Agenda of Development Assessment Panel

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 25/10/2017

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 25/10/2017

Item: 05

Subject: DA2017 - 738.1 Alterations And Additions To Dwelling - Lot 3 DP807508, No 31 The Fairway Port Macquarie

Report Author: Stephen Ryan

Dditions to a dwellingant: Graham Wood c/- Collins W Collins

Owner: G T Wood

Estimated Cost: $150,000

Parcel no: 23523

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2017 – 738.1 for alterations and additions to a dwelling at Lot 3, DP 807508, No. 31 The Fairway, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

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

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and surrounding development

The site has an area of 941.9m².

The site is zoned R1 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:

· Additions to dwelling comprising second storey addition including front upper level deck.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 22 August 2017 - Application lodged

· 1 September 2017 – 14 September 2017 - Exhibition via neighbour notification

· 11 September 2017- 2 Submissions received.

· 15 September 2017- Email sent to applicant advising of neighbour concerns.

· 22 September 2017- Revised plans & statement received addressing neighbour concerns.

· 26 September 2017- 1 Submission received.

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 79C(1) Matters for Consideration

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

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) any Environmental Planning Instrument:

Section 79C(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. 71 – Coastal Protection and Clause 5.5 of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

The site is not located within a coastal zone as defined in accordance with clause 4 of SEPP 71.

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

A BASIX certificate (number A290225) 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 additions are 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, contributes to the range of housing available in the Port Macquarie-Hastings and is 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) 2008.

· Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 8.435m which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4, the floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.319:1.0 which complies with the maximum 0.65.0:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

· Clause7.13, satisfactory arrangements are in place for provision of essential services.

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

No draft instruments apply to the site.

(iii) any Development Control Plan in force:

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
3.2.2.1	Ancillary development: • 4.8m max. height • Single storey • 60m2 max. area • 24 degree max. roof pitch • Not located in front setback		N/A
3.2.2.4	4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space	18m	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	1.5m & 7.990m. 1.5m & 7.990m (Sunlight to the principal area of ground-level private open space of adjacent properties is not reduced to less than 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on June 21.) 9.964m	Yes Yes Yes
3.2.2.6	35m² min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade	Available at rear	Yes
3.2.2.10	Privacy: • Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed. • Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m. • Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m	No direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings. Living areas greater than 9m to windows of adjoining dwellings. High sill windows & screen provided to upper level windows facing adjoining western dwelling. Windows within 12m of open space of southern neighbour. Privacy screen not required for proposed upper level bedroom windows. (Changed to high sill windows) Privacy screen proposed for sitting room window on south western side adjoining boundary. Deck floor greater than 1m in height, however proposed setback greater than 3m from adjoining side boundaries. Privacy screen not required.	Yes & No Yes Yes

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline	Adequate casual surveillance available	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	None proposed	N/A
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads	Maintains existing access	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Maintains existing driveway crossover	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. 1 space per single dwelling (behind building line)	No change to existing parking arrangements	N/A
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified		Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface	Contained within site	Yes
2.5.3.17	Vehicle washing facilities – grassed area etc available.	Available	Yes

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to DP:3.2.2.10

The relevant objectives are:

· To protect the visual privacy of on-site and nearby residents.

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

· Upper level windows are within 12m of the rear open space of southern neighbour. A setback of 9.824m is proposed from the living area & 7.990m to the balcony.

· The rear yard of the southern property is partially obscured by a tree located on the subject site and a shade sail on the adjoining property.

· Due to the elevated nature of the site, the potential for overlooking is considered to be no greater than what already exists from existing dwelling & front deck.

Based on the above assessment, the variation proposed to the provisions of the DCP are considered acceptable and the relevant objectives have been satisfied. The variation does not amount to an adverse impact or a significance that would justify refusal of the application.

(iiia) any planning agreement that has been entered into under Section 93f or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under Section 93f:

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:

N/A

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

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:

Context and setting

Solar access-

· The proposal will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts in regard to solar access. (Sunlight to the principal area of ground-level private open space of adjacent properties is not reduced to less than 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on June 22.

Public domain-

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

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

View sharing-

• There are no adverse impacts on existing view sharing.

Privacy-

· Privacy impacts in regard to the adjoining western property bathrooms has been addressed from the change to high sill windows.

· Privacy impacts from the proposed works are considered to be no greater than what already exists on the site.

Access, transport and traffic

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

Water Supply

Service available.

Sewer

Service available.

Stormwater

Service available.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

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

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

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

Air and microclimate

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

Flora and fauna

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

Waste

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

Energy

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

Noise and vibration

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

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

Safety, security and crime prevention

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

Social impacts in the locality

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

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

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

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

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

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Eastern facing window & balcony may be overlooking pool at 6 Hart Street.	Adequate separation in excess of DCP requirements is provided between the proposed upper level deck and living areas, and the adjoining boundary with 6 Hart Street. (12.715m from living areas, 10.9m from deck.
Reduced sunlight to ensuite, master bedroom, main bathroom & toilet of adjoining western property.	From the shadow diagrams provided, sunlight to the adjoining dwellings primary living areas will not be reduced to less than 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on June 21 (Winter Solstice). Bathrooms, toilet & ensuites are not considered primary living areas under DCP 2013.
Reduction in privacy to ensuite, master bedroom, main bathroom & toilet of adjoining western property.	The concerns over privacy have been addressed by the applicant by the implementation of high sill windows on the side facing the western neighbour.
Reduction in privacy to rear yard of adjoining western property.	The implementation of high sill windows on the side facing the western neighbour has addressed this issue. There are no other windows orientated toward the neighbouring properties rear yard.
Reduction in privacy to rear yard of adjoining southern property & privacy screen requested to boundary fence.	There is anticipated to be a degree of impact in regard to privacy from the proposed upper level addition toward the rear yard of the southern neighbour, due to the elevated nature of the site. The rear yard of the southern property is partially obscured by a tree located on the subject site and a shade sail erected on the adjoining property. It is considered that privacy impacts from the proposed additions will be only slightly greater than what already exists on site from the existing front deck. The impact is not considered significant to warrant refusal of the application. A privacy screen erected on the boundary is not a requirement of DCP 2013.

(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

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

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

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

Attachments

1 View. DA2017 - 738.1 Recommended Conditions

2 View. DA2017 - 738.1 Plans

3 View. DA2017 - 738.1 Submission - Dickson

4 View. DA2017 - 738.1 Submission - Price & Ryan

5 View. DA2017 - 738.1 Submission - Vincent

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 25/10/2017

Item: 06

Subject: DA2017 - 690.1 Dual Occupancy And Torrens Title Subdivision Lot 6 DP 1233221, Scarborough Way, Dunbogan

Report Author: Deb McKenzie

Applicant: Encompass Drafting

Owner: KC & DA Dimon

Estimated Cost: $475,000

Parcel no: 66922

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2017 - 690 for a dual occupancy and torrens title subdivision at Lot 6, DP 1233221, Scarborough Way, Dunbogan, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a dual occupancy and torrens title subdivision at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and surrounding development

The site has an area of 771.7sqm.

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

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Proposed dual occupancy and torrens title subdivision

· Each dwelling to comprise three (3) bedrooms + media room and double garage

· Access to both dwelling via domestic crossovers and driveways off Scarborough Way and Borrowdale Avenue.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 9 August 2017 Application lodged

· 24 August 2017 – 6 September 2017 Pubic notification

· 31 August 2017 Submission received

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 79C(1) Matters for Consideration

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) any Environmental Planning Instrument:

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

The site is cleared of vegetation. No impact on any koala food trees. 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. 71 – Coastal Protection and Clause 5.5 of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

The site is located within a coastal zone as defined in accordance with clause 4 of SEPP 71. In accordance with clause 5, this SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A BASIX certificate (number 849877S & 849926S) 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, contributes to the range of housing options available for the community and consistent with the residential locality.

• Clause 4.3 Height of buildings – both dwellings are single storey or generally flat land. Both dwellings are less than the maximum 8.5m height limit and comply.

• Clause 4.4 Floor space ratio – the proposed FSR is 0.41:1, less than the allowable 0.65:1. Complies.

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

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

No draft instruments apply to the site.

(iii) any Development Control Plan in force:

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
3.2.2.1	Ancillary development: • 4.8m max. height • Single storey • 60m2 max. area • 100m2 for lots >900m2 • 24 degree max. roof pitch • Not located in front setback	None.	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	Scarborough Way: – no structures within the articulation zone. Borrowdale Ave: – no structures within the articulation zone.	None.
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	Unit 1: Scarborough Way – 4.79m setback to media room. Borrowdale Ave – 4m to ensuite of Bedroom 1. Unit 2: Borrowdale Ave – 3.696m to media room wall. Complies with secondary road setback.	Yes
3.2.2.3	Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade. Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided	Unit 1 – 5.527m Unit 2 – 5.875m Both garages are setback from the main walls of the dwelling. Both doors are compliant.	Yes
	6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building	Width of both garage doors are compliant with the maximum width requirements. Both garages are less than 50% of the width of the dwellings.	Yes
	Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width	Driveway crossings widths (4.5m) are compliant with the maximum width requirements.	Yes
3.2.2.4	4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space	No setback requirement as corner lot.	N/A
3.2.2.5	Side setbacks: • Ground floor = min. 0.9m • First floors & above = min. 3m setback or where it can be demonstrated that overshadowing not adverse = 0.9m min. • Building wall set in and out every 12m by 0.5m	The minimum side setback requirements are complied with. The building wall articulation is satisfactory to address the objective intent of the development provision.	Yes
3.2.2.6	35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade	Unit 1 – POS at front of dwelling. Unit 2 – POS at rear of dwelling. Both dwellings comply with area and size requirements.	Yes
3.2.2.7	Front fences: • If solid 1.2m max height and front setback 1.0m with landscaping • 3x3m min. splay for corner sites • Fences >1.2m to be 1.8m max. height for 50% or 6.0m max. length of street frontage with 25% openings • 0.9x0.9m splays adjoining driveway entrances	Unit 1 – front fence required to provide POS area in front of dwelling. Details provided with DA. Generally compliant with DCP regarding height and openings. Unit 2 – none indicated.	Yes
3.2.2.8	Front fences and walls to have complimentary materials to context No chain wire, solid timber, masonry or solid steel front fences	Unit 1 fencing materials complements the clad and rendered materials of the dwelling.	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	Both dwellings are single storey. The 1.8m high boundary fences will provide sufficient privacy for residents of the two dwellings and adjoining sites at ground level. The POS areas of each dwelling are on the opposite sides of the lots.	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	Site is generally flat. None proposed.	N/A
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage	None proposed.	N/A
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer	No retaining walls.	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
	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Driveway crossings acceptable allowing space for onstreet parking.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. 1 space per single dwelling (behind building line)	2 spaces per dwelling in double garages.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Refer to main body of report.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Concrete driveways proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16	Driveway grades first 6m or ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade with transitions of 2m length	Compliant, Condition recommended for section 138 Roads Act permit.	Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.	Yes

(iiia) any planning agreement that has been entered into under Section 93f or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under Section 93f:

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:

Site is located within the area covered by the Coastal Policy. The proposed development will impact on the achievement of the aims and objectives of the policy or SEPP 71.

Demolition of buildings AS 2601:

Nil

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

Nil

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

Context and setting

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

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

• There is no adverse impact on existing view sharing.

• There is no unacceptable privacy impacts.

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

Access, transport and traffic

Water, Sewer, Stormwater Supply

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

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

Other land resources

No adverse impacts anticipated. The site is within an established large lot residential 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

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

Flora and fauna

Site is cleared. No requirements.

Waste

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

Energy

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

Noise and vibration

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

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

Safety, security and crime prevention

Social impacts in the locality

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

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative impacts

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

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

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

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

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

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Precedence for every block in the estate to be subdivided.	The site is zoned R1 General Residential zone. Dual occupancy is permissible with Council’s consent. Clause 4.1A permits the subdivision of land into 2 lots (or more) and the erection of a dwelling house on each lot resulting from the subdivision. The site is a corner lot, larger than the average lot within the subdivision. Dual occupancy development of these lots are common place throughout the POr Macquarie-Hastings. There is a general trend in the market place for this development typology on corner lots. The proposal is not a precedence as it is a permissible landuse with Council consent. The proposal satisfactorily addresses relevant planning controls applying to the site.
Estate covenant – houses to be a reasonable size and predominantly of brick structure, not cladding.	The covenant referred to in the submission would be the restriction eightly referred in the deposited plan (DP 1233221). It refers to the building type, materials, garages, fencing etc. The developer, Punusi Pty Ltd, is specifically empowered to release, vary or modify the restriction. Council has no part in the application or enforcement of that restriction. The imposition of this type of land title restriction is not a planning consideration and is not reflected in local planning policy. Councils are obliged to accept and assess development applications based on local planning policy, not restrictions placed on land by the developer and property owner. Clause 1.9A of the LEP provides for the legal mechanism for Council’s planning controls to override private covenants.
Standards set for the “First Fleet” estate are being greatly reduced and not in keeping with the overall area.	As above. In this case, the right to strictly impose or choose to vary the covenants that apply to the estate are to prerogative of the land developer.

(e) The Public Interest:

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

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

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

5. CONCLUSION

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

Attachments

1 View. DA2017 - 690.1 Plans

2 View. DA2017 - 690.1 Recommended Conditions

3 View. DA2017 - 690.1 Submission - Bell

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 25/10/2017

Item: 07

Subject: DA2015 - 913.1 Multi-Dwelling Housing (6 Dwellings) And Strata Title Subdivision - Lot 27 DP 1213714, No 20 Bluewren Close, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Patrick Galbraith-Robertson

Applicant: J W Wortley CARE Collins W Collins

Owner: J W Wortley

Estimated Cost: $1.164M

Parcel no: 66185

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2015 – 913.1 for a multi-dwelling housing (6 dwellings) at Lot 241, DP 1227796, No. 20 Bluewren Close, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a Development Application (DA) for a multi dwelling housing and strata 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, two (2) submissions have been received.

The proposal has been amended during the assessment of the DA to address assessment related matters.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and surrounding development

The site has an area of 1844m2.

The site has a general south street frontage orientation to Blue Wren Close. The site at time of the lodgement of the DA was a proposed lot within a subdivision yet to be released. The Lot to create the site has now been registered and ownership transferred to the new owner during the assessment the DA. This has led to some significant delays in processing of the application.

Adjoining the site to the north is rural zoned land.

Adjoining the site to the east and west is residential zoned land.

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

The existing subdivision pattern and location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph (2012 aerial):

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Construction 6 x single storey dwellings. 3 x 1 bedroom, 2 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom dwellings

· Construction of common driveway areas including 2 x nominated visitor parking spaces

· Construction of front fence and landscaping

· Strata title subdivision

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 10 December 2015 – DA lodged with Council.

· 18 December 2015 to 22 January 2016 – Neighbour notification of proposal.

· 13 January 2016 – Additional information requested – Ecological impacts of tree removal to be addressed and Units 1 and 3 internal design concerns.

· 28 January 2016 – Issues raised in submissions forwarded to Applicant for consideration.

· 1 March 2016 – Additional information requested – finished floor levels of Unit 4 questioned, internal driveway width concerns, and driveway long section requested.

· 9 May 2016 – Follow up request for additional information.

· 5 August 2016 – Additional ecological/tree removal offset information received from Applicant.

· 30 August 2016 – Initial concerns raised with Applicant with regard to Lot not being registered and possibly triggering State Environmental Planning Policy No.44 – Koala Habitat Protection (SEPP 44).

· 19 September 2016 – Applicant advised working on providing additional information.

· 12 October 2016 – Additional information received from Owner’s Solicitor that the Applicant for the proposed Lot at the time (Lot is now registered) to be registered has had exchanged contracts for purchase.

· 17 October 2016 - Follow up request for additional information with regard to legal advice on applicability of SEPP 44.

· 31 October and 1 November 2016 – Additional information received from Applicant with regard to SEPP 44 not applying and advising that they consider a Koala Plan of Management is not required. Applicant requests the DA not be determined until the proposed Lot be registered.

· 1 November 2016 – Additional information requested on addressing specifics for offset planting locations.

· 10 November 2016 – Offset planting locations plan received from Applicant.

· 11 November 2016 – Additional information requested on addressing specifics for offset planting.

· 15 June 2017 – Applicant advised that the proposed Lot, the subject of the DA, has been registered.

· 15 June 2017 – Specifics on offset planting specified to Applicant and follow up request for other additional information with regard to finished floor levels of Unit 4 questioned, internal driveway width concerns, and driveway long section requested.

· 7 September 2017 – Additional information and amended plans received. The amended plans have revisited the internal driveway width, levels of the proposed Unit 4 and internal design of proposed Units 1 and 3 including removal of second kitchen.

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 79C(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 1 hectare in area therefore no further investigations are required. It should be noted that the DA was lodged on a proposed Lot which has been registered during the assessment of the DA and ownership transferred. This SEPP therefore does not require consideration. The processing of the DA has been significantly delayed pending this matter being resolved.

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

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

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

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

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

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

· Clause 2.2, the subject site is zoned R1 General Residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table, the multi dwelling housing 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 sufficiently consistent with the immediate residential locality.

· Clause 4.1, the standard minimum lot size requirements do not apply to this proposal which includes only a strata subdivision.

· Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 5.66m which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4, the floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.5:1.0 which complies with the maximum 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

· Clause 5.9 – Three(3) listed trees in Development Control Plan 2013 are proposed to be removed with only two(2) being koala browse species.

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

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

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

No draft instruments apply to the site.

(iii) any Development Control Plan in force:

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013:

*DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
3.2.2.1	Ancillary development: • 4.8m max. height • Single storey • 60m2 max. area • 100m2 for lots >900m2 • 24 degree max. roof pitch • Not located in front setback	Water tanks are appropriately located	Yes
3.2.2.2	Articulation zone: • Min. 3m front setback • An entry feature or portico • A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah • A window box treatment • A bay window or similar feature • An awning or other feature over a window • A sun shading feature	The development contains a patio post and the south-east corner of Unit 6 within the articulation zone. The patio post and section of Unit 6 building do not exceed 25% of the articulation zone and is still setback greater than 3m.	Yes
3.2.2.2	Front setback (Residential not R5 zone): • Min. 6.0m classified road • Min. 4.5m local road or within 20% of adjoining dwelling if on corner lot • Min. 3.0m secondary road • Min. 2.0m Laneway	Front building line setback is compliant with the minimum 4.5m front setback requirements. Note some sections of Unit 6 building within the front setback which can be considered as part of the articulation zone area and are significantly lower than the street level pavement.	Yes
3.2.2.3	Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade. Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided	Garage door setback requirements are complied with.	Yes
	6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building	Width of garage door requirements are complied with.	Yes
	Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width	5.5m wide driveway crossover (at kerb) and proportionally 16% of frontage.	Yes and No*
3.2.2.4	4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space	Min. 1.7m rear setback to patio posts and 4.2m to main part of Units 1, 2 and 3	No*
3.2.2.5	Side setbacks: • Ground floor = min. 0.9m • First floors & above = min. 3m setback or where it can be demonstrated that overshadowing not adverse = 0.9m min. • Building wall set in and out every 12m by 0.5m	The minimum side setback requirements are complied with. The wall articulation is compliant and satisfies the objectives of the development provision.	Yes
3.2.2.6	35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade	Each occupancy contains 35m² open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m area.	Yes
3.2.2.7	Front fences: • If solid 1.2m max height and front setback 1.0m with landscaping • 3x3m min. splay for corner sites • Fences >1.2m to be 1.8m max. height for 50% or 6.0m max. length of street frontage with 25% openings • 0.9x0.9m splays adjoining driveway entrances • Front fences and walls to have complimentary materials to context	The proposed front fence design at height of 1.8m with 25% transparency and landscaped recesses is considered to meet the fencing provisions and objectives of DCP 2013. No adverse impacts will occur. N/A	Yes
3.2.2.8	No chain wire, solid timber, masonry or solid steel front fences		Yes
3.2.2.10	Privacy: • Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed • Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m • Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m	No direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. No privacy screens are recommended.	Yes
3.2.2.11	Roof terraces	N/A
3.2.2.13 onwards	Jetties and boat ramps	N/A

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline	No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Cut and fill <1.0m change 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Yes
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage	None proposed	N/A
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer	Condition recommended to require engineering certification for retaining walls within close proximity to existing property boundaries.	Yes
	Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway	No retaining wall front fence combination proposed.	N/A
2.3.3.8	Removal of hollow bearing trees	No hollow bearing trees proposed to be removed	N/A
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100m diameter trunk at 1m above ground level and 3m from external wall of existing dwelling)	Two (2) koala food trees proposed to be removed. Offset planting proposed of 4 trees on adjoining property as shown in the attachments section of this report.	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	Combined common driveway crossing is restricted in width which will allow for casual parking on road verge.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. Multi dwelling 1 space per 1 & 2 bedroom occupancies 1.5 spaces per 3+ bedroom occupancies 0.25 spaces per occupancy for visitor parking.	Proposal involve: 3 x 1 bedroom, 2 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom dwellings Therefore requirements are: 5 x 1 space = 5 spaces + 1 x 1.5 spaces = 1.5 spaces (2 spaces rounded up) = 7 spaces + 6 x 0.25 visitor = 2 spaces (rounded up) = 9 spaces in total The development proposes: 9 parking spaces as part of the dwellings + 2 nominated visitor parks at the front of the site. 11 spaces in total are proposed	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Contributions apply.	Yes
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Suitable landscaping proposed around driveway/parking locations.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Sealed driveway areas proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16	Driveway grades first 6m or ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade with transitions of 2m length	Driveway grades capable of satisfying Council standard driveway crossover requirements. Condition recommended for section 138 Roads Act permit	Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.	Yes

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to the recommended 5m width driveway crossing. The proposal includes a 5.5m wide driveway with a 0.5m variation to width.

The relevant objectives are:

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

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

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

· The driveway proportional width to the front boundary is significantly less than the recommended 1/3 frontage development provision.

· The variation is minor at only 0.5m of additional driveway width.

· The 5.5m width is necessary for 2 cars to pass each other satisfactorily.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to recommended 4m rear setback. The proposal includes sections of the rear of the Units 1, 2 and 3 with open patio areas within the 4m area.

The relevant objectives are:

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

· To provide useable yard areas and open space.

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

· There is no existing residential lot or dwelling to the north and the land is rural zoned. There are no adverse natural light and ventilation issues to the northern neighbouring property.

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

· The subject Units 1, 2 and 3 have greater than 35m2 of useable private open space areas.

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

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

(iiia) any planning agreement that has been entered into under Section 93f or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under Section 93f:

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

iv) any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

N/A

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

None applicable.

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

Context and setting

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

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

• There are no adverse impacts on existing view sharing.

• There are no adverse privacy impacts.

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

Roads

The site has road frontage to Blue Wren Close.

Blue Wren Close is a residential street which is sealed with kerb and gutter. It is a local road with a 7m road formation within a 17m road reserve. There is no path paving within Blue Wren Close.

Traffic and Transport

The site is currently vacant land. This development proposes to generate 35 additional daily trips. The addition in traffic associated with the development is unlikely to have any adverse impacts to the existing road network within the immediate locality.

Site Frontage & Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed though a shared driveways with direct frontage to Blue Wren Close being a public road. Access shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards, and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

Due to the type and size of development, additional works are required to include:

· concrete footpath paving (minimum 1.2m wide) along the full frontage

Parking and Manoeuvring

A total of 2 visitor parking spaces and 7 garaged/covered resident spaces. Parking spaces have been provided on-site within garages with additional parking provided available within the driveway. Parking and driveway widths on site can comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

It is noted that the column located on the front corner of Unit 5’s porch should be removed and the roof should be cantilevered to allow access and egress from the garage.

Water Supply

Council records indicate that the current development site has a 20mm/25mm metered water service from the 100mm/150mm AC/PVC water main on the same/opposite side of street.

A new metered water service will be required for each allotment as part of the Torrens Title Subdivision.

Final water service sizing will need to be determined by a hydraulic consultant to suit the development as well as addressing fire service coverage to AS 2419 and backflow protection.

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

Sewer

The plans supplied with the development application indicate that the proposed building will encroach over the sewer main but the existing manhole will be within the driveway area. Council permits building over the sewer main, however not a manhole or junction vertical inspection shaft, provided that building footing and slab design is engineered to ensure that no load from the buildings is transferred to the pipeline.

A manhole will also be required at the high end of the line as it will be more than 40m long.

If the main is subject to future extension an end of line terminal shaft (poo pit) will be required.

As the dwellings are to be Strata Titled, a private sewer system can be adopted, connected from a single manhole junction or each dwelling can be connected directly to Council main with individual connections.

As the development will exceed 2ET discharge, sewer connection is to be made from a manhole.

If the development is to be Community Title, the sewer mains are to be vested in Council and are to comply with Council Auspec D12 design standard.

The hydraulic designer is to confer with Council sewer section prior to submitting sewer design plans.

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

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards rear and is currently serviced via an existing easement to drain water.

The legal point of discharge for the proposed development is defined as the existing easement to drain water at the rear over lot 245 DP1227796.

Stormwater from the proposed development is planned to be disposed via this easement which is consistent with the above requirements.

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

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

· On-site stormwater detention facilities

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

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

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

Air and microclimate

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

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will require removal/clearing of existing trees including two (2) koala browse trees (Tallowwood trees included). During the assessment of the DA, the Applicant has offered to carry out offset planting of four (4) trees (2:1 ratio) on the adjoining neighbouring property with planting of 4 koala food trees. An off-set planting plan is attached to this report for consideration.

Specific conditions are recommended for the planting of the four (4) off-set plantings including size and ongoing management.

Based upon the limited number of trees proposed to be removed and offset planting proposed the proposal will be unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on biodiversity or threatened species of flora and fauna. Section 5A of the Act (the legislation in force at the time of the application being received) is considered to be satisfied.

Waste

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

Energy

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

Noise and vibration

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

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

Safety, security and crime prevention

Social impacts in the locality

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

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative impacts

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

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

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

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

Two (2) written submissions have been received following public exhibition of the application.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Neighbour notification being over the Christmas/New Year period and not giving sufficient time.	The proposal was neighbour notified for an extended period in accordance with Council’s adopted Notification Policy from 18 December 2015 to 22 January 2016.
Unhappy that a development of this nature is even being considered in this small cul-de-sac, which is full of families with children.	The development is permissible in the residential zoning applying to the site. The density of the dwellings is permissible and compliant off-street parking is provided.
Impact 1 block having 6 units is disastrous in regards to traffic. The road will not cater for the traffic increases and is not a wide street.	Blue Wren Close a local road with a 7m road formation within a 17m road reserve. This development proposes to generate 35 additional daily trips. The addition in traffic associated with the development is unlikely to have any adverse impacts to the existing road network within the immediate locality to warrant refusal of the application.
When the blocks in the street were first open for purchasing, this street was sprouted as having golf course frontage.	The potential for development of the golf course is not a matter for consideration under this application.
Very unlikely that a golf course will be put in because by building so many units/villas will devalue the land in this street.
There are covenants on this land and will pursue class action with other residents from this area for this lack of consideration for the traffic impacts, environmental impacts and family living impacts.	The development is permissible in the residential zoning applying to the site. The density of the dwellings is permissible and compliant off-street parking is provided.
There has not been any consideration given to existing residents and it is clearly stated in the application that residents in this area have not been consulted.	The proposal has been neighbour notified in accordance with Council’s Neighbour Notification policy. The Council’s planning guidelines and development controls provide protection for amenity impacts of an area to acceptable standards.
Council garbage trucks will not be able to manoeuvre due to forseen congestion from increased vehicles.	Council garbage trucks will still be required to enter off the street.
Practical access to all houses will now be impacted.	The density of the dwellings is permissible and compliant off-street parking is provided.
This is just one block, which means that if 6 units are to go on this block, what does that mean for the remaining blocks.	Each application is assessed individually against Council guidelines and on merit. There is potential for similar multi dwelling proposals on the other lots released in this section of Blue Wren Close subject to complying with each individual parking, density and other planning requirements.
There have already been 4 houses sold in this street because of proposed changes to the vacant blocks.	Any potential impact on land values is not able to be considered under the planning assessment of Development Applications. The proposed development has been permissible on the site for many years and the property is zoned residential.
This will block views from the 'proposed' golf course for many residents as the block will consistent of nearly all building constructions.	The Lots referred to are all zoned residential. No adverse view sharing impacts can be identified requiring detailed analysis given all dwellings are single storey and well below the maximum 8.5m building height restriction applying to the site.
The stormwater in this street is inadequate. The blocks flood consistently and have been reported to Council previously. Question whether existing facilities are adequate.	The site naturally grades towards rear and is currently serviced via an existing easement to drain water. The legal point of discharge for the proposed development is defined as the existing easement to drain water at the rear over lot 245 DP1227796. Stormwater from the proposed development is planned to be disposed via this easement which is consistent with the above requirements. On-site detention facilities will be required. The proposal will not lead to any identifiable increased potential stormwater drainage impacts in the locality.
Concern with the removal of vegetation. We have seen koalas living in the trees on the vacant land. Photo proof available.	There is no Koala Plan of Management applying to this particular site. Construction of the proposed development will require removal/clearing of existing trees including two (2) koala browse trees (Tallowwood trees included). During the assessment of the DA, the Applicant has offered to carry out offset planting of four (4) trees (2:1 ratio) on the adjoining neighbouring property with planting of 4 koala food trees. An off-set planting plan is attached to this report for consideration. Specific conditions are recommended for the planting of the four (4) off-set plantings including size and ongoing management. There is no Koala Plan of Management applying to this particular site.
Parking in the development. There are only 2 visitor parking spaces in the proposed development. Extra cars parked on the street will create a bottle neck in our already narrow road. Concern with the amount of noise having 6 neighbours will create. 3 of which will back on to our house, right near our 3 young children's bedrooms.	The parking provision is compliant with the Council Policy for provision of off-street parking. The development proposes 9 parking spaces as part of the dwellings + 2 nominated visitor parks at the front of the site. There are no identifiable adverse privacy impacts identified to the eastern neighbouring property particularly given the floor levels adopted for the dwellings.
Concern with decrease in property value.	Any potential impact on land values is not able to be considered under the planning assessment of Development Applications.
Concern with privacy issues, having 6 neighbours.	There are no identifiable adverse privacy impacts identified to the eastern neighbouring property particularly given the floor levels adopted for the dwellings.

(e) The Public Interest:

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

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

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

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

5. CONCLUSION

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

Attachments

1 View. DA2015 - 913.1 Plans

2 View. DA2015 - 913.1 Recommended Conditions

3 View. DA2015 - 913.1 Submission - Dunn

4 View. DA2015 - 913.1 Submission - Moore

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 25/10/2017

Item: 08

Subject: DA2016 - 372.2 Modification To Residential Flat Building - Lot 3 DP 345930, No. 3 Gore Street, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Clint Tink

Applicant: All About Planning

Owner: Gotham Trading Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: N/A

Parcel no: 7331

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2016 - 372.2 for a Section 96 modification to a residential flat building at Lot 3, DP 345930, No. 3 Gore Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a Section 96(1A) modification of consent application at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Being a s96 modification, the amended proposal has been assessed against the legislation in place at the time of the original assessment.

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

The site has an area of 588.1m².

The site is zoned R4 High Density 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:

· Council’s Development Assessment Panel (DAP) approved the original development on 9 November 2016. The DAP report and minutes are attached at the end of this report for context.

· The proposal is retained as a six (6) storey residential flat building comprising:

- 11 units with 10 units containing 2 bedrooms and 1 unit containing 3 bedrooms.

- A basement level car park is also retained. However, access to the basement will change from Gore Street to Alva Lane and will introduce a single car lift for access/egress. The lift also eliminates the need for the previous approved stacker parking.

- 14 parking spaces are proposed within the basement, which includes 12 spaces for residents and 2 visitor parking spaces. Included in the 12 resident spaces is a disabled space and stacked space for the 3 bedroom unit.

· The majority of the building design and layout remains unchanged from the first floor up. In particular, the changes centre on the basement and ground floor in response to the revised driveway entry design.

· The height of the building remains unchanged with the previous Clause 4.6 variation to Clause 4.3 (height of buildings) in the Port Macquarie Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 still standing.

· The residential flat building has dual frontage to Gore Street and Alva Lane. Pedestrian access is provided off both frontages.

· The development also involves strata subdivision.

· Three (3) submissions received to the modification.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 9/11/2016 - DA2016 - 372.1 approved by DAP.

· 13/4/2017 – Council staff met with the applicant/owner to discuss potential changes to the approved development, the s96 process and issues to be considered.

· 6/7/2017 – s96 modification lodged with Council.

· 20/7/2017 to 2/8/2017 – Notification period.

· 21/7/2017 – Council staff requested additional information on BASIX, parking, storage, screening, open space and various minor matters. Applicant acknowledged request.

· 30/8/2017 – Applicant provided response to additional information request from Council staff.

· 31/8/2017 – Based on the response/revised detail, Council staff requested further information and clarification on fire doors, plantings and screening.

· 4/9/2017 – Applicant responded to screening issue.

· 6/9/2017 – Applicant responded to fire door and planting concerns.

· 26/9/2017 to 4/10/2017 – Discussion between Council staff and applicant around the height and operations of the car lift.

· 3-4/10/2017 – Discussions between Council staff and car lift company on noise levels.

· 12/10/2017 – Applicant responded to car lift matters. A waiting bay was include off Alva Lane, greater setback to the lift entry to allow potential stacked waiting and reconfigure of basement parking. The waiting bay relocated a section of deep soil zone area to the north east corner.

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Is the proposal substantially the same?

Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 enables the modification of consents and categorises modifications into three categories - S.96(1) for modifications involving minor error, mis-description or miscalculation; S.96(1A) for modifications involving minimal environmental impact; and S.96(2) for other modifications. Each type of modification must be considered as being substantially the same to that which was originally consented to.

The subject application is being considered under the provisions of Section 96(1A). The proposal is considered to be substantially the same development to that which was originally lodged and consented to and will have minimal environmental impact. In particular, the main changes occur at the basement and ground level regarding vehicle access being changed from Gore Street via a driveway down into the basement to a car lift off Alva Lane. Having regard to the above, the proposed modification is not considered to alter the fundamental essence of the original development for the following reasons:

· The building dimensions, design, height, number of units, footprint etc remain relatively unchanged.

· The revised vehicle basement access provides a suitable alternate arrangement while ensuring the overall development remains substantially the same – see above dot point.

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

No changes to any conditions imposed by a Minister, government or public authority.

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

Neighbour notification has been undertaken in accordance with the DCP.

Any submissions made concerning the modification?

Three written submissions were received following public exhibition of the application.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
A lot of cars already use Alva Lane. Alva Lane is narrow, contains potholes and has no lighting. The change will cause traffic problems for users of Alva Lane (ie people queuing to use the car lift/backing out into Alva Lane to allow someone out of the lift). Will residents resort to parking in Alva Lane or adjoining properties? The Gore Street vehicle access is the better location.	The proposed modification, design off Alva Lane and future growth occurring in the area have been considered by Council staff in the assessment process. The design is considered acceptable for the following reasons: - Conditions will be imposed to upgrade the section of Alva Lane that the development fronts. This will include widening to allow passing traffic if a car chooses to wait within the road reserve to use the lift. - Waiting areas are incorporated into the design to allow occupants of the residential flat building to also wait onsite for the car lift (rather than in Alva Lane). - The development is within walking distance to key CBD areas, which will reduce the need for vehicles. - There are parking areas in Gore Street that are more likely to be used rather than people resorting to parking in Alva Lane or adjoining properties. The above matters, coupled with the small number of units proposed, will ensure Alva Lane operates in an acceptable manner.
Loss of privacy to bedrooms in the property to the west.	It should be noted that the design of the building from ground level up remains essentially the same to that which was originally approved. The main change to the western neighbour is the installation of the car lift, which will reduce openings to the west. Fencing, separation and screening will further ensure privacy to the western property is maintained. The main bedroom openings on the property to the west are also designed at an angle to face north (ie they don’t face east). This will further aid in maintaining privacy in an east west direction.
Noise from the car lift.	The car lift was reviewed by Council’s Environmental Health Officer and considered unlikely to create adverse noise. Components for the lift are located within the basement and the opening faces south. Conditions will also be imposed to further reinforce that the car lift is designed and operates in accordance with acceptable noise levels.

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

Overall, the proposed development remains consistent with the original s79C assessment. Areas of the original assessment impacted by the changes or with revised comments are outlined below. For all other matters, refer to comments provided in the original DAP assessment attached to this report:

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (SEPP 65)

Clause 115 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 does not require a revised design verification for a s96(1A).

Principle 3: Density

Good design achieves a high level of amenity for residents and each apartment, resulting in a density appropriate to the site and its context.

Appropriate densities are consistent with the area’s existing or projected population. Appropriate densities can be sustained by existing or proposed infrastructure, public transport, access to jobs, community facilities and the environment.

The original application proposed an FSR of 1.99:1. The modification proposes an FSR of 1.97:1. The new FSR is a minor reduction and remains compliant with previous comments.

Complies

Apartment Design Guide (ADG) Objective	Design Guidance/Design Criteria (Italics)	Proposed	Complies
3D Communal and public open space
3D - 1 An adequate area of communal open space is provided to enhance residential amenity and to provide opportunities for landscaping	Design Criteria 1. Communal open space has a minimum area equal to 25% of the site (see figure 3D.3) 2. Developments achieve a minimum of 50% direct sunlight to the principal usable part of the communal open space for a minimum of 2 hours between 9 am and 3 pm on 21 June (mid winter). Communal open space should be consolidated into a well designed, easily identified and usable area. Communal open space should have a minimum dimension of 3m, and larger developments should consider greater dimensions. Communal open space should be co-located with deep soil areas. Direct, equitable access should be provided to communal open space areas from common circulation areas, entries and lobbies. Where communal open space cannot be provided at ground level, it should be provided on a podium or roof. Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, such as on small lots, sites within business zones, or in a dense urban area, they should: - provide communal spaces elsewhere such as a landscaped roof top terrace or a common room - provide larger balconies or increased private open space for apartments - demonstrate good proximity to public open space and facilities and/or provide contributions to public open space	25% of the site (588.1m²) equates to a communal open space area requirement of 147m². The original development provided an area of approximately 42m² with an additional 10m² area being 2.58m in width (just short of the 3m width requirement). The modification provides an area of 37m² with an additional 7m². The width of the areas are less than 3m but are considered to remain useable. The changes are a minor decrease from the original approval As allowed by the ADG, the shortfall is still justified based on the following: - The shortfall has been offset by providing the units with an excess of private open space above the standard. - The site is constrained by size and the lack of opportunities to consolidate with surrounding sites. - The site is well positioned to take advantage of surrounding public open space for larger communal activities. In addition to the above, the communal areas are easily accessible, well defined, useable, co-located with deep soil areas, located at ground level and contain a mixture of light and shade areas.		Yes
3E Deep soil zones
3E - 1 Deep soil zones provide areas on the site that allow for and support healthy plant and tree growth. They improve residential amenity and promote management of water and air quality	Design Criteria 1. Deep soil zones are to meet the following minimum requirements: a) < 650m², no min dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. b) 650-1500m², 3m dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. c) >1500m², 6m dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. On some sites it may be possible to provide larger deep soil zones, depending on the site area and context: - 10% of the site as deep soil on sites with an area of 650m² - 1,500m² - 15% of the site as deep soil on sites greater than 1,500m². Deep soil zones should be located to retain existing significant trees and to allow for the development of healthy root systems, providing anchorage and stability for mature trees. Design solutions may include: - basement and sub basement car park design that is consolidated beneath building footprints - use of increased front and side setbacks - adequate clearance around trees to ensure long term health - co-location with other deep soil areas on adjacent sites to create larger contiguous areas of deep soil. Achieving the design criteria may not be possible on some sites including where: - the location and building typology have limited or no space for deep soil at ground level (e.g. central business district, constrained sites, high density areas, or in centres) - there is 100% site coverage or non-residential uses at ground floor level. Where a proposal does not achieve deep soil requirements, acceptable stormwater management should be achieved and alternative forms of planting provided such as on structure.	The site is <650m². The applicant originally proposed 6.7% deep soil zone. The modification proposes an increase to 7%. Improved outcome.		Yes
3H Vehicle access
3H - 1 Vehicle access points are designed and located to achieve safety, minimise conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles and create high quality streetscapes	Car park access should be integrated with the building’s overall facade. Design solutions may include: - the materials and colour palette to minimise visibility from the street - security doors or gates at entries that minimise voids in the facade - where doors are not provided, the visible interior reflects the facade design and the building services, pipes and ducts are concealed. Car park entries should be located behind the building line. Vehicle entries should be located at the lowest point of the site minimising ramp lengths, excavation and impacts on the building form and layout. Car park entry and access should be located on secondary streets or lanes where available. Vehicle standing areas that increase driveway width and encroach into setbacks should be avoided. Access point locations should avoid headlight glare to habitable rooms. Adequate separation distances should be provided between vehicle entries and street intersections. The width and number of vehicle access points should be limited to the minimum. Visual impact of long driveways should be minimised through changing alignments and screen planting. The need for large vehicles to enter or turn around within the site should be avoided. Garbage collection, loading and servicing areas are screened. Clear sight lines should be provided at pedestrian and vehicle crossings. Traffic calming devices such as changes in paving material or textures should be used where appropriate. Pedestrian and vehicle access should be separated and distinguishable. Design solutions may include: - changes in surface materials - level changes - the use of landscaping for separation	The proposed development will change from a driveway entry off Gore Street to a driveway off Alva Lane that will enter what looks like a single garage. However, the single garage area will contain a car lift that transports vehicles in and out of the basement car park. The revised location has the benefits of being off a secondary lane and behind the building façade. The process of a car entering the lift and going up or down can take 1-2 minutes with an approximate 3 minute cycle. A waiting area off Alva Lane and driveway length (ie capable of holding another car) have been provided to ensure no adverse traffic impacts on Alva Lane. Alva Lane will also be upgraded/widened to allow passing traffic Landscaping provided to help blend in the entry. Alva Lane is already treated as a back of house area so headlight glare will create no adverse impact.		Yes
3J Bicycle and car parking
3J - 1 Car parking is provided based on proximity to public transport in metropolitan Sydney and centres in regional areas Notes Port Macquarie is a nominated regional centre. In terms of using Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, Port Macquarie is a “sub-regional centre” as by definition it does not have access to rail. Medium density is 2 - <20 dwellings. High Density is 20 or more dwellings	Design Criteria 1. For development in the following locations: a) on sites that are within 800 metres of a railway station or light rail stop in the Sydney Metropolitan Area; or b) on land zoned, and sites within 400 metres of land zoned, B3 Commercial Core, B4 Mixed Use or equivalent in a nominated regional centre the minimum car parking requirement for residents and visitors is set out in the Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, or the car parking requirement prescribed by the relevant council, whichever is less The car parking needs for a development must be provided off street. Where a car share scheme operates locally, provide car share parking spaces within the development. Car share spaces, when provided, should be on site. Where less car parking is provided in a development, council should not provide on street resident parking permits Guide to Traffic Generating Developments Medium density residential flat buildings require: - 1 space per unit + - 1 space for every 5 x 2 bedroom unit + - 1 space for every 2 x 3 bedroom unit + - 1 space for 5 units (visitor parking). High density residential flat buildings for metropolitan sub-regional centres require: - 0.6 spaces per 1 bedroom unit - 0.9 spaces per 2 bedroom unit - 1.40 spaces per 3 bedroom unit + - 1 space per 5 units (visitor parking)	Site is within 400m of a B3 zone. Building is medium density. 10 x 2 bed units and 1 x 3 bed units proposed. 11 x 1 space per unit = 11 spaces 10 x 2 bedroom units/5 = 2 spaces 1 x 3 bedroom unit/2 = 0.5 spaces 11/5 = 2.2 visitor spaces. Total required is 11 + 2 + 0.5 + 2.2 = 15.7 spaces (rounds to 16) The original proposal nominated/had approved, 14 spaces onsite and contributions to cover the 2 space shortfall. The modification does not change this outcome.		Yes
3J - 4 Visual and environmental impacts of underground car parking are minimised	Excavation should be minimised through efficient car park layouts and ramp design. Car parking layout should be well organised, using a logical, efficient structural grid and double loaded aisles. Protrusion of car parks should not exceed 1m above ground level. Design solutions may include stepping car park levels or using split levels on sloping sites. Natural ventilation should be provided to basement and sub basement car parking areas. Ventilation grills or screening devices for car parking openings should be integrated into the facade and landscape design	The modification will reduce excavation by eliminating the need for car stackers. Layout is well organised. While car lifts have not been popular to date in Port Macquarie they are a suitable alternative and used elsewhere.		Yes
4E Private open space and balconies
4E - 1 Apartments provide appropriately sized private open space and balconies to enhance residential amenity	Design Criteria 1. All apartments are required to have primary balconies as follows: a) Studio apartments = 4m² b) 1 bedroom apartments = 8m² and 2m min depth. c) 2 bedroom apartments = 10m² and 2m min depth. d) 3+ bedroom apartments = 12m² and 2.4m min depth. The minimum balcony depth to be counted as contributing to the balcony area is 1m. 2. For apartments at ground level or on a podium or similar structure, a private open space is provided instead of a balcony. It must have a minimum area of 15m² and a minimum depth of 3m. Increased communal open space should be provided where the number or size of balconies are reduced. Storage areas on balconies is additional to the minimum balcony size. Balcony use may be limited in some proposals by: - consistently high wind speeds at 10 storeys and above - close proximity to road, rail or other noise sources - exposure to significant levels of aircraft noise - heritage and adaptive reuse of existing buildings In these situations, juliet balconies, operable walls, enclosed wintergardens or bay windows may be appropriate, and other amenity benefits for occupants should also be provided in the apartments or in the development or both. Natural ventilation also needs to be demonstrated	Ground floor apartments have in excess of the 15m² and 3m minimum depth. Ground floor open space has increased due to driveway/entry being moved to the rear.		Yes
4H Acoustic privacy
4H - 1 Noise transfer is minimised through the siting of buildings and building layout	Adequate building separation is provided within the development and from neighbouring buildings/adjacent uses (see also section 2F Building separation and section 3F Visual privacy). Window and door openings are generally orientated away from noise sources. Noisy areas within buildings including building entries and corridors should be located next to or above each other and quieter areas next to or above quieter areas. Storage, circulation areas and non-habitable rooms should be located to buffer noise from external sources. The number of party walls (walls shared with other apartments) are limited and are appropriately insulated. Noise sources such as garage doors, driveways, service areas, plant rooms, building services, mechanical equipment, active communal open spaces and circulation areas should be located at least 3m away from bedrooms.	The revised basement entry faces a back of house lane and is well separated from other properties. A screen over the window to ground floor unit 1, bedroom 2 will help ensure privacy and screening to the new car lift waiting area. The window will also be conditioned to be high sill. The waiting area is also unlikely to be used at night (quieter time) ensuring minimal impact. Other acoustic provisions of ADG have been suitably implemented.		Yes
4L Ground floor apartments
4L - 2 Design of ground floor apartments delivers amenity and safety for residents	Privacy and safety should be provided without obstructing casual surveillance. Design solutions may include: - elevation of private gardens and terraces above the street level by 1-1.5m (see figure 4L.4) - landscaping and private courtyards - window sill heights that minimise sight lines into apartments - integrating balustrades, safety bars or screens with the exterior design Solar access should be maximised through: - high ceilings and tall windows - trees and shrubs that allow solar access in winter and shade in summer	The use of elevation, fencing, screening and landscaping provides a suitable mixture of privacy and surveillance. Solar access will not be adversely inhibited.		Yes
4O Landscape design
4O - 1 Landscape design is viable and sustainable	Landscape design should be environmentally sustainable and can enhance environmental performance by incorporating: - diverse and appropriate planting - bio-filtration gardens - appropriately planted shading trees - areas for residents to plant vegetables and herbs - composting - green roofs or walls Ongoing maintenance plans should be prepared. Microclimate is enhanced by: - appropriately scaled trees near the eastern and western elevations for shade - a balance of evergreen and deciduous trees to provide shading in summer and sunlight access in winter - shade structures such as pergolas for balconies and courtyards Tree and shrub selection considers size at maturity and the potential for roots to compete (see Table 4) Table 4 requires - For site area up to 850m² = 1 medium tree per 50m² of deep soil zone - Between 850 - 1,500m² = 1 large tree or 2 medium trees per 90m² of deep soil zone - Greater than 1,500m² = 1 large tree or 2 medium trees per 80m² of deep soil zone	Suitable landscape plan provided that allows a range of plantings and stormwater detention. 1 medium tree required based on the size of the property and deep soil zone. At least one medium tree is considered achievable and has been shown on the plan.		Yes
4P Planting on structures
4P - 1 Appropriate soil profiles are provided	Structures are reinforced for additional saturated soil weight Soil volume is appropriate for plant growth, considerations include: - modifying depths and widths according to the planting mix and irrigation frequency - free draining and long soil life span - tree anchorage Minimum soil standards for plant sizes should be provided in accordance with Table 5. Table 5 requires - Large trees 12-18m high, up to 16m crown spread at maturity = need 150m³ of soil at a depth of 1,200mm and area of 10m x 10m or equivalent. - Medium trees 8-12m high, up to 8m crown spread at maturity = need 35m³ of soil at a depth of 1,000mm and area of 6m x 6m or equivalent. - Small trees 6-8m high, up to 4m crown spread at maturity = need 9m³ of soil at a depth of 800mm and area of 3.5m x 3.5m or equivalent. - Shrubs need soil depth of 500-600mm - Ground cover needs soil depth of 300-450mm - Turf needs soil depth of 200mm	Can be engineered to comply - condition required. The north eastern deep soil zone has suitable dimensions to allow a medium size tree to grow as required by 4O - 1 above. Smaller areas contain suitable depths to allow variations in species size and type.		Yes
4V Water management and conservation
4V - 3 Flood management systems are integrated into site design	Detention tanks should be located under paved areas, driveways or in basement car parks. On large sites parks or open spaces are designed to provide temporary on site detention basins.	Detention provided via a tank under the vehicle driveway.		Yes
4W Waste management
4W - 1 Waste storage facilities are designed to minimise impacts on the streetscape, building entry and amenity of residents	Adequately sized storage areas for rubbish bins should be located discreetly away from the front of the development or in the basement car park. Waste and recycling storage areas should be well ventilated. Circulation design allows bins to be easily manoeuvred between storage and collection points. Temporary storage should be provided for large bulk items such as mattresses. A waste management plan should be prepared	Suitable sized basement garbage storage proposed. Garbage area located in the basement out of site and accessible to occupants Private collection required and to be conditioned. Ventilation provided.		Yes
4X Building maintenance
4X - 2 Systems and access enable ease of maintenance	Window design enables cleaning from the inside of the building. Building maintenance systems should be incorporated and integrated into the design of the building form, roof and façade. Design solutions do not require external scaffolding for maintenance access. Manually operated systems such as blinds, sunshades and curtains are used in preference to mechanical systems. Centralised maintenance, services and storage should be provided for communal open space areas within the building.	New storage area added to basement area that could be used for maintenance.		Yes

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

A revised BASIX certificate (number 716615M_03) has been submitted demonstrating that the revised 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

· Clause 4.4, the floor space ratio (FSR) of the modification is 1.97:1 a reduction from the original 1.99:1. Modification remains compliant with the maximum 2:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

· Clause 7.3, the site is land within a mapped “flood planning area”. The modification has been reviewed by Council’s Flood Officer and accepted, subject to conditions.

(iii) any Development Control Plan in force:

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: Residential Flat Development, Tourist and Visitor Accommodation and Mixed Use Development*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3.3.2.6	Side setbacks comply with Figure 3.3-1: · Min. Side setback 1.5m for 75% of building depth. · Windows on side walls min. 3m from side boundary. · 3m minimum where adjacent to existing strata titled building.	The original approved development was setback 3m from side boundaries. In terms of the modification, part of the ground floor of the building has been extended to the western boundary to accommodate the entry point to the car lift structure. The particular section of building does not contain any windows, habitable use or result in a loss of privacy. In addition, the single storey height of the new component and southern location does not create any adverse overshadowing. Suitable landscaping and open space are retained.	Yes
3.3.2.24	Solid fences should be: · Max. 1.2m high, · Setback 1m, · Suitably landscaped, · Provide 3m x 3m splay.	The modification contains a front fence that is over 1.2m but not more than 1.8m (to be conditioned). The fence is setback approximately 2m from the front boundary. The fence will also contain vegetation screening and transparency in accordance with the DCP. The new front fence component is considered an acceptable change that will provide security and privacy to the development, while not impacting on the streetscape.	Yes
3.3.2.29	Development complies with AS/NZS2107:2000 Acoustic – Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors for residential development.	As per the original approval, details to be provided at CC stage.	Yes
3.3.2.46	Accessible storage provided for tenants in basement car park or garages.	While the modification does not propose storage in the basement for each unit, proposed storage is compliant with ADG.	Yes
*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed		Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline: · Casual surveillance and sightlines · Land use mix and activity generators · Definition of use and ownership · Lighting · Way finding · Predictable routes and entrapment locations	The proposed modification does create a new concealment area at the fire exit onto Alva Lane. The western wall to the fire exit (creating the concealment) will be conditioned to be removed or amended.		Yes
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	A suitable driveway has been provided off Alva Lane. The change in vehicle entry from Gore Street to Alva Lane (as proposed in the modification) will improve street parking overall. In particular, the removal of the driveway in Gore Street will create additional street parking, while the new driveway in Alva Lane does not impact on street parking (ie currently no street parking in Alva Lane).		Yes
*DCP 2013: Westport Precinct*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed		Complies
4.2.4.6	Side and rear setbacks to be: - 3m from side boundaries. - 6m from rear boundary. - South of Gordon Street 10m rear setback. - Party wall not appropriate.	Refer to comments on 3.3.2.6 above in this DCP assessment.		Yes.
4.2.4.9	Open space areas are: - 25% communal open space. Where 25% not possible due to constraints, 5m² per dwelling required. - 2 hours sunlight for communal area between 9am and 3pm. - Communal areas may be reduced where development contributes to public area. - Rooftop communal setback from edges and not overlook.	Refer to comments on 3D – 1 of ADG above in this assessment.		No, but acceptable
4.2.4.10	Deep soil to site area provided as follows: - <650m² = 7% - 650m² to 1500m² = 10% - >1500m² = 15% Min 6m width unless a constrained site - see DCP for what constitutes constrained. Constrained sites need to be 3m. 10% paving allowed where tree growth can still occur.	Refer to comments on 3E – 1 of ADG above in this assessment.		No, but acceptable.
4.2.4.11	Fences and retaining walls to comply with the following: - Within 1m of front boundary be max 1.2m high. - Variations allowed where ground floor level is higher than ground level. - Fences greater than 1.2m should be 50% transparent above the 1.2m height. - Fences should step down sloping sites.	Front fence is setback over 2m and ground floor level is higher than ground level.		Yes

Other matters from the original assessment that have been revised due to the modification are listed below.

Roads

Vehicular access to the on-site car park is now proposed off Alva Lane, a Council owned and maintained laneway. The Alva Lane road pavement is variable in condition and width, currently ranging between 3 and 4m and is missing kerb and piped stormwater drainage in some places, including the frontage of the site subject to this application. Condition of consent A(14) exists requiring upgrade of Alva Lane with a design pavement to collector road standard.

An amendment to this condition is recommended to require additional laneway widening within the existing 6.2m wide reserve, to provide additional manoeuvring clearance for cars using the onsite car lift and waiting bay and potentially allow other vehicles to pass any vehicle that chooses to wait within Alva Lane instead of onsite.

Traffic and Transport

A Traffic Impact Assessment has not been submitted with the application. However, the likely traffic generated by residential dwellings is quantified by research in the RMS’ Guide to Traffic Generating Developments. For a medium to high density mix of dwellings in a regional area, around 7 vehicle trips per dwelling per day on average can be expected.

The proposal will shift additional traffic onto Alva Lane. For 11 proposed units, the increase in traffic using Alva Lane as a result of the modification is likely to be up to 77 vehicle trips per day, or equating to 8 additional vehicle trips during each peak hour, in the morning and afternoon peaks (approximately equivalent to 1 car every 7 minutes). Given a lift cycle time of approximately 3 minutes (ground level to ground level) a waiting bay has been provided onsite adjacent to the car lift entry to accommodate the likelihood that multiple cars will want to use the lift simultaneously during the peak hour.

Multiple other residential flat buildings exist with principal access to Alva Lane, and those developments have been required to upgrade the Alva Lane pavement along the frontages of their sites. There are currently approximately 160 approved dwellings (before approval of the subject DA proposal) and multiple businesses with principal access along Alva Lane, including the residential flat buildings. Council’s asset database indicates that the Alva Lane pavement is in places not constructed to a suitable standard to cater for the proposed demand. The existing condition A(14) will ensure this development’s contribution to traffic in the laneway is offset by improvement works.

Site Frontage & Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed via a car lift with frontage to Alva Lane. Sufficient manoeuvring clearances are available to comply with AS 2890.1 and AS2890.6 and existing conditions of consent act to ensure compliance.

Parking and Manoeuvring

A total of 14 parking spaces have been provided on-site in the basement storey, including 1 disabled access space allocated to accessible Unit 1, and 2 visitor spaces. Parking and driveway widths on site can comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

Stormwater

Existing stormwater conditions will accommodate the nominal changes to roof drainage and impervious area. No new risks are identified. Alva Lane upgrade will need to include augmentation of the existing pit and pipe network that runs along its northern edge.

Proposed changes to conditions

Refer to attached draft consent illustrating condition changes.

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

As per original application with revised Notice to be produced (factoring in CPI).

5. CONCLUSION

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 96 and 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Attachments

1 View. DA2016 - 372.2 Plans

2 View. DA2016 - 372.2 Recommended Conditions

3 View. DA2016 - 372.1 Previous DAP Report 9 November 2016

4 View. DA2016 - 372.2 Submission - Armstrong

5 View. DA2016 - 372.2 Submission - Creighton

6 View. DA2016 - 372.2 Submission - Shade

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 25/10/2017

Item: 09

Subject: DA2017 - 723.1 Alterations And Additions To Food And Drink Premises - Lot 1 DP 364377, No. 76 William Street, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Clint Tink

Applicant: R Clucas

Owner: R J & K M Clucas and N Olynick

Estimated Cost: $35,000

Parcel no: 25439

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2017 – 723.1 for alterations and additions to a food and drink premises at Lot 1, DP 364377, No. 76 William Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for alterations and additions to a food and drink premises at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Following exhibition of the application, two (2) submissions were received. However, one (1) of the submissions was later withdrawn bringing the total submissions received down to one (1).

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

The site has an area of 518.7793m².

The site is zoned R4 High Density 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:

History

· DA2007/256 approved the food and drink premises and gallery onsite.

· DA2010/548 approved a deck addition to the food and drink premises.

· DA2007/256 approved hours of 7am to 5pm (daily) and once a month until 11pm.

· DA2010/548 required five (5) parking spaces, comprising three (3) customer and one (1) staff space at the rear of the property and one (1) disabled space at the front. The parking areas were approved to be done in gravel construction. It should be noted that aerial photos suggest that the disabled space has since been grassed over.

· Parking for DA2007/256 and DA2010/548 was based on a seat/area rate. In particular, the food and drink premises was approved to have 24 seats.

DA2017 – 723.1

· Proposes an extra six (6) seats up from 24 to 30.

· Proposed hours of 7am to 11pm Thursday to Saturday and 7am to 10pm Sunday to Wednesday.

· Internal reconfiguration.

· Alterations to the entry.

· Shutters on windows.

· New front sign and pergola/entry feature structure

· No alcohol is proposed to be served but this could be applied for separately after or via BYO.

· Applicant proposing some minor works as exempt development under State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 and Clause 5.10(3) of Port Macquarie Hastings Local Environmental Plan

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 18/8/2017 - Application lodged with Council.

· 24/8/2017 – Council requested owners consent.

· 25/8/2017 – Owners consent provided.

· 30/8/2017 – Application sent to Heritage Council.

· 30/8/2017 to 12/9/2017 – Notification period.

· 1/9/2017 Request for additional information on site plan, shutters, provision of alcohol and parking.

· 4/9/2017 – Response to additional information received.

· 15 to 18/9/2017 – Discussions with neighbour.

· 9/10/2017 – Heritage Council sign off received.

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 79C(1) Matters for Consideration

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) any Environmental Planning Instrument:

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage

The proposed development includes proposed advertising signage in the form of business identification.

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

The following assessment table provides an assessment checklist against the Schedule 1 requirements of this SEPP:

Applicable clauses for consideration	Comments	Satisfactory
Clause 8(a) Consistent with objectives of the policy as set out in Clause 3(1)(a).	The proposed signage complies with the subject Clause. In particular, the proposed signage is not excessive in size, is consistent with surrounding signage and will not impact on streetscape.	Yes
Schedule 1(1) Character of the area.	Signage is consistent with others in the area and will not compromise the character of the locality.	Yes
Schedule 1(2) Special areas.	Not a special area.	Yes
Schedule 1(3) Views and vistas.	No views or vistas impacted.	Yes
Schedule 1(4) Streetscape, setting or landscape.	The proposed signage is not excessive, is consistent with surrounding signage and will not impact on streetscape.	Yes
Schedule 1(5) Site and building.	The proposed signage fits in with the site and location of buildings.	Yes
Schedule 1(6) Associated devices and logos with advertisements and advertising structures.	None proposed.	Yes
Schedule 1(7) Illumination.	Conditions will be imposed to cover illumination of the sign.	Yes
Schedule 1(7) Safety.	The signage will create no safety impacts.	Yes

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

The site is located within a coastal zone noting clause 4 of the SEPP.

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

Having regard for clauses 2, 8 and 12 to 16 of the SEPP and clause 5.5 of the PMH LEP 2011, the proposed development will not result in any of the following:

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

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

c) any adverse impacts on flora and fauna;

d) the development being subject to any adverse coastal processes or hazards;

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

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

g) reduction in the quality of the natural water bodies in the locality (due to effluent & stormwater disposal, construction impacts, landuse conflicts);

h) adverse cumulative impacts on the environment;

i) a form of development that is unsustainable in water and energy demands;

j) development relying on flexible zone provisions. (refer to clause 5.3 of LEP 2011 - Development near zone boundaries unable to be undertaken when SEPP 71 applies).

The site is located within an area zoned and already built out for residential/commercial purposes.

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 R4 High Density Residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R4 zone landuse table, the proposed development for alterations and additions to a food and drink premises is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the R4 zone are as follows:

o To provide for the housing needs of the community within a high density residential environment.

o To provide a variety of housing types within a high density residential environment.

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

o To provide for tourist and visitor accommodation in key tourist precincts of urban areas of the Council area, while also encouraging increased population levels.

o To encourage development that has regard to the desired future character of streets and supports active and safe uses at pedestrian level.

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 retains a facility that services the day to day needs of residents in the area and the greater area.

· Clause 2.7, certain demolition works require consent as they do not fit within the provisions of SEPP (Exempt and Complying) 2008.

· Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) remains unchanged. As a result, the clause does not apply.

· Clause 4.4, the floor space ratio of the proposal will increase as a result of the north east semi outdoor deck area being enclosed with the proposed bi fold doors. The gross floor area will increase from approximately 118m² to 148m² as a result of the bi fold doors being installed. The FSR will be 0.29:1, which still complies with the 2:1 FSR applying to the site.

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

· Clause 5.10, the site is not identified as a heritage item but is located within the Port Macquarie Archaeology site/area of early European settlement. The application was referred to the Heritage Council who raised no objection subject to installation of a condition to cover if anything is found during any works (ie excavation for the pergola/entry feature).

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

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

None relevant.

(iii) any Development Control Plan in force:

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline: · Casual surveillance and sightlines · Land use mix and activity generators · Definition of use and ownership · Lighting · Way finding · Predictable routes and entrapment locations	The proposed development creates no new concealment or entrapment areas, has positive territorial cues and retains surveillance of the street from within.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Off-street parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. (Provision to consider reduced parking where supported by parking demand study)	The previous applications that approved the food and drink premises, worked off a per seat rate, with a seat occupying 1m². Overall 24 seats were proposed equating to a dining area of 24m². Restaurants/cafes outside commercial zones require 1 parking space per 6m². Based on the above (24/6), 4 spaces were required. The previous applications also had a gallery component, which was assessed at 1 space per 30m² rate. Based on the gallery areas at the time, an additional space was required. In total, previous applications required 5 spaces. The applicant of DA2017 – 723 proposes to remove the gallery component and provide a 30 seat food and drink premises. Using the above assessment approach, 5 parking spaces are required (ie 30m²/6m² per seat). In this regard, given the previous applications had 5 approved parking spaces, no further changes are required. While technically the DCP works off serviced floor area (ie not seats), the above approach was utilised before and is considered acceptable given the following: - The site is located only 200m from the Port Macquarie CBD/commercial zones. To reiterate this, commercial zones work off a 1 space per 30m² and there is an argument that such a rate could be utilised for the subject site. Using a serviced floor area of approximately 70m², only 3 spaces would be required. - There is a large number of unused street parking spaces in the area. 4. It should be noted that a site inspection of the site also identified that the original approved disabled parking space has been grassed over. The space will need to be reinstated or contributions levied for any shortfall.	Yes
2.5.3.4	Parking credits to be calculated for redevelopment or change of use	Refer to above comment.	Yes
2.5.3.7	Visitor parking to be easily accessible	Remains unchanged from previous food and drink approval. It is considered that the onsite parking is more suited to staff parking and that guests will likely use on street parking in the area or walk to the site.	Yes
	Stacked parking permitted for medium density where visitor parking and 5.5m length achieved	None proposed.	N/A
	Parking layout in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1 and AS/NZS 2890.2	Remains unchanged from previous food and drink approval.	Yes
	Parking spaces generally located behind building line	Remains unchanged from previous food and drink approval.	Yes
2.5.3.8	Accessible parking provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1, AS/NZS 2890.2 and AS 1428	Existing approved disabled parking space will need to be reinstated.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Refer to main body of report.	Noted
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Remains unchanged from previous food and drink approval.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Remains unchanged from previous food and drink approval.	Yes
2.5.3.15	Driveway grades for first 6m of ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade (Note AS/NZS 2890.1 allows for steeper grades)	Remains unchanged from previous food and drink approval.	Yes
2.5.3.16	Transitional grades min. 2m length	Remains unchanged from previous food and drink approval.	Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Remains unchanged from previous food and drink approval.	Yes
	Vehicle washing facilities – grassed area etc available.	None proposed or required.	N/A
	No direct discharge to K&G or swale drain	No new hard stand areas proposed or change to existing stormwater.	N/A
2.5.3.19	Off street commercial vehicles facilities are provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.2	Size of development does not warrant the need for a loading area onsite. Existing parking can be utilised.	Yes

While the area is zoned residential, the commercial DCP provisions are deemed more relevant in this case. In particular, the current use is commercial based, there are surrounding non-residential uses (ie Telstra complex, Innervision skate and surf shop, Port Primary School) and the plan for the area encompasses food and drink premises at ground level as part of shop top housing/residential flat buildings. Relevant provisions from the DCP are addressed below.

*DCP 2013: Business & Commercial Development*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3.4.3.1	Setbacks: A zero metre setback to ground floor is preferred in all business zone developments.	The current building is setback 1.2m. A proposed pergola/entry structure will be erected on the front boundary, consistent with the DCP. It is also noted that there are other similar structures and buildings built on or near the front boundary in the area at 78 and 80 William Street. As a result, the proposal will also not impact on the streetscape of the area.	Yes
3.4.3.2	Where a zero setback cannot be achieved, such as where parking can only be provided between the building and the street, a minimum 3.0m pedestrian setback is provided between the edge of the car park and the building. · The 3.0m pedestrian setback must be: open and accessible for pedestrians for its entire length and width; · clear of columns (other than awning posts where provided) and other obstructions; · has a pavement matching the gradient of the adjoining footpath and connects pedestrian areas on neighbouring sites; and · connects without any lip or step to adjoining footpaths or abutting pedestrian areas on neighbouring sites.	Disabled car parking space in front of the building is already approved and will not change. It is noted that the space has been grassed over. A condition will be imposed to reinstate the space. The wider disabled space will also provide suitable pedestrian access into the building.	Yes
3.4.3.3	Roof Form	No change to the roof proposed. The pergola/entry feature will add interest.	Yes
3.4.3.5	Shopfront widths are to be between 15 and 20 m.	Remains unchanged.	Yes
3.4.3.7	Infill development or alterations should respect the form, scale and massing of existing traditional buildings.	The alterations to the external part of the building are considered minor with most of the work occurring inside or as exempt development.	Yes
3.4.3.7	Where traditional frontages and facades set the architectural theme for parts of a Centre, infill buildings or alterations respect and reflect the architectural qualities and traditional materials of those buildings, but do not necessarily imitate historical architectural styles.	Refer to above comment.	Yes
3.4.3.8	Active Frontages: (Note: An active street frontage if all premises on the ground floor of the building facing the street are used for the purposes of business premises or retail premises.) Ground floor levels shall not be used for residential purposes in B1, B2, B3 and B4 zones.	The introduction of the bi fold doors will create a more active frontage.	Yes
3.4.3.9	A minimum of 50% of the ground floor level front facade is to be clear glazed.	The bi fold doors will create a min 50% glazed area.	Yes
	Active frontages must consist of one or more of the following: · A shop front. · Commercial and residential lobbies. · Café or restaurant if accompanied by an entry from the street. · Public building if accompanied by an entry from the street.	Existing café retained with access from the street.	Yes
	Active ground floor uses are to be accessible and at the same level as the footpath.	Additional entry will exist via the new bi fold doors and disabled parking area.	Yes
	Restaurants, cafés and the like shall provide openable shop fronts to the footpath but must not encroach into footpath.	Bi fold doors create openable frontage without encroaching the footpath.	Yes
3.4.3.11-14	Awnings	No change to awning proposed or required. Controls more relevant to a major or new development onsite.	N/A
3.4.3.15	Landscaping: A landscape plan shall be submitted with the development application and include: · Existing vegetation; and · Existing vegetation proposed to be removed; and · Proposed general planting and landscape treatment; and · Design details of hard landscaping elements and major earth cuts, fills and any mounding; and · Street trees; and · Existing and proposed street furniture including proposed signage.	Suitable landscaping areas will be retained onsite.	Yes
3.4.3.18	At grade car parking incorporate water sensitive urban design principles to drain pavement areas.	No change to parking proposed or required. In particular, area does not exist onsite for additional parking.	Yes
3.4.3.19	Fencing for security or privacy shall not be erected between the building line and the front boundary of a site.	No new front fencing proposed.	N/A
3.4.3.22	Any ramps are to be integrated into the overall building and landscape design.	The existing disabled access ramp on the western side of the building is to be retained.	Yes
3.4.3.22	The development complies with AS1428—Design for Access and Mobility.	Capable and to be reinforced via conditions.	Yes
3.4.3.24	Waste management: A waste management plan for the construction and/or occupation of the development is provided that: · Recycles and reuses demolished materials where possible; · Integrates waste management processes into all stages of the project; · Specifies building materials that can be reused and recycled at the end of their life; · Uses standard components and sizes to reduce waste and facilitate update in the future.	Waste management for the existing food and drink premises will remain in place. A condition will be imposed to keep bins away/screened from residential receivers.	Yes
3.4.3.27	Vehicular Access Location and Design:	No change to access or parking proposed or required. Area does not exist onsite to create any additional parking spaces.	N/A
3.4.3.30	Pedestrian Entries & Access: The development complies with AS1428—Design for Access and Mobility.	Existing approved disabled access will be retained.	Yes
3.4.3.31	Pedestrian and vehicle movement areas are separated to minimise conflict.	Vehicle parking areas etc remain unchanged. New pedestrian access is proposed to occur near the disabled access space, which is unlikely to experience a high turnover/create conflict.	Yes
3.4.3.33	Secure and convenient parking/storing for bicycles is provided close to the entrance of the development and with good surveillance.	Suitable area exists onsite to store bicycles.	Yes
3.4.3.34	Outdoor Dining	No footpath dining proposed.	N/A
3.4.3.35	Commercial Development Adjoining Residential Land uses: The development is designed so that all vehicle movement areas and servicing areas are located away from adjoining residential areas.	The driveway and parking areas remain unchanged. The access, services etc are located alongside the Telstra building (non-residential land use side) or at the rear of the property. Fencing exists at the rear of the property to help shield the development from the residential uses to the south. There are residential uses to the west but openings etc from the development are limited on this frontage to help reduce conflict. A vegetation screen is also proposed to be conditioned along this side of the property.	Yes
	The building elevation adjoining the residential area must be; · Articulated, with changes in setback at intervals no greater than 10m; · Use a variety of materials and treatments; · Be setback a minimum of half the height of the wall or a minimum of 3.0metres whichever is greater.	Overall design remains unchanged. However, shutters, screening and reduced access will be applied.	Yes
	Waste areas are located and managed to minimise pests, noise and odour.	Remain unchanged.	N/A
*DCP 2013: East Port Neighbourhood (relevant provisions considered below)*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
4.3.2.1	Development is generally in accordance with the precinct structure plans	Development is consistent with the planned mixed use for the area.	Yes
4.3.2.4	a) Northern side of Clarence Street, east of Munster Street • Setback to Clarence Street is 3 metres. b) Southern side of Clarence Street, between Munster and School Streets • A zero street setback is provided c) Southern side of William Street, between Murray and Grant Streets • Setback to William Street is 2 metres. d) Development from 2 to 10 Burrawan Street • For lots with dual frontage to Burrawan and Windmill Streets, buildings are to address Burrawan Street as their primary frontage. e) Development from 5 to 9 Pacific Drive • Setback to Pacific Drive is a minimum of 6 metres.	Except for signage and a light weight pergola/entry feature; the development is setback 2m.	Yes

(iiia) any planning agreement that has been entered into under Section 93f or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under Section 93f:

None relevant.

iv) any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

New South Wales Coastal Policy:

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

Demolition of buildings AS 2601:

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

Fire Safety and other considerations

Discussions with one of Council’s Building Surveyors confirmed that fire safety is unlikely to be an issue as the development represents less than 50% of the volume of the building. In addition, the building use remains essentially the same, has a small footprint, contains suitable setbacks to surrounding properties and the proposed use will result in reduced fire loads by removing the gallery/display areas.

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

No Coastal Zone Management Plan applies to the subject site.

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

Context and setting

The site has a northerly street frontage to William Street.

Adjoining the site to the north is a primary school.

Adjoining the site to the east is a Telstra tower and associated building.

Adjoining the site to the south and west are residential housing.

Within the locality, there are other commercial based uses amongst residential housing.

The proposal is considered to be consistent with the future desired mixed use that is planned for the area and subject to conditions, addresses relevant planning controls.

However, the proposal does have the potential to impact on surrounding residential housing in the interim. In particular, noise impacts from late night operating hours can adversely impact on occupants of the surrounding housing. To address potential noise impacts, the requested hours of operation have been reduced and will only be allowed on a one year trial period. Upon completion of the trial period, the hours will revert back to that originally approved in DA2007/256, unless a modification is lodged to keep the new hours. The trial period and modification process will allow noise impacts to be reviewed.

Access, transport and traffic

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

Water Supply Connection

Service available.

Sewer Connection

Service available.

Stormwater

No changes to existing arrangements.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

Refer to comments on heritage in the LEP 2011 section of this report.

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

The proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts on soils in terms of quality, erosion, stability and/or productivity.

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

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 and vibration

The existing food and drink premises has the following approved hours of operation:

· 7am to 5pm daily with once a month being allowed to trade to 11pm.

The applicant requested revised hours of operation as follows:

· 7am to 11pm Thursday to Saturday

· 7am to 10pm Sunday to Wednesday

The applicant also proposes to have pedestrian access (excluding for disabled persons) via the bi fold door area to minimise people walking up the western boundary adjacent to the residential housing. Shutters are also proposed to eliminate openings to the west.

A preliminary review of the hours of operation for a number of similar café type uses showed that their hours of operation normally ceased at 9pm to 9:30pm. Most were located within the CBD area.

The proposed hours of operation were also discussed with Council’s Environmental Health Officer.

Considering the above and noting the adjoining residential uses, the following hours of operation on a 12 month trial period are recommended:

· 7am to 9pm Sunday to Wednesday

· 7am to 10pm Thursday to Saturday

Deliveries are not to occur outside the hours of operation.

Upon cessation of the 12 month period, the development will revert to the approved hours in DA2007/256. Should the applicant wish to retain the later hours of operation, a modification of consent can be lodged and a review of the past 12 months carried out.

Conditions will also be applied to:

· Install a landscape screen along the western boundary to help with perceived impacts (ie vegetation will not stop noise but will help address views/maintain privacy).

· Have bin storage areas on the eastern side (away from residential receivers).

· No amplified music onsite.

Based on the above, the proposal is considered capable of being managed so as no adverse noise impacts will occur.

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

Safety, security and crime prevention

Social impacts in the locality

The applicant has advised that no alcohol will be served onsite. However, being a food and drink premise, the applicant could later apply for a liquor licence, including BYO, through the Office of Liquor and Gaming. Council provides comment on liquor licence but is not the determining authority – separate process. When liquor is sold/consumed onsite there is potential for anti-social behaviour, which could impact on surrounding properties. As the main change with this application from the existing food and drink premises is the extended hours, it is considered the 12 month trial on hours will allow this social impact to be assessed specific to this site.

Based on the above and suggested conditions of consent, the proposal is unlikely to result in any adverse social impacts.

Economic impact in the locality

No adverse impacts. Likely positive impacts can be attributed to the construction and operation of the development, which will maintain employment in the construction and hospitality industry. The employment can lead to flow on expenditure in the area.

Site design and internal design

Subject to conditions, 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:

Subject to conditions, the proposal will continue to fit into the locality and the site attributes are conducive to the proposed development.

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

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

Following exhibition of the application, two (2) submissions were received. However, one (1) of the submissions was later withdrawn bringing the total submissions received down to one (1).

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

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Proposed hours of operation are not compatible with the surrounding residential area and will lead to sleep disturbance, noise from music, increased traffic noise, noise from patrons leaving the site to their cars etc.

Suggested alternate hours of Sunday to Thursday 7am to 5pm and Friday and Saturday 7am to 9pm.

Comments and concerns are noted. Refer to comments on Noise and Vibration above in this report. While the suggested hours have not been adopted, Council staff are proposing to reduce the hours and only allow them on an initial 12 month trial – refer to recommended conditions of consent.

Loss of values to surrounding properties.

Not a matter for consideration under s79C.

(e) The Public Interest:

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

Development contributions do not apply.

5. CONCLUSION

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

Attachments

1 View. DA2017 - 723.1 Plans

2 View. DA2017 - 723.1 Recommended Conditions

3 View. DA2017 - 723.1 Submission - Cunningham

4 View. DA2017 - 723.1 Submission - Schofield & Taylor

Member	09/08/17	23/08/17	13/09/17	27/09/17	11/10/17
Paul Drake	P	P	P	P	P
Robert Hussey	-	-	P	P	P
David Crofts (alternate member)	-	-	-	-
Dan Croft (Group Manager 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