Development Assessment Panel

CHARTER

1.0 OBJECTIVES

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

2.0 KEY FUNCTIONS

· To review development application reports and conditions;

· To determine development applications outside of staff delegations;

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

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

· To maintain transparency in the determination of development applications.

Delegated Authority of Panel

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

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

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

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

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

3.0 MEMBERSHIP

3.1 Voting Members

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

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

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

3.2 Non-Voting Members

· Not applicable

3.3 Obligations of members

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3.4 Member Tenure

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

3.5 Appointment of members

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

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

4.0 TIMETABLE OF MEETINGS

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

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

5.0 MEETING PRACTICES

5.1 Meeting Format

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

· Meetings shall be open to the public.

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

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

5.2 Decision Making

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

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

5.3 Quorum

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

5.4 Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson

· Independent Chair (alternate, second independent member)

5.5 Secretariat

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

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

5.6 Recording of decisions

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

6.0 CONVENING OF “OUTCOME SPECIFIC” WORKING GROUPS

Not applicable.

7.0 CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST

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

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

8.0 LOBBYING

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

MINUTES

Development Assessment Panel Meeting

14/03/2018

PRESENT

Members:

Paul Drake

David Crofts

Clinton Tink

Other Attendees:

Patrick Galbraith-Robertson

Chris Gardiner

David Troemel

The meeting opened at 2:00pm.

01 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

The Acknowledgement of Country was delivered.

02 APOLOGIES

CONSENSUS:

That the apology received from Robert Hussey be accepted.

03 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

CONSENSUS:

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

04 DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

There were no disclosures of interest presented.

05 DA2017 - 1141.1 Dwelling - Lot 271 DP 1234160 No. 64A The Anchorage, Port Macquarie

Speakers:

Sally Newton (owner)

CONSENSUS:

That DA2017 – 1141.1 for a dwelling at Lot 271, DP1234160, No. 64A The Anchorage, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

06 DA2017 - 1065.1 Alterations To Caravan Park, Lot 2 DP 1233513, Munster Street, Port Macquarie

Speakers:

Michelle Love (applicant)

CONSENSUS:

That DA 2017 – 1065.1 for Alterations to Caravan Park at Lot 2, DP 1233513, Munster Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

07 DA2017-1100.1 Dwelling & Swimming Pool, Lot 34 DP 22916, No 12 Surf Street, Port Macquarie

Speakers:

Helen Knox (o)

James Collins (applicant)

CONSENSUS:

That DA2017 – 1100.1 for the construction of new dwelling house and swimming pool at Lot 34 DP 22916, No. 12 Surf Street, Port Macquarie be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

08 Section 96 Modification DA2016 - 404.2 Modification to Industry (Cement Depot) - Lot 21 DP 1205839, 39 Randall Street, Wauchope

Speakers:

Kate Jackson (applicant)

CONSENSUS:

That the section 96 modification to DA2016 - 404 for a modification to industry (cement depot) – increase in throughput at Lot 21, DP 1205839, No. 39 Randall Street, Wauchope, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions as amended below:

Amend condition A2 to state:

A2 (A013) The general terms of approval from the following authorities, as referred to in section 93 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and referenced below, are attached and form part of the consent conditions for this approval.

· NSW Environment Protection Authority - The General Terms of Approval, Reference EF13/2674 and dated 5 March 2018, are attached and form part of this consent.

09 Section 96 Modification DA2013 - 211.2 - Modification To A Continued Use Of Animal Boarding And Training Establishment (Horse Riding) - Lot 4 DP 1110091, No 334 Crows Road, Frazers Creek

Speakers:

Mark Ennor (applicant)

CONSENSUS:

That the Section 96 modification to DA2013 - 211 for a proposed amendment to conditions of consent relating to a previous approved continued use of an animal boarding and training establishment (horse riding) at Lot 4, DP 1110091, No. 334 Crows Road, Frazers Creek, be determined by granting approval subject to the recommended conditions.

10 Section 96 Modification DA2010 - 572.11 - Modification Of Subdivision Layout And Dwelling Design (Proposed Lots 213 To 217) - Lot 498 DP 1237901 Crestwood Drive, Port Macquarie.

Speakers:

Michael Quach (o)

Willem Hoogers (o)

Donna Clarke (applicant)

Derek Collins (applicant)

CONSENSUS:

That DA2010 – 572.11 for a Section 96 modification to subdivision layout and design of dwellings (proposed Lots 213 to 217) at Lot 498, DP 1237901, Crestwood Drive, Port Macquarie be determined by granting the modified consent subject to recommended conditions as amended below:

Amend condition A1 to state:

A1 (DA001) The development is to be carried out in accordance with the plans and supporting documents set out in the following table except where modified by any conditions of this consent.

Plan / Supporting Document	Reference	Prepared by	Date
Plans	Sheets 1 to 4 78/78 – Issue F	Adenbrook Homes	24/02/2011
Plans	Sheets 2 & 3 – Revision E	Adenbrook Homes	11/12/2010
Driveway access section plans	Drawing No. P08 – P15 Revision No 1	Luke & Company	Undated
Site cross section plan	Drawing No. 30F7 Issue B	Luke & Company	15/02/11
Richmond Horizons 2 Stage 2 Cluster Housing	Drawing 1	Land Dynamics	18 February 2015
External layout and grading plan	2 of 7	Luke & Company	17/12/2010
Typical landscape sections & example images	7 of 7	Luke & Company	17/12/2010
Landscape - planting concept	6 of 7	Luke & Company	17/12/2010
Subdivision layout plan (including residue)	1	Luke & Company	15/4/2011
House Plans for Lot 202	Sheets 1 to 5	Collins W Collins	27 July 2015
BASIX certificate	637837S	Collins W Collins	22 June 2015
BASIX certificates	646229S, 637843S, 637847S, 646246S, 645768S, 646250S, 646252S, 646982S,	Collins W Collins	7 July 2015
House plans Lot 208 dwelling	Sheets 1 to 3	Collins W Collins	18 August 2015
House plans Lot 201 dwelling	Sheets 1 to 4	Collins W Collins	18 August 2015
House plans Lot 207 dwelling	Sheets 1 to 4	Collins W Collins	19 August 2015
House plans Lot 209 dwelling	Sheets 1 to 3	Collins W Collins	18 August 2015
House plans Lot 204 dwelling	Sheets to 4	Collins W Collins	18 August 2015
House plans Lot 203 dwelling	Sheets 1 to 3	Collins W Collins	18 August 2015
House plans Lot 206 dwelling	Sheets 1 to 3	Collins W Collins	18 August 2015
House plans Lot 205 dwelling	Sheets 1 to 3	Collins W Collins	19 August 2015
Plans Lot 327	Sheets 1 to 8	Collins W Collins	22 March 2017
BASIX Certificate Lot 327 dwelling	646252S_02	Collins W Collins	30 March 2017
Plans Lot 317	Sheets 1 to 7	Collins W Collins	22 March 2017
BASIX Certificate Lot 317 dwelling	808551S	Collins W Collins	3 April 2017
Plans Lot 321	Sheets 1 to 8	Collins W Collins	4 July 2017
BASIX Certificate Lot 321 dwelling	833377S	Collins W Collins	24 June 2017
Plans Lot 326	Sheets 1 to 7	Collins W Collins	4 July 2017
BASIX Certificate Lot 326 dwelling	833373S	Collins W Collins	24 June 2017
Plans Lot 330	Sheets 1 to 8	Collins W Collins	18 August 2017
BASIX Certificate Lot 330 dwelling	853493S	Collins W Collins	28 August 2017
Plans Lot 213	Sheets 1 to 8	Collins W Collins	12 February 2018
Plans Lot 214	Sheets 1 to 8	Collins W Collins	7 December 2017
Plans Lot 215	Sheets 1 to 8	Collins W Collins	7 December 2017
Plans Lot 216	Sheets 1 to 8	Collins W Collins	7 December 2017
Plans Lot 217	Sheets 1 to 8	Collins W Collins	7 December 2017
Richmond Horizons 2 Stage 2 – Cluster Housing	General Layout Plan	Land Dynamics Australia	7 December 2017
Plan of subdivision	Sheets 1 to 3 - Plan of subdivision of Lot 498 DP1237901	Graham McLeod Burns	4 November 2017
BASIX certificate Lot 213 dwelling	882519S_02	Collins W Collins	9 March 2018
BASIX certificate Lot 214 dwelling	882253S_02	Collins W Collins	9 March 2018
BASIX certificate Lot 215 dwelling	882390S	Collins W Collins	30 November 2017
BASIX certificate Lot 216 dwelling	882467S	Collins W Collins	30 November 2017
BASIX certificate Lot 217 dwelling	882497S	Collins W Collins	30 November 2017

In the event of any inconsistency between conditions of this development consent and the plans/supporting documents referred to above, the conditions of this development consent prevail.⁹

Amend condition A30 to state:

A30 A200) Proposed lots 213 to 220 inclusive shall be subdivided by Community Title only. The proposed private road serving these lots shall be located on the common property. All other lots shall be subdivided under the Torrens system instead. The following requirements shall be met by the subdivision plan(s):

a) No part of the roadway serving community title lots may reside on a Torrens titled lot, including retaining structures which support the road.

b) A Torrens titled lot must have frontage to a public road which complies with the provisions of Council’s Development Control Plan in force at the time.

c) All roads which are to be dedicated to the public, shall comply with Council’s AUSPEC standard

d) The private road shall be wholly within the common property of Community Title land

e) A restriction on the title of lots accessed by the private road shall require a 5.5m wide setback to the garage of any dwelling.

f) Access to Lot 220 can be off the private lane or Horizons Parkway.

Details shall be provided to Council prior to subdivision Construction Certificate approval. ²

Replace the wording of condition B21 to state:

B21 The floor and elevation plans submitted with the Construction Certificate for the Lot 217 dwelling shall include a minimum 1.7m height privacy screen along the southern elevation of the alfresco area.

11 GENERAL BUSINESS

Nil.

The meeting closed at 3:20pm.

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 28/03/2018

Item: 04

Subject: DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

RECOMMENDATION

That Disclosures of Interest be presented

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST DECLARATION

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

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

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

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

…………………………………………………….……………...…..

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

Pecuniary:

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

Non-Pecuniary - Significant Interest:

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

Non-Pecuniary - Less than Significant Interest:

May participate in consideration and voting.

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

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

Name: …………………………………………………….

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

(Further explanation is provided on the next page)

Further Explanation

(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)

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

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

Pecuniary Interest

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

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

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

Non-Pecuniary

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

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

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

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

Non Pecuniary – Significant Interest

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Non Pecuniary – Less than Significant Interest

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

SPECIAL DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST DECLARATION

[insert full name of councillor]

In the matter of

[insert name of environmental planning instrument]

Which is to be considered at a meeting of the

[insert name of meeting]

Held on

[insert date of meeting]

PECUNIARY INTEREST

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

Relationship of identified land to councillor

[Tick or cross one box.]

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

 Associated person of councillor has interest in the land.

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

MATTER GIVING RISE TO PECUNIARY INTEREST

Nature of land that is subject to a change

in zone/planning control by proposed

LEP (the subject landⁱⁱⁱ

[Tick or cross one box]

 The identified land.

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

Current zone/planning control

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

Proposed change of zone/planning control

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

Effect of proposed change of zone/planning control on councillor

[Tick or cross one box]

 Appreciable financial gain.

 Appreciable financial loss.

Councillor’s Name: …………………………………………

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

Important Information

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

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

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

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

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

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

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 28/03/2018

Item: 05

Subject: DA2017 - 853.1 Multi Dwelling Housing and Torrens Title Subdivision of proposed Lots 401, 402, 403 and 404 - currently Lot 208, DP 1224779, Ventura Place, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Benjamin Roberts

Applicant: Land Dynamics Australia

Owner: Precoz Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: $1,620,000

Parcel no: 65851

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2017 – 853.1 for multi dwelling housing and torrens title subdivision on proposed Lots 401, 402, 403 and 404, currently Lot 208, DP 1224779, Ventura Place, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for multi dwelling housing and torrens tile 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 current site, being Lot 208 DP 1224779, has an area of 8300m². The combined area of proposed lots 401, 402, 403 and 404 approved under DA2004/363 is 2423m².

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 approved subdivision plan as recently modified is provided below. The proposal is over proposed lots 401, 402, 403 and 404 as highlighted in red in stage 4. The proposed application would essentially ‘supersede’ the underlying subdivision.

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:

· Erection of multi dwelling housing comprising six dwellings and associated infrastructure

· Torrens title subdivision

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 22 September 2017 – Application lodged.

· 6 October 2017 – Additional information request (integrated referral cheque).

· 9 October 2017 – Cheque received and referred to NSW Rural Fire Service.

· 11 to 24 October 2017 – Public exhibition via neighbour notification.

· 15 November 2017 – Additional information request. Proposal inconsistent with approved subdivision creating the lots. Overall site plan and elevations.

· 13 December 2017 – Overall site and elevation plans received.

· 16 December 2017 – Section 96 modification lodged to amend inconsistency with lot boundaries under DA2004/363.

· 31 January 2018 – Additional information request. Right of Carriageways (ROC) required. Driveways and ROCs to be illustrated on plans.

· 14 February 2018 – Revised plans received.

· 27 February 2018 – Section 96 application approved for amendment to lot boundaries of DA2004/363.

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 79C(1) Matters for Consideration

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

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) Any Environmental Planning Instrument:

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 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.

Standard conditions of consent will be applied to cover the removal of any asbestos in the existing dwelling during the demolition process.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

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

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

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

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

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

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

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

o To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

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

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

· Clause 4.1A allows an integrated housing application whereby construction and subdivision are included in the one application. When both construction and subdivision are included in the one application, Clause 4.1A allows the minimum lot size standard to be varied/reduced.

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

· Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 5.5m, 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 0.41:1.0, which complies with the maximum 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

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

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

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

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

None relevant to the proposal.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force:

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
3.2.2.1	Ancillary development: • 4.8m max. height • Single storey • 60m2 max. area • 100m2 for lots >900m2 • 24 degree max. roof pitch • Not located in front setback	Water tank and drying areas are appropriately located behind the front building line. Bin areas capable of being located behind building line.	Yes
3.2.2.2	Articulation zone: • Min. 3m front setback • An entry feature or portico • A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah • A window box treatment • A bay window or similar feature • An awning or other feature over a window • A sun shading feature	Front porch on dwelling 403 located 3.5m from boundary at closest point.	Yes
3.2.2.2	Front setback (Residential not R5 zone): • Min. 4.5m local road or within 20% of adjoining dwelling if on corner lot.	Front building line setback requirements are complied with. The closest point to front boundary is dwelling 403 with a 4.8m 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	Garage door setback requirements are complied with.	Yes
	6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building	Garage doors are compliant with the provisions of the DCP.	Yes
	Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width	While the driveway crossing width exceed 1/3 of the site frontage and 5m width. The variation is considered acceptable given the street cul-de-sac. The development control is not considered to be practical in this circumstance. Each dwelling is considered to provide for good street presentation and the development overall will not create any adverse impact on the streetscape, amenity of the area or significant loss of on street parking.	No, but acceptable.
3.2.2.4	4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space	Dwellings 401,402,403,404 and 406 all provide a 4m rear setback. Dwelling 405 is setback 2m from rear boundary at closest point.	No – refer to comment below
3.2.2.5	Side setbacks: • Ground floor = min. 0.9m • 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 a 4m x 4m area and minimum of 35m² open space in one area (dwelling 405 has smallest area at 37m2).	Yes.
3.2.2.10	Privacy: • Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed • Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m • Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc. which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m	The development will not compromise privacy in the area due to a combination slab on ground single storey construction and 1.8m boundary fencing.	Yes

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline	No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available. Fencing defines property boundaries.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	No cut or fill greater than 1m proposed	Yes
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads	No new access proposed to arterial or distribution road.	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Driveway crossing is minimal in width and retains street parking.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. Dwelling/dual occupancies 1 space per dwelling/occupancy (behind building line). 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 involves 6 x 4 bedroom units. Therefore, 6 x 1.5 spaces + 6 x 0.25 visitor spaces = 10.5 spaces required. The development proposes double garages for each unit (i.e. 6 x 2 spaces = 12 spaces) and visitor stack parking in front of each dwelling. The proposal exceeds the requirements of the DCP.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Contributions apply - refer to ET calc and NOP.	Yes
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Suitable landscaping areas proposed 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.	Yes

Note: Subdivision provisions of the DCP (except battle axe handle width) are aimed at the creation of vacant lots (i.e. not lots within an integrated housing proposal such as this) and have therefore been excluded from the above assessment. Servicing requirements are discussed later in this report.

3.2.2.4 – Rear building setback

The objectives of this Clause are as follows:

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

· To provide usable yard areas and open space

The proposed rear setback to dwelling 405 is 2m at the closest point. The variation is considered acceptable having regard for the following:

· The private open space are is 37m2 with a 4m x 4m area.

· The open space area is level, directly accessible off a living areas and considered to be capable of supporting practical outdoor use associated with the dwelling.

· The open space area is orientated to the north providing good solar access and ventilation.

(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:

None relevant

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

None relevant

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

Context and setting

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

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

• 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 Ventura Place.

Adjacent to the site, Ventura Place is a sealed public road under the care and control of Council. Ventura Place is a local road with a 7m formation within a 15m road reserve.

Traffic and Transport

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

Site Frontage & Access

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

Parking and Manoeuvring

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

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site has four existing 20mm sealed water services from the 100 PVC water main on the same side of Ventura Place.

Each lot requires an individual metered water service. The existing water services must be re-located to suit the proposed lot boundaries. Water services cannot terminate in potential driveway locations – they must terminate on either boundary. Details are to be shown on the engineering plans.

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is connected to sewer via junction to the existing sewer line that runs along the southern boundary. Each lot requires an individual connection to sewer. Engineering plans are required to detail how proposed Lot 402 will be able to drain to the sewer junction shown on the conceptual plan. A sewer main extension may be required from manhole PM77P156MH. Details are to be shown on the engineering plans.

Stormwater

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

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

· On site stormwater detention facilities

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

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

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

Air and microclimate

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

Flora and fauna

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

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

Energy

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

Noise and vibration

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

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone. As a result, the applicant has submitted a bushfire report, which has been forwarded to the NSW Rural Fire Service as integrated development.

The NSW Rural Fire Service has subsequently issued a Bushfire Safety Authority consisting of a series of conditions, which have been incorporated into the draft conditions. Council staff concur with the findings and recommendations of the NSW Rural Fire Service.

Safety, security and crime prevention

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

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

Social impacts in the locality

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

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative Impacts

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

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

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

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

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

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
The proposal is subject to adverse risk of bushfire and the dwellings are inappropriately sited noting this risk. All the dwellings should be subject to specific bushfire construction requirements due to the risk of embers, not just dwelling 406.	The NSW Rural Fire Service has issued a conditional bushfire safety authority (BSA) for the development. These conditions are recommended to be included in any consent. Noting the issuing of the BSA there are considered insufficient grounds to refuse the application on bushfire grounds.

(e) The Public Interest:

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

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

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

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

5. CONCLUSION

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 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 - 853.1 Plans

2 View. DA2017 - 853.1 Recommended Conditions

3 View. DA2017 - 853.1 NSW Bushfire Safety Authority Conditions

4 View. DA2017 - 853.1 Submission - Holley

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 28/03/2018

Item: 06

Subject: DA2018 - 91.1 Garage/Shed - Lot 39 DP 790538, No 13 Babinda Avenue, West Haven

Report Author: Anthony Crane

Applicant: B J & F L Eldridge

Owner: B J & F L Eldridge

Estimated Cost: $72,000

Parcel no: 888

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2018 – 91.1 for a garage/shed at Lot 39 DP790538, No.13 Babinda Avenue, West Haven be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

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

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and surrounding development

The site has an area of 889.2m².

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

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Construction of a brick garage/shed with tiled roof.

· The building is located in the rear yard with a 0.9m side setback. Originally, the building had a 0.5m side setback but was later amended to 0.9m.

· Objector advised of amended site plan showing compliant side setback and advised that he still wants his submission considered.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· Application lodged 14/02/2018

· One submission received 12/03/2018

· Amended site plan received 16/03/2018

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 1ha in area therefore no further investigations are required.

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The site is predominately cleared and located within an area zoned and built out for residential 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 R1 General Residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table, the garage/shed is ancillary to the dwelling being a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

o To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

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

· Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 4.12m, which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

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

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

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

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

· Clause 7.3, the site is not land within a mapped “flood planning area”.

· 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	The shed complies with the height and size controls and is not located in the front setback.	Yes
3.2.2.4	4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space	The rear setback requirements are complied with. In particular, sheds can be located 900mm from rear boundaries.	Yes
3.2.2.5	Side setbacks: • Ground floor = min. 0.9m • First floors & above = min. 3m setback or where it can be demonstrated that overshadowing not adverse = 0.9m min. • Building wall set in and out every 12m by 0.5m	The minimum side setback requirements are complied with. The building wall articulation is compliant and/or satisfactory to address the objective intent of the development provision.	Yes
3.2.2.6	35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade	The dwelling contains 35m² open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m space.	Yes
3.2.2.7	Front fences: • If solid 1.2m max height and front setback 1.0m with landscaping • 3x3m min. splay for corner sites • Fences >1.2m to be 1.8m max. height for 50% or 6.0m max. length of street frontage with 25% openings • 0.9x0.9m splays adjoining driveway entrances	No fences proposed .	N/A

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline	No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Cut and fill <1.0m change 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Yes
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage	None proposed	N/A
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer	No retaining wall likely >1m	Yes
	Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway	No retaining wall front fence combination proposed.	N/A
2.3.3.8	Removal of hollow bearing trees	No 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)	No trees proposed to be removed	N/A
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads	No new access proposed to arterial or distribution road.	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Driveway crossing existing	N/A
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. 1 space per single dwelling (behind building line)	1 or capacity for more than 1 parking space behind the building line has been provided for.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. No specific landscaping requirements recommended.	N/A
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Sealed driveway existing	N/A
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	N/A	N/A
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	N/A	N/A

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

NSW Coastal Policy 1997

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:

None applicable.

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

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.

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.

Stormwater

Service available – details required with S.68 application

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

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

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

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

Waste

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

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 expenditure in the area).

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

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

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

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

One written 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
Ground in drainage easement in objector’s property adjacent to boundary has subsided and is considered to be unstable. Proposed building has potential to cause further damage to this area.	Proposed building to be sited 0.9m from boundary on stable, natural ground. Structural engineer’s design for footings provided. Stormwater to be directed to existing system.
View across eastern side boundary will be blocked by proposed building.	No iconic views available. View to rear remains unchanged for adjoining property. Views across side boundaries cannot be guaranteed. Proposed building complies fully with Council’s DCP 2013. Based on the above, no adverse view loss will occur and suitable view sharing retained.

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Ground in drainage easement in objector’s property adjacent to boundary has subsided and is considered to be unstable. Proposed building has potential to cause further damage to this area.

Proposed building to be sited 0.9m from boundary on stable, natural ground. Structural engineer’s design for footings provided. Stormwater to be directed to existing system.

View across eastern side boundary will be blocked by proposed building.

No iconic views available. View to rear remains unchanged for adjoining property. Views across side boundaries cannot be guaranteed. Proposed building complies fully with Council’s DCP 2013.

Based on the above, no adverse view loss will occur and suitable view sharing retained.

(e) The Public Interest:

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

· Not applicable to garage/shed.

5. CONCLUSION

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

Attachments

1 View. DA2018 - 91.1 Plans

2 View. DA2018 - 91.1 Recommended Conditions

3 View. DA2018 - 91.1 Submission - Bewley

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 28/03/2018

Item: 07

Subject: DA2017 - 234 - Waste Management Facility (Concrete Recycling) - Lot 1 DP 1202080, Pacific Highway, Pembrooke

Report Author: Patrick Galbraith-Robertson

Applicant: Alan Taylor & Associates

Owner: Port Macquarie – Hastings Council

Estimated Cost: $1.5M

Parcel no: 64348

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That the Development Assessment Panel recommend to Council that DA2017 - 234 for a waste management facility (concrete recycling facility) at Lot 1, DP 1202080, Pacific Highway, Pembrooke, be determined by refusing consent for the following reasons:

1. Integrated Development concurrence has not been obtained for the proposal. An Environment Protection License has not been granted by the NSW Environment Protection Authority for the proposal pursuant to section 91 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

2. The Applicant has failed to submit a site and development specific specialist Traffic Report to address the proposal’s likely impacts and ascertain whether mitigation measures will be required.

3. The Applicant has failed to submit a specialist Noise and Dust report to address the proposal’s likely impacts and ascertain whether mitigation measures will be required.

4. The Applicant has failed to provide the necessary specialist stormwater management plans to satisfactorily address required stormwater quality management.

5. The Applicant has failed to provide satisfactory details on management of asbestos and contaminated materials.

6. The Applicant has failed to provide the necessary dust monitoring (depositional dust analysis) in accordance with AS/NZS 3580.10.1-2003.

7. The Applicant has failed to provide satisfactory details on perimeter landscaping details.

Executive Summary

This report considers a Development Application (DA) for a waste management facility (concrete recycling) 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.

This DA is being reported to the Development Assessment Panel (DAP) due to the submission received and the application being on Council land.

This DA will need to be reported to an Ordinary Meeting of Council following consideration by the DAP in Council’s Conflict of Interest Policy.

The Development Application has been lodged with Council for 12 months and there have been requests for additional information and these requests have unfortunately been unsatisfactorily addressed including requirements for technical water, noise and dust reports. The NSW Environmental Protection Authority have confirmed their requests for additional information, which are required prior to any consideration being given to issuing general terms of approval (or concurrence) to the proposal as an Integrated Development. The Applicant has been provided with a significant period of time to resolve these matters.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

The site has an area of 111.04 hectares.

The site is zoned SP2 waste or resource management facility in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

The existing location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph (red X shows site location):

The site is located within an existing and planned waste management facility precinct with access to the Pacific Highway (to be known as Telegraph Point Road as this section of Highway has been declassified) to the east – see below image.

National Park and State Forest adjoin the site and existing Waste Management Facility.

The proposed site is identified as Development Pad 3 within the Cairncross Waste Management Facility (WMF), Industrial Waste Precinct. The site adjoins the Cairncross WMF Access Road to the north, Development Pad 2 to the west and Road 2 on the east and south. East of Road 1 is the Rawdon Island Nature Reserve.

The area of the site development area is 17,296m².

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Use of Development Pad 3 within the Cairncross Waste Management Facility (WMF), Industrial Waste Precinct for a waste management facility for concrete recycling including construction of associated new driveway access, buildings and facilities – refer below image of site plan submitted;

· It’s proposed to carry out the works in three (3) stages:

Stage 1 = Areas A, B & C;

Stage 2 = Area D – Future machinery shed; and

Stage 3 = Area E – Shed for sale of resource recovery materials;

· The proposed hours of operation are Monday to Saturday 7am to 5pm.

· The proposal is an Integrated Development pursuant to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. In regard, the proposal requires concurrence from the NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) prior to determination of the DA.

Concurrence has been unable to be obtained from the EPA to obtain general terms of approval which would then set out the terms for obtaining an Environmental Protection License. The primary information not provided relates to specialist noise and dust assessments and satisfactory clarification of the intended quantities of material to be processed/handled on-site.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 23 March 2017 – DA lodged with Council.

· 7 to 26 April 2017 – Neighbour notification of development proposal.

· 10 May 2017 – Additional information requested – additional fees for integrated development, advised of submission issues raised, questioned material volumes, stormwater management approach unsatisfactory, clearance to services/ easement, traffic impact details, site specific noise assessment, question how bitumous and asbestos products (which are unable to be accepted) will be managed, deceleration lane details and turning paths, landscaping details, crime prevention measures, fencing details, site specific dust report, odour general details, potential hazards and request a concrete pavement be provided for the Cairncross access road entrance point.

· 15 May 2017 – Council General Manager confirmed internal assessment by Council Officer acceptable to continue.

· 16 May 2017 – Referral to the NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) for comment under State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007.

· 8 June 2017 – Advice received from the RMS.

· 20 June 2017 – Copy of submission forwarded to EPA.

· 4 July 2017 – Applicant provided waste volume detail, stormwater advice, disagree on upgrade of access road point, wheel wash or shaker pad will be added to an amended plan, traffic details advice, disagree on request for noise, odour and dust specialist reports based upon context and hazard assessment details confirmed.

· 11 July 2017 – EPA request for additional information forwarded to the Applicant to provide a response to.

· 8 August 2017 – Additional information request status follow up.

· 21 August 2017 – Applicant advised that all information requested by the EPA will be provided to Council to forward to the EPA for concurrence on behalf of Bridle Group.

· 30 August 2017 - DA2017 – 626 for recycled hardstand area approved by Council on the same site. No works carried out or commenced on-site.

· 20 September 2017 – Bridle Group requested EPA to permit deferral of specialist noise and air quality impact assessments.

· 25 September 2017 – EPA advice received that deferral for specialist noise and air quality assessments are not permitted.

· 5 October 2017 – Additional information received from Bridle Group including draft letter of advice to forward to the EPA.

· 9 October 2017 – Advised Bridle Group that a full response to the EPA request is required before referral can occur to the EPA.

· 25 October 2017 – Further advice received from the NSW EPA in response to the draft information provided from Bridle Group. Confirmation that specialist noise, water quality and air impact assessments specific to the proposed site are required. The material volumes are also questioned and stockpiling and selling of recovered materials are questioned. A copy of as constructed drawings for the proposed site including stormwater detention basin and artificial wetland should be provided.

· 31 October 2017 – Copy of EPA letter dated 25 October 2017 received from Applicant.

· 17 November 2017 – Original additional information request sent 10 May 2017 forwarded to Applicant as requested.

· 19 February 2017 – Follow up request for additional information sent to Bridle Group and Applicant. A timeline was also provided to submit the required information otherwise final reporting and a likely recommendation for refusal would occur.

· 20 February 2017 – Bridle Group advised information will be submitted however with no timeline estimated for completion.

· 10 March 2017 - Follow up request for additional information request send to Bridle Group and Applicant.

· 12 March 2017 – Applicant submitted specialist Water Assessment Impact report and draft Air and Noise Report dated 22 December 2017 and January 2018.

· 12 March 2017 – Request for additional information on how the final Air and Noise reports are progressing since late December to early January.

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. 33 - Hazardous and Offensive Development

The subject SEPP was introduced to clarify the definitions for hazardous and offensive industries and to apply guidelines for the assessment of industries that have the potential to create hazards or an offence.

In this case, the development has the potential to be an offensive development given the processing component of the proposal, which will generate significant noise and the provisions of the SEPP apply. Having considered the SEPP, it is unclear due to a lack of specialist noise assessment information as to whether the proposed development will be confirmed to not be an offensive industry.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

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

The application has demonstrated that no habitat will be removed or modified. 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 could potentially be suitable for the intended use.

The site development pad does not contain acid sulphate soils or previous industrial contamination.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

Based upon the current submitted information, it is unclear as to whether the proposed development will have potential to lead to any adverse impacts on existing aquaculture industries.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage

The proposed development does not include any proposed advertising signage in the form of business/building identification and/or general advertising.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

The proposal has been referred to the NSW Roads and Maritime Service (RMS). The RMS’ advice and other matters requiring consideration under clause 104(3)(b)(ii) and (iii) are considered in the assessment of access, traffic and parking impacts addressed later in this report.

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 SP2 waste or resource management facility. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the SP2 zone landuse table, the proposed waste management facility is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the SP2 zone are as follows:

o To provide for infrastructure and related uses.

o To prevent development that is not compatible with or that may detract from the provision of infrastructure.

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 is directly related to the intent of the zoning for the site and is co-locating similar landuses.

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

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

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

No draft instruments apply to the site.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force:

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013:

No specific precinct provisions under the DCP apply to the proposal.

The extent of fill associated with the proposed hardstand areas and excavation is likely to be less than a 1m change in height.

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Cut and Fill Regrading

The majority of cut and fill has been completed under DA2013 - 659.

There would be some fill required as part of this DA to build up the access driveway. The Applicant has advised that this access point would be designed to not impede existing stormwater drainage and would be stabilised with planting of batters. If possible, fill from the immediate locality would be used where it is certified clean and capable of compaction to the necessary densities.

Environmental Management Areas and Buffers

The existing benched area designated for this development has an area of approximately 1.7ha. Appropriate buffers have been assessed under DA2013 – 659.

Parking Provision

The Applicant has provided the following satisfactory justification for provision of on-site parking using the following calculations:

Stage 1 Initial Offices

1 per 30sq.m office area or 1.5 per office space

1 per 70sq.m landscape material display, 1 per employee and 2 visitors.

REQUIRED: 3

PROVIDED: 6*

*In addition to the spaces above, 4 will be placed in Heavy Machinery Parking

Stage 2 Machinery shed

1 per 70sq.m

REQUIRED: 11

PROVIDED: 8*

*8 Spaces immediately north of the machinery shed will be provided in conjunction with the 6 spaces provided in stage 1,

Stage 3 Resource recovery sales

1 per 100sq.m

REQUIRED: 10

PROVIDED: 6*

*In addition to the spaces provided above, staff parking for 4 cars for the resource recovery shed will already be in the spillover section of the heavy vehicle parking area as provided on site at Stage 1 (Area C). These car spaces will be immediately beside the shed. (ie the western end)

Total Required: 24 spaces

Total Provided: 24 spaces

(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:

· 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

Insufficient information has been submitted to identify and assess whether the proposal will result in any adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties.

There are no identifiable adverse impacts identified to the public domain.

The proposal could be considered to be consistent with other waste development in the locality subject to appropriate justification.

There are no significant adverse lighting, view sharing, privacy or overshadowing impacts identified to neighbouring properties.

The Applicant has failed to provide satisfactory details on perimeter landscaping (buffer), boundary fence design, and site layout clear of easements.

Roads and Maritime Services (RMS)

Consistent with RMS requirements, the proposal was referred to the RMS on 08/06/2017. RMS’ review of the proposal determined:

Roads and Maritime has reviewed the referred information and provides the following comments to assist the consent authority in making a determination;

1. The existing Pacific Highway will be declassified to Local road status following completion of the Oxley Highway to Kundabung Pacific Highway upgrade project in early 2018 (weather permitting).

2. Forest Hut Road is described as a private road. It would be classified as a ‘road related area’ in accordance with traffic legislation for the purposes of enforcement. Any regulatory controls will need to be considered by Council’s Local Traffic Committee prior to Council approval.

3. Standard white on blue service signs have been installed on the existing Pacific Highway to identify the facility and guide traffic. A number of advertising signs have been erected on both sides of the highway at the junctions of Forest Hut Road and Bill Hill Road. Council should be satisfied that these signs are on private property and comply with Council’s Development Control Plan and NSW Department of Planning and Environment’s Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines.

The feedback advice provided above has been taken into consideration with the below assessment comments. Note: there is no change to existing signage proposed as part of the application.

Roads

The site has road frontage to Cairncross WMF Access Road and Road 2 (service road).

The Cairncross WMF Access Road and Road 2 (service road) are Private Roads owned and managed by Port Macquarie Hastings Council (PMHC). The Cairncross WMF Access Road is a 7.1m sealed road and Road 2 (service road) is a 6.0m sealed road.

Traffic and Transport

The Applicant has been requested to provide a specialist traffic report detailing the estimated traffic volumes accessing the site (AADT) including:

· Estimated growth rates over the life of the development.

· Morning and afternoon peak hour volumes (vph) in and out of the site.

· Import and export volumes of materials.

· Types (sizes) of trucks that would be in use.

The Applicant has failed to provide the necessary specialist report for assessment purposes. It is therefore not possible to assess and mitigate impacts of the proposed development.

Site Frontage & Access

As mentioned above, the Applicant has not provided specialist traffic report details, which makes it difficult to reasonably assess the proposal’s likely impacts and to ascertain whether mitigation measures will be required.

Whilst no specialist traffic and parking report has been received the following matters of significance are noted:

· Vehicle access to the site is proposed through a concrete driveway coming off Cairncross WMF Access Road fronting Pacific Highway. Site access is to comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards.

· Whilst no details have been provided it is considered that given the location, nature of the proposed access and requirement for heavy vehicle access, the Cairncross WMF Access Road will require a concrete pavement, 30m either side of the access point, be constructed for the full width of the existing road to manage the screwing effect of trucks entering the site.

· The deceleration lane for trucks, proposed as per Alan Taylor and Associates, site plans, Revision A; “Cairncross Waste Management Facility – Concrete Processing Site – Pad 3 Forest Hut Road,” dated 20-03-2017, require additional details and justification. Demonstration of suitability and compliance with AUSTROADS to be provided including, details of complying gradients for batter slopes and site distances taking into consideration a minimum of 2.0m clearance to the main power and communications pit in the Cairncross WMF Access Road that would be required.

· A wheel wash or shaker pad is needed on site to control sediment from being transported on to the main Cairncross WMF Access Road.

The below image shows the location of the access road providing access to the site:

Parking and Manoeuvring

A total of 24 parking spaces have been proposed to be provided on-site. Parking and driveway widths on-site can comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) with ample room for overflow and truck parking.

Whilst no specialist traffic and parking report has been received the following matters of significance are noted:

· Due to the type of development, car park circulation is required to enable vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward manner. Additional information has been recommended to be provided to show adequate area is available.

· In addition, separation of heavy vehicle routes from public and staff cars including pedestrian desire lines is required wherever possible to minimise safety risks.

· If entrance gating is to be proposed, this should be shown on the site plan ensuring there is adequate distance for vehicles to queue without backing up into the road. Conditions could be imposed as per AS2890.1 Clause 3.4.

Water Supply Connection

The site has water services available at the boundary. However, while water mains are installed to the site; the water main connection to Telegraph Point is not yet constructed. This is expected late 2018. Overall, water is not available until this Pembrooke Road main is installed.

The Applicant has advised that a rainwater tank will be proposed to collect all roof water.

Sewer Connection

The southern side of the site contains sewer services which have not yet been connected to Council’s sewer network. A 5.0m wide ‘easement’ is in place and no infrastructure, stockpiles or other materials may be constructed or placed in this area.

The sewer connection may be available at a future date however not for immediate use. Provision of toilet facilities will be by site structures pumped out by waste services.

Stormwater

The Applicant failed to provide the necessary specialist stormwater management plans however has very recently provided a Water Quality Assessment report as prepared by Precise Environmental Consulting Environmental Scientists.

The existing wetland system developed as part of the Cairncross Waste Management Facility (WMF) Industrial Waste Precinct (located south of Road 2) is not suitable on its’ own for the treatment of runoff from this type of development and must not be used as part of the treatment system. As such this site must provide its own on-site sediment system prior to discharging to the constructed wetland system. Preliminary water quality and quantity calculations and plans must be provided to justify any proposal. This is also identified in the Precise Environmental Consulting report recently received.

Additional information in the stormwater management plans is required to demonstrate that stormwater quality and quantity impacts associated with the proposed hardstand and recycling use of the site can be managed adequately onsite prior to discharge to the surrounding environment.

The proposed site plan should also be updated to amend the layout of the operations to reflect the required provision of a stormwater quality control installation. Specific details of stormwater quality control are to be provided to show that stormwater can be dealt with on site with quality modelling for the development to be undertaken in accordance with recommended procedures within Chapter 13 – Modelling Urban Stormwater Management Systems of ARQ 2006.

The pollutant outflow concentrations must comply with the relevant requirements of AUS-SPEC D7 in particular table D7.4 and table D7.7 with water quality testing from a NATA approved laboratory being required on a quarterly basis.

Other Utilities

The western side of the site contains water, sewer, power and communications services. A 5.0m wide ‘easement’ is in place and no infrastructure, stockpiles or other materials may be constructed or placed in this area.

Electrical and communications conduits only are provided to the boundary of the site. The Applicant would be required to provide the necessary electrical and communications connections to the main switchboard (via the existing conduits) based on their site specific needs.

Heritage

Following a site inspection (and a search of Council records), no known items of Aboriginal or European heritage significance exist on the property. No adverse impacts anticipated.

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

In terms of potential water pollutants, waste concrete may be an important contributor (more so than masonry) due mainly to the characteristics and constituents of concrete, which include cement hydration products and from its use in higher risk applications such as service station forecourts (hydrocarbons etc). Water pollutants from waste concrete may include pH, heavy metals including arsenic, chromium, lead and selenium, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) such as benzene.

A specialist Water Quality Impact assessment has been submitted late in the assessment process. This report has not yet been forwarded to the NSW EPA however is considered well justified in regards to addressing the likely impacts of the proposal together with making satisfactory recommendations in regards to mitigation measures including a recommendation for stormwater detention basin on the site.

A final assessment and review of additional information provided has not been undertaken by the EPA.

Soils

Air and microclimate

The Applicant has failed to provide the necessary dust monitoring (depositional dust analysis) in accordance with AS/NZS 3580.10.1-2003.

A final assessment and review of the proposal has not been undertaken by the EPA due to the outstanding specialist dust assessment information not being received. It is unclear as to whether the proposed development will have any adverse impacts on the air and microclimate of this locality.

Whilst no specialist dust report has been received the following matters of significance are noted:

· Dust from the site must be managed to ensure that no dust escapes the site and becomes an OH&S issue for staff and customers on adjoining land (ie. Development Pads 1, 2, 4, 5, 6), the future STP (south or Road 2), the existing Organic Resource Recovery Facility (ORRF) office, the Cairncross weighbridge, and material Recovery Facility (MRF) office.

· Monitoring sites would be required to be installed on and off the site to ensure that no dust escapes the site. The water supply (when installed) only allows for toilet flushing and limited washing of plant and equipment. The water supply does not allow for dust suppression and firefighting.

· Silica dust from concrete crushing and recycling - sufficient dust suppression and management is required along with an adequate buffer zone. A site specific Operational Management Plan would be recommended for this facility.

· The Applicant must provide sufficient water storage capacity (tanks) and pumps for dust suppression and firefighting. Fire requirements must be in accordance with BCA and AS 2419.

Flora and fauna

The siting for the development comprises of a previously cleared and benched area on the eastern side of the existing Cairncross Waste Management Facility.

The Applicant has detailed that landscaping of the site and parking areas is to be provided along the northern boundary of the site fronting Forest Hut Road and the eastern boundary fronting the service road. Landscaping is to consist primarily of planting to stabilise the existing and proposed batters and is also to include indigenous shade trees at 3m centres within the fenced area.

Waste

The proposal is for a waste management facility.

The Applicant has been requested by Council assessment staff and the EPA to provide more details on the likely total amount of waste to be processed and stored at the proposed facility. See attached letters of request from the EPA. Specifically it was requested to confirm the maximum quantity (tonnes) of material to be processed onsite each year, for the purpose of establishing an annual limit as a condition of consent. An annual limit enables assessment of the impacts of the development based on a likely worst case. Compliance with this limit would be ensured by reference to production and weighbridge records.

If the proposal was approved standard precautionary site construction management conditions and limits would be recommended.

Energy

No adverse impacts anticipated.

Noise and vibration

The Applicant has currently only provided a noise assessment based on a 2003 Noise Impact Assessment (NIA) for the Kingfisher Road site. While the information in this report provides some detail on plant noise levels, it has not considered site issues such as other users at the Cairncross site and the nature of the use (ie. neighbouring lots, weighbridge operators etc).

The Applicant has failed to provide the necessary site specific noise management assessments in accordance with the NSW Industrial Noise Policy (2000). A final assessment and review has not been undertaken by the EPA due to the outstanding specialist noise assessment information not being received. It is unclear as to whether the proposed development will be unlikely to have any adverse noise impacts within the subject locality.

Whilst a final specialist report has not yet been provided the following additional assessment comments are noted:

· Noise from the site must be managed to ensure that it does not become an OH&S issue for staff and customers on adjoining land (ie. Development Pads 1, 2, 4, 5, 6), the future STP (south or Road 2), the existing Organic Resource Recovery Facility (ORRF) office, the Cairncross weighbridge, and material Recovery Facility (MRF) office.

· The proposed hours of operation are noted to be Monday to Saturday 7am to 5pm.

Asbestos

The Applicant has failed to provide satisfactory details on methods to address potential asbestos and contaminated management. Procedures are required to be in place to dispose of asbestos material according to NSW Work Health and Safety (WHS) legislation, and the requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment (Waste) Regulation 2005, and comply with the EPA Protocol For Managing Asbestos During Resource Recovery Of Construction And Demolition Waste (2014).

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

The siting of the proposed development within the larger site as Development Pad 3 within the Cairncross Waste Management Facility (WMF), Industrial Waste Precinct, is provided with satisfactory access, defendable space as an Asset Protection Zone and is capable of future water supply coverage. The Applicant however must provide sufficient water storage capacity (tanks) and pumps for fire fighting. Fire requirements must be in accordance with BCA and AS 2419.

The proposal is not a residential use however could be capable meeting the aims and objectives of the Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 subject to additional details being provided.

Safety, security and crime prevention

The Applicant has detailed that the landscaping of parking areas is to be provided along the northern boundary of the site fronting Forest Hut Road. Man-proof chainwire fencing is to be installed to the perimeter of the subject land.

It is considered that the Applicant has however failed to provide satisfactory details on perimeter landscaping (to provide a satisfactory buffer).

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 identified. A likely positive impact would be that the development will maintain employment in the industry, which will lead to flow impacts such as expenditure in the area.

Site design and internal design

Insufficient details have been provided to establish whether the proposed development design will be satisfactory with regard to the site attributes and locality.

Construction

Subject to compliance with potential appropriate mitigation measures, no potential adverse impacts identified to neighbouring properties with the construction of the proposal.

If the development was approved, a condition would be recommended to require a Construction Certificate to be obtained prior to works commencing on-site.

Cumulative impacts

The proposed development would not be expected to have any adverse cumulative impacts on the natural or built environment or the social and economic attributes of the locality subject to resolution of noise, dust and amenity impacts.

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

Unsatisfactory details are available to demonstrate as to whether the proposal will fit into the locality and it is unclear as to whether the site attributes are conducive to the proposed development.

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

One (1) 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
Concerns/objections with regards to the development proposal. Ø Smell Ø Lowering the value of our property Ø Noise	With regard to potential smell or odour impacts it is unlikely that the subject proposal will result in any adverse impacts to the property owner who has lodged this submission due to the existing physical separation distance of greater than 1 kilometre and the likely nature of the waste material to be stored and processed. With regard to potential claims of impacts on property values – this is not a matter for consideration under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. With regard to potential likely noise impacts, the likely impacts are unclear and a specialist report has been requested as detailed earlier in this report. Unfortunately, this report has not been forthcoming from the Applicant. Refer also to comments earlier in this report.

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Concerns/objections with regards to the development proposal.

Ø Smell

Ø Lowering the value of our property

Ø Noise

With regard to potential smell or odour impacts it is unlikely that the subject proposal will result in any adverse impacts to the property owner who has lodged this submission due to the existing physical separation distance of greater than 1 kilometre and the likely nature of the waste material to be stored and processed.

With regard to potential claims of impacts on property values – this is not a matter for consideration under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

With regard to potential likely noise impacts, the likely impacts are unclear and a specialist report has been requested as detailed earlier in this report. Unfortunately, this report has not been forthcoming from the Applicant. Refer also to comments earlier in this report.

(e) The Public Interest:

The proposed development is unable to satisfy relevant planning controls and would not be in the public’s interest to recommend supporting unless satisfactory specialist traffic, noise, water quality and dust assessments are received.

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

· Development contributions would be required at a later stage towards augmentation of town water supply and sewerage system head works under Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993. If the development was approved a standard condition requirement for a Section 307 Water Management 2000 certificate to be obtained prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate would be required.

· Development contributions would be required under Section 94A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

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.

The proposal has been assessed on the current information and is unable to be justifieddue to a lack of supporting information. It is recommended that the application be refused for the reasons detailed earlier in this report.

Attachments

1 View. DA2017 - 234.1 Cairncross Proposed Lease Boundary Plan - Concrete Site v5-Lease - Final

2 View. DA2017 - 234.1 Site Plan

3 View. DA2017 - 234.1 EPA Request for Additional Information

4 View. DA2017 - 234.1 EPA Letter Draft Response Request for Additional Inform...

5 View. DA2017 - 234.1 Further information EPA.

6 View. DA2017 - 234.1 EPA Response to Bridle Concrete Resources Request to Defer Noise and Air

7 View. DA2017 - 234.1 Water Quality Assessment

8 View. DA2017 - 234.1 Submission - Rowsell

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 28/03/2018

Item: 08

Subject: Section 96 Modification DA2017 - 500.2 - Modify Design Of Previous Approved Dwelling - Lot 703 DP 1228141, No 37 Yaluma Drive, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Patrick Galbraith-Robertson

Applicant: JE Miller Builders

Owner: R & J Border

Estimated Cost: NIL

Parcel no: 66295

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2017 – 500.2 for a Section 96 modification to design of previous approved dwelling at Lot 703, DP 1228141, No. 37 Yaluma Drive, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting the modified 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 Section 96 modification, the modified proposal has only been assessed against the legislation and related planning guidelines in place at the time of the original assessment.

The building is currently under construction and has the roof sheeting complete.

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 799.35 m2.

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 December 2017:

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Raising of the garage floor level by 105mm to RL45.38m AHD.

· Raising of the habitable ground floor level at the front of the building by 105mm to RL45.55m AHD.

· Raising of the ground floor lower level (split level) at the rear by 135mm from RL44.145m AHD to RL44.28m AHD.

· Raising of the upper floor level (split level) at the rear by 135mm from RL47.245m AHD to RL47.38m.

· Increase of maximum roof building height (from existing ground level) by 255mm at the highest roof ridge point from 8.145m at the time to 8.4m (based on FFLs, heights and site plan contours shown and not scaling off the elevations).

· Increase of the maximum roof building height (from existing ground level) by 255mm at the rear-most part of the building from 8.245m to 8.5m (based on FFLs, heights and site plan contours shown and not scaling off the elevations). The maximum building height is therefore 8.5m at the rear-most section of the roof line above the south-western corner of the upper floor alfresco. It should be noted that the rear-most part of the building is slightly higher than the upper-most ridge as the ground level slopes away faster than the rake of the roof.

The floor levels and the upper ridge of roof have been confirmed on-site by survey as constructed to the plans submitted by a registered surveyor.

The floor to ceiling heights, front building line, side and rear setbacks have not changed to that which has been approved under the current DA plans. This has been double checked using Council’s Trapeze plan overlay software (light table checking).

It should be noted that when the original DA was lodged, it did not comply with the 8.5m height limit. However, during the assessment period of the original DA, the plans were subsequently amended to comply.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 11 August 2017 – original DA approved. Stamped approved plans attached to this report.

· 5 February 2018 – section 96 modification application lodged.

· 22 February 2018 – amended drawings received showing more details on heights and levels and additional information

· 27 February to 12 March 2018 – Neighbour notification of modification proposal.

· 13 March 2017 – Additional information received.

· 14 March 2017 – Additional information received.

· 15 March 2017- Additional information requested – request for further survey information. This information was not received however the ridge height and floor levels are considered sufficient.

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 when making a comparison between the original and proposed modified proposal. In particular, the main changes occur to the design of floor levels and a corresponding increase in roof height which has resulted in a minor change to the building height of the dwelling.

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

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?

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

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

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Question whether the dwelling constructed is lawful as the height exceeds 8.5m.	Upon a detailed review of the modified plans, the proposed modified building height is compliant at the highest rear section of the building at a maximum 8.5m.
Copy of survey certificate requested prior to modification application being lodged to establish actual ridge heights, finished slab levels and lower roof/wall height of the southern elevation adjacent to the second brick column.	Survey heights have been provided of finished floor levels and the upper-most roof ridge heights. The height of the rear-most section of the building has been calculated to be 600mm lower than the ridge and calculated to be 8.5m in building height using the LEP definition.
Private Certifier advised that building exceeded 8.5m in height.	It is assumed that this advice provided was made in error without qualification as the building heights need to be assessed against the pre-existing ground levels as per the definition of building height in the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011.
The information submitted with the modification application does not detail the wall/roof height on the southern elevation.	This detail has been requested during the assessment of the application post neighbour notification. The building height is 8.5m at the highest point.
The new ridge height is RL51.3 and the lower roof/wall height is RL50.8m with an existing natural ground level of RL42 giving an overall height of approximately 8.8m (information taken from revised site plan and Beukers written survey).	The upper-most ridge height is RL51.3m however the lower rear roof/wall height referred to is 600mm lower at RL50.7m and the existing ground level at the time to the highest point of the building was RL42.2 (as shown on the site plans both original and modified). 50.7m – 42.2m = 8.5m building height The concern raised by the submission is not agreed with. No further justification is required of the Applicant.
The new site plan indicates a primary street setback of 3.72m and encroachment of 0.58m into the required 4.5m primary frontage setbacks. This was not dimensioned, considered or formed part of the development consent.	The front setback of the articulation zone feature was originally assessed as having a setback of 3.72m which is permitted under Council’s Development Control Plan 2013 and referenced in the SEPP Housing Code that the objection refers to. The front setback has not changed as approved.
A section 96 modification is not appropriate to assess an unlawful development. A new DA is required.	A section 96 modification is considered appropriate in this instance.
The dwelling under construction could not be constructed as Complying Development as the setback is required to be 6m and the deck area is no greater than 3m in height from natural ground level.	The Complying Development criteria are noted however the subject dwelling has been applied for, assessed and approved under a Development Application. The proposal meets the Development Control Plan 2013 front, side and rear setback criteria. The rear setback is a minimum 12.51m.
A clause 4.6 objection is required to the 8.5m building height standard.	The height is considered to be 8.5m at the highest part of the building based upon the plans and information submitted. No variation is proposed.
Request that an alternate senior assessing officer review a new DA for the dwelling.	A section 96 modification has been lodged and is considered appropriate. A change of assessing officer is not required as the modification application will be determined by the Development Assessment Panel.

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:

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2001

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

· Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 8.5m (increased from 8.245m) which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

Context and setting

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

• The modified proposal is considered to be consistent with the desired character for future and existing residential development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area.

• There are no identifiable adverse impacts on existing view sharing with the modified proposal noting the compliance of the building with the building heights, the split level design response of the building to the site and the majority of the building bulk being centred to the rear of the site.

• There are no identifiable adverse privacy impacts with the modified proposal.

• There are no identifiable adverse overshadowing impacts with the modified proposal.

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

No contributions applicable – single dwelling only.

5. CONCLUSION

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 96 and 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.

The site remains 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 modification application be approved, subject to the recommended modified conditions of consent provided in the attachment section of this report.

Attachments

1 View. DA2017 - 500. 2 Amended Plans

2 View. DA2017 - 500.1 Original Plans

3 View. DA2017 - 500.2 Floor Level Certificate

4 View. DA2017 - 500.2 Recommended Amended Conditions

5 View. DA2017 - 500.2 Submission - Wilkie

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 28/03/2018

Item: 09

Subject: DA2017 - 1018.1 Dwelling - Lot 20 DP 803114, No 21 Mill Hill, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Deb McKenzie

Applicant: KiS Drafting & Design

Owner: J L Williams

Estimated Cost: $350,000

Parcel no: 13759

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2017 – 1018.1 for a dwelling at Lot 20, DP 803114, No. 21 Mill Hill, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for 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, one submission has been received.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

The site has an area of 932.1m².

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

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:

· The site is the last vacant residential property in Mill Hill.

· The site backs onto a reserve adjacent the water supply tank at the top of the ridge.

· The site contains koala habitat trees that are reportedly visited by koalas on a regular basis.

· The lot contains a building envelope on the land title.

Application Chronology

· 15/11/17 – DA lodged.

· 11/12/17 – notification finished.

· 11/12/17 – submission received.

· 30/11/17 – additional information requested regarding ecological assessment

· 02/01/18 – additional information received (ecological assessment).

· 19/02/18- meeting with applicant and proponent.

· 09/03/18 – additional information received from applicant (revised plans and ecological assessment)

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) any Environmental Planning Instrument:

The provisions (where applicable) of:

(a)(i) Any environmental planning instrument

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

A Mill Hill Koala Plan of Management applies to the site (EcoPro 1999).

There are twelve (12) koala food trees on the subject site. These are shown in Figure 1 below (source: Naturecall Environmental, March 2018).

The following trees are to be removed – T3, T4, T5, T6, T7, T8, T12. The remainder are retained. The seven (7) trees to be removed are due to either location within the building envelope or location with the Bushfire Inner Protection Area (IPA) of the site. The applicant has agreed to replacing the 7 trees at a ratio of 2:1 either within the reserve at the top of the ridge or elsewhere, as agreed with Council. Replacement planting is allowed under the KPOM and the proposal is consistent with such requirements. The final location for the new trees is yet to be finalised, however, initial discussions with the applicant indicate that suitable site/s are available.

Due to the importance of replacing these trees - in an agreed location - it is proposed to issue a ‘deferred commencement’ development consent that will operate once the siting of the new trees is agreed, in writing, with Council and payment towards the purchase and planting of the trees is received by Council. This will ensure that Council officers can be assured this work is capable of being finalised in a reasonable timeframe and the applicant can commence site works for the dwelling.

Figure 1: location of the koala food trees on the site

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 (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

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

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

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

o To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

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

· Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 8.49m which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5 m applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4, the floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.35:1.0 which complies with the maximum 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

· Clause 5.9 – Seven (7) Tallowood trees are to be removed as part of the application. Compensatory planting at a ratio of 2:1 is proposed in accordance with DCP. An Ecological Assessment, prepared by Natural Call Environmental, dated March 2018 was submitted with the DA, justifying the tree removal. Conditions of consent to apply.

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

· Clause 7.5 – Koala Habitat applies to the site. Refer to comments under SEPP 44 heading and Clause 5.9 above. Conditions of consent are to apply regarding compensatory plantings.

· 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:

Nil

(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
3.2.2.2	Articulation zone: • Min. 3m front setback • An entry feature or portico • A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah • A window box treatment • A bay window or similar feature • An awning or other feature over a window • A sun shading feature	No elements within the articulation zone.	N/A
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	Dwelling is sited within the designated building envelope for this site. Setback = 12.4m.	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 is setback behind the entry porch, 12.4m from the front boundary.	Yes
	6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building	6.3m wide garage. Less than 50% of the building width. Carport also located on southern side of garage.	Yes
	Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width	Driveway crossing width is long due to distance from kerb to front boundary. Compliant.	Yes
3.2.2.4	4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space	Rear setback = 5.314m Complies.	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	Southern side: 4.030m to wall of building and 500mm to side of carport. As the wall is a blank wall construction of a car port, this variation is acceptable in this case. Northern: 6.78m to edge of water tanks. The upper level retreat is located towards to the northern side of the dwelling, over 7m from the northern boundary.	No, but acceptable
3.2.2.6	35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade	The dwelling contains over 35m² open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m space.	Yes
3.2.2.10	Privacy: • Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed • Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m • Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m	No direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings. No privacy screens are recommended.	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	Condition recommended to require engineering certification	Condition of consent.
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.	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. 2:1 koala habitat tree replacement condition of consent.	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)	Discussed in this report previously. Conditions of consent to apply.	N/A
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads	No new access proposed to arterial or distribution road.	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Driveway crossing minimal in width.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. 1 space per single dwelling (behind building line)	Double garage provided + carport adjoining. Complies.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Sealed driveway to be condition of consent	Condition of consent.
2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16	Driveway grades first 6m or ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade with transitions of 2m length	Driveway grades capable of satisfying Council standard driveway crossover requirements. Condition recommended for section 138 Roads Act permit.	Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.	Yes

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

Nil

iv) any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

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:

The site is zoned for residential purposes. The subject site is a long established vacant allotment. The land title of all properties in Mill Hill are subject to building envelope restrictions. New land purchasers are aware of these restrictions when buying in this area. There is a Koala Plan of Management for the Mill Hill area. Therefore, koala habitat trees and koalas are well known to occur in this area.

The site contains twelve (12) Tallowood trees – known koala habitat trees. Seven (7) of those trees are located within the building envelope or close proximity to the building envelope on the site. These require removal as part of this application. The applicant has been requested to review this situation and has agreed to compensate for the loss of seven (7) trees at a ratio of 2:1. It is has been assessed by Council officers and found to be acceptable in the circumstances of this case. The replacement of koala trees at a ratio of 2:1 (14 trees in this case) is consistent with the requirements of the KPOM.

Notwithstanding agreement being reached for tree planting compensation the location of the 14 new trees (2:1 ratio) has not been finalised. On this basis, it is proposed to issue a ‘deferred commencement’ consent requiring as Part A of that consent, written agreement (via plan or GPS location, or both) with Council officers of the appropriate location/s for the trees and payment for their purchase and planting. Once satisfied, the consent can commence and the applicant can proceed to Part B conditions of the consent (site works and construction). This is proposed to ensure that this important matter, while capable of being satisfied, is actioned in the short term.

The site is identified as bushfire prone land. A bushfire attack level certificate, prepared by S & K Johnson for the site recommends a BAL 19 construction level for all elevations of the building and BAL 29 for the alfresco area and associated stairs and landings. The entire site is to be treated as an Inner Protection Zone (IPZ) for the life of the buildings. In this regard, canopy cover must be less than 15%, any canopy must be located more than 5 metres from any roofline, trees should have lower limbs removed up to a height of 2 metres above the ground (4 metres if emergency vehicles need to park next to or drive around them) and shrubs and gardens need to be 1.5m away from exposed windows and doors. These, and other design and landscaping recommendations will be applied as conditions of consent in this case.

Cumulative Impacts

Acceptable, subject to imposition of the conditions of consent requiring compensatory planting at a ratio of 2:1; and ensuring that the plantings are appropriately sited and carried out.

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

The subject site is the last vacant property in Mill Hill. There is a reasonable expectation by the landowner of being able to construct a dwelling on the land, subject to the consent of Council and reflecting the site specific constraints. The applicant was requested to submit further information addressing, in more detail, the koala habitat trees on the site and the siting the dwelling. A revised ecological assessment was also submitted. Based on the outcomes of a review of the information submitted, the proposed dwelling is considered suitable for the site.

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

One (1) 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
Removal of Tallowood trees close to the southern fence – loss of koala trees + impact on koala population?	This matter has been reviewed and assessed in some detail as part of the assessment of this application. Council officers have agreed to the replacement of seven (7) Tallowoods at a rate of 2:1, resulting in 14 trees to be planted. The trees to be removed are located within the building envelope of the dwelling or within the bushfire inner protection area (IPA) adjacent the building. The remaining seven (7) Tallowoods identified on site are to be retained.
Was a tree report submitted with the application?	The applicant was requested to submit an Ecological Assessment. A revised version of that assessment (dated March 2018) forms the basis of the ecological assessment of the development on the subject site.
Move the house 6m to the north and 5m to towards to street.	Repositioning of the house was discussed at a meeting with Council officers during assessment of the application. The subject affected trees would be affected due to the excavation and proximity to nearly any dwelling proposed on the site.
Visual impact and effect of proposed removal of the trees.	The subject site has been vacant for many years and currently forms part of the backdrop to Mill Hill and the neighbourhood. The site has a dwelling entitlement and a building envelope on it that allows for residential construction on the site. 7 of the 14 Tallowoods are to be retained on site, thereby addressing this submission where possible.
Replanting not the same as existing trees.	This is acknowledged. However, as a form of compensation, replanting at a rate of 2:1 will assist.
Is there a time limit on the building envelope or who can release the building envelope on the land title?	In relation to the subject site the existing covenant on the land title – the building envelope is current and valid.

(e) The Public Interest:

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

· Not applicable – credit exists from the lot.

5. CONCLUSION

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

Attachments

1 View. DA2017 - 1018.1 Plans

2 View. DA2017 - 1018.1 Recommended Conditions

3 View. DA2017 - 1018.1 Submission - Roberts

Member	06/12/17	13/12/17	14/02/18	28/02/18	14/03/18
Paul Drake	P	P	P		P
Robert Hussey	P	P	P	A	A
David Crofts (alternate member)				P	P
Dan Croft (Acting Director Development & Environment) Clinton Tink (Acting GM Development Assessment (alternates) - Director Development & Environment - Development Assessment Planner	P P	P P	P P	P	P