Development Assessment Panel

 

Business Paper

 

date of meeting:

 

Wednesday 11 April 2018

location:

 

Function Room

Port Macquarie-Hastings Council

17 Burrawan Street

Port Macquarie

time:

 

2:00pm

 


Development Assessment Panel

 

CHARTER

 


 

 

1.0     OBJECTIVES

 

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

 

 

2.0     KEY FUNCTIONS

 

·                To review development application reports and conditions;

·                To determine development  applications  outside  of staff delegations;

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

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

·                To maintain transparency in the determination of development applications.

 

Delegated Authority of Panel

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

 

3.0      MEMBERSHIP

 

3.1      Voting Members

 

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

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

 

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

 

3.2      Non-Voting Members

 

·                Not applicable

3.3      Obligations of members

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

3.4      Member Tenure

 

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

 

3.5      Appointment of members

 

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

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

 

 

4.0     TIMETABLE OF MEETINGS

 

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

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

 

 

5.0      MEETING PRACTICES

 

5.1      Meeting Format

 

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

·                Meetings shall be open to the   public.

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

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

 

5.2      Decision Making

 

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

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

 

5.3      Quorum

 

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

 

5.4      Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson

 

·                Independent Chair (alternate, second independent member)

 

5.5     Secretariat

 

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

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

 

5.6      Recording of decisions

 

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

 

 

6.0     CONVENING OF “OUTCOME SPECIFIC” WORKING GROUPS

 

Not applicable.

 

 

7.0     CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST

 

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

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

 

 

8.0     LOBBYING

 

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


Development Assessment Panel

 

ATTENDANCE REGISTER

 

 

 

Member

13/12/17

14/02/18

28/02/18

14/03/18

28/03/18

Paul Drake

P

P

P

P

P

Robert Hussey

P

P

       A

A

P

David Crofts

(alternate member)

 

 

P

P

 

Dan Croft

(Acting Director Development & Environment)

Clinton Tink

(Acting GM Development Assessment

(alternates)

- Director Development & Environment

- Development Assessment Planner

P

 

P

P

 

P

 

P

 

 

P

 

 

P

 

Key: P =  Present

         A  =  Absent With Apology

         =  Absent Without Apology

 

 

 


Development Assessment Panel Meeting

Wednesday 11 April 2018

 

Items of Business

 

 

Item       Subject                                                                                                      Page

 

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

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

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

04           Disclosures of Interest..................................................................................... 14

05           DA2017 - 1116.1 Secondary Dwelling - Lot 4 DP 37760, No. 9 Hastings Street, Port Macquarie...................................................................................................................... 18

06           DA2018 - 48 - Demolition Of Existing Structures And Erection Of Emergency Services Facility (Ambulance Station) And Lot Consolidation - Lots 26 & 27 DP 37531, 94 - 96 High Street, Wauchope....................................................................................................... 80  

07           General Business

 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      11/04/2018

Item:          01

Subject:     ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

 

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

 

 

Item:          02

Subject:     APOLOGIES

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the apologies received be accepted.

 

 

Item:          03

Subject:     CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES

Recommendation

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

 


MINUTES

Development Assessment Panel Meeting

                                                                                                                                  28/03/2018

 

 

 

 

PRESENT

 

Members:

Paul Drake

Robert Hussey

Clinton Tink

 

Other Attendees:

Patrick Galbraith-Robertson

Dan Croft

Deb McKenzie

David Troemel

 

 

 

The meeting opened at 2:00pm.

 

 

01       ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

The Acknowledgement of Country was delivered.

 

 

02       APOLOGIES

Nil.

 

 

03       CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Paul Drake advised that the attendance register for 28 February 2018 was incorrect. In particular, the attendance register had Paul Drake as being away when in fact he was at the meeting. The anomaly was noted and to be corrected.

CONSENSUS:

That the Minutes of the Development Assessment Panel Meeting held on 14 March 2018 be confirmed.

 

 

04      DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

 

There were no disclosures of interest presented.

 

 

05       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

Speakers:

Donna Clarke (applicant)

Michael Summers (applicant)

 

CONSENSUS:

 

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 as amended below:

 

Replace the wording of condition A9 to state:

 

A9     (A007) The development must only proceed in accordance with the approved stages as set out below:

·      Stage 1 – site works

·      Stage 2 – construction of the dwellings and subdivision

          Unless specified, the conditions of this consent will apply to all stages, with any decision on any discrepancy with conditions and associated staging resting with Council. Any decision to allow a change to staging will rest with Council along with applicable conditions and any contributions payable.

 

 

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

 

Speakers:

Gary Bewley (o)

Robert Smallwood (applicant)

 

CONSENSUS:

 

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 description of the development being a shed (not garage) and the recommended conditions as amended below:

 

·      Add condition B2 to state:

B2        (B195) Prior to release of the Construction Certificate, details are to be submitted demonstrating that the structure will not impact on the zone of influence of the adjoining stormwater pipe or ability to excavate and do work on the pipe.

 

·      Delete condition F2.

 

 

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

 

Speakers:

Nil.

 

CONSENSUS:

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.

 

 

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

Speakers:

Nil.

 

CONSENSUS:

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.

 

 

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

Speakers:

Laura Clyne (applicant)

 

Clinton Tink advised that he was approached by David Roberts (objector) during his site inspection. David Roberts advised that he was an apology for the meeting but requested the issues raised in his submission still be considered and that the house should be amended to avoid damage/loss of trees and fencing along his boundary.

 

CONSENSUS:

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

 

Amend deferred condition 1 to state:

 

1          Koala Habitat Tree Compensatory Planting

(a)          The applicant and Port Macquarie-Hastings Council are to agree, in writing, as to the location of the replacement planting of the koala habitat trees required as part of this application.

(b)          A replacement ratio of 2:1 is to be applied, requiring fourteen (14) replacement koala habitat trees (preferably Tallowoods) be planted.

(c)          The applicant is to employ a suitably qualified tree consultant to undertake the planting of the replacement trees (14 in total), as agreed with Council. Each tree is to be a minimum of three (3) litre containers.

(d)          The planting of the trees is to be undertaken in accordance with AUSPEC landscaping provisions and maintained by a Council contractor.

(e)          Council staff are to inspect the site(s) of the tree plantings within 14 days of notification of the plantings being accepted.

 

            The consent will not operate until such time as this agreement is in place and Council notifies the applicant, in writing, that deferred commencement consent conditions, as indicated above, have been satisfied.

            Upon Council giving written notification to the Applicant that the deferred commencement conditions have been satisfied, the consent will become operative from the date of that written notification, subject to the conditions of consent as shown in Schedule 1A – Conditions of Consent.

 

 

10       GENERAL BUSINESS

Nil.

 

 

 

The meeting closed at 3:30pm.

 

 

 

 

 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      11/04/2018

Item:          04

Subject:     DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Disclosures of Interest be presented

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST DECLARATION

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

 

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

 

 

        Pecuniary:

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

 

 

        Non-Pecuniary - Significant Interest:

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

 

        Non-Pecuniary - Less than Significant Interest:

              May participate in consideration and voting.

 

 

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

 

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

 

Name:  …………………………………………………….

 

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

 

 

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


 

Further Explanation

(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)

 

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

 

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

 

Pecuniary Interest

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Non-Pecuniary

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Non Pecuniary – Significant Interest

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

 

Non Pecuniary – Less than Significant Interest

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

SPECIAL DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST DECLARATION

 

 

By

[insert full name of councillor]

 

 

In the matter of

[insert name of environmental planning instrument]

 

 

Which is to be considered at a meeting of the

[insert name of meeting]

 

 

Held on

[insert date of meeting]

 

 

PECUNIARY INTEREST

 

 

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

 

 

Relationship of identified land to councillor

[Tick or cross one box.]

 

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

 

Associated person of councillor has interest in the land.

 

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

 

MATTER GIVING RISE TO PECUNIARY INTEREST

 

 

Nature of land that is subject to a change

in zone/planning control by proposed

LEP (the subject land iii

[Tick or cross one box]

 

The identified land.

 

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

Current zone/planning control

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

 

Proposed change of zone/planning control

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

 

Effect of proposed change of zone/planning control on councillor

[Tick or cross one box]

 

Appreciable financial gain.

 

Appreciable financial loss.

 

 

 

Councillor’s Name:  …………………………………………

 

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


 

 

Important Information

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

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

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

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

 

 

 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      11/04/2018

 

 

Item:          05

 

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

Report Author: Andrew Rock

 

 

 

Applicant:               Love Project Management

Owner:                    P J & Y M Baumgart

Estimated Cost:     $70,000

Parcel no:               8297

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

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

 

Executive Summary

 

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

 

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

 

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 689.2000m2.

 

The site is zoned B4 Mixed Use in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=46bc8095-fc20-4183-a844-a0d980a1151f&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

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

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=01511e55-35e4-4182-8db0-69a4a37b4637&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

 

 

 

 

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

 

·    Construction of secondary dwelling

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    14.12.2017 – Application lodged

·    9-22.1.2018 – Application notified

·    18.1.2018 – Submission received

·    31.1.2018 – Site inspection

·    31.1.2018 – Site meeting with applicants

·    31.1.2018 – Site meeting with objectors representatives

·    13.2.2018 – Further information requested from applicant

·    6.3.2018 – Further information/revised plans received from applicant

·    7.3.2018 – Revised plans sent to objector for consideration/comment

·    12.3.2018 – Updated plan provided by applicant

·    26.3.2018 – Objector requesting more time to consider revised plans

·    28.3.2018 – Objector advised that still objecting to proposed development

·    29.3.2018 – Applicant and objector notified of application referral to DAP

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

 

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

 

(a)     The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i)      any Environmental Planning Instrument:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

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

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

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

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

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

 

 

 

 

 

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

SEPP 71 does not apply to the site.

 

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

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

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

Clause 20 - the site is not located within a prescribed zone (R1, R2, R3, R4 and R5). However, the applicant is relying on flexible zone provisions to the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan with regard to being located within close proximity to R1 – General Residential Zoning for permissibility purposes. Accordingly, Division 2 of the SEPP may be considered. In this regard, a secondary dwelling is permissible with consent within the R1 zoning pursuant to the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan.

 

Clause 22(2) - the development would not result in there being a dwelling other than the primary dwelling and the secondary dwelling.

 

Clause 22(3) – the total floor area of the principle and secondary dwelling is significantly less than the floor space ratio of the 1.0:1 applying to the site and the 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the adjoining residential land. The total floor area of the secondary dwelling is less than 60m².

 

Clause 22(4) - it is noted that consent cannot be refused on the grounds of site area or parking.

 

Clause 24 - it is noted that the consent authority must not consent to a development application that would result in any subdivision of a lot on which development for the purposes of a secondary dwelling has been carried out. This is not proposed.

 

The requirements of this SEPP are therefore satisfied.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is mapped within the ‘coastal use area’ however Clause 21 – Savings and transitional provisions, sub clause 1 states:

 

The former planning provisions continue to apply (and this policy does not apply) to a development application lodged, but finally determined, immediately before the commencement of this Policy in relation to land to which this Policy applies.

 

Note: former planning provisions means the following policies that were in force immediately before the Policy’s repeal/amendment:

 

·    State Environmental Planning Policy No 14 – Coastal Wetands,

·    State Environmental Planning Policy No 26 – Littoral Rainforests,

·    State Environmental Planning Policy No 71 – Coastal Protection, and

·    State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

 

This application was lodged on 14 December 2017 and State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018 commenced on 3 April 2018. Accordingly, this policy does not apply.

 

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 B4- Mixed Use. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the B4 zone landuse table, the secondary dwelling is a prohibited landuse.

 

The objectives of the B4 – Mixed Use Zone are as follows:

 

To provide a mixture of compatible land uses.

To integrate suitable business, office, residential, retail and other development in accessible locations so as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.

To ensure the new developments make a positive contribution to the public domain and streetscape.

 

In accordance with Clause 2.3(1) the proposed development is a prohibited landuse. See below with regard to the proposed use of Clause 5.3 – Development near zone boundaries.

·        Clause 2.7, no demolition works proposed.

 

·        Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 4.24 m 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 approximately 0.29:1.0 which complies with the maximum 1.0:1 floor space ratio applying to the site. The proposed floor space ratio would also apply to the adjoining residential zoned land which has a maximum floor space ratio of 0.65:1.

 

·        Clause 5.3, relates to development near zone boundaries. This clause prescribes that “the objective of this clause is to provide flexibility where the investigation of a site and its surrounds reveals that a use allowed on the other side of a zone boundary would enable a more logical and appropriate development of the site and be compatible with the planning objectives and land uses for the adjoining zone.”

 

In accordance with subclause (2), the relevant distance from an adjoining zone R1 – General Residential is 20m, within which the secondary dwelling is proposed.  

 

In accordance with subclause (3) this clause does not apply to land within a “coastal zone” (among other restrictions). The definition of a “coastal zone” within the LEP has the same meaning as the Coastal Protection Act 1979 which defines “coastal zone” as:

 

(a)  the area within the coastal waters of the State as defined in Part 10 of the Interpretation Act 1987 (including any land within those waters), and

(b)  the area of land and the waters that lie between the western boundary of the coastal zone (as shown on the maps outlining the coastal zone) and the landward boundary of the coastal waters of the State, and

(c)  the seabed (if any) and the subsoil beneath, and the airspace above, the areas referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b).

The coastal zone consists of the area between the western boundary of the coastal zone shown on the maps outlining the coastal zone and the outermost boundary of the coastal waters of the State. The coastal waters of the State extend, generally, to 3 nautical miles from the coastline of the State.”

 

The “coastal zone” as mapped (see SEPP 71 – Coastal Protection mapping) does not include the site. Accordingly, the site is not excluded from using this clause as a result of sub clause 3.

 

Sub clause 4 nominates that development consent may be granted to development that may be carried out in an adjoining zone, if the consent authority is satisfied that:

 

a)   The development is not inconsistent with the objectives for development in both zones, and

b)   The carrying out of the development is desirable due to compatible land use planning, infrastructure capacity and other planning principles relating to the efficient and timely development of land.

 

With regard to (4)(a) above, the objectives of the zone applying to the site, B4 – Mixed Use are as follows:

 

To provide a mixture of compatible land uses.

To integrate suitable business, office, residential, retail and other development in accessible locations so as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.

To ensure that new developments make a positive contribution to the public domain and streetscape.

 

It is considered that the proposed secondary dwelling; is compatible with the surrounding residential land uses, is located within close proximity to the Wauchope CBD and will not detract from the public domain nor streetscape. Accordingly, the proposed development is not considered to be inconsistent with the B4 land zoning.

 

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

 

To provide for the housing needs of the community.

To provide for a variety of housing types and densities.

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

 

The proposed secondary dwelling contributes to the housing needs of the community and provides a housing type which is suitable for a segment of the community. Accordingly, the proposed development is not inconsistent with the R1 land zoning.

 

With regard to (4)(b) above, the proposed secondary dwelling is compatible with the surrounding residential land uses of the area. The existing infrastructure within the locality will be able to satisfactorily cater for the proposed development, and the future development of the B4 Mixed Use zone will not be unacceptably impacted as a result of the proposed development. Accordingly, the proposed development is not inconsistent with the provisions of subclause (4)(b).    

 

Accordingly, the proposed development complies with the relevant provisions of Clause 5.3.

 

·        Clause 5.4, the floor area of the secondary dwelling does not exceed 60m².

 

·        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 sulfate 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:

 

N/A

 

(iii)    any Development Control Plan in force:

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

 

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

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

 

Front setback (Residential not R5 zone):

•     Min. 6.0m classified road

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

•     Min. 3.0m secondary road

•     Min. 2.0m Laneway

Secondary dwelling proposed behind the existing dwelling.

Yes

3.2.2.3

Car parking space 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade.

Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided

Proposed car parking space for existing dwelling is to be located forward of the building line.

No

 

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

No garage or carport proposed.

N/A

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

Existing driveway crossover.

Yes

3.2.2.4

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

Proposed rear setback of 1.0m. The design of the secondary dwelling has a deck and living areas orientated to the north which will achieve a better solar access. The proposal is unlikely to achieve a minimum 4m in width x 15.2m (equivalent length of rear boundary) open space area but will provide a usable open space area for the secondary dwelling and is unlikely to adversely impact on dwellings to the west (rear) of the site.

No

3.2.2.5

Side setbacks:

•     Ground floor = min. 0.9m

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

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

A minimum side setback of 1.0m is proposed.

 

The southern elevation of the proposed secondary dwelling is designed to have an unarticulated 13.550m wall. This unarticulated wall is proposed to be located next to an existing shed (with an unarticulated side wall adjoining the common lot boundary, of a similar length to the proposed unarticulated wall) on the adjoining property to the south. As the proposed unarticulated wall does not immediately adjoin an existing primary indoor area or principle open space area, perceptions of overbearing, building bulk are minimised to the south and privacy is maintained.  

Yes

 

 

No

3.2.2.6

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

Available for both proposed and existing dwelling.

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 changes to front fencing proposed.

N/A

3.2.2.8

Front fences and walls to have complimentary materials to context

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

No changes to front fencing proposed.

 

N/A

3.2.2.10

Privacy:

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

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

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

•     Southern elevation windows proposed to be frosted.

•     Eastern elevation window proposes a sill height of 1.5m above finished floor level.

•     Screening/fencing proposed between the principal open space areas of both the existing and proposed dwelling of 9 Hastings Street and the property to the south, 11 Hastings Street, Wauchope.

•     Internal fencing proposed between open space areas of existing and proposed dwelling.

•     Existing 1.8m boundary fencing and vegetation screening along the northern and western lot boundaries.

Yes

 

DCP 2013: General Provisions

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

2.7.2.2

Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline

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

Yes

2.3.3.1

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

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

Yes

2.3.3.2

1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage

None proposed

N/A

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

No retaining wall proposed.

 

N/A

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

2.5.3.2

New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads

No new access proposed to arterial or distribution road.

N/A

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

Driveway crossing minimal in width including maximising street parking

Yes

2.5.3.3

Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1.

1 space per single dwelling (behind building line). Parking for secondary dwelling optional.

One car space proposed for secondary dwelling at rear of lot.

 

One car space proposed for principal between the dwelling and the front lot boundary.

 

Yes

 

 

 

No

2.5.3.14

Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified

Sealed driveway proposed

Yes

2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16

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

Existing driveway crossover is suitable.

Yes

2.5.3.17

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

Development is for a secondary dwelling only with standard driveway. Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.

Yes

 

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provisions relating to:

 

·    Proposed car parking space located forward of the building line – 3.2.2.3,

·    Secondary dwelling proposed to be setback less than 4m from the rear lot boundary – 3.2.2.4, and

·    Southern elevation of secondary dwelling is proposed to extend greater than 12m without articulation – 3.2.2.5. 

 

With regard to the proposed car parking space being located forward of the building line the objectives of 3.2.2.3 are:

 

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

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

 

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

 

·    The proposal will not create an additional garage nor driveway.

·    The proposal assists to maintain on street car parking.

·    Minimal adverse impacts on the streetscape and amenity of the area.

 

With regard to the secondary dwelling proposed 1m from the rear lot boundary (4m rear setback development provision), the objectives of 3.2.2.4 are:

 

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

•        To provide usable yard areas and open space.

 

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

 

·        Given the proposed single storey design of the secondary dwelling and orientation of the lot, the residential dwelling/s to the west of the site are unlikely to be adversely impacted with regard to the availability of natural light and ventilation to this dwelling and open space area.

 

·        The living area of the proposed secondary dwelling and deck are orientated to the north to take advantage of the desirable aspect. An open space area, directly accessible from the living room area, is proposed to be located to the north of the secondary dwelling, ensuring a quality/usable outdoor space area.    

 

With regard to the southern elevation of the proposed secondary dwelling extending 13.350m without articulation (12m development provision), the objectives of 3.2.2.5 are:

 

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

•     To provide for visual and acoustic privacy between dwellings.

 

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

 

·        The proposed secondary dwelling is single storey and will adjoin an existing storage shed (of a similar length and overall size to the proposed secondary dwelling) on the property to the south (11 Hastings Street). Consequently, minimal if any perceptions of overbearing or building bulk can reasonably be expected when considered from the existing dwelling or open space areas of the property to the south (11 Hastings Street).

·        Frosted screens are proposed on the non-living room windows, on the southern elevation of the secondary dwelling, which will further protect visual privacy.    

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

iv)     any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

 

 

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 applicable.

 

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

 

Context and setting

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

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

•     There are no adverse impacts on existing view sharing.

•     There are no unacceptable privacy impacts.

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

 

Access, transport and traffic

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

 

Water Supply

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

 

Sewer

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

 

Stormwater

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

 

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

 

Heritage

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

 

Other land resources

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

 

Water cycle

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

 

Soils

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

 

Air and microclimate

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

 

Flora and fauna

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

 

Waste

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

 

Energy

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

 

Noise and vibration

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

 

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

 

Safety, security and crime prevention

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

 

Social impacts in the locality

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

 

Economic impact in the locality

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

 

Site design and internal design

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

 

Construction

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

 

Cumulative impacts

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

One written submissions 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

Lighting impacts from vehicle parking

With revised plans submitted, lighting from vehicles will not be directed towards an adjoining property. 

Visual privacy impacts

Revised plans submitted nominate a barrier between the open space areas between properties. A condition is recommended to limit any transparency to less than 25%.

Potential noise, dust and privacy impacts during construction.

Proposed secondary dwelling is to be positioned on top of pad footings, accordingly, minimal excavation works area required.

Construction times recommended to be restricted to standard hours as per consent condition.

Building bulk

This has been assessed as acceptable. See assessment in Development Control Plan 2013 section (3.2.2.5)

No existing and proposed ground survey levels provided to allow for assessment of overshadowing impacts and building bulk.

Revised section plan nominates finished floor level 600mm above existing ground level and an overall height of 4.24m above existing ground level. Minimal overshadowing impacts expected and building bulk earlier assessed as acceptable.

The consent authority cannot be satisfied that the development meets Clause 5.3(4)(a) and (b) of LEP 2011 as follows :

a)  The development is not inconsistent with the objectives for development in both zones, and

b)  The carrying out of the development is desirable due to compatible land use planning, infrastructure capacity and other planning principles relating to the efficient and timely development of land.

Assessment earlier in this report deems the proposed development acceptable with regard to Clause 5.3(4)(a) and (b).

The amended plans do not include adequate measures to provide or maintain visual privacy. Development should be conditioned as follows:

The developer must design and install a new, minimum 6-foot high fence, at the full expense  to the developer, to replace the existing fence along the full length of the southern boundary of the property, prior to the commencement of construction of the development, in consultation with and to the satisfaction of the owner (in writing) of the adjoining property (11 Hastings Street), to avoid lighting impacts, provide adequate visual privacy, attenuate construction noise, minimise dust impacts and avoid perceptions of building bulk.

The existing boundary fence between 9 and 11 Hastings Street is approximately 1.2m high and has been in existence for several years. Presently, there is minimal visual privacy between the two properties.

The design of the proposed secondary dwelling ensures that privacy is maintained between living areas of the secondary dwelling and 11 Hastings Street. As such, privacy is only considered to be required between areas of private open space between 9 and 11 Hastings Street.

In this regard, the following condition is recommended:

A privacy screen or fence is to be installed on or adjacent to the lot boundary of 9 and 11 Hastings Street. The fence or privacy screen is to extend from the south-western corner rear of the existing dwelling to the south-eastern corner of the proposed secondary dwelling. The fence or screen is to be a minimum of 1.8m above existing ground level, have a maximum transparency level of 25% and be installed prior to occupation or the issue of an occupation certificate. 

The above condition will ensure that appropriate privacy is achieved between the lots, even if agreement cannot be reached between adjoining land owners. 

(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

 

Not applicable.

 

5.       CONCLUSION

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

Attachments

 

1View. DA2017 - 1116.1 Plans

2View. DA2017 - 1116.1 SOEE

3View. DA2017 - 1116.1 Applicants Letter

4View. DA2017 - 1116.1 Recommended Conditions

5View. DA2017 - 1116.1 Submission - Monkley

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

11/04/2018

 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

11/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

11/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

11/04/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

11/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      11/04/2018

 

 

Item:          06

 

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

Report Author: Patrick Galbraith-Robertson

 

 

 

Applicant:               Health Infrastructure CARE Lotti Wilkinson, City Plan Strategy and Development

Owner:                    Ambulance Service of New South Wales

Estimated Cost:     $2.623M

Parcel no:               8964 & 8964

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

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

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report considers a Development Application for demolition of existing structures and erection of emergency services facility (ambulance station) and lot consolidation at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (Act).

 

The proposal is a Crown Development.

 

Section 4.33 of the Act sets out the following requirements for Crown Developments:

 

(1)  A consent authority (other than the Minister) must not:

(a)  refuse its consent to a Crown development application, except with the approval of the Minister, or

(b)  impose a condition on its consent to a Crown development application, except with the approval of the applicant or the Minister.

 

 

The Applicant has been forwarded the draft conditions for concurrence in accordance with these requirements of the Act. At the time of writing this report, the Applicant has not yet come back to Council with any requested changes. The Applicant will need to agree to the proposed conditions of consent prior to determination.

 

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

 

Amended stormwater management plans have also been received during the assessment of the application.

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

 

The combined site has an area of 2367.68m2.

 

The site fronts High Street, which is the main road extending through Wauchope, and forms part of the Oxley Highway. The immediate locality comprises a mix of land uses, including the Wauchope District Memorial Hospital directly opposite the site, single storey dwellings to the north, east and west of the site and various commercial uses along High Street. The site contains an existing single storey ambulance station at No. 96 High Street and an existing single storey residential dwelling at No. 94 High Street. The existing ambulance station has a capacity of two ambulance vehicles and 5 full time equivalent (FTE) staff.

 

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 location of existing development within the locality is shown in the following aerial photograph (source: nearmap December 2017):

 

 

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

 

·    Demolition of the existing buildings and removal of two trees on the site;

·    Construction of a new single storey ambulance station;

·    Six (6) internal ambulance parking spaces;

·    Six (6) carparking spaces, including one accessible space;

·    One (1) external wash bay;

·    New flag pole;

·    Internal facilities including:

Administration and storage spaces;

Amenity facilities including lockers, toilets, relief area, showers, kitchen and dining, lounge area and outdoor area.

·    Tree removal;

·    Landscape works including tree planting;

·    Consolidation of Lots 26 and 27 DP 37531.

 

Vehicle access to the proposed ambulance station is provided via a two-way entry/exit on the eastern side of the site which is shared by ambulances, staff and service vehicles from High Street and a dedicated exit on the western side.

 

The ambulance station is expected to employ up to 12 full time equivalent staff and will operate 24 hours a day and 7 days per week. At any one time the maximum number of FTE on site will be six (6).

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    30 January 2018 – DA lodged with Council

·    2 February 2018 – Additional information requested – clarification of owner’s consent and additional application fees

·    2 February 2018 – Additional information received

·    15 to 28 February 2018 – Neighbour notification and advertising in local newspaper of proposal

·    1 March 2018 – Email correspondence with Applicant

·    6 March 2018 – Copy of submission requested by Applicant

·    6 March 2018 – Copy of submission forwarded to Applicant

·    9 March 2018 – Amended stormwater plans received

·    23 March 2018 – Status update requested from Applicant on assessment and draft conditions

·    3 April 2018 – Draft conditions forwarded to Applicant for concurrence

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

 

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

 

(a)     The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i)      any Environmental Planning Instrument:

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

With reference to clauses 6 and 7, the subject land is less than 1 hectare (including any adjoining land under same ownership) and therefore the provisions of SEPP do not require consideration.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

Following a search of Council records, the subject land is not identified as being potentially contaminated. The Applicant has however detailed that the existing conditions of the site have been assessed by Regional Geotechnical Solutions (RGS) in the submitted Geotechnical Site Investigation and Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment. The assessment concludes that asbestos appears to be the only identifiable contaminant on the site and will need to be removed during the demolition of the buildings. Overall the report concludes that provided the recommendations set out in the report are implemented, including the preparation of an asbestos management plan, the land is suitable for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

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

 

 

 

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage

The proposed development includes proposed advertising signage in the form of 1 flush wall building identification sign.

 

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

 

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

 

Applicable clauses for consideration

Comments

Satisfactory

Clause 8(a) Consistent with objectives of the policy as set out in Clause 3(1)(a).

The proposed signage is consistent with the objectives of this policy.

Yes

Schedule 1(1) Character of the area.

The signage is consistent with the desired future character of the area and locality as it is limited to the building’s purpose and does not protrude above the building.

Yes

Schedule 1(2) Special areas.

The signage will not detract from the amenity or visual quality of any special areas.

Yes

Schedule 1(3) Views and vistas.

 

The signage will not obscure or adversely impact on any views of vistas.

Yes

Schedule 1(4) Streetscape, setting or landscape.

 

The signage is proportionate to the building proposed and the site to which it will be installed and will not detract from the streetscape.

Yes

Schedule 1(5) Site and building.

 

The signage is of a suitable scale and proportion to the site which it’s to be located.

Yes

Schedule 1(6) Associated devices and logos with advertisements and advertising structures.

A logo is nominated and of an appropriate for the intended identification purpose.

Yes

Schedule 1(7) Illumination.

 

No illumination proposed.

Yes

Schedule 1(7) Safety.

No adverse safety impacts identified from the proposed signage.

Yes

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

In accordance with clause 8, this SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.

 

In accordance with clause 47, the proposed emergency services facility on behalf of the Ambulance Service of New South Wales is identified as being a permissible land use in the R1 general residential zone.

 

In accordance with clause 101, the following comments are provided:

·    Adjacent to the site, High Street/Oxley Highway is a sealed public road under the care and control as a classified road by the Roads and Maritime Services;

·    Vehicle access is not practical to be provided from an alternative road other than the classified road;

·    The safety, efficiency and ongoing operation of High Street/Oxley Highway will not be adversely affected by the design of the vehicle access points proposed or likely nature and volume of vehicles which will be gaining access to the site from this classified road.

 

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 proposed development for an emergency services facility is a permissible landuse with consent.

 

The objectives of the R1 General Residential zone are as follows:

 

To provide for the housing needs of the community.

To provide for a variety of housing types and densities.

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

 

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

The proposal is a permissible landuse.

The proposal will provide for an essential service to meet the day to day needs of residents.

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

·   Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 8.4m, 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 0.29:1.0 which complies with the maximum 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

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

·   Clause 7.13, satisfactory arrangements are in place for provision of essential services including water supply, electricity supply, sewer infrastructure, stormwater drainage (as justified with proposed arrangements) and suitable road access to service the development.

 

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

 

No draft instruments apply to the site.

 

(iii)    any Development Control Plan in force:

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

This DCP has limited application to the proposal as there is no specific chapter for emergency service facilities or neighbourhood/precinct specific development control provisions. There are however several general provisions which are addressed below.

 

The following table provides a checklist against the Development Provisions requirements of this DCP:

 

DCP 2013: General Provisions

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

2.7.2.2

Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline

The layout does not create any identifiable crime risk safety issues. The design limits potential concealment areas and allows surveillance of the carpark and street in part.

Security fencing is proposed along the front of the premises.

Appropriate lighting can be provided to improve safety.

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.

No*

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

Proposal will 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

N/A

N/A

2.3.3.8

Removal of hollow bearing trees

No hollow 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)

Tree removal applied for and addressed later in this report.

Yes

2.4.3

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

Refer to main body of report.

Yes

2.5.3.2

New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads

Existing accesses proposed to be replaced with the replacement emergency services facility.

N/A

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

Driveway crossings minimal in width including maximising potential for street parking.

Yes

2.5.3.3

Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1.

No specific parking rates required.

The proposal provides for adequate parking on the site, with the provision of six (6) onsite car parking spaces, including one accessible space, in addition to the six ambulance bays. The maximum number of staff on site at any one time is six (6).

N/A

2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13

Landscaping of parking areas

Landscaping of parking areas satisfactory.

 

Yes

2.5.3.14

Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified

Sealed driveways proposed.

Yes

2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16

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

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.

Proposed stormwater management systems capable of satisfying all relevant standards and requirements.

Yes

 

The proposal seeks to vary the Development Provision relating to the performance based maximum fill regrading levels permitted associated with a new building (outside 1m of the building itself).

 

The relevant objectives are:

 

To ensure that design of any building or structure integrates with the topography of the land to:

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

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

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

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

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

 

The site slopes towards the rear with a cross fall of approximately 3.5m. The proposal involves filling of the site to a maximum depth of 1700mm on the eastern extent of the site along the boundary of 92 High Street and to a maximum depth of 1500mm on the western extent of the site along the boundary of 96 High Street. The fill is retained by masonry retaining walls on the eastern and western boundaries. At the rear, the landfill is battered to a low retaining wall approximately 0.47m high and 11.36m from the rear boundary.

 

The Applicant has stated that although the building provides generous setbacks from the adjoining residential properties at No.s 92 and 98 High Street, vehicle manoeuvring areas encroach within 1m on the western boundary and 2.5m on the southern boundary and are elevated according to the landfill. The Applicant has further justified that it is proposed to retain and/or reinstate the colorbond boundary fences and provide landscape screening between the retaining walls and the manoeuvring areas as illustrated in the architectural and landscape plans. Rather than erect a conventional fence along these boundaries, it was decided to construct a blockwork wall, up to 1700mm on the eastern boundary and 1500mm on the western boundary with a 1000mm high metal balustrade fence.

 

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

 

·     Due to the existing topography of the land and the need to provide appropriate levels for access to both the proposed emergency services facility and associated carpark, the proposal does not strictly comply.

·     Retaining walls are limited to 1.5m to 1.7m in maximum height and not located towards the rear of the site.

·     There are no adverse stormwater impacts identified.

·     The additional fill heights will be unlikely to result in any identifiable adverse impacts to the neighbouring properties particularly noting the fencing proposed, orientation of the site and existing building locations.

·     The fill areas will be required to be stabilized with appropriately designed engineered retaining walls.

 

(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:

 

Demolition of buildings AS 2601 – Clause 92

 

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

 

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

An existing ambulance station operates from part of the site (96 High Street).

 

The proposal is for a single storey ambulance station. The surrounding built form includes a mix of commercial premises and low rise residential dwellings. Considering the surrounding land uses and built form, the proposal will be compatible within the context and built form character of the existing area.

 

The proposal provides a 6.2m setback along the site's main frontage along High Street and a setback of 8.6m is provided from the site's western boundary, an 8.3m setback is provided from the site's eastern boundary and an 11.7m setback is provided from the rear boundary.

 

With regard to the likely impact on the existing streetscape, the proposal is technically not subject to the front setback controls under Development Control Plan 2013. The proposal has however adopted a front setback greater than the typical minimum 6.0m front setback alignment for a residential building fronting a classified road and has provided satisfactory landscaping.

 

The proposed ambulance station incorporates appropriate setbacks and a relatively modest built form when viewed from the public domain. The proposed scale and mass combined with the appropriate landscape treatment will enhance the appearance of the site and will ensure that the proposed ambulance station is consistent with the character of the immediate locality.

 

The building placement has also had satisfactory regard to the other existing developments in the locality and therefore the proposal will be unlikely to result in adverse impacts to the streetscape.

 

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 development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area.

 

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

 

The proposal does not have significant adverse lighting impacts.

 

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

 

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

 

Roads

The site has road frontage to High Street/Oxley Highway, Wauchope.

 

Adjacent to the site, High Street/Oxley Highway is a sealed public road under the care and control of RMS. High Street/Oxley Highway is an Urban Arterial/RMS State road with a 12.7m carriageway width within a 20m road reserve. The road formation includes parallel parking and (SA) upright kerb on both sides of the street. The site is fronted by a 1.2m wide concrete footpath.

 

Traffic and Transport

The subject property occupies approximately 2,358m², with a 40m frontage along High Street/Oxley Highway. Currently, the property is occupied by a residential dwelling (94 High Street) and an Ambulance Station (96 High Street).

 

The Oxley Highway has sufficient capacity to accommodate the development as proposed.

 

The application includes a Traffic Impact Assessment from PTC Consultants on 18 December 2017.  Findings of the study determined:

 

·     The DA seeks to redevelop the existing Wauchope Ambulance Station at 96 High Street, Wauchope, as part of the Health Infrastructures Rural Ambulance Infrastructure Reconfiguration (RAIR) program,

·     The existing ambulance station currently has a capacity of two ambulance vehicles. The redevelopment will increase the capacity to four ambulance vehicles, 1 ambulance SUV operational vehicle and one tyre changing facilities, ambulance washing facilities, and an increase from 5 to 12 FTE staff along with improved end-of-trip facilities. 6 external parking spaces are proposed on-site, inclusive of 1 accessible bay. This has been assessed to be adequate to meet the parking demands of the proposal,

·     Traffic generations associated with the immediate staff increase under the proposal are found to be negligible (anticipated net increase in 4 hourly trips). Trips associated with emergency responses have been assessed using NSW Ambulance projections from a similar-scale regional Ambulance Station, which is a similar rural station. The projections for the next 20 years, estimates that the hourly trip volumes will increase from 1.8 trips (currently, including return) to 2.6 trips per hour. This growth is driven by the growing regional population, which is the driver for this RAIR ambulance upgrade. In regards to traffic, these volumes are considered minor, and not expected to notably impact the local road conditions.

·     Public transportation is limited within the area; therefore, it is anticipated that most staff will drive to the station. However, the bus network connecting the Wauchope Region and Port Macquarie could be a viable alternative to transportation, which should be encouraged by building management,

·     Visibility between ambulances leaving the site and pedestrians and vehicles along High Street is compliant with AS2890. In addition to providing adequate visibility, the audio/visual warnings from ambulance sirens will accommodate a good degree of safety between ambulances and public,

·     It is understood that waste collection will be conducted on-street, which aligns with the general context of the area,

·     The architectural plans have been reviewed in the context of vehicular arrangements (AS2890, NSW Ambulance requirements and industry best practice). This review found that all elements including access, visibility, manoeuvrability and parking to be compliant and safe for vehicles and other road users, both internally and externally,

·     Based on the assessment, ptc. endorse this DA in the context of parking and traffic considerations.

·     In order to prevent insufficient site distance at the driveway, it is recommended that a “Keep Clear” zone and “No Stopping” signs be installed along the full frontage of the proposed site. This will improve the sight distance of exiting vehicles significantly;

·     The close proximity of the Wauchope District Memorial Hospital and the Wauchope Town Centre will lead to a high rate of walking. In order to ensure safety for pedestrians, any fencing or landscaping should be low in height and/or made with permeable materials.

 

The traffic study has been assessed by Council staff and deemed satisfactory.

 

Site Frontage & Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed through multiple access driveways to High Street/Oxley Highway. All accesses shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements. 

 

High Street/Oxley Highway is a Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) state classified road and will require concurrence from the RMS prior to works on this road. Details shall be provided as part of a Roads Act (Section 138) application to Council.  

 

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. 

 

Due to the type of development, car park circulation is required to enable vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward manner. Site plans show adequate area is available and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements. 

Refer to relevant recommended conditions of consent.

 

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site has two existing 20mm metered water services. Final water service sizing will need to be determined by a hydraulic consultant to suit the domestic and commercial components of the development, as well as fire service and backflow protection requirements in accordance with AS3500.

Refer to relevant recommended conditions of consent.

 

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is currently has two connections to Council’s sewer system. The development is to discharge all sewage to the junction connected to the existing sewer manhole within the site. The redundant sewer junction must be capped at the main. Engineering plans are required to detail how the building will avoid placing additional loads on the existing sewer infrastructure.

Refer to relevant recommended conditions of consent.

 

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards the rear and is currently un-serviced.

 

There are no easements for drainage available to service the site, however the roof level of the proposed development is sufficiently high to be drained via gravity to the kerb and gutter in High Street.

 

The nature of the site and topography means that surface water runoff cannot be drained via gravity to High Street. These areas naturally drain overland through the properties to the south.

 

In seeking an ideal drainage solution for the site, the landowner has sought to create an easement(s) for drainage over those lower downstream lots. Unfortunately, the Applicant has not been successful in gaining consent from the adjoining downstream landowners.

 

With no easement(s) for drainage available to the site, the applicant has the following options available:

 

1.  Seek to enforce the creation of an easement for drainage over downstream lots via the Land and Environment Court – this options has not been pursued by the applicant

2.  Utilise on-site absorption facilities to dispose of runoff on-site – site soil conditions are expected to be unfavourable, rendering such a proposal unlikely to be feasible. This options has not been explored by the applicant.

3.  Drain the site to the public drainage system adjacent to the site in High Street. Noting that the site does not naturally drain to High Street, charged and/or pump-out drainage system is required. This option has been utilised and is discussed in more detail below.

 

Stormwater from the proposed development is planned to be disposed via charged lines from the roof and pump-out system with back-up for the remainder of the site.

 

The charged roof drainage system will drain all roof areas via gravity to the kerb and gutter in High Street via a rainwater tank and suitably sized on-site detention facilities.

 

The remainder of the site is proposed to be drained to a pump-out system via a separate on-site stormwater detention system, from where discharge will be pumped up to the kerb and gutter in High Street.

 

The proposal to discharge to the pump-well via an on-site stormwater detention system results in flows to the pump-well being at a rate equivalent to pre-development flows. Hence, even in the event of a total pump failure (the risk of which is managed via the use of dual pumps and other mechanical safeguards as per AS3500), any overflows from the pump out system will only occur at a rate equivalent to the pre-development discharge rate.

 

Consequently and subject to the provision of an overflow mechanism that spreads any overflows uniformly along the length of the property, downstream properties will not see an increase in stormwater discharge as a consequence of the development.

 

A detailed site stormwater management plan will be required to be submitted for assessment with the Section 68 application and prior to the building works commencing.

 

Refer to relevant conditions of consent.

 

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

 

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

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

 

Soils

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

 

Air and microclimate

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

 

Flora and fauna

The proposal seeks the removal of two (2) trees to accommodate the proposed development. The trees include a Bunya Pine and a Hoop Pine located at the front of the site. Mid North Coast Tree Service completed an assessment on the trees and concluded in their report that each should be removed as they are within the footprint of the proposed ambulance station. There is no significant value identified with retaining the subject trees.

 

A Landscape Concept Plan prepared by Terras Landscape Architects has been submitted. The proposed landscaping comprising new trees, hedging, turf and planting. Along the site's High Street frontage, two hoop pine trees and two water gum trees are proposed, with turf planting and understorey planting proposed along the frontage of the ambulance station to assist in improving and enhancing the presentation of the site.

 

Along the eastern and western boundaries of the site, basket grass is proposed to provide a robust edging to the driveway and a narrow callistemon hedge is provided to the rear of the site to assist in appropriately screening the fence line from the adjoining neighbouring properties. To the rear of the site, a row of Backhousia myrtifolia is proposed, as well as two blueberry ash trees, to provide appropriate screening to the rear of the site.

 

The landscaping proposed is satisfactory.

 

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

Demolition and Construction Waste

 

The Applicant has advised that a waste management plan will be prepared by the builder during construction including site diagrams. The report will include the appropriate methods of disposal or excavated material, construction waste and recycling where appropriate.

 

Operational Waste

 

The Applicant has advised during the operations of the ambulance station, the Station Officer will supervise and follow up with the staff to ensure that the Waste Management procedures are followed in accordance with the Policy Directive –Waste Management Guidelines for Health Care Facilities – August 1998, Document Number PD2005_123.

 

Staff will dispose of waste from the point of generation to the waste holding area located in the site.

 

Waste will be collected by an external operator from a waste holding area on the Ambulance Station site which is secure and separate from the Plant Room. The Waste Area is a designated area where waste bins are kept. The frequency of general waste and recyclable waste collection will be as per current council arrangements for the local area.

 

Clinical Waste

 

Paramedics will dispose of waste, including clinical waste, at hospitals. This will reduce the amount that is returned to the Station.

 

Standard precautionary site management condition recommended.

 

Energy

The proposal includes measures to address energy efficiency and will be required to comply with the requirements of Section J of the Building Code of Australia.

 

No adverse impacts anticipated.

 

Noise and vibration

The Applicant has submitted details to address potential noise impacts with an Acoustic Assessment submitted prepared by Acoustic Studio. Identified noise impacts likely to result from the ambulance station are related to plant and mechanical equipment (principally the air conditioning plant and a pressure washer) and vehicle movements. It is noted that the external plant and equipment is proposed to be located on the High Street frontage of the site, away from the adjoining residential properties.

 

The Acoustic Assessment assesses the likely impact against the NSW Industrial Noise Policy Criteria, which Acoustic Studio consider to be the most stringent criteria.

In the absence of a noise survey, Acoustic Studio have applied the recommended background noise levels from Australian Standard 1055.3:1997

 

The assessment concludes that provided the recommendations detailed in this report are correctly implemented, it is anticipated that the proposed building will have no adverse noise impact at the nearest receivers and recommended internal noise levels within the ambulance station will be met for all areas.

 

It is noted that one of the recommendations includes a restriction on night time use of the pressure washer. Hours of operation will be restricted to between 7am to 8pm during Monday and Saturday and between 8am to 8pm on Sundays.

 

With regards to the use of sirens, ambulance drivers can decide whether to use ambulance sirens on a case-by-case basis. It is the practice of paramedics to minimise the use of sirens when it will cause a noise disturbance and the sirens are deemed unnecessary. It is noted that the site provides good sight distances for drivers which minimises the need for sirens.

 

No identifiable adverse impacts are therefore anticipated. The proposed hours of operation are acceptable and a condition is recommended to restrict construction to standard construction hours.

 

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

 

Safety, security and crime prevention

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

 

Social impacts in the locality

Given the nature of the proposed development and its’ location the proposal is unlikely to result in any adverse social impacts. Improved ambulance facilities is seen as creating a positive social impact for the locality.

 

Economic impact in the locality

 

No adverse impacts. A likely positive impact is that the development will maintain employment in the construction and health industry, which will lead to flow impacts such as expenditure in the area.

 

Site design and internal design

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

 

Construction

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

 

Cumulative impacts

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

 

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

 

The proposal is considered to be an appropriate response to the physical characteristics of the site, its immediate surrounding area and locality and the needs of the surrounding communities. The proposal is a suitable development outcome for this site.

 

Site constraints, including stormwater drainage disposal, has been adequately addressed by the Applicant during the assessment of the application and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

 

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

 

One (1) written submission has been received from a Solicitor on behalf of the owners of 21 Bruxner Avenue to the rear of the site following public exhibition of the application.

 

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

 

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

The proposed drainage easement through 21 Bruxner Avenue property along the western boundary is inappropriate.

In seeking an ideal drainage solution for the site, the landowner sought to create an easement(s) for drainage over those lower downstream lots, however has not been successful in gaining consent from the adjoining downstream landowners.

 

With no easement(s) for drainage available to the site, the Applicant has chosen the option to drain the site to the public drainage system adjacent to the site in High Street. Noting that the site does not naturally drain to High Street, charged and/or pump-out drainage system is required.

 

The charged roof drainage system will drain all roof areas via gravity to the kerb and gutter in High Street via a rainwater tank and suitably sized on-site detention facilities.

 

The remainder of the site is proposed to be drained to a pump-out system, via a separate on-site stormwater detention system, from where discharge will be pumped up to the kerb and gutter in High Street.

 

Refer to additional specialist comments in stormwater drainage addressed earlier in this report which concludes that this arrangement is acceptable subject to specific conditions of consent.

The creation of the easement would require excavation of 21 Bruxner Avenue’s concrete path and driveway causing disruption and inconvenience.

The easement could be more conveniently located adjacent to the rear boundaries of 21 Bruxner Avenue and the neighbouring property to the east at no. 19 Bruxner Avenue and run along the western boundary of 17 Bruxner Avenue exiting to Bruxner Avenue.

 

 

 

(e)     The Public Interest:

 

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

 

Ecologically Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle

 

Ecologically sustainable development requires the effective integration of economic and environmental considerations in decision-making processes.

 

The four principles of ecologically sustainable development are:

·          the precautionary principle,

·          intergenerational equity,

·          conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity,

·          improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms.

 

The principles of ESD require that a balance needs to be struck between the man-made development and the need to retain the natural vegetation. Based on the assessment provided in the report and with recommended conditions of consent, it is considered an appropriate balance has been struck.

 

4.       DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

 

·    Development contributions are normally required towards augmentation of town water supply and head works and sewer services headworks under Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993. However, under Clause 2.7 of Council’s Contribution Policy, Council cannot levy contributions for water and sewer on essential facilities. As a result, Section 64 contributions will not apply.

·    With regard to S94A Levy Contributions, these normally apply to all land within the Port Macquarie-Hastings LGA. The Contribution Plan enables Council to levy Section 94A developer contributions for new and upgraded road networks, traffic management facilities, car parking and town centre improvement works. However, exercising the discretion afforded under the Act (ie to not impose a condition requiring the payment of a Section 94A levy), Section 94A contributions will not apply for the following reasons:

·    An ambulance station is an important public facility in its own right;

·   The proposed new ambulance station will not generate any demand for new services; and

·   The ambulance facility is a substantial investment in social infrastructure to meet the needs of the local community and is considered to be worthy of an exemption from paying this contribution.

 

5.       CONCLUSION

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Attachments

 

1View. DA2018 - 48.1 Plans

2View. DA2018 - 48.1 Easement Offers

3View. DA 2018 - 48.1 Recommended Conditions

4View. DA2018 - 48.1 Submission - Priest for Fowler

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

11/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

11/04/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

11/04/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

11/04/2018