives are:

 

·   To allow adequate natural light and ventilation between dwellings/buildings and to private open space areas.

·   To provide useable yard areas and open space.

 

Having regard for the development provisions and relevant objectives, the variation is considered acceptable for the following reasons:

·        There are no adverse natural light and ventilation issues to the northern neighbouring property.

·        The structures within the 4m setback are only relating to open patios with posts.

·        The subject units have areas well in excess of 35m² of useable private open space areas.

·        The patio encroachment areas create a useable mix of light and shade to open space areas.

 

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to maximum cut of 1.0m external to the building. The proposal proposes a cut of 1-1.3m.

 

The relevant objectives are:

 

·    Minimise the extent of site disturbance caused by excessive cut and fill to the site.

·    Ensure there is no damage or instability to adjoining properties caused by excavation or filling.

·    Ensure there is no adverse alteration to the drainage of adjoining properties.

·    Ensure the privacy of adjoining dwellings and private open space are protected.

·    Ensure that adequate stormwater drainage is provided around the perimeter of buildings and that overflow paths are provided.

 

Having regard for the development provisions and relevant objectives, the variation is considered acceptable for the following reasons:

·        There is no adverse impacts on privacy due to the variation being limited to cut only.

·        Stormwater design and drainage will cater for the proposed cut.

·        The proposal will allow for more efficient and appropriate use of the site for suitable outdoor areas.

·        Retaining walls are to be designed by a structural engineer to ensure there is no instability or damage to adjoining properties.

 

Based on the above assessment, the variations proposed to the provisions of the DCP are considered acceptable and the relevant objectives have been satisfied.

 

Cumulatively, the variations do not amount to an adverse impact or a significance that would justify refusal of the application.

 

(iiia)  any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 7.4, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 7.4:

 

No planning agreement has been offered or entered into relating to the site.

 

iv)     any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

 

New South Wales Coastal Policy:

 

The proposal is consistent with the Policy.

 

(b)     The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, social and economic impacts in the locality:

 

Context and setting

·    The proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties and satisfactorily addresses the public domain.

·    The proposal is considered to be consistent with other residential development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area.

·    There are no adverse impacts on existing view sharing.

·    There are no adverse privacy impacts.

·    There are no adverse overshadowing impacts. The proposal does not prevent adjoining properties from receiving 3 hours of sunlight to private open space and primary living areas on 21 June.

 

View sharing

During the neighbour notification period concerns surrounding view loss were raised by the rear neighbour at Lot 142 Waterside Way.

 

The notion of view sharing is invoked when a property enjoys existing views and a proposed development would share that view by taking some of it away for its own enjoyment. (Taking it all away cannot be called view sharing, although it may, in some circumstances, be quite reasonable.)

 

Using the planning principles of NSW Land and Environment Court in Tenacity Consulting v Warringah 2004 NSW LEC 140, the following comments are provided in regard to the view impacts using the 4 step process to establish whether the view sharing is acceptable.

 

Step 1

Assessment of views to be affected. Water views are valued more highly than land views. Iconic views (e.g. of the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge or North Head) are valued more highly than views without icons. Whole views are valued more highly than partial views, e.g. a water view in which the interface between land and water is visible is more valuable than one in which it is obscured.   

 

Comments:

Lot 142 when constructed may enjoy views to the south across to North Brother Mountain which may be considered iconic in the local context. The significance of this view is likely to be considered moderate but is difficult to gauge without a dwelling on the neighbouring property.

 

Step 2

Consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries. In addition, whether the view is enjoyed from a standing or sitting position may also be relevant. Sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views. The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic.

 

Comments: Affected views from Lot 142 could possibly be obtained from two habitable levels of the neighbouring dwelling when constructed but it is anticipated that fencing or even a single storey dwelling would obstruct lower levels.

 

Step 3

Assess the extent of the impact. This should be done for the whole of the property, not just for the view that is affected. The impact on views from living areas is more significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued because people spend so much time in them). The impact may be assessed quantitatively, but in many cases this can be meaningless. For example, it is unhelpful to say that the view loss is 20% if it includes one of the sails of the Opera House. It is usually more useful to assess the view loss qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating.

 

Comments: The extent of the impact upon the views enjoyed from Lot 142 Waterside Way would vary between a possible two levels and location in which a person was standing/sitting.

 

Whilst the impacts may be significant, a dwelling has not been approved or constructed and so a design may be proposed that potentially achieves views.

 

Step 4

Assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of non-compliance with one or more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours. If the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.

 

Comments: The proposal complies with the maximum building height of 8.5m set for the area. There are non-compliances with the provisions of DCP 2013, however none of these matters would have any impact on view sharing as they relate to rear setbacks, driveway width, cut/fill and retaining walls.

 

Without a dwelling on the neighbouring property, it is also difficult to gauge whether an alternative design would reduce the extent of any potential view loss. As a result, it is considered unreasonable to refuse the application on such grounds.

 

Overall, the proposal is considered to achieve a satisfactory view sharing outcome having regard to the above principles and is a reasonable response to the site conditions.

 

View from street level- Lot 142 Waterside Way

 

Roads

The site has road frontage to Sandy Shores Avenue which is a residential street which is sealed with kerb and gutter.

 

Traffic and Transport

The site is currently vacant land. The addition in traffic associated with the development is unlikely to have any adverse impacts to the existing road network within the immediate locality.

 

Site Frontage & Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed though driveways with direct frontage to Sandy Shores Avenue. Access shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards, and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements. 

 

Parking and Manoeuvring

Parking spaces have been provided on-site within garages and with additional parking available within the driveways. Parking and driveway widths on site can comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

 

Water Supply

Council records indicate that the development site has multiple existing water services. Each propose lot requires an individual metered water service. The engineering plans submitted with the development application are not acceptable in their current form.

 

Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application. Overall, the design is considered capable of complying.

 

Sewer

Council records indicate that the development site is connected to Sewer via several junctions. Each proposed lot requires an individual connection to sewer. The engineering plans submitted with the development application are acceptable for Sewer Section purposes.

Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application.

 

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards the street.

A detailed site stormwater management plan will be required to be submitted for assessment with the Section 68 application and prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. Overall, stormwater is capable of complying.

 

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

 

Heritage

This site does not contain or adjoin any known heritage item or site of significance.

 

Other land resources

No adverse impacts anticipated. The site is within an established urban context and will not sterilise any significant mineral or agricultural resource.

 

Water cycle

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on water resources and the water cycle.

 

Soils

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on soils in terms of quality, erosion, stability and/or productivity subject to a standard condition requiring erosion and sediment controls to be in place prior to and during construction.

 

Air and microclimate

The construction and/or operations of the proposed development will be unlikely to result in any adverse impacts on the existing air quality or result in any pollution.

 

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will not require removal/clearing.

The proposal will be unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on biodiversity or threatened species of flora and fauna. 

 

Waste

Satisfactory arrangements are in place for proposed storage and collection of waste and recyclables. No adverse impacts anticipated.

 

Energy

The proposal includes measures to address energy efficiency and will be required to comply with the requirements of BASIX.

 

Noise and vibration

No adverse impacts anticipated. Condition recommended to restrict construction to standard construction hours.

 

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

 

Safety, security and crime prevention

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area.

 

Social impacts in the locality

Given the nature of the proposed development and its’ location the proposal is unlikely to result in any adverse social impacts.

 

Economic impact in the locality

No adverse impacts. Likely positive impacts can be attributed to the construction of the development and associated flow on effects (ie maintained employment and expenditure in the area).

 

Site design and internal design

The proposed development design satisfactorily responds to the site attributes and will fit into the locality. No adverse impacts likely.

 

Construction

No potential adverse impacts identified to neighbouring properties with the construction of the proposal.

 

Cumulative Impacts

 

The proposed development is not expected to have any adverse cumulative impacts on the natural or built environment or the social and economic attributes of the locality.

 

(c)     The suitability of the site for the development:

 

The proposal will fit into the locality and the site attributes are conducive to the proposed development.

 

(d)     Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the Regulations:

 

One written submission has been received following public exhibition of the application.

 

Key issues raised in the submissions received and comments in response to these issues are provided as follows:

 

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Bulk and scale - 3 storey, high density use.

The development is a permissible use within a general residential zone and complies with the relevant height and floor space ratios of the area. Numerous dual occupancies and multi- unit development are proposed within the subdivision.

Obstruction of views.

The applicant has attempted to demonstrate a potential proposed two storey with the relevant floor levels on the site to the rear. As the dwelling at the rear has not been approved, it is possible for a design to be achieved that maintains views from the upper level. Some additional view corridors can be maintained due to the upper level setbacks of the proposal. See view sharing assessment above in this report.

Loss of privacy - occupants will have a clear view into the back yard and areas of the house.

The lower patio levels will be screened by fencing and the upper levels that look out to the rear are setback from the rear boundary by over 8m. These rooms are a bedroom and rumpus that are unlikely to create significant privacy issues.

(e)     The Public Interest:

 

The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls and is unlikely to impact on the wider public interest.

 

4.       DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

 

·    Development contributions will be required towards augmentation of town water supply and sewerage system head works under Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993.

·    Development contributions will be required under Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 towards roads, open space, community cultural services, emergency services and administration buildings.

 

5.       CONCLUSION

 

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the application have been considered in the assessment of the application. Where relevant, conditions have been recommended to manage the impacts attributed to these issues.

 

The site is suitable for the proposed development, is not contrary to the public's interest and will not have a significant adverse social, environmental or economic impact. It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to the recommended conditions of consent provided in the attachment section of this report.

 

Attachments

 

1View. DA2018 - 75.1 Plans

2View. DA2018 - 75.1 Recommended Conditions

3View. DA2018 - 75.1 Submission - Innes

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      26/04/2018

 

 

Item:          09

 

Subject:     DA2017 - 1110.1 Demolition Of Dwelling And Construction Of New Dwelling - Lot 27 DP 20480, No. 24 Bundella Avenue, Lake Cathie

Report Author: Chris Gardiner

 

 

 

Applicant:               A Geoghegan

Owner:                    N A Geoghegan

Estimated Cost:     $585,000

Parcel no:               2927

Alignment with Delivery Program

4.3.1  Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2017 – 1110.1 for demolition of dwelling and construction of a new dwelling at Lot 27, DP 20480, No. 24 Bundella Avenue, Lake Cathie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report considers a development application for demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a new dwelling at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Following exhibition of the application, one submission has been received.

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 645m2.

 

The site is zoned R1 General Residential in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=f3f7bb4c-0aea-4b9e-ab3c-2801bf99a746&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=802ec2e8-2d5a-44cf-9245-997e36912f1f&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

 

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

 

·    Demolition of the existing dwelling and outbuildings;

·    Construction of a new two storey dwelling.

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    13 December 2017 – Application lodged.

·    8 January 2018 to 22 January 2018 – Neighbour notification.

·    4 April 2018 – Additional information requested from Applicant.

·    10 April 2018 – Additional information submitted.

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

 

In determining the application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters as are relevant to the development that apply to the land to which the development application relates:

 

(a)     The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i)      any Environmental Planning Instrument:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

 

There is no Koala Plan of Management on the site. Additionally, the site is less than 1ha in area. Therefore, no further investigations are required.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

 

Following an inspection of the site and a search of Council records, the subject land is not identified as being potentially contaminated and is suitable for the intended use.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

 

Given the nature of the proposed development and proposed stormwater controls the proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impact on existing aquaculture industries.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 71 – Coastal Protection and Clause 5.5 of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

 

The site is located within a coastal zone as defined in accordance with clause 4 of SEPP 71.

 

In accordance with clause 5, this SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.

 

Having regard to clauses 8 and 12 to 16 of SEPP 71 and clause 5.5 of Hastings LEP 2011 inclusive the proposed development will not result in any of the following:

a)   any restricted access (or opportunities for access) to the coastal foreshore

b)   any identifiable adverse amenity impacts along the coastal foreshore and on the scenic qualities of the coast;

c)   any identifiable adverse impacts on any known flora and fauna (or their natural environment);

d)   subject to any identifiable adverse coastal processes or hazards;

e)   any identifiable conflict between water and land based users of the area;

f)    any identifiable adverse impacts on any items of archaeological/heritage;

g)   reduce the quality of the natural water bodies in the locality.

 

The site is predominately cleared and located within an area zoned for residential purposes.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

 

A BASIX certificate has been submitted demonstrating that the proposal will comply with the requirements of the SEPP. It is recommended that a condition be imposed to ensure that the commitments are incorporated into the development and certified at Occupation Certificate stage.

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

 

The proposal is consistent with the LEP having regard to the following:

·    Clause 2.2, the subject site is zoned R1 General Residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table, the dwelling is a permissible landuse with consent.

 

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

To provide for the housing needs of the community.

To provide for a variety of housing types and densities.

To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

 

In accordance with Clause 2.3(2), the proposal is consistent with the zone objectives as it is a permissible landuse and consistent with the established residential locality.

 

·    Clause 2.7, the demolition requires consent as it does not fit within the provisions of SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008.

 

·    Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 8.2m, which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

·                      

·    Clause 4.4, the floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.42:1 which complies with the maximum 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

·                      

·    Clause 5.10, the site does not contain or adjoin any known heritage items or sites of significance.

·                      

·    Clause 7.1, the site is mapped as potentially containing class 3 acid sulphate soils. The proposed development does not include excavation extending 1m or more below the natural surface level and therefore no adverse impacts are expected to occur to the acid sulphate soils found on site.

·                      

·    Clause 7.13, satisfactory arrangements are in place for provision of essential services.

 

(ii)     Any draft instruments that apply to the site or are on exhibition:

 

No draft instruments apply to the site.

 

(iii)    any Development Control Plan in force:

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

 

DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

3.2.2.1

Ancillary development:

4.8m max. height

Single storey

60m2 max. area

100m2 for lots >900m2

24 degree max. roof pitch

Not located in front setback

Water tank is appropriately located.

Yes

3.2.2.2

Articulation zone:

Min. 3m front setback

An entry feature or portico

A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah

A window box treatment

A bay window or similar feature

An awning or other feature over a window

A sun shading feature

The dwelling contains stairs for access to the first floor deck at a 3.2m front setback.

 

Yes

Front setback (Residential not R5 zone):

Min. 6.0m classified road

Min. 4.5m local road

Min. 3.0m secondary road

Min. 2.0m Laneway

Front building line setback is compliant with the minimum 4.5m front setback requirements.

Yes

3.2.2.3

Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade.

Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided

Garage door setback is compliant with the minimum front setback requirements.

Garage door recessed.

Yes

 

 

6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building

Width of garage door/s are compliant with the maximum width requirements

Yes

Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width

Driveway crossing/s width are compliant with the maximum width requirements

Yes

3.2.2.4

4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space

The rear setback requirements are complied with.

Yes

3.2.2.5

Side setbacks:

Ground floor = min. 0.9m

First floors & above = min. 3m setback or where it can be demonstrated that overshadowing not adverse = 0.9m min.

Building wall set in and out every 12m by 0.5m

The minimum side setback requirements are complied with. The Applicant has submitted shadow diagrams demonstrating that the reduced first floor side setbacks would not adversely affect solar access to living room windows of the adjoining dwelling at No. 22 Bundella Avenue.

The building wall articulation is satisfactory to address the objective intent of the development provision.

Yes

3.2.2.6

35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade

The dwelling contains 35m² open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m space.

Yes

3.2.2.7

Front fences:

If solid 1.2m max height and front setback 1.0m  with landscaping

3x3m min. splay for corner sites

Fences >1.2m to be 1.8m max. height for 50% or 6.0m max. length of street frontage with 25% openings

0.9x0.9m splays adjoining driveway entrances

No fences proposed.

 

N/A

3.2.2.8

Front fences and walls to have complimentary materials to context

No chain wire, solid timber, masonry or solid steel front fences

None proposed.

N/A

3.2.2.10

Privacy:

Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed

Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m

Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m

The development will not compromise privacy in the area due to a combination of lack of windows on side/rear boundaries, having high sill windows that face side/rear boundaries, limiting living areas that face adjoining living areas/open space, compliant separation and use of screening/fencing.

Yes

 

DCP 2013: General Provisions

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

2.7.2.2

Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline

No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.

Yes

2.3.3.1

Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls

Cut and fill <1.0m change 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls.

Yes

2.3.3.2

1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage

None proposed.

N/A

Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer

No retaining wall likely >1m.

Yes

Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway

No retaining wall front fence combination proposed.

N/A

2.3.3.8

Removal of hollow bearing trees

No hollow bearing trees proposed to be removed.

N/A

2.6.3.1

Tree removal (3m or higher with 100m diameter trunk at 1m above ground level and 3m from external wall of existing dwelling)

Single tree proposed to be removed. The tree is not a Koala food tree and offsets are not required.

Yes

2.4.3

Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater

Refer to main body of report.

 

2.5.3.2

New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads

No new access proposed to arterial or distributor road.

N/A

Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking

Driveway crossing minimal in width including maximising street parking.

Yes

2.5.3.3

Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1.

1 space per single dwelling (behind building line)

More than 1 parking space behind the building line has been provided for.

Yes

2.5.3.11

Section 94 contributions

Refer to main body of report.

 

2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13

Landscaping of parking areas

Single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. No specific landscaping requirements recommended.

N/A

2.5.3.14

Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified

Sealed driveway proposed

Yes

2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16

Driveway grades first 6m or ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade with transitions of 2m length

Driveway grades capable of satisfying Council standard driveway crossover requirements. Condition recommended for section 138 Roads Act permit

Yes

2.5.3.17

Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.

Single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.

Yes

 

(iiia)  any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 7.4, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 7.4:

 

No planning agreement has been offered or entered into relating to the site.

 

iv)     any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

 

New South Wales Coastal Policy:

 

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives and strategic actions of this policy.

 

Demolition of buildings AS 2601:

 

Demolition of the existing building on the site is capable of compliance with this Australian Standard and is recommended to be conditioned.

 

(b)     The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, social and economic impacts in the locality:

 

Context and setting

The proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties and satisfactorily addresses the public domain.

 

The proposal is considered to be compatible with other residential development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area.

 

There are no adverse impacts on existing view sharing.

 

There are no adverse privacy impacts.

 

There are no adverse overshadowing impacts. The proposal does not prevent adjoining properties from receiving 3 hours of sunlight to private open space and primary living areas on 21 June.

 

Access, transport and traffic

The proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts in terms access, transport and traffic. The existing road network will satisfactorily cater for any increase in traffic generation as a result of the development.

 

Water Supply

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

 

Sewer

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

 

Stormwater

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

 

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

 

Heritage

This site does not contain or adjoin any known heritage item or site of significance.

 

Other land resources

No adverse impacts anticipated. The site is within an established urban context and will not sterilise any significant mineral or agricultural resource.

 

Water cycle

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on water resources and the water cycle.

 

Soils

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on soils in terms of quality, erosion, stability and/or productivity subject to a standard condition requiring erosion and sediment controls to be in place prior to and during construction.

 

Air and microclimate

The construction and/or operations of the proposed development will be unlikely to result in any adverse impacts on the existing air quality or result in any pollution.

 

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will not require any removal/clearing of any significant vegetation and therefore will be unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on biodiversity or threatened species of flora and fauna.

 

Waste

Satisfactory arrangements are in place for proposed storage and collection of waste and recyclables. No adverse impacts anticipated.

 

Energy

The proposal includes measures to address energy efficiency and will be required to comply with the requirements of BASIX.

 

Noise and vibration

No adverse impacts anticipated. Condition recommended to restrict construction to standard construction hours.

 

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

 

Safety, security and crime prevention

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area.

 

Social impacts in the locality

Given the nature of the proposed development and its’ location the proposal is unlikely to result in any adverse social impacts.

 

Economic impact in the locality

No adverse impacts. Likely positive impacts can be attributed to the construction of the development and associated flow on effects (ie maintained employment and expenditure in the area).

 

Site design and internal design

The proposed development design satisfactorily responds to the site attributes and will fit into the locality. No adverse impacts likely.

 

Construction

No potential adverse impacts identified to neighbouring properties with the construction of the proposal.

 

Cumulative Impacts

The proposed development is not expected to have any adverse cumulative impacts on the natural or built environment or the social and economic attributes of the locality.

 

(c)     The suitability of the site for the development:

 

The proposal will fit into the locality and the site attributes are conducive to the proposed development.

 

Site constraints have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

 

(d)     Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the Regulations:

 

One written submissions have been received following public exhibition of the application.

 

Key issues raised in the submissions received and comments in response to these issues are provided as follows:

 

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Stormwater impacts on neighbouring properties when existing swimming pool in the rear yard overflows.

This is an existing situation and the proposed development does not involve any new work associated with the swimming pool. As the issue does not reasonably relate to the development proposed, it is not possible to impose conditions to rectify the issue.

 

It is noted that the proposed development will substantially improve the existing situation where stormwater from roofed areas discharges on site. Impervious areas of the new works will be required to drain to the road drainage system in Bundella Avenue. There would be an opportunity for the owner to investigate the feasibility of improving the swimming pool drainage as part of this process.

(e)     The Public Interest:

 

The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls and is unlikely to impact on the wider public interest.

 

4.       CONCLUSION

 

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the application have been considered in the assessment of the application. Where relevant, conditions have been recommended to manage the impacts attributed to these issues.

 

The site is suitable for the proposed development, is not contrary to the public's interest and will not have a significant adverse social, environmental or economic impact. It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to the recommended conditions of consent provided in the attachment section of this report.

 

 

Attachments

 

1View. DA2017 - 1110.1 Plans

2View. DA2017 - 1110.1 Recommended Conditions

3View. DA2017 - 1110.1 Submission - Lindsay

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      26/04/2018

 

 

Item:          10

 

Subject:     DA2017 - 1084.1 Clubhouse - Lot 7054 DP 1074173, No. 12 Maritime Lane (Oxley Oval), Port Macquarie

Report Author: Chris Gardiner

 

 

 

Applicant:               Hastings Valley Vikings Rugby Union Club

Owner:                    Crown Land (Trustee - Port Macquarie-Hastings Council)

Estimated Cost:     $300,000

Parcel no:               32429

Alignment with Delivery Program

4.3.1  Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That it be recommended to Council that DA 2017 – 1084.1 for a clubhouse at Lot 7054, DP 1074173, No. 12 Maritime Lane (Oxley Oval), Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report considers a development application for a clubhouse at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Following exhibition of the application, 3 submissions have been received.

 

The proposal is for development on Council owned/managed land and the application is required to be considered by the Development Assessment Panel and referred to Council for determination in accordance with Council’s Development Applications – Conflict of Interest Policy.

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 5.1 hectares.

 

The site is zoned RE1 Public Recreation in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=abff16d6-31b3-49bd-a28a-00a859db0435&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=8550f404-4c91-4f33-baea-8856e26fa78d&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

 

·    Removal of two Norfolk Island Pine trees;

·    Construction of a clubhouse building ancillary to the existing recreation area (Oxley Oval), including amenities, changing facilities, canteen and bar.

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    5 December 2017 – Application lodged.

·    18 December 2017 to 12 January 2018 – neighbour notification.

·    21 December 2017 – Additional information requested from Applicant.

·    19 February 2018 – Further additional information requested from Applicant.

·    13 April 2018 – Amended plans submitted by Applicant in response to additional information request.

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

 

In determining the application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters as are relevant to the development that apply to the land to which the development application relates:

 

(a)     The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i)      any Environmental Planning Instrument:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

 

With reference to clauses 6 and 7, the subject land is greater than 1 hectare (including any adjoining land under same ownership) and therefore the provisions of SEPP must be considered.

 

The land does not contain 15% Schedule 2 Koala feed tree species and therefore does not meet the definition of potential koala habitat. No further investigation is required.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

 

Following an inspection of the site and a search of Council records, the subject land is not identified as being potentially contaminated and is suitable for the intended use.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

 

Given the nature of the proposed development and proposed stormwater controls the proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impact on existing aquaculture industries

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 71 – Coastal Protection and Clause 5.5 of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

 

The site is located within a coastal zone noting clause 4 of the SEPP.

 

In accordance with clause 5, this SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.

 

Having regard for clauses 2, 8 and 12 to 16 of the SEPP and clause 5.5 of the PMH LEP 2011, the proposed development will not result in any of the following:

a)   any restricted access (or opportunities for access) to the foreshore

b)   any adverse amenity impacts along the foreshore and on the scenic qualities of the coast;

c)   any adverse impacts on flora and fauna;

d)   the development being subject to any adverse coastal processes or hazards;

e)   any significant conflict between water and land based users of the area;

f)    any adverse impacts on any items of archaeological/heritage;

g)   reduction in the quality of the natural water bodies in the locality (due to effluent & stormwater disposal, construction impacts, landuse conflicts);

h)   adverse cumulative impacts on the environment;

i)    a form of development that is unsustainable  in water and energy demands;

j)    development relying on flexible zone provisions.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

 

Clause 45 – The proposal includes works in proximity to electricity infrastructure. Essential Energy were given written notice of the proposal on 16 February 2018 and provided with the opportunity to make comment. No comments were received within the statutory timeframe for response.

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

 

The proposal is consistent with the LEP having regard to the following:

 

·    Clause 2.2, the subject site is zoned RE1 Public Recreation. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the RE1 zone landuse table, the proposed development for a recreation area (ancillary clubhouse/amenities building) is a permissible landuse with consent.

 

The objectives of the RE1 zone are as follows:

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.

 

In accordance with Clause 2.3(2), the proposal is consistent with the zone objectives having regard to the following:

The proposal is a permissible landuse;

The development would support the use of the site for sporting and recreational activities.

 

·    Clause 5.5 - Development within the coastal zone - relevant objectives of this clause are addressed by SEPP 71 section (see above).

 

·    Clause 5.10, the site does not contain or adjoin any known heritage items or sites of significance.

·                      

·    Clause 7.13, satisfactory arrangements are in place for provision of essential services including water supply, electricity supply, sewer infrastructure, stormwater drainage and suitable road access to service the development.

 

(ii)     Any draft instruments that apply to the site or are on exhibition:

 

No draft instruments are applicable to the proposal.

 

(iii)    any Development Control Plan in force:

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

 

DCP 2013: Chapter 4.3 - Port Macquarie East

DCP Objective

Development Provisions

Proposed

Complies

4.3.2.1

Development generally in accordance with the precinct structure plan.

The proposal is generally consistent with the precinct structure plan.

 

A north-south pedestrian/cycle link is identified in the structure plan along the western boundary adjoining the school. The proposed clubhouse building would reduce the area available to accommodate the future link, but a sufficient corridor has been retained to ensure that the structure plan is still feasible.

Yes

 

DCP 2013: General Provisions

DCP Objective

Development Provisions

Proposed

Complies

2.7.2.2

Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline:

·    Casual surveillance and sightlines

·    Land use mix and activity generators

·    Definition of use and ownership

·    Lighting

·    Way finding

·    Predictable routes and entrapment locations

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area. The development would increase activity and improve lighting for this part of the site.

Yes

2.3.3.1

Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls

Less than 1m of cut and fill 1m outside the walls of the building.

Yes

2.3.3.2

1m max. height retaining walls along road frontages

No retaining walls at the road frontage proposed.

N/A

Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structural engineer

Retaining wall 0.75m high proposed.

N/A

Combination of retaining wall and front fence height

No retaining wall/front fence combination proposed.

N/A

2.3.3.8 onwards

Removal of hollow bearing trees

None proposed to be removed.

N/A

2.6.3.1

Tree removal (3m or higher with 100mm diameter trunk and 3m outside dwelling footprint

Two mature Norfolk Island Pines are proposed to be removed for construction of the clubhouse. The trees are not listed as Koala browse species and offset plantings are not required by the DCP.

Yes

2.4.3

Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater

Refer to main body of report.

 

2.5.3.2

New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads. Existing accesses rationalised or removed where practical

No new access proposed.

N/A

Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking

No new access proposed.

N/A

2.5.3.3

Off-street parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1.

(Provision to consider reduced parking where supported by parking demand study)

The proposal is ancillary to the existing recreation area and is not expected to increase demand for off-street parking. The site has 98 existing parking spaces, including 4 accessible spaces.

Yes

2.5.3.11

Section 94 contributions

Refer to main body of report.

Noted

 

(iiia)  any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 7.4, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 7.4:

 

No planning agreement has been offered or entered into relating to the site.

 

iv)     any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

 

New South Wales Coastal Policy:

 

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives and strategic actions of this policy. See comments earlier under SEPP No. 71 – Coastal Protection.

 

(b)     The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, social and economic impacts in the locality:

 

Context and Setting

The site has a general easterly street frontage orientation to Pacific Drive and a southerly frontage to Burrawan Street.

 

Adjoining the site to the north is a tennis club. Adjoining the site to the east is Oxley Beach. Adjoining the site to the south is distant medium density residential development. Adjoining the site to the west is a bowling club and school.

 

The proposal does not have a significant adverse impact on existing view sharing.

 

The proposal does not have significant adverse lighting impacts.

 

There is no adverse overshadowing impacts. The proposal does not prevent adjoining properties from receiving 3 hours of sunlight to private open space and primary living areas on 21 June.

 

Roads

The site has road frontage to Pacific Drive and Burrawan Street.

 

Adjacent to the site, both streets are sealed public roads under the care and control of Council.

 

Traffic and Transport

The traffic associated with the development is unlikely to have any adverse impacts to the existing road network within the immediate locality.

 

Parking and Manoeuvring

The proposal is ancillary to the existing recreation area and is not expected to increase demand for off-street parking. The site has 98 existing parking spaces, including 4 accessible spaces.

 

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site does not currently have a water meter. Final water service sizing will need to be determined by a hydraulic consultant to suit the components of the development, as well as fire service and backflow protection requirements in accordance with AS3500.

 

Refer to relevant conditions of consent.

 

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is connected to sewer via a junction to the existing sewer line to the east of the proposed amenities block. The proposed development may discharge all sewage to the existing point of connection to Council’s sewer system.

 

Refer to relevant conditions of consent.

 

Stormwater

The site in the location of the proposed clubhouse naturally grades to the north-west.

The development is capable of draining to Council’s existing stormwater drainage infrastructure.

 

Existing stormwater drainage from the car park located to the south of the proposed clubhouse building will need to be relocated to the east as part of a separate Council project for installation of a new substation for upgrades to the lighting at Oxley Oval. The location of the proposed clubhouse building has been reviewed and amended through the assessment process to ensure that an adequate corridor is retained to carry out the future stormwater relocation work.

 

A detailed site stormwater management plan will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application and prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

 

Heritage

No known items of Aboriginal or European heritage significance exist on the property. No adverse impacts anticipated.

 

Other land resources

The site is within an established urban context and will not sterilise any significant mineral or agricultural resource.

 

Water cycle

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on water resources and the water cycle.

 

Soils

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on soils in terms of quality, erosion, stability and/or productivity subject to a standard condition requiring erosion and sediment controls to be in place prior to and during construction.

 

Air and microclimate

The construction and/or operations of the proposed development will be unlikely to result in any adverse impacts on the existing air quality or result in any pollution. Standard precautionary site management condition recommended.

 

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will not require any removal/clearing of any habitat and therefore will be unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on biodiversity or threatened species of flora and fauna.

 

Waste

Satisfactory arrangements are in place for proposed storage and collection of waste and recyclables. No adverse impacts anticipated. Standard precautionary site management condition recommended.

 

Energy

The proposal includes measures to address energy efficiency and will be required to comply with the requirements of Section J of the Building Code of Australia. No adverse impacts anticipated.

 

Noise and vibration

The proposed clubhouse building would be ancillary to the existing recreational use of the site and is not expected to result in any significant increase in noise generation. A condition is recommended restricting use of the clubhouse/kiosk/bar to occasions when the recreation area is being used for sporting/recreational events.

 

A condition is also recommended restricting construction to standard construction hours.

 

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

 

Safety, security and crime prevention

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area. The development would increase activity and improve lighting for this part of the site.

 

Social impacts in the locality

Given the nature of the proposed development and its’ location, the proposal is unlikely to result in any adverse social impacts. It is recommended that the use of the facility, including the bar, be restricted to the times when the recreation area is being used for sporting activities. This is expected to reduce the potential for anti-social behaviour associated with the consumption of alcohol at the premises.

 

A separate liquor licence would also be required for the bar and would need to go through that associated process.

 

Economic impact in the locality

No adverse impacts. A likely positive impact is that the development will maintain employment in the construction and recreation industry, which will lead to flow impacts such as expenditure in the area.

 

Site design and internal design

The proposed development design satisfactorily responds to the site attributes and will fit into the locality. No adverse impacts likely.

 

Construction

No potential adverse impacts identified to neighbouring properties with the construction of the proposal.

 

Cumulative impacts

The proposed development is not expected to have any adverse cumulative impacts on the natural or built environment or the social and economic attributes of the locality.

 

(c)     The suitability of the site for the development:

 

The proposal will fit into the locality and the site attributes are conducive to the proposed development.

 

Site constraints have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

 

(d)     Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the Regulations:

 

Three (3) written submissions have been received following public exhibition of the application.

 

Key issues raised in the submissions received and comments in response to these issues are provided as follows:

 

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Are there alternative options or locations for the clubhouse that would have less impact on trees and use of public space?

It is understood that there has been considerable negotiation between the proponent and Council’s Recreation and Buildings Section and various alternatives have been investigated. The location in the current proposal is understood to be the only one that was suitable in principle to both parties.

 

The assessment of the application needs to consider the development proposed (rather than alternatives).

The loss of two Norfolk Island Pines will affect the attractiveness of the oval landscape and the quality of views from Burrawan Street and the adjacent Oxley Oval Reserve.

In the location of the proposed development, the existing Norfolk Island Pines have been planted in two rows (one row along the edge of the oval and the other row along the northern edge of the parking area). The proposal to remove two trees from the row adjoining the oval would have less visual impact when viewed from the south due to the second row of trees. The development would not create an obvious ‘gap’ in the plantings when viewed from the locations noted.

The proposal has not considered Council’s Social Impact Assessment Policy.

The potential social impacts of the development have been considered in the assessment report. Council’s Social Impact Assessment Policy only requires a Social Impact Comment for recreational facilities that have a capacity for greater than 100 people. The proposal facility is not expected to accommodate such numbers.

Has there been any pre-lodgement consultation with Council’s Duty Planner? If so what were the issues raised to be dealt with by the proponents?

There has been no formal pre-lodgement meeting regarding the proposal.

Approval of the proposal would create a precedent for other sporting groups to construct independent facilities.

The proposal is understood to be a shared facility for both the cricket and rugby union users. It is not expected that the development would result in multiple clubhouse/amenity facilities at the oval. The development will be located on Council managed land and Council will have the ability to manage the future use of the facility.

Remedial landscaping is essential if approval is granted for removal of the existing Norfolk Island Pines.

A condition is recommended requiring offset plantings at a 2:1 ratio to the satisfaction of Council’s Tree Management Section.

Competition impacts of proposed bar on nearby licenced premises.

Competition is not a relevant planning consideration.

Social impacts in the locality associated with the proposed bar area in the clubhouse.

The proposed bar will essentially formalise a use that already exists at the site. It is understood that a mobile bar is currently used during rugby union games and an appropriate liquor licence is in place for this activity.

 

The consumption of alcohol at the premises is expected to generally be by spectators during games and players at the completion of games during pack up and any presentations.

 

A condition is recommended restricting the use of the bar to times when there are sporting event at the site. This would prevent independent functions from being carried out at the site.

(e)     The Public Interest:

 

The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls and is unlikely to impact on the wider public interest.

 

 

4.       CONCLUSION

 

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the application have been considered in the assessment of the application. Where relevant, conditions have been recommended to manage the impacts attributed to these issues.

 

The site is suitable for the proposed development, is not contrary to the public's interest and will not have a significant adverse social, environmental or economic impact. It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to the recommended conditions of consent provided in the attachment section of this report.

 

Attachments

 

1View. DA2017 - 1084.1 Plans

2View. DA2017 - 1084.1 Recommended Conditions

3View. DA2017 - 1084.1 Submission - Brown

4View. DA2017 - 1084.1 Submission - Hazenveld

5View. DA2017 - 1084.1 Submission - Port City Bowling Club

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      26/04/2018

 

 

Item:          11

 

Subject:     DA2017 - 1138.1 Dwelling And Secondary Dwelling At Lot 61 DP 1226839, No. 33 Summer Circuit, Lake Cathie

Report Author: Chris Gardiner

 

 

 

Applicant:               L M Barsby & D M King

Owner:                    L M Barsby & D M King

Estimated Cost:     $385, 560

Parcel no:               66034

Alignment with Delivery Program

4.3.1  Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2017 – 1138.1 for a dwelling and secondary dwelling at Lot 61, DP 1226839, No. 33 Summer Circuit, Lake Cathie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report considers a development application for a dwelling and secondary dwelling at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Following exhibition of the application, two (2) submissions have been received.

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 492.1m2.

 

The site is zoned R1 General Residential in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=0b3fe7f5-6e17-4265-a81c-91f814eb44b1&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=d5b9f354-044c-423b-929e-20a673a7218b&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

More recent (December 2017) aerial imagery from Nearmap shows the nature of existing development in the locality.

 

 

 

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

 

·    Construction of a dwelling and secondary dwelling.

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    19 December 2017 – Application lodged.

·    11 January 2018 to 24 January 2018 – Neighbour notification.

·    23 March 2018 – Amended plans submitted by Applicant in response to submission.

·    23 March 2018 – Amended plans forwarded to objector for further review/comment.

·    5 April 2018 – Further submission received from objector.

·    6 April 2018 – Additional information requested from Applicant.

·    13 April 2018 – Additional information submitted by Applicant.

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

 

In determining the application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters as are relevant to the development that apply to the land to which the development application relates:

 

(a)     The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i)      any Environmental Planning Instrument:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

 

The site is subject to the adopted Area 14 Koala Plan of Management. No tree removal is proposed and the proposal is consistent with the adopted plan of management.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

 

Following an inspection of the site and a search of Council records, the subject land is not identified as being potentially contaminated and is suitable for the intended use.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

 

Given the nature of the proposed development and proposed stormwater controls the proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impact on existing aquaculture industries.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 71 – Coastal Protection and Clause 5.5 of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

 

The site is located within a coastal zone as defined in accordance with clause 4 of SEPP 71.

 

In accordance with clause 5, this SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.

 

Having regard to clauses 8 and 12 to 16 of SEPP 71 and clause 5.5 of Hastings LEP 2011 inclusive the proposed development will not result in any of the following:

a)   any restricted access (or opportunities for access) to the coastal foreshore

b)   any identifiable adverse amenity impacts along the coastal foreshore and on the scenic qualities of the coast;

c)   any identifiable adverse impacts on any known flora and fauna (or their natural environment);

d)   subject to any identifiable adverse coastal processes or hazards;

e)   any identifiable conflict between water and land based users of the area;

f)    any identifiable adverse impacts on any items of archaeological/heritage;

g)   reduce the quality of the natural water bodies in the locality.

 

The site is predominately cleared and located within an area zoned for residential purposes.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

 

A BASIX certificate has been submitted demonstrating that the proposal will comply with the requirements of the SEPP. It is recommended that a condition be imposed to ensure that the commitments are incorporated into the development and certified at Occupation Certificate stage.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

 

Clause 20 - the site is in a prescribed zone and secondary dwellings are permissible with consent pursuant to the SEPP.

 

Clause 22(2) - the development would not result in there being a dwelling other than the primary dwelling and the secondary dwelling.

 

Clause 22(3) - the proposed secondary dwelling would not have a floor area exceeding 60m2 and the combined floor area of the primary and secondary dwelling would not exceed the maximum permitted under the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 (LEP 2011) - see comments below under LEP 2011 section of this report.

 

Clause 22(4) - it is noted that consent cannot be refused on the grounds of site area or parking.

 

Clause 24 - it is noted that the consent authority must not consent to a development application that would result in any subdivision of a lot on which development for the purposes of a secondary dwelling has been carried out.

 

The requirements of this SEPP are therefore satisfied.

 

(ii)     Any draft instruments that apply to the site or are on exhibition:

 

No draft instruments apply to the site.

 

(iii)    any Development Control Plan in force:

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

 

DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

3.2.2.1

Ancillary development:

4.8m max. height

Single storey

60m2 max. area

100m2 for lots >900m2

24 degree max. roof pitch

Not located in front setback

No ancillary development in front setback.

Yes

 

Front setback (Residential not R5 zone):

Min. 4.5m local road

Front building line setback is compliant with the minimum front setback requirements.

Yes

3.2.2.3

Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade.

Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided

Garage door setback is compliant with the minimum front setback requirements.

Garage door recessed.

Yes

 

 

6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building

Width of garage door/s are compliant with the maximum width requirements.

Yes

Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width

Driveway crossing/s width are compliant with the maximum width requirements.

Yes

3.2.2.4

4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space

The rear setback requirements are complied with.

Yes

3.2.2.5

Side setbacks:

Ground floor = min. 0.9m

First floors & above = min. 3m setback or where it can be demonstrated that overshadowing not adverse = 0.9m min.

Building wall set in and out every 12m by 0.5m

The minimum side setback requirements are complied with.

 

The north- western wall of the secondary dwelling is 16.9m long without any articulation. However, the wall is single storey and includes numerous window and door openings. Additionally, a 1.8m high Colorbond fence is proposed along the side boundary. On this basis the building would not be bulky or overbearing when viewed from the neighbouring property. The building wall articulation is satisfactory to address the objective intent of the development provision.

No, but acceptable

3.2.2.6

35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade

Both the primary and secondary dwelling each contain 35m² open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m area.

 

Yes

3.2.2.8

Front fences and walls to have complimentary materials to context

No chain wire, solid timber, masonry or solid steel front fences

No front fencing proposed.

N/A

3.2.2.10

Privacy:

Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed

Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m

Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m

The development will not compromise privacy in the area due to a combination of having high sill windows that face side boundaries, limiting living areas that face adjoining living areas/open space, and use of screening/fencing.

Yes

 

DCP 2013: General Provisions

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

2.7.2.2

Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline

No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.

Yes

2.3.3.1

Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls

Cut and fill <1.0m change 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls

Yes

2.3.3.2

1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage

None proposed

N/A

Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer

No retaining wall likely >1m

 

Yes

Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway

No retaining wall front fence combination proposed.

N/A

2.4.3

Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater

Refer to main body of report.

 

2.5.3.2

New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads

No new access proposed to arterial or distributor road.

N/A

Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking

Driveway crossing minimal in width including maximising street parking.

Yes

2.5.3.3

Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1.

1 space per single dwelling (behind building line). Parking for secondary dwelling optional.

1 parking space behind the building line for the dwelling and secondary dwelling.

Yes

2.5.3.11

Section 94 contributions

Refer to main body of report.

 

2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13

Landscaping of parking areas

Development is for a dwelling and secondary dwelling only with standard driveway. No specific landscaping requirements recommended.

N/A

2.5.3.14

Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified

Sealed driveway proposed.

Yes

2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16

Driveway grades first 6m or ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade with transitions of 2m length

Driveway grades capable of satisfying Council standard driveway crossover requirements. Condition recommended for section 138 Roads Act permit.

Yes

2.5.3.17

Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.

Development is for a dwelling and secondary dwelling only with standard driveway. Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.

Yes

 

Based on the above assessment, the variations proposed to the provisions of the DCP are considered acceptable and the relevant objectives have been satisfied.

 

(iiia)  any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 7.4, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 7.4:

 

No planning agreement has been offered or entered into relating to the site.

 

iv)     any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

 

New South Wales Coastal Policy:

 

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives and strategic actions of this policy.

 

(b)     The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, social and economic impacts in the locality:

 

Context and setting

The site is located within a developing greenfield subdivision and surrounding development is generally residential dwellings interspersed with medium density housing. On the southern side of Summer Circuit is the planned ‘Hilltop Village’, which is expected to accommodate further medium density housing and mixed use development. The proposal is considered to be compatible with existing and likely future development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area. Particularly:

•     There are no adverse impacts on existing view sharing.

•     There are no adverse privacy impacts.

•     There are no adverse overshadowing impacts. The proposal does not prevent adjoining properties from receiving 3 hours of sunlight to private open space and primary living areas on 21 June.

 

Access, transport and traffic

The proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts in terms of access, transport and traffic. The existing road network will satisfactorily cater for any increase in traffic generation as a result of the development.

 

Water Supply

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

 

Condition recommended requiring dwelling and secondary dwelling to have a common water service. Contributions will be applicable if separate water services are proposed.

 

Sewer

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

 

Stormwater

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

 

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

 

Heritage

This site does not contain or adjoin any known heritage item or site of significance.

 

Other land resources

No adverse impacts anticipated. The site is within an established urban context and will not sterilise any significant mineral or agricultural resource.

 

Water cycle

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on water resources and the water cycle.

 

Soils

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on soils in terms of quality, erosion, stability and/or productivity subject to a standard condition requiring erosion and sediment controls to be in place prior to and during construction.

 

Air and microclimate

The construction and/or operations of the proposed development will be unlikely to result in any adverse impacts on the existing air quality or result in any pollution.

 

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will not require any removal/clearing of any significant vegetation and therefore will be unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on biodiversity or threatened species of flora and fauna.

 

Waste

Satisfactory arrangements are in place for proposed storage and collection of waste and recyclables. No adverse impacts anticipated.

 

Energy

The proposal includes measures to address energy efficiency and will be required to comply with the requirements of BASIX.

 

Noise and vibration

No adverse impacts anticipated. Condition recommended to restrict construction to standard construction hours.

 

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

 

Safety, security and crime prevention

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area.

 

Social impacts in the locality

Given the nature of the proposed development and its’ location the proposal is unlikely to result in any adverse social impacts.

 

Economic impact in the locality

No adverse impacts. Likely positive impacts can be attributed to the construction of the development and associated flow on effects (ie maintained employment and expenditure in the area).

 

Site design and internal design

The proposed development design satisfactorily responds to the site attributes and will fit into the locality. No adverse impacts likely.

 

Construction

No potential adverse impacts identified to neighbouring properties with the construction of the proposal.

 

Cumulative impacts

The proposed development is not expected to have any adverse cumulative impacts on the natural or built environment or the social and economic attributes of the locality.

 

(c)     The suitability of the site for the development:

 

The proposal will fit into the locality and the site attributes are conducive to the proposed development.

 

(d)     Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the Regulations:

 

Two (2) written submissions have been received following public exhibition of the application.

 

Key issues raised in the submissions received and comments in response to these issues are provided as follows:

 

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Unarticulated wall length exceeds DCP requirement of 12m.

Comments regarding wall articulation are provided on the DCP section earlier in this report. It is noted that the Applicant has amended the plans to provide compliant wall articulation to the eastern side wall adjoining the objector’s property.

Development does not comply with the DCP requirement for a minimum 4.0m rear setback.

The plans have been amended and now provide a compliant rear setback.

Loss of privacy to No. 35 Summer Circuit from rear patio of main dwelling.

The proposed rear patio will have a maximum height above ground level of approximately 800mm (including the proposed 200mm of fill). In accordance with 3.2.2.10 of the DCP, privacy screens are not required for patios/decks unless they have a finished level greater than 1m above ground level and are located within 3m of the boundary.

 

While a privacy screen along the eastern side of the patio, as suggested in the submission, would improve privacy for both parties the consent authority cannot impose a requirement that is more onerous than the DCP requirements.

Loss of privacy to No. 31 Summer Circuit from proposed side access to secondary dwelling.

The proposal includes a 1.8m high fence along the western boundary, which is considered to provide adequate privacy to protect the neighbouring property from pedestrians accessing the secondary dwelling.

 

(e)     The Public Interest:

 

The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls and is unlikely to impact on the wider public interest.

 

4.       CONCLUSION

 

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the application have been considered in the assessment of the application. Where relevant, conditions have been recommended to manage the impacts attributed to these issues.

 

The site is suitable for the proposed development, is not contrary to the public's interest and will not have a significant adverse social, environmental or economic impact. It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to the recommended conditions of consent provided in the attachment section of this report.

 

Attachments

 

1View. DA2017 - 1138.1 Plans

2View. DA2017 - 1138.1 Recommended Conditions

3View. DA2017 - 1138.1 Submission - Hall & Dodds

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      26/04/2018

 

 

Item:          12

 

Subject:     Section 4.55 Modification DA2004 - 687.5 To Modify The Hours Of Operation For Existing Sawmill At Lot 1 DP 1065577, Old Kempsey Road, Gum Scrub

Report Author: Fiona Tierney

 

 

 

83Applicant:           Hopkins Consultants Pty Ltd

Owner:                    D J & O V Hayden

Estimated Cost:     Nil

Parcel no:               43591

Alignment with Delivery Program

4.3.1  Undertake transparent and efficient development assessment in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the section 4.55 modification to DA 2004 – 687.5 for a modification of hours of operation of an existing sawmill at Lot 1, DP 1065577, No. 269 Old Kempsey Rd, Gum Scrub, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report considers a Section 4.55 modification application at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Being a Section 4.55 modification, the modified proposal has only been assessed against the legislation and related planning guidelines in place at the time of the original assessment.

 

Development consent was granted by Council on 16 October 2004 for a Sawmill Upgrade and Office.

 

This modification seeks to modify hours of operation and exchange the approved Saturday operation to Sunday. Extended hours and Sunday operations are proposed for maintenance activities only.

 

Following exhibition of the application, 13 submissions have been received with 1 in support.

 

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 14.65ha.

 

The site was zoned 1(a4) Rural Agricultural in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2001, as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph:

 

 

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

 

·    Modification to the hours of operation for Monday to Friday from the current approved hours 7am-6pm to the proposed 7am-9pm and restrict extended hours (6pm-9pm) for general maintenance only.

·    Swap the current approved hours from Saturday to Sunday and restrict time to 8am-6pm for general maintenance only.

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    Application received 22 January 2018

·    29 January 2018 – 12 February 2018- Neighbour notification of proposal

·    12 April 2018 – Site inspection

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Is the proposal substantially the same?

Section 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 enables the modification of consents and categorises modifications into three categories - S.4.55(1) for modifications involving minor error, mis-description or miscalculation; S.4.55(1A) for modifications involving minimal environmental impact; and S.4.55(2) for other modifications or modifications that require a condition imposed by a Minister, public authority or approval body to be amended. Each type of modification must be considered as being substantially the same to that which was originally consented to.

 

The proposal is considered to be a S.4.55(1A) and remains substantially the same development to that which was originally lodged and consented to and will have minimal environmental impact. In particular, the only change relates to a change in operating hours and a swap from Saturday to Sunday for operation. No further change to the Mill operations is proposed. Having regard to the above, the proposed modification is not considered to alter the fundamental essence of the original development.

 

Much of the matters raised in submissions relate to ongoing issues with the operation of the Mill in general terms and not necessarily in relation to the subject changes applied for under this application. It was noted at the site inspection that dust generation of the trucks is significant and that care must be taken on bends with risk that trucks moving at speed may be present. It is recommended that a compliance review be conducted to ensure compliance with overall conditions. 

 

Are there any condition(s) of consent imposed by a Minister, government or public authority that require modification?

 

No.

 

Does the application require notification/advertising in accordance with the regulations and/or any Development Control Plan?

 

Neighbour notification has been undertaken in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013.

 

Any submissions made concerning the modification?

During exhibition thirteen (13) submissions were received.

 

Key issues raised in the submission received and comments in response to the issues are provided as follows:

 

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Road Safety, speeding drivers, near misses on blind bends.

The proposal does not intend to alter the volumes of traffic to the site and is not the subject of this application.

Dust generation.

The proposal does not intend to alter the volumes of traffic to the site and are not the subject of this application.

Roads deteriorating.

The proposal does not intend to alter the volumes of traffic to the site and are not the subject of this application

Non-compliance total fire bans.

Non-compliances should be reported to the Rural Fire Service.

Health and enjoyment of residents diminished from traffic.

The proposal does not intend to alter the volumes of traffic to the site and are not the subject of this application.

Stifles other businesses from coming to the area due to traffic and dust.

The proposal does not intend to alter the volumes of traffic to the site and are not the subject of this application.

Noise - object to change/expansion of hours.

Conditions are to be applied relating to noise. Maintenance activities only are permitted during these expanded hours and no additional logging truck movements to and from the site are permitted at these times.

Acoustics report proposes 8am-6pm and application seeking 7am-9pm.

Acoustic assessment does indicate   extension to 9pm. 8am to 6pm refers to Sunday operating hours.

Asking how sawmill got approval to operate at its current size without notification of residents.

The sawmill has been the subject of a number of applications and neighbour notifications.

Objection to non-compliance with current conditions of consent.

 A review of overall compliance matters can be undertaken should residents have concerns.

Sunday is a day of rest and more people are home increasing the impacts to residents.

The proposal is for an increase in hours to enable maintenance. No Timber Mill operations are permitted. Conditions relating to noise and permissible activities is to be applied to the consent.

Any matters referred to in section 79C (1)/4.15 relevant to the modification?

 

Overall, the proposed development remains consistent with the original s79C/4.15 assessment. Refer to comments provided in the original DAP assessment attached to this report. Comments on notable changes are included below.

 

Noise

It’s proposed to modify the existing development consent condition (which restricts operation of the sawmill to 7am-6pm Mondays to Saturdays) to allow for maintenance work to be carried out in the evenings until 9pm, Mondays to Fridays. The proposal is also to swap the Saturday operating hours to Sundays, with no work on Saturdays.

 

If approved the new operating hours will be 7am to 9pm Mondays to Fridays and 8am to 6pm on Sundays. General sawmill operations will remain at the pre-approved hours of 7am to 6pm Monday to Friday and general maintenance work only from 6pm to 9pm Monday to Friday and 8am to 6pm on Sundays.

 

The EMM noise report dated 13 November 2017 indicates that noise levels from the general maintenance work proposed to be carried out from 6pm to 9pm Monday to Friday after the mill has closed and from 8am to 6pm on Sundays will be at an acceptable level (<35dB(A)) for the rural location at the closest residence not associated with the sawmill. 

The newly introduced “Noise Policy for Industry” NSW EPA October 2017 sets the amenity level for a rural area during the Day at 50 decibels and during the Evening at 45dB(A) so the predicted <35dB(A) is deemed to be satisfactory.

Waste

The sawmill has a long history of inappropriate storage of very large amounts of timber offcuts and waste timber and its unauthorised disposal by burning.

There’s an existing 2004 development consent condition that required the mill operators to cease burning waste by-products when the mill was upgraded (DA2004/0687) however the operator continues to disregard this requirement.

Complaints were still being received by Council in 2017 about the mill operators burning waste timber and the inappropriate storage of very large amounts of timber offcuts posing a bush fire risk. (See the 2005 aerial photo on page 2 of the NIA Report where smoke can be seen on the RHS centre).

DA2004/0687 dated 16 December 2004, Part A conditions state:

(10)   (DDA0000176) Once the new mill is operational, wastes including wood off cuts shall not be disposed of by burning.

(11)   (DDA0000197) Noise control measures shall be applied to the waste wood chipper in accordance with the recommendations contained in the Noise Impact Assessment by Bridges Acoustics, Report J0053-07-R1, and dated 9 December 2004.

(12)   (DDA0000198) Noise control measures and practices for plant and equipment shall comply with the recommendations contained in the Noise Impact Assessment by Bridges Acoustics, Report J0053-07-R1, and dated 9 December 2004.

It is considered unlikely that the proposed modifications will have any significant adverse environmental health impacts, subject to the imposition of conditions of consent as indicated in Authority. However, Council Compliance staff will need to investigate compliance with other consent conditions.

 

Proposed changes to conditions

Refer to attached draft recommended consent with conditions subject to change being highlighted in red.

 

4.       DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

 

As per original application it has been considered that the change to hours and exchange of days will not result in any adverse impact to the local road network. Accordingly development contributions are not applicable in this case.

 

5.       CONCLUSION

 

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the application have been considered in the assessment of the application. Where relevant, conditions have been recommended to manage the impacts attributed to these issues.

 

The site is suitable for the proposed development, is not contrary to the public's interest and will not have a significant adverse social, environmental or economic impact. It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to the recommended conditions of consent provided in the attachment section of this report.

 

Attachments

 

1View. DA2004 - 687.5 SoEE

2View. DA2004 - 687.5 Acoustic Report

3View. DA2004 - 687.5 Recommended Conditions

4View. DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Armstrong

5View. DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Bell

6View. DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Cheetham

7View. DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Codd

8View. DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Codd 09022018

9View. DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Graham

10View.           DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Green

11View.           DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Howe & Kerr

12View.           DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Howe

13View.           DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Kinnarney & Mahon

14View.           DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Ozolins

15View.           DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - Scott

16View.           DA2004 - 687.5 Submission - White

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

26/04/2018

 


 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      26/04/2018

 

 

Item:          13

 

Subject:     DA2018 - 74.1 Dwelling - Lot 2 DP 1237933, No 122B Camden Head Road, Dunbogan

Report Author: Robert Slater