Agenda of Development Assessment Panel

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 5/12/2018

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: ..................................

(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

[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 landⁱⁱⁱ

[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 relative^iv 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 5/12/2018

Item: 05

Subject: DA2018 - 759.1 Replacement Of Revetment Wall And Construction Of Pontoon - Lot 5 DP 217022, No, 10 North Shore Drive, North Shore.

Report Author: Stephen Ryan

Applicant: M J & P B Chapman

Owner: M J & P B Chapman

Estimated Cost: $19,500

Parcel no: 14796

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2018 – 759.1 for the replacement of revetment wall and construction of pontoon at Lot 5 DP 217022 No.10 North Shore Drive, North Shore, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a [description of development] 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.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and surrounding development

The site has an area of 743.13m².

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:

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:

· Replace deteriorated revetment wall along the river frontage and install new floating pontoon & walkway.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 18 September 2018- Application lodged.

· 4 October 2018 - 2 November 2018- Exhibition via neighbour notification

· 8 October 2018 - Submission received

· 18 October 2018 - Submission received

· 22 October 2018 – Revised submission received

· 7 November 2018 - Site inspection.

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

The proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impact on existing aquaculture industries. Controlled activity approvals will be required from Department of Primary Industries and Office of Water. These approvals will need to be followed through the construction process to ensure there is no significant impact on the Hastings River environment.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018 and Clause 5.5 of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

The site is located within a coastal use area / coastal environment area.

In accordance with clause 7, this SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.

Having regard to clauses 13 and 14 of the SEPP and clause 5.5 of the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 the proposed development is not considered likely to result in any of the following:

a) any adverse impact on integrity and resilience of the biophysical, hydrological (surface and groundwater) and ecological environment;

b) any adverse impacts coastal environmental values and natural coastal processes;

c) any adverse impacts on marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms;

d) any adverse impact on marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms;

e) any adverse impact on Aboriginal cultural heritage, practices and places;

f) any adverse impacts on the cultural and built environment heritage;

g) any adverse impacts the use of the surf zone;

h) any adverse impact on the visual amenity and scenic qualities of the coast, including coastal headlands;

i) overshadowing, wind funneling and the loss of views from public places to foreshores;

The the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding coastal and built environment. The site is predominately cleared and located within an existing nresidential area.

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

BASIX is not applicable.

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 General Residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the RU1 zone landuse table, the dwelling (or ancillary structure to a dwelling) 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 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, there is no maximum overall standard height limit applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4, there is no maximum floor space ratio applying to the site.

· Clause 4.6 – exceptions to development standards.

· Clause 5.5 - Development within the coastal zone - relevant objectives of this clause are addressed by SEPP (Coastal Management) 2018 section (see above).

· Clause 5.10 – Heritage. 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.

o Works more than 1 metre below the natural ground surface.

o Works by which the watertable is likely to be lowered more than 1 metre below the natural ground surface.

The proposed development includes 4 bored piles to a depth of 1.5m. Works are consistent with Councils Policy Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan for Minor Works. No adverse impacts are expected to occur to the acid sulphate soils found on site.

· Clause 7.3, the site is land within a mapped “flood planning area” (Land subject to flood discharge of 1:100 annual recurrence interval flood event (plus the applicable climate change allowance and relevant freeboard) In this regard the following comments are provided which incorporate consideration of the objectives of Clause 7.3, Council’s Flood Policy 2015, the NSW Government’s Flood Prone Lands Policy and the NSW Government’s Floodplain Development Manual (2005):

o The proposal is compatible with the flood hazard of the land taking into account projected changes as a result of climate change;

o The proposal will not result in a significant adverse effect on flood behaviour that would result in detrimental increases in the potential flood affectation of other development or properties;

o The proposal incorporates measures to minimise & manage the flood risk to life and property associated with the use of land;

o The proposal is not likely to significantly adversely affect the environment or cause avoidable erosion, siltation, destruction of riparian vegetation or a reduction in the stability of river banks or watercourses;

o The proposal is not likely to result in unsustainable social and economic costs to the community as a consequence of flooding.

· Clause 7.5 – Koala Habitat applies to the site. Refer to comments under SEPP 44 heading.

· Clause 7.6 – The land is not identified as a Coastal Erosion Risk on the Coastal Erosion Map (Lake Cathie/Town Beach).

· 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 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	Pontoon and walkway 22m² Rear setback	N/A Yes Yes N/A N/A 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	Walkway setback 1.0m from side boundary.	Yes
3.2.2.13 onwards	Jetties and boat ramps	a) Mooring piles are to be set at a level no lower than the level which ensures that the floating structure is retained during the design 1:100 year flood event. b) The width of a jetty walkway not to exceed 1.0m. (1.0m proposed). c) The area of a platform should not exceed 10m². d) Jetty length measured from the existing revetment wall not to exceed 17m. (12m proposed). e) Boating ramps should have a maximum overall width of 3.0 metres and a maximum overall length of 10.0 metres. f) Pontoons moored at right angles to the revetment wall not to extend 17 metres from the wall. g) Pile cut off levels should not be lower than RL3.0m AHD. (3.8m proposed) h) Fixed jetties may only extend to a point 7m from the revetment wall. i) Any extension beyond a point 7m from the revetment wall is to be by way of a pivoting walkway to a floating pontoon. j) The deck of the jetty is to be above and not resting on the revetment wall and the top surface is not to be above RL 1.4m AHD. k) Pontoons moored parallel to the revetment wall not to extend beyond a point 12 metres. (12m proposed). l) Floating moorings should be located between 17m from the revetment wall. m) Fixed mooring poles should not be greater than 17m from the revetment wall.	Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A N/A Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes N/A 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
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer	Revetment/ retaining wall engineer designed	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.

(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 – Clause 92

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 and the social and economic impacts in the locality

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.

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.

Access, Traffic and Transport

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.

Other Utilities

N/A

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

Heritage

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

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. Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act is considered to be satisfied.

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

No adverse impact anticipated. Standard construction methodologies capable for completing the works.

Noise and vibration

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

Bushfire

The site is identified as being partially bushfire prone.

No construction requirements under AS3959- 2009 are applicable to the proposed works.

Safety, security and crime prevention

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 maintain employment in the construction 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 of bushfire/flooding have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

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
Pontoon does not suit the surrounding environment & will be out of place.	The pontoon & walkway is consistent with other similar structures to the east of the subject lot.
The length of the walkway is excessive & will be a hazard at night.	The walkway length is consistent with the maximum length specified in the Development Control Plan.
The pontoon is not suited to a river especially during flood times.	The pontoon is engineer certified to withstand flood forces at the 1:100 year flood event.
The consideration requires more consideration (environmental reports of water flow, sand build up, effect on weed beds)	Further environmental assessments are not considered necessary. The relevant State Government authorities have granted consent and imposed conditions of approval.
This part of the river is for the use of everyone	The proposed walkway and pontoon does not restrict the use of the river.
During flood & heavy rain, debris, logs, oyster racks etc. will get caught up on the western part of the pontoon.	The pontoon is engineer certified to withstand flood forces at the 1:100 year flood event.
Debris will block neigbouring walls & boat ramps.	The effect of debris during river flows cannot be anticipated.

(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

N/A

5. CONCLUSION AND STATEMENT OF REASON

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 considered suitable for the proposed development and the proposal adequately addresses relevant planning controls. The development is not considered to be contrary to the public's interest and will not result 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

1 View. DA2018 - 759.1 Recommended conditions

2 View. DA2018 - 759.1 Plans

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 5/12/2018

Item: 06

Subject: DA2018 - 735.1 Alterations And Additions To Dwelling - Lot 9 DP 708575, No 32 St Andrews Avenue, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Andrew Rock

Applicant: J T McKeough

Owner: J T McKeough

Estimated Cost: $180,000

Parcel no: 22662

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2018 – 735.1 for alterations and additions to dwelling at Lot 9 DP708575, No. 32 St Andrews Avenue, Port Macquarie be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

Following exhibition of the application, four (4) submissions has been received, from the one objector.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and surrounding development

St Andrews Ave is a residential street containing one and two storey dwellings.

The subject site has an area of 990.200m^2.

The site is zoned R 1 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:

· An upper floor addition to a rear section of the existing dwelling, adjacent to the southern lot boundary.

· The removal of a ground floor store room.

· Internal alterations.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 11.9.18 – Application lodged

· 13.9.18 – Notification undertaken (18.9.18 – 2.10.18)

· 2.10.18 – First submission received (email dated 2.10.18)

· 3.10.18 – Second submission received (email dated 3.10.18)

· 11.10.18 – Amended plans received (Rev F)

· 16.10.18 – Additional pans received (Rev H)

· 16.10.18 – Third submission received (email dated 16.10.18)

· 14.11.18 – Site inspection of proposed development site

· 16.11.18 – Site inspection from objectors property

· 16.11.18 – Fourth submission received (undated)

· 20.11.18 – Final plan set received (Rev I)

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

(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 (Coastal Management) 2018 and Clause 5.5 of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

The site is located within on land within a proximity area for coastal wetlands and within a coastal use and coastal environment area.

In accordance with clause 7, this SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.

In accordance with clause 11, the proposed additions will not significantly impact on:

(a) the biophysical, hydrological or ecological integrity of the adjacent coastal wetland, or

(b) the quantity and quality of surface and ground water flows to and from the adjacent coastal wetland.

Having regard to clauses 13 and 14 of the SEPP and clause 5.5 of the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 the proposed development is not considered likely to result in any of the following:

a) any adverse impact on integrity and resilience of the biophysical, hydrological (surface and groundwater) and ecological environment;

b) any adverse impacts coastal environmental values and natural coastal processes;

c) any adverse impacts on marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms;

d) any adverse impact on marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms;

e) any adverse impact on Aboriginal cultural heritage, practices and places;

f) any adverse impacts on the cultural and built environment heritage;

g) any adverse impacts the use of the surf zone;

h) any adverse impact on the visual amenity and scenic qualities of the coast, including coastal headlands;

i) overshadowing, wind funneling and the loss of views from public places to foreshores;

The bulk, scale and size of the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding coastal and built environment. The site is 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 (or ancillary structure to a dwelling) 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 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 6.861 m which complies with the standard height limit of 11.5 m applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4, the floor space ratio of the proposal is 26.6:1.0 which complies with the maximum 1.0:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

· Clause 5.10 – Heritage. The site does not contain or adjoin any known heritage items or sites of significance.

· Clause 7.1, the site is not mapped as potentially containing acid sulfate soils.

· Clause 7.3, the site is not land within a mapped “flood planning area” (Land subject to flood discharge of 1:100 annual recurrence interval flood event (plus the applicable climate change allowance and relevant freeboard).

· Clause 7.5 – Site is not mapped as containing Koala Habitat.

· Clause 7.8 - Development in areas subject to aircraft noise – site not located within an ANEF contour of 20 or greater.

· Clause 7.9 - Development subject to acoustic controls – site not identified as being subject to acoustic controls.

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

N/A

(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	Ancillary development 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	No elements within the articulation zone.	Yes
3.2.2.2	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	All proposed development behind the building line and greater than 6m from Ocean Drive.	Yes
3.2.2.3	Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade. Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided	No changes to existing proposed.	N/A
	6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building	No changes to existing proposed.	N/A
	Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width	Existing driveway suitable.	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 ground floor side setback requirements are complied with. Upper floor addition proposed to be setback 1.942m from the southern lot boundary (labelled eastern elevation plan). The ground floor 3m addition to the south-west would result in an unarticulated building wall length of approximately 20m to the southern wall.	Yes No No
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
3.2.2.10	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 upper floor addition is not proposed to contain primary indoor living areas. Windows proposed on the eastern elevation plan are a high sill 0.6m x 0.9m (height x width) window and 0.9m x 0.6m wet area window. Upper floor windows proposed on the northern and southern elevations will not provide direct views (directly overlook with normal use of the room) to the primary indoor living area or primary outdoor space of an adjoining property.	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	Minimal cut/fill proposed.	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 distribution road.	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Existing driveway crossing considered suitable.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. 1 space per single dwelling (behind building line)	Existing double garage on-site.	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	Existing single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. No alterations considered necessary.	N/A
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Existing sealed driveway.	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	Existing driveway considered suitable.	Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Existing single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. Stormwater drainage is currently being managed adequately.	Yes

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision 3.2.2.5 relating to ground floor building walls being unarticulated for greater than 12m (approx. 20m) and the upper floor side setback of less than 3m (1.942m).

The relevant objectives are:

· To reduce overbearing and perceptions of building bulk on adjoining properties and to maintain privacy.

· To provide for visual and acoustic privacy between dwellings.

With regard to the proposed ground floor building walls (existing walls + proposed) being unarticulated for approximately 20m (eastern elevation as shown on plan), the following observations are made:

o The existing wall extends for approximately 17m without articulation, and a 3m extension of the subject wall is proposed.

o The site of the proposed development is significantly lower than the existing dwelling and land to the south (30 St Andrews Ave).

o There is an existing sheet metal dividing fence along the subject common boundary.

20181116_101614

View to proposed development site from 30 St Andrews Ave

Given the above considerations, it is not considered that the proposed additions to the ground floor, resulting in an unarticulated wall of approximately 20m, will create a feeling of overbearing or perceptions of building bulk from the property to the south (30 St Andrews Ave).

With regard to the proposed upper floor side setback being 1.942m from the southern side boundary, the following observations are made:

o The floor level of the proposed upper floor addition is of a similar height to that of the primary outdoor living area of dwelling to the south (no 30 St Andrews Ave). See page 11 of the plan set.

o The proposed addition is to have a physical separation of 7.8m from the dwelling to the south (30 St Andrews Ave). See page 11 of the plan set.

o The proposed upper floor addition is to extend a length of 7.990m along the southern lot boundary.

o Upper floor windows adjoining the southern lot boundary (labelled as east elevation on plan) are not within living rooms. One window with dimensions 0.6m x 1.5m (height x width) has a minimum sill height of 1.5m, and the other window with dimensions of 0.9 x 0.6m, is proposed to be located within a wet area.

o There will be additional overshadowing caused to a section of grassed area of the property to the south (30 St Andrews Ave).

Given the above observations, and the residential context, it is not considered that the proposed upper floor addition will feel unacceptably overbearing or unacceptably bulky when considered from the property to the south. The window placement on the eastern elevation labelled plans will ensure that visual privacy is maintained to the primary outdoor living area to the dwelling to the south. The physical separation between the dwellings, combined with the proposed use of the rooms adjoining the lot boundary, will maintain an adequate level of acoustic privacy between dwellings. The upper floor addition, proposed to be setback 1.942m from the side lot boundary will result in some overshadowing to the land to the south, which is explored in more detail below.

When considering side setbacks and overshadowing impacts, Development Provision 3.2.2.5 of Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan, point b) states:

“First floors and above should be setback minimum of 3m from the side boundary or reduced down to 900mm where it can be demonstrated that the adjoining property primary living areas and primary private open space areas should not be adversely overshadowed for more than 3hrs between 9am-3pm on 21 June.”

With regard to the above, the following observations are made:

o The proposed development will result in additional overshadowing on the land to the south (30 St Andrews Ave). The overshadowing will occur in a section of land to the north-west of an existing covered deck.

o The extent of the overshadowing is shown in the plans accompanying the application. Page 4 shows an isometric projection of the existing development only on 21 June. Pages 5 and 12 shows a plan and isometric projection of the proposed development on the 21 June. Page 13 shows an isometric projection on 21 March.

o The plans show that no adjoining living areas will be over shadowed as a result of the proposed development.

o The plans show that the deck area of the dwelling to the south (30 St Andrews Ave) will not be overshadowed as a result of the development.

o Open space areas located on the property to the south (30 St Andrews Ave) exist, relative to the covered deck area, are to the; north, north-west, west area, along the southern lot boundary and a section along the eastern lot boundary.

o The area which would be overshadowed as a result of the proposed development is an area to the north-west of the existing deck at 30 St Andrews Ave. Other areas identified in the point above will not be overshadowed as a result of the proposed development.

o It is noted that some of the areas of open space listed above, at 30 St Andrew Ave, will be overshadowed at different times of the day from the existing dwelling at 30 St Andrews Ave.

Nearmap image

Aerial image of proposed development site, taken 23 October 2018 (nearmap)

The proposed upper floor addition will result in overshadowing impacts to an area of open space to the north-west of the existing deck at 30 St Andrews Ave. It is noted that the impacted lot is quite large and has a number of grassed outdoor areas, most of which directly adjoin a large covered deck which is considered the principal outdoor living area. These open space areas are all behind the building line and screened from adjoining residential land by boundary fencing. Accordingly, given the availability of a variety of private open space areas available at 30 St Andrew Ave, the period of time within the year when there will be an overshadowing impact and the 11.5m max building height, it is considered that the overshadowing impact is not considered unacceptable given the site circumstances.

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 unacceptable impact 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:

N/A

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.

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

With regard to view impacts, there will be some interruption to a view of trees along Ocean Drive to the north-west from the covered deck area of 30 St Andrew Ave. The view proposed to be interrupted is across a side boundary and will not be for the entirety of the northern lot boundary. There will no impact to a view of trees along Ocean Drive over the western rear boundary, or of the Port Macquarie Golf Course over the rear southern lot boundary. The interruption of a view to the north-west of the affected property would occur as a result of a non-compliance with a development provision of the Development Control Plan, however the extent of the view loss is not considered unreasonable given the site circumstances.

Labelled view interuption image

View to the north-west from the deck of 30 St Andrew Ave, Port Macquarie

The proposal does not have significant adverse lighting impacts.

There are no significant adverse privacy impacts to primary living areas or primary private open space areas due to the proposed orientation of windows, high window sill design to the southern elevation and proposed use of the rooms containing windows.

There would be some overshadowing impacts resulting from the proposed development however due to the limited size of the area to be affected, for a limited period of the year the extent of overshadowing is not considered unreasonable.

The proposal will be unlikely to have any unacceptable impacts to the 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.

Access, Traffic and Transport

Water Supply Connection

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

Sewer Connection

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

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

Air and microclimate

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 BASIX.

Noise and vibration

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

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

The Applicant has submitted a bushfire report prepared by a Certified Consultant.

An assessment of bushfire risk having regard to section 4.3.5 of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 including vegetation classification and slope concludes that a Bushfire Attack Level 29 shall be required and that some upgrading of the existing dwelling is recommended.

Management of bushfire risk is acceptable subject to BAL construction levels being implemented and APZ being maintained. An appropriate condition is recommended.

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 increase in housing density will improve natural surveillance within the locality and openings from each dwelling overlook common and private areas.

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 maintain employment in the construction industry, which will lead to flow impacts such as expenditure in the area.

Site design and internal design

The proposed development design adequately responds to the site attributes and will result in a section of the dwelling being double storey, which will fit into the locality. The internal design, with no primary living areas proposed on the upper floor, assists to minimise potential impacts.

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 of bushfire risk have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

Four (4) 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
Overshadowing to a section of the backyard.	Proposed development will result in overshadowing to a section of the backyard of an adjoining property, particularly during the winter months however the extent of overshadowing is not considered unacceptable. See assessment earlier in this report.
View and ‘atmosphere’ impacts from primary indoor and outdoor areas.	Proposed development will have an impact on a view from the subject areas however view to be interrupted is not considered unacceptable given the circumstances. See assessment earlier in this report. Potential impacts to the ‘atmosphere’ of the subject areas are not considered significant due to the relative height of the proposed development, window placement and the proposed use of the rooms on the upper floor addition.
Privacy impacts including ‘overlooking’ of a swimming pool and backyard and ‘direct views’ into primary indoor living and covered deck area.	Upper floor windows proposed on the northern and southern elevation plans are orientated to the front and rear of the subject lot respectively. Normal use of the rooms containing these windows is unlikely to cause unacceptably ‘overlooking’ of the yard and pool areas. There are two windows proposed on the eastern elevation which are orientated to the primary indoor living and covered deck area of 30 St Andrews Ave. As identified in the assessment above, neither of the rooms is proposed to contain primary indoor living areas. One of the windows has a sill height of a minimum of 1.5m above floor level and the other window is proposed to contain a wet area. The high sill window is unlikely to result in adverse privacy impacts and it is proposed to impose a condition that the wet area window contain obscured glass.

(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

N/A

5. CONCLUSION AND STATEMENT OF REASON

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

Attachments

1 View. DA2018 - 735.1 Recommended conditions

2 View. DA2018 - 735.1 Plans

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 5/12/2018

Item: 07

Subject: DA2018 - 528.1 Log Processing Works (Rural Industry) - Lot 2 DP 505234, 75 Bobs Creek Road, Bobs Creek

Report Author: Clint Tink

Applicant: B E & J B Osbourne

Owner: B E & J B Osbourne

Estimated Cost: N/A

Parcel no: 18658

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2018 – 528.1 for a log processing works (rural industry) at Lot 2, DP 505234, No. 75 Bobs Creek Road, Bobs Creek, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for log processing works 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 and prior to finalising this report, ten (10) submissions were received. The submissions comprise two (2) against the proposal and eight (8) in support of the proposal.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

The site has an area of 19.92ha.

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:

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

Geocortex image 2013

Nearmap image zoomed in on logging works area 2018

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· A log processing mill is to be established for the purposes of processing timber into firewood and timber fencing.

· Hours of operation (including vehicles picking up and delivering product) are proposed to be 7:30am to 4:00pm Monday to Friday and 8:00am to 1:00pm Saturdays.

· Maximum of four (4) staff operating the mill.

· 3000-4000 tonnes (approx 4600m³) to be processed per year with less than 1000 tonnes to be stored onsite at any one time.

· Approximately two (2) to three (3) truckloads (28 tonnes per load) of timber will be delivered per week during the aforementioned hours of operation.

· Timber to be sold via wholesale market with no retails sales direct to the public occurring onsite.

· A noise impact assessment has been undertaken.

· Access for staff, people doing repairs and friends (light vehicles) will predominately be obtained via the existing southern private access/driveway off Bobs Creek Road. Access for trucks delivering and picking up timber will be via the existing western Forestry Road off Bobs Creek Road. The Forestry access will ensure the larger timber trucks do not have to pass the neighbouring dwellings in Bobs Creek Road.

· No burning of timber will occur onsite with waste timber to be recycled or sent to a waste management facility.

· No works are proposed within 40m of the eastern drainage line onsite.

· No clearing is proposed onsite as part of this application.

· Amenities facilities are available within the existing dwelling and shed onsite.

· A twelve (12) month trial period is proposed to be condition to allow the applicant the opportunity to show compliance with conditions and to align with the Forest Corporation twelve (12) month access approval. Towards the end of the twelve (12) month trial, the applicant can modify the consent to extend the consent.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 18/7/2018 – Development Application lodged with Council.

· 20/7/2018 – Council staff sought clarification from the applicant on noise impacts, works within 40m of drainage line, truck movements, amount of material to be processed, waste disposal, location of amenities, owners consent from Forestry Corporation to use forestry road for access to commercial operation, access and use of facility. Applicant acknowledged request.

· 25/7/2018 to 7/8/2018 – Development Application notification period.

· 31/7/2018 – Applicant provided update on additional information issues and that noise consultant would take approximately five (5) weeks to complete noise report (based on their workload).

· 26/9/2018 – Update was provided to one of the objectors on the status of the application. The applicant also provided partial response to additional information issues.

· 27/9/2018 – Applicant confirmed location of sawdust stockpile onsite. Update provided to one of the objectors who had requested status of the application.

· 17/10/2018 – Council staff requested update on owners consent from Forestry Corporation. Applicant provided response.

· 19/10/2018 – Update was provided to one of the objectors on status of the application.

· 24/10/2018 – Applicant provide update on owners consent from Forestry Corporation.

· 26/10/2018 – Forestry Corporation consent provided for 12 months. Council staff checked with applicant that they were aware consent was for only 12 months.

· 30/10/2018 – One of the objectors raised concerns with ongoing operations without consent.

· 6&7/11/2018 – Update on status of the application provided to objector. Discussion with applicant on Forestry Corporation consent and Development Assessment Panel (DAP) process. Applicant requested copies of submissions. Council staff provided redacted copies of submissions to applicant. Applicant also discussed with Council staff that they would be obtaining letters of support.

· 8&20/11/2018 – Discussion with applicant about obtaining pre-development application information.

· 12&20/11/2018 – Discussion with one of the objectors and the applicant regarding a truck arriving before 7:30am.

· 13&20/11/2018 – Applicant provided response to submission issues, which was acknowledged by Council staff.

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) any Environmental Planning Instrument:

State Environmental Planning Policy 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. In this case, the development has the potential to be an offensive industry by virtue of the noise component. Having considered the SEPP along with the associated application and imposition of conditions; the proposed development is not considered to be an offensive industry and will create no adverse impact. Proposal can be considered a rural industry.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

With reference to clauses 6 and 7, the subject land is greater than one (1) hectare and therefore the provisions of SEPP must be considered.

In this case, the application has demonstrated that no habitat will be removed or modified (ie the development will occur within existing cleared areas). 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/erosion control that will be in place; the proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impact on existing aquaculture industries.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage

No signage proposed.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018 and Clause 5.5 of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

While the lower part of the property (south of Bobs Creek Road) contains land affected by the SEPP; no development is proposed within such an area. In particular, the proposed development is located over 300m from land affected by the SEPP.

As a result of the above, the proposed development is not considered to result in any of the following:

a) any adverse impact on integrity and resilience of the biophysical, hydrological (surface and groundwater) and ecological environment;

b) any adverse impacts coastal environmental values and natural coastal processes;

c) any adverse impacts on marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms;

d) any adverse impact on marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms;

e) any adverse impact on Aboriginal cultural heritage, practices and places;

f) any adverse impacts on the cultural and built environment heritage;

g) any adverse impacts the use of the surf zone;

h) any adverse impact on the visual amenity and scenic qualities of the coast, including coastal headlands;

i) overshadowing, wind funnelling and the loss of views from public places to foreshores;

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

The development does not trigger any of the clauses or thresholds in the SEPP.

State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011

The development does not trigger any of the clauses or thresholds in the SEPP.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Rural Lands) 2008

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

SEPP requirement	Comment	Complies
Objectives
2(a) to facilitate the orderly and economic use and development of rural lands for rural and related purposes,	Log processing is a permissible use in a rural zone. The use will not impact on the overall rural use of the site or surrounding areas. In addition, the portable nature of the business ensures no long term impact on the land.	Yes
2(b) to identify the Rural Planning Principles and the Rural Subdivision Principles so as to assist in the proper management, development and protection of rural lands for the purpose of promoting the social, economic and environmental welfare of the State,	Refer to above comment. The rural planning principles are specifically addressed later in this assessment table.	Yes
2(c) to implement measures designed to reduce land use conflicts,	Conditions are to be imposed to manage conflicts arising from such issues as noise and visual impact of the development on adjoining properties. In particular, screening of the site, additional mufflers, enclosure around engines, restrictions on access/use etc will be utilised.	Yes
2(d) to identify State significant agricultural land for the purpose of ensuring the ongoing viability of agriculture on that land, having regard to social, economic and environmental considerations,	The development will not affect the viability of any state significant agricultural land. As mentioned previously, the portable nature of the business ensures no long term impact on the land.	Yes
2(e) to amend provisions of other environmental planning instruments relating to concessional lots in rural subdivisions.	Local environmental planning provisions have removed concessional lots.	N/A
Rural Planning Principles
7(a) the promotion and protection of opportunities for current and potential productive and sustainable economic activities in rural areas,	The development will not affect the productivity and sustainability of surrounding rural areas. Most of the immediate properties comprise either forestry land or smaller rural farms/hobby farms or rural residential sized lots.	Yes
7(b) recognition of the importance of rural lands and agriculture and the changing nature of agriculture and of trends, demands and issues in agriculture in the area, region or State,	Refer to above comment. In addition, the proposed use comprises rural based elements i.e. processing of a primary product (timber).	Yes
7(c) recognition of the significance of rural land uses to the State and rural communities, including the social and economic benefits of rural land use and development,	The processing of a primary product for firewood purposes and typically rural fencing products plays a role in the local community through maintenance of jobs and expenditure, while also providing a product (firewood and fencing) to the area, state etc.	Yes
7(d) in planning for rural lands, to balance the social, economic and environmental interests of the community,	The zoning of the site allows for the use with other issues such as noise, access, servicing etc having been considered in this assessment report. Impacts are considered manageable through conditions.	Yes
7(e) the identification and protection of natural resources, having regard to maintaining biodiversity, the protection of native vegetation, the importance of water resources and avoiding constrained land,	This application deals with the processing of a primary product. The product (trees) would have already been approved to be removed elsewhere in supplying this business (ie the trees are approved as a separate process to this application). In addition, the processing of timber onsite will occur within a cleared section of land, clear of any sensitive environment land. This will also ensure no further adverse impact on flora and fauna onsite.	Yes
7(f) the provision of opportunities for rural lifestyle, settlement and housing that contribute to the social and economic welfare of rural communities,	The development does not involve subdivision or impact on rural settlement opportunities.	N/A
7(g) the consideration of impacts on services and infrastructure and appropriate location when providing for rural housing,	No new housing proposed.	N/A
7(h) ensuring consistency with any applicable regional strategy of the Department of Planning or any applicable local strategy endorsed by the Director-General.	The development is not inconsistent with any strategy.	Yes
Rural Subdivision Principles	No subdivision proposed.	N/A
Matters to be considered in determining development applications for rural subdivisions or rural dwellings	No subdivision or dwellings proposed.	N/A

The requirements of this SEPP are therefore satisfied.

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 a rural industry (log processing industry) is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the RU1 zone are as follows:

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

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

o To minimise the fragmentation and alienation of resource lands.

o 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:

o The proposal is a permissible landuse.

o The proposal does not impact on the resource base.

o The proposal encourages diversity by providing an alternate primary industry.

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

o Conditions will be utilised to reduce conflict with neighbouring properties.

· Clause 5.10, the site does not contain or adjoin any known heritage items or sites of significance. The area is also disturbed from past agriculture/grazing purposes.

· Clause 7.3, the lower part of the site (south of Bobs Creek Road) contains land within a mapped “flood planning area”. However, this development is located on the northern side of Bobs Creek Road, well clear of the flood prone area. Flood free access is also retained. As a result of the above, no further consideration of flooding provisions required.

· 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

33 Wood or timber milling or processing works

Wood or timber milling or processing works (being works, other than joineries, builders supply yards or home improvement centres) that saw, machine, mill, chip, pulp or compress timber or wood:

(a) that have an intended processing capacity of more than 6,000 cubic metres of timber per year and:

(i) are located within 500 metres of a dwelling not associated with the milling works, or

(ii) are located within 40 metres of a natural waterbody or wetland, or

(iii) burn waste (other than as a source of fuel), or

(b) that have an intended processing capacity of more than 50,000 cubic metres of timber per year.

The proposed development is not designated as it does not have an annual processing capacity of 6000 cubic metres (approximately 4600 cubic metres proposed per annum), will be located 40m from a natural waterbody and will not burn any waste. Conditions will also be imposed to reinforce compliance.

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

There are no relevant draft instruments that are applicable to this site or development.

(iii) any Development Control Plan in force:

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: Chapter 3.5 - Industrial Development (used as guide)*
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 approximately 200m from Bobs Creek Road.	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.	No buildings proposed. Milling structures are more portable/machinery type structures. Nonetheless, the structures are approximately 200m from Bobs Creek Road and screened via logs and vegetation.	Yes
3.5.3.2	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.	Refer to above comment.	Yes
3.5.3.3	Material storage/work areas and volumes to be provided with application.	Storage and work areas shown on plans.	Yes
3.5.3.3	Open work and storage areas to be located at rear of premises and screen from view by landscaping and/or fencing minimum 2m high.	Work areas and storage are located approximately 200m from Bobs Creek Road and suitably screened via logs and vegetation.	Yes
3.5.3.4	Detailed landscaping plan submitted.	Considered not applicable to this application given the separation to roads/adjoining dwellings and existing vegetation. Screening will also be covered by conditions of consent.	N/A
	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.	No fencing 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.	Area exists onsite for casual amenities/recreation by staff.	Yes
3.5.3.6	Provide onsite facilities for changing, showering and secure bike storage.	Facilities available at the shed/dwelling onsite.	Yes
3.5.3.7	Development complies with NSW Industrial Noise Policy.	A noise impact assessment was submitted with the application. The assessment was reviewed by Council’s Environmental Health Officer and deemed capable of complying, subject to conditions. It should be noted that noise impacts and associated comments are addressed in more detail later in this report.	Yes
	Building openings located to minimise noise impacts if within 400m of residential zone.	No buildings proposed. Conditions will be imposed to manage noise.	N/A
	External plant such as generators, air conditioning plant and the like, should be enclosed to minimise noise nuisance and located away from residences.	Conditions are proposed to enclose plant.	Yes
	External and security lighting should be directed and shielded to avoid light spillage to adjoining residential areas.	No lighting proposed. Development will not operate outside of daylight hours.	N/A
	Driveways should be arranged or screened to avoid headlight glare on residential windows.	No new driveways proposed. In addition, the development will only operate during daylight hours, which will negate the use and impact of headlight glare.	N/A
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.	None proposed.	N/A
3.5.3.10	Garbage storage areas are not visible from a public place.	To be conditioned.	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 subject site has an existing dwelling that can provide surveillance of the site. CCTV can also be installed to provide further security when the site is not in use. No other adverse concealment, entrapment or crime issues foreseen.	Yes
2.3.3.2	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structural engineer	Loading ramp exceeds 1m in height and will be conditioned to require certification from a structural engineer.	Yes
2.3.3.8 onwards	Removal of hollow bearing trees	No tree removal proposed or required.	N/A
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100m diameter trunk and 3m outside dwelling footprint	No tree removal proposed or required.	N/A
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads. Existing accesses rationalised or removed where practical	No new access proposed, including to an arterial or distributor road.	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking.	No new access or driveway proposed.	N/A
2.5.3.3	Off-street parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. Reduction possible if supported by parking demand study.	Being a rural property, the site contains sufficient area for informal parking associated with the development.	Yes
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	There is an existing strip of vegetation south of the operations area, which suitably screens the development and parking from surrounding areas.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Being a rural property, the gravelled driveway is acceptable. In particular, gravel driveways and roads are common in rural zoned areas. Conditions will be imposed to manage dust.	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)	Driveway grades are acceptable and easily traversed by two wheel drive vehicles.	Yes
2.5.3.20	Where visible from the public domain, loading bays are located behind the building.	The loading areas are partially screened by existing vegetation onsite. Conditions will also be imposed to create stockpile screens.	Yes
	Where visible from the public domain, loading bays are located behind the building.	Refer to above comments.	Yes
	Where loading bays are located close to a sensitive land use, adequate visual and acoustic screening is provided.	Refer to above comments.
2.5.3.21	Plans to confirm vehicular access, circulation and manoeuvring in accordance with AUSTROADS and AS 2890.	Being a large rural property, adequate area exists onsite to allow manoeuvring of the vehicles that will use the facility. Vehicles will also be able to enter and exit the site in a forward direction with suitable site distances.	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:

None relevant.

iv) any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

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 & Setting

The site has frontage to Bobs Creek Road to the south and also west (via a Forest Corporation road connection).

The property is predominately cleared except for some timbered areas in the north east corner surrounding the proposed log processing site and also a small section along Bobs Creek on the southern portion of the overall lot.

The property contains an existing dwelling on the southern portion of the property (ie south of Bobs Creek Road) and a shed on the northern portion.

Surrounding the development is a mixture of rural residential sized lots, smaller hobby farm sized lots and some larger rural properties. There is also Forest Corporation land to the north and within the overall locality.

Subject to the imposition of noise control measures, screening and a twelve (12) month trial; the proposal will be unlikely to have any significant impact on adjoining properties. The site is considered to be compatible with the area and adequately addresses planning controls.

Access, Traffic and Transport

The proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts in terms access, transport and traffic. The volume of vehicles proposed is not excessive with trucks to be re-directed away from adjoining dwellings via the use of the forestry road. The existing road network will satisfactorily cater for the small increase in traffic generation as a result of the development.

Utilities

Utilities are not specifically required for the development but can be made available at the applicant’s expense.

Water

Onsite water storage will be utilised.

Sewer

Cleaning and toilet facilities are available within the existing shed and dwelling onsite.

Stormwater

Capable of being managed onsite via conditions of consent. There is also substantial grassed areas between the site and nearby watercourses to act as a natural filter.

Soils

Air & Micro-climate

Potential exists for sawdust to be generated onsite however given the separation distance to the neighbouring properties, it is unlikely that there will be any impact on adjoining residents.

Potential exists for wood smoke to adversely impact on adjoining residents and local air quality if wastes are burnt on the premises. It is recommended that the consent prohibit the burning of any waste products and/or off cuts etc.

Flora & Fauna

The proposed development will not require any removal/clearing of any significant vegetation onsite 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

No adverse impacts anticipated.

Noise & Vibration

A Noise Impact Assessment was undertaken by Matrix Thornton for the proposed development. Background noise levels were taken at the nearest residential receiver (located 244m south of the active development site) while no activities were occurring at the site. Results were as follows:

· 36LA90 (background); 41LAeq (Calculated Intrusive Noise Level); 48LAEQ (Calculated Project Amenity Noise Level)

Background noise levels were then taken at the nearest residential receiver (located 244m south of the active development site) while the hardwood mill was operating. Results were as follows:

· 60LAeq (including 5dB(A) tonal penalty (52LA90; and 57L10)).

The measured operational level of 60dB(A) is in excess of the 41dB(A) Project noise trigger level by 19dB(A). The intrusiveness of an industrial noise source may generally be considered acceptable if the equivalent continuous noise level (Laeq) of the source (measured over a 15 minute period) does not exceed the background noise level by more than 5dB.

Matrix Thornton suggested a two (2) stage mitigation strategy to reduce noise impacts to the nearest residential receiver. ‘Stage 1’ of the mitigation strategy would require the installation of a secondary exhaust silencer or muffler on the diesel engines involved in the proposed development. ‘Stage 1’ of the mitigation strategy would also involve the installation of an acoustic barrier surrounding operational machinery. Matrix Thornton predicts that such measures will reduce noise impacts by approximately 10 dB(a), including reduced tonality of the noise, which will remove the 5dB(A) tonal penalty.

‘Stage 2’ of the mitigation strategy involves the installation of a second acoustic barrier between the first acoustic barrier and the property boundary. The second barrier is noted as being required to be located as close as possible to the boundary of the nearest residency. The barrier should also be constructed 4.8 m high, with four 1.2 m wide x 2.4 m long timber panels (form ply is one possible product) stacked on top of each other. The barrier is to run the entire length of the exposed northern residential boundary. Matrix Thornton indicated that the secondary barrier could further reduce the noise impacts from the proposed development by at least 7 dB(A).

In terms of the two (2) stages, Matrix Thornton also suggested that Stage 1 could be implemented first and then further testing done to see whether Stage 2 was required. However, the applicant has indicated that they are prepared to implement both Stage 1 and 2 upfront.

Overall, Matrix Thornton concluded that the combination of the ‘Stage 1’ and ‘Stage 2’ mitigation measures would reduce the operational noise level to below the 41dB(A) project noise trigger and that ‘the continued operation of the mill following the required implementation of noise mitigation would not be considered a source of offensive noise’.

Having considered the noise report, a concern with the recommendations is the visual impact of the second barrier next to the neighbouring dwelling. As a result, an alternate barrier is proposed to be located closer to the mill. In particular, it is suggested that a wood stack comprising either log storage, offcut storage, waste timber storage etc be located south of the mill to form a visual and acoustic barrier. The stack would need to be maintained at all times and be a minimum of 3m in height. A similar measure was applied by Council to another log processing facility and proved to be effective in reducing visual and noise impacts.

Furthermore, as an occupation certificate is not required for the use and the business has been operating already; a suitable approach would be to condition the implementation of Stage 1 and 2 within six (6) weeks of the date of determination. This should allow suitable time for the measures to be put in place. In addition to the above, Council will condition the consent be limited to twelve (12) months to act as a trial for the consent. This will allow noise impacts to be further monitored.

The above noise report and proposed measures (including alternate wood stack barrier) were considered by Council’s Environmental Health Officer and considered an acceptable approach in managing noise impacts to a compliant level.

Natural Hazards

The site is mapped as bushfire prone land. No buildings are proposed and it is considered that the bushfire legislation does not apply to the use.

Similar sawmill type developments have been referred to the local NSW Rural Fire Service for comment in the past. However, based on the nature of the operation and lack of residential structures, the NSW Rural Fire Service provided a response raising no concerns or issues in relation to bushfire.

In terms of the wood piles creating a hazard, the site contains a dam that can be used as a water source to help put out any fires that may occur.

Adjoining dwellings are also well separated from the woodpile by over 100m. This would also allow further protection/buffering in the event of a fire.

Based on the above, bushfire or adverse fire hazards are unlikely to occur as a result of the development.

Social Impact 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 operation of the development through the maintenance of employment in the timber/logging industry and associated flow on effects such as expenditure in the area.

Site Design and Internal Design

The proposed development design satisfactorily responds to the site attributes and the imposition of various conditions will ensure the development fits into the locality.

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 site attributes are conducive to the proposed development. The site is located within a semi-rural setting, is zoned for primary production activities and it can be reasonably expected that primary production activities will be conducted in the area.

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

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
The proposal operates 24/7. Staff arrive from 6:30am, heavy machines 7:00am, trucks all day and night. The proposal operates in summer out of firewood season.	Conditions will be imposed to control hours of operation (including vehicles picking up and dropping off product) to 7:30am to 4:00pm Monday to Friday and 8:00am to 1:00pm Saturday.
Area not used for agriculture but more rural residential. Not an industrial area. Recent approval for dwelling was on the basis that the area is not used for agriculture.	While there are lots in the area more conducive to rural residential, there are still hobby farms and rural activities occurring in the area. Furthermore, the rural zone allows rural industries, the site is considered acceptable for the use and conditions of consent will mitigate impacts.
Proposal does not comply with RU1 zone objectives in minimising conflict.	The aspects of the site and proposed conditions of consent are considered to result in the proposal not creating any adverse conflict.
The shed onsite is being used as a dwelling.	The use of the shed is not the subject of this application. Council’s Compliance Team has and will continue to monitor this as a separate issue.
Forest access not suitable for large vehicles.	The forest access is considered of suitable construction and capable of allowing a range of vehicle types. The applicant will need to continue to monitor this with the Forest Corporation, especially given no heavy vehicle access will be allowed from the existing southern light vehicle access. Being a forestry road, it would need to cater for Forestry Corporation logging trucks regardless of this application.
Applicant has failed to comply with the agreed practices.	The imposition of a consent and associated conditions will allow a more certain point of monitoring and compliance. A twelve (12) month trial is also proposed.
Bobs Creek Road pavement is failing and not suitable. Mud and dust problems.	Bobs Creek Road and the associated pavement is suitable for the scale of development. In addition, the heavy vehicles will be required to use the forestry road, which will further minimise impacts on Bobs Creek Road. Standard site management conditions will be imposed to control dust etc.
Loss of property values.	Loss of property values is not a matter of consideration under Section 4.15.
Previous logging applications have not proceeded.	Noted.
Safety of forest users.	Forestry roads are designed and expected to cater for logging trucks - the proposal does not change this. Furthermore, the forest road will not allow high speeds, which will provide suitable warning to users.
The statement of environment effects contains incorrect information.	Noted. Matters in the statement of environmental effects have been clarified and conditions of consent imposed to provide further certainty on the use.
Utes and cars with trailers use the site for private sales.	Moving forward, no private sales will be allowed from the site and conditions of consent will reflect this.
Air pollution/smoke and noise/vibration impacts.	Fumes from the mill are consistent with other farming equipment that can occur on a rural property. There is also approximately 200m separation to the nearest dwelling, which will further dissipate any fumes. No burning of timber will be conditioned – removes smoke impact. Noise impacts are addressed under the Noise and Vibration heading within this report.
Was there community consultation?	There is no requirement for an applicant to consult with neighbours, prior to lodging a development application. Council carried out standard notification as part of the development application process.
The tonnage doesn’t stack up with vehicle numbers.	This has been clarified and conditions imposed to control numbers.
Is the dam permitted?	The dam does not form part of this application. Nonetheless, a preliminary look indicates that it is capable of complying with exempt dam provisions.
Heavy vehicles use the light vehicle access.	Noted. Moving forward, conditions of consent will be imposed to stop this practice.
Machinery compliant with industry standards.	This is a matter for the applicant to ensure from an OHS perspective, RMS road safety perspective etc. Council will impose conditions to manage noise output.
Applicant disregards rules.	Noted. Conditions of consent will be imposed and compliance action can be taken if this is the case.
No screening of the facility.	Site inspection revealed that there is existing strands of vegetation that suitably screen the development from surrounding viewpoints.
Letters of support and positive comments for the proposal have also been received outlining the following: · Noise from the facility is acceptable. · There are other noise sources in the area that create an impact (ie highway). · Use doesn’t impact on surrounding properties. · The operator is friendly, helpful, community minded and hard working. · Positive contribution to the community. · Facility provides local employment opportunities. · Facility provides easy access to the highway. · The forestry road access will negate a lot of the issues. · There are other uses that could have a worse visual impact. For example, large exempt shed.	Noted.

(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

Not applicable to this application, which does not have any residential or construction component. There is also no reticulated water or sewer available to the site.

5. CONCLUSION AND STATEMENT OF REASON

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

Attachments

1 View. DA2018 - 528.1 Recomended conditions

2 View. DA2018 - 528.1 Plans and documents

3 View. DA2018 - 528.1 Noise impact assessment

4 View. DA2018 - 528.1 Hardwood site plan

5 View. DA2018 - 528.1 Forestry Corporation owners consent.pdf

6 View. DA2018 - 528.1 Forestry map owners consent

Member	08/08/18	26/09/18	24/10/18	14/11/18	28/11/18
Paul Drake	A	P	P	P	P
Robert Hussey	P	P	P	P	P
David Crofts (alternate member)	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

1.0 OBJECTIVES

2.0 KEY FUNCTIONS

Delegated Authority of Panel

3.0 MEMBERSHIP

3.2 Non-Voting Members

3.3 Obligations of members

3.4 Member Tenure

3.5 Appointment of members

4.0 TIMETABLE OF MEETINGS

5.0 MEETING PRACTICES

5.2 Decision Making

5.3 Quorum

5.4 Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson

5.5 Secretariat

5.6 Recording of decisions

6.0 CONVENING OF “OUTCOME SPECIFIC” WORKING GROUPS

7.0 CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST

8.0 LOBBYING