Development Assessment Panel

 

Business Paper

 

date of meeting:

 

Wednesday 13 June 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

28/03/18

11/04/18

26/04/18

09/05/18

23/05/18

Paul Drake

P

P

P

P

P

Robert Hussey

P

P

P

P

P

David Crofts

(alternate member)

 

 

 

 

 

Dan Croft

(Acting Director Development & Environment)

Clinton Tink

(Acting GM Development Assessment

(alternates)

- Director Development & Environment

- Development Assessment Planner

 

 

P

 

 

P

P

 

P

P

 

P

P

 

P

 

Key: P =  Present

         A  =  Absent With Apology

         =  Absent Without Apology

 

 

 


Development Assessment Panel Meeting

Wednesday 13 June 2018

 

Items of Business

 

 

Item       Subject                                                                                                      Page

 

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

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

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

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

05           DA2018 - 132.1 Additions To Dwelling At Lot 2 DP 242597, No. 22 Honeysuckle Road, Bonny Hills................................................................................................................ 17

06           DA2017 - 885.1 Tourist And Visitor Accommodation - Lot 331 DP828346, Lot 24 DP 22883, 14-20 Flynn Street, Port Macquarie ........................................................................... 32  

07           General Business

 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      13/06/2018

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 23 May 2018 be confirmed.

 


MINUTES

Development Assessment Panel Meeting

                                                                                                                                  23/05/2018

 

 

 

 

PRESENT

 

Members:

Paul Drake

Robert Hussey

Clinton Tink

 

Other Attendees:

Dan Croft

Fiona Tierney

David Troemel

 

 

 

The meeting opened at 2:05pm.

 

 

01       ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

The Acknowledgement of Country was delivered.

 

 

02       APOLOGIES

Nil.

 

 

03       CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

CONSENSUS:

That the Minutes of the Development Assessment Panel Meeting held on 9 May 2018 be confirmed.

 

 

04      DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

 

There were no disclosures of interest presented.

 

 

 

 

05       DA2018 - 139.1 Fence - Lot 9 DP 20480, No 15 Illaroo Road, Lake Cathie

Speakers:

Margaret Fraser Martin (objector)

Scott Marchant (applicant)

 

 

CONSENSUS:

 

That DA2018 – 139.1 for a fence at Lot 9, DP20480, No.15 Illaroo Road, Lake Cathie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

 

06       DA2018 - 115.1 Change Of Use From Panel Beater Workshop To Recreation Facility (Indoor) - Lot 2 DP 3749, No. 148 Nancy Bird Walton Drive, Kew

 

Speakers:

Peter Newman (objector)

Donna Clarke (objector)

Julie Bellamy (applicant)

 

 

The Panel was unable to reach a consensus.

 

For: Paul Drake and Robert Hussey

 

That DA 2018 – 115.1 for a change of use from panel beater workshop to a recreation facility (Indoor) at Lot 2, DP 3749, No. 148 Nancy Bird Walton Drive, Kew, be refused for the following reasons:

 

1.         4.15(1)(a)(i) - The plans and Statement of Environmental Effects are deficient and inadequate.

          4.15(1)(a)(iii) – None compliance with Port Macquarie Hastings Development Control Plan 2013 as follows:

1)    2.5.3.3 lack of parking and onsite manoeuvrability.

2)    2.5.3.2 inefficient driveway access to the rear subject site and questionable transition into downslope.

3)    2.5.3.15/16 unacceptable reliance on existing parking/access arrangements, alternative parking is designed and allocated to other occupancies on overall site and the proposal is not a dance studio as assessed in terms of parking.

2.         4.15C(1)(b) The development creates adverse impacts on adjacent property in terms of the following:

1)    Unacceptable noise impacts on adjoining residential motel.

2)    Reliance on closing of facing doors at peak times is not policeable.

3)    No internal acoustic mitigating features.

4)    The proposed limits on dB levels is not policeable.

5)    Fails to meet zone objectives.

3.         4.15C(1)(c) The site is unsuitable for the following reasons:

1)    Given the location at the rear, poor access for clients.

2)    Given front parking is legally unavailable.

3)    Alternate premises are available at the front (vacant coffee shop) more suitable for 6 patrons.

4)    The 230m² floor space will encourage an increase in numbers.

4.         The development is not in the public interest due to adjoining conflicting uses.

5.         The site is not suitable for the development.

6.         The acoustic assessment was inadequate.

 

Against:  Clinton Tink disagreed with the majority decision on the basis that the determination of the development application should be deferred to allow the applicant time to respond to the issues listed above.

 

 

 

07       GENERAL BUSINESS

 

 

07.01     Item 7 - 9 May 2018

Robert Hussey tabled a letter providing further comment on Item 7 of the DAP agenda dated 9 May 2018, assessment process, conditions and current practices. A copy of the letter was also attached to the relevant Development Application file.

 

 

 

The meeting closed at 3:30pm.

 

 

 

 

 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      13/06/2018

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      13/06/2018

 

 

Item:          05

 

Subject:     DA2018 - 132.1 Additions To Dwelling At Lot 2 DP 242597, No. 22 Honeysuckle Road, Bonny Hills

Report Author: Deb McKenzie

 

 

 

Applicant:               T Kennelly & P Kennelly

Owner:                    T Kennelly & P Kennelly

Estimated Cost:     $68,000

Parcel no:               9719

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2018-132.1 for additions to existing dwelling (carport and extension to balcony) at Lot 2 DP 242597, No. 22 Honeysuckle Road, Bonny Hills, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

 

 

Executive Summary

 

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

 

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

 

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

 

The site has an area of 575.4m². The site contains a single, two storey dwelling with double garage. It is known to be used for holiday accommodation.

 

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

 

http://pmhq-v-gtx01.pmhc.nsw.gov.au/Geocortex/Essentials/GXE471/REST/TempFiles/EBP%20Layout.jpg?guid=7e6f198f-5fa9-4e7a-a9e1-49c79203eb51&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=b57e83d6-2958-4474-a0b3-23a9e2b51788&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

 

·        The site contains a single, two storey dwelling with double garage.

·        The building is a brick and tile construction.

·        Proposed carport (for housing a caravan) and balcony addition are located on northern side of the dwelling.

·        Application seeks variation to side boundary setback (nil - 50mm) to provide for new caravan parking area.

·        First floor balcony is to be setback 900mm from northern boundary with 1.7m high semi-transparent privacy screen.

·        Carport dimensions are 3.36m wide x 2.77m high.

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·        26th February 2018 – DA lodged.

·        14th March – 27th March 2018 – DA publicly notified. Three submissions received during notification period.

·        28th March 2018 – Submitters advised to lodge land use complaint separately with Development Compliance section of Council. In particular, submissions were received regarding use of the property for holiday/tourist accommodation. While the use of the premises for holiday/tourist accommodation is noted, it does not rely or link to this application in terms of work proposed. For example, compliance action may result in the holiday/tourist use ceasing, while this DA could still consider the carport and deck as additions to a dwelling.

·        CRM records indicate two land use complaints lodged.

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

 

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

 

(a)     The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i)      any Environmental Planning Instrument:

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

The subject land is not identified as being potentially contaminated and is suitable for the intended use.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

 

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

 

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

 

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

o   To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

 

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

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

·        Clause 4.3, no change to the overall height of the building.

·        Clause 4.4, no change to the gross floor area of the dwelling.

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

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

 

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

 

None.

 

(iii)    any Development Control Plan in force:

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

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

 

Requirements

Proposed

Complies

3.2.2.2

Articulation zone:

Min. 3m front setback

An entry feature or portico

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

A window box treatment

A bay window or similar feature

An awning or other feature over a window

A sun shading feature

No elements within the articulation zone.

 

N/A

Front setback (Residential not R5 zone):

Min. 6.0m classified road

Min. 4.5m local road

Min. 3.0m secondary road

Min. 2.0m Laneway

Front building line of existing dwelling is not altered by the proposal. The carport is setback behind the existing building line.

Yes

3.2.2.3

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

Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided

No change. The carport building line is 1m behind the existing building line (ie 5.5m from the front boundary).

Yes

 

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

No change.

Yes

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

No change. No additional driveway or new crossover is proposed for the carport. This is acceptable as this is a low traffic area that can be accessed via the existing driveway.

Yes

3.2.2.4

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

No change.

Yes

3.2.2.5

Side setbacks:

Ground floor = min. 0.9m

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

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

The northern setback is proposed to be nil to 50mm. A variation to the DCP is requested. See assessment below.

Length of the wall on the boundary line is less than 12m (8.9m) long. Complies.

 

First floor balcony setback is 900mm from the northern boundary. A 1.7m semi-transparent screen is proposed along the length of the balcony. This is considered acceptable in this case as:

-     The southern façade of the northern neighbour will not be overshadowed by the extended balcony

-     The balcony does not overlook the rear private open space of the northern neighbour (heavily screened by mature landscaping)

-     The balcony will overlook an adjoining enclosed carport.

No, but acceptable in this case.

3.2.2.6

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

No change at rear of site.

Yes

3.2.2.10

Privacy:

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

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

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

Privacy is addressed in the proposal via the installation of a 1.7m high, semi-transparent screen, located 900mm from the northern boundary. The balcony is 2.8m above the ground and approximately 9m long.

 

Visual and acoustic privacy concerns have been raised by the northern neighbours. This is due to the holiday letting of the house, particularly to large groups of people (ie due to the size of the property being 4 bedrooms with media room and craft room, living and separate lounge room with large rumpus room downstairs).

 

The submission is not supported for reasons outlined above.

Acceptable in this case. 

 

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

No requirements.

N/A

2.3.3.2

1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage

None proposed.

N/A

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

None proposed.

Yes

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

No retaining wall front fence combination proposed.

N/A

2.3.3.8

Removal of hollow bearing trees

No tree removal proposed.

N/A

2.6.3.1

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

No tree removal proposed.

N/A

2.4.3

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

No requirements. Stormwater from balcony roof to be connected to existing dwelling’s system.

Condition of consent to require plans of stormwater collection and disposal from the rear yard of the site to be provided.

Bushfire – BAL 29. Condition of consent applied.

No requirements

2.5.3.2

New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads

None proposed.

N/A

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

None proposed as part of the application.
No requirements as carport only to be used for parking of caravans.

N/A

2.5.3.3

Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1.

1 space per single dwelling (behind building line)

No change.

Yes

2.5.3.11

Section 94 contributions

No. Single dwelling only.

N/A

2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13

Landscaping of parking areas

No requirements.

N/A

2.5.3.14

Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified

No change.

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

No change.

Yes

2.5.3.17

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

See above. Collection and disposal of stormwater from the site to be reviewed as part of the Section 68 application. The site is capable of providing a pit and pipe system from the rear yard connecting to Council’s stormwater system along Honeysuckle Road.

Yes

 

The proposal seeks to vary the DCP provision relating to side boundary setback for the carport on the northern boundary. The application includes a request for the variation from the applicant, addressing reasons for the variation.

 

The objectives are as follows:

 

·   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 boundary wall is of solid construction, minimising the need for maintenance in the long term.

·    The southern wall of the adjoining two storey dwelling to the north does not contain habitable rooms with window openings in the southern façade (Note: the two windows in the southern façade of the northern neighbour are amenities and obscured glass).

·    The adjoining property to the north has a carport with semi-solid privacy screen within 900mm of the dividing boundary fence. The height of that structure is marginally lower than the proposed wall height.

·    The existing dividing fence is constructed of asbestos fibre. Its whole or partial replacement along the northern boundary of the site would be beneficial in the long term.

·    Given the low traffic use of the southern setback to the northern dwelling, the proposed wall does not present as an overbearing feature for the northern neighbour.

·    The balcony extension on top of the carport does not overlook the rear private open space area of the northern dwelling. In particular, the area is well screened by mature vegetation planted along the boundary of the two properties.

·    The balcony extension overlooks the carport of the northern neighbour (located 1m forward of the proposed carport building line).

 

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

 

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

 

None.

 

iv)     any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

 

New South Wales Coastal Policy:

 

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

 

Demolition of buildings AS 2601:

 

Any demolition of parts of the existing structure is to comply with the Australian Standard and is recommended to be conditioned.

 

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

 

Water supply, sewer and stormwater

Services, as existing. No additional loads on water or sewer as a result of this application.

 

A concern about stormwater flows on the northern side of the dwelling (location of the new carport) has been raised during notification of the development.

Flows from the rear of the site have been considered and are capable of complying using a combination of pits and pipes. Detailed design to be submitted with the 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.

 

Flora and fauna

No vegetation to be removed as part of this application.

 

Waste

A concern regarding waste disposal from the holiday use of the site was lodged as part of the notification of the application. The use of the dwelling as a single dwelling is capable of complying with Council’s policy in this regard. Satisfactory arrangements are in place for storage and collection of domestic waste and recyclables. No requirements as part of this application.

 

The use of the premises for tourist/holiday accommodation will need to be investigated and addressed as a separate compliance matter.

 

Bushfire

The site is located within a recognised bushfire location due to the vegetation on the eastern side of Honeysuckle Road. A bushfire assessment submitted with the DA documents proposes a construction level of BAL level 29. This concurs with previous assessments for this site. A condition of consent is to apply.

 

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 and economic impacts in the locality

The proposal, being a carport and balcony addition to an existing dwelling, will not result in undue impacts in the locality, subject to conditions of consent.

 

Concerns raised regarding the holiday letting and commercial use of the property are to be investigated separately to this application.

 

Site design and internal design

No adverse impacts likely, subject to conditions of consent.

 

Cumulative impacts

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Loss of privacy to the northern neighbour – screen insufficient – should be solid structure

The proposed screen is to be located along the northern edge of the balcony, 900mm from the boundary. It faces the southern façade of the adjoining dwelling, overlooking an enclosed carport. Privacy is addressed previously in this report. Normal domestic use of the dwelling should not raise acoustics issues that would warrant refusal of this application. The holiday letting matter is to be investigated by Council’s Compliance Team.

The height, length and design of the screen is considered acceptable. The material used is to be non-combustible to comply with bushfire construction requirements.

Issues related to use of site:

Noise impacts from use of the site large commercial holiday accommodation.

Future maintenance of large wall on boundary – should be brick.

Garbage – use of neighbours bins due to overflow.

Unlawful intrusions to retrieve balls etc.

Social impact of use of dwelling.

 

The commercial use of the site as holiday home is acknowledged. Objectors were advised, by phone and in writing, to forward any land use complaints to Council’s Compliance Team for follow-up. Council’s Compliance Section are to investigate the use of the site separately to this application.

 

If there is any non-compliance from a land use perspective it should be investigated and actioned as a separate matter to the consideration of this application.

 

The issue of noise emissions, intrusions, garbage etc are not specific to the proposed development. The reasonable use of the site as a single dwelling-house does not raise any issue in relation to these matters.

Stormwater disposal – cross boundary flows.

The proposed development is capable of collecting and disposing of stormwater without any additional cross boundary flows or impact. In particular, stormwater flows will not change to that which occurs at present as part of pre-development flows.

The detail design of the stormwater will occur as part of the s68 application.

Carport unlikely to be used due to size, slope of access.

The average width of a caravan is 2.3m. The carport is at least 3m wide (clear width). This is acceptable for this use. The height of the port is 2.77m. This is also considered acceptable. The skill of any driver using the space is not a planning matter. The site is accessible, noting that Council does not ordinarily require separate driveways for access to these spaces as they are not the primary parking areas on site and are only used on an intermittent basis.

 

(e)     The Public Interest:

 

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

 

4.       DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

 

Not applicable in this case.

 

a)             

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 - 132.1 Plans

2View. DA2018 - 132.1 Recommended Conditions

3View. DA2018 - 132.1 Submission - Doyle for Martin

4View. DA2018 - 132.1 Submission - Martin

5View. DA2018 - 132.1 Submission - Nossiter

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


AGENDA                                              Development Assessment Panel      13/06/2018

 

 

Item:          06

 

Subject:     DA2017 - 885.1 Tourist And Visitor Accommodation - Lot 331 DP828346, Lot 24 DP 22883, 14-20 Flynn Street, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Benjamin Roberts

 

 

 

Applicant:               Builtsmart Group Pty Ltd

Owner:                    Permanent Trustee Australia Ltd

Estimated Cost:     $10,942,792

Parcel no:               6779, 6782

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

1.       That DA2017 – 885.1 for tourist and visitor accommodation at Lot 331, DP 828346 and Lot 24, DP 22883, No. 14-20 Flynn Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

2.       That the Koala Plan of Management be approved in granting consent to the development application.

 

Executive Summary

 

This report considers a development application for tourist and visitor accommodation 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, five (5) submissions have been received.

 

 

1.       BACKGROUND

 

Existing sites features and surrounding and existing development

 

The site comprises two separate parcels being Lot 331 DP 828346 and Lot 24 DP 22883 with a combined land area of 18,053.87m2. The property is relatively flat with Wrights Creek traversing its eastern portion.

 

The site currently comprises a four (4) storey serviced apartment building fronting Flynn Street, comprising sixty (60) serviced apartments in three blocks with basement parking, swimming pool and children’s playground area.

 

These existing buildings and amenities were constructed as part of the first stage of a development consent issued by Council on 19 February 2003 for a tourist accommodation complex (DA2002/920). This consent provides for a further 4 detached buildings (4 storeys in height)) which have not yet commenced. A copy of the approved site plan is reproduced below for reference:

 

 

The current development application seeks to modify the remaining development approval by incorporating 59 new villa style apartment buildings with at-grade parking in lieu of the remaining stages of the commenced development consent.

 

The site is highly modified in terms of vegetation however scattered trees exist throughout with evidence of remnant riparian vegetation adjoining Wrights Creek.

 

Adjoining the site to the east is a mixture of both 3 and 4 storey walk up style apartment and commercial buildings fronting Pacific Drive and Flynn Street. Adjoining the site immediately to the north is Council owned land containing the Wrights Creek riparian corridor. Adjoining development to the northeast comprises a mixture of 3 to 4 storey unit buildings. Adjoining development to the northwest is 3 storey unit complex with single storey dwellings further along the northern side of Flynn Street. Adjoining the site to the west is a combination of both 2 and 3 storey unit complexes. Adjoining the site to the south is a manufactured home estate often referred to as “Taskers Village” comprising single storey cabin style manufactured homes.

 

The site is zoned R3 Medium Density and E2 Environmental Conservation 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=dd3b4ce8-676e-43d5-9a76-4338c0db45d8&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=c1382531-20fa-4633-b6aa-b02a953abffa&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

2.       DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

 

·    Selective tree removal, including 8 Koala feed trees.

·    Construction of fifty-nine (59) cabin style villas for tourist accommodation use.

·    Construction of at-grade parking.

·    Internal alterations to existing building to convert existing sales area into two 1xbedroom units, convert existing reception area to administration area and convert existing recreation area and a unit into a sales area.

·    Construction of ancillary café, reception and office building.

·    Construction of ancillary recreational facilities including BBQ and utility pavilions.

·    Construction of ancillary maintenance and staff amenities.  

·    Retention and enhancement of riparian corridor adjoining Wrights Creek.

 

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

 

Application Chronology

 

·    4 October 2017 – Application lodged.

·    26 October to 24 November 2017 – Public exhibition.

·    12 October 2017 – Referral to NSW Rural Fire Service.

·    12 October 2017 – Referral to NSW Office of Water.

·    20 October 2017 – Applicant advised that flood impact assessment deficient. Additional information required.

·    17 November 2017 – Revised flood impact assessment lodged.

·    21 November 2017 – Additional information request to applicant.

·    28 November 2017 – Bushfire Safety Authority received from NSW Rural Fire Service.

·    11 December 2017 – Applicant advised that revised flood impact assessment still deficient. Additional information required.

·    19 January 2018 – Additional information request. Stormwater concept modelling and onsite detention facility details.

·    23 January 2018 – Revised flood impact assessment, cost breakdown, Arborist report, Koala Plan of Management, revised plans lodged.

·    1 February 2018 – Additional information request. Traffic, parking, compensatory plantings and Asset Protection Zone conflicts.

·    6 February 2018 – Revised stormwater management plan with details.

·    13 February 2018 – Additional information request. Ecological assessment deficient, Asset Protection Zone requirements conflict with compensatory replanting proposed under Koala Plan of Management, Vegetation Management Plan deficient.

·    14 February 2018 – Traffic movement data provided.

·    6 March 2018 – Traffic and parking response with revised plans provided.

·    8 March 2018 – Revised ecological assessment provided.

·    14 March 2018 – Revised Koala Plan of Management provided.

·    16 March 2018 – Koala Plan of Management referred to NSW Planning.

·    16 March 2018 – Bushfire advice provided surrounding compensatory replanting.

·    19 April 2018 – Further flooding advice lodged.

·    30 April 2018 – Applicant advised that revised flood impact assessment is still deficient and fails to address previous concerns.

·    2 May 2018 – Advice from NSW Department of Planning advising Koala Plan of Management approved.  

·    14 May 2018 – Advice from NSW Office of Water with General Terms of Approval.

·    15 May 2018 – Additional flood information lodged.

·    16 May 2018 – Applicant advised information still deficient and that additional data and information to be incorporated into a revised flood impact assessment.

·    21 May 2018 – Revised flood impact assessment lodged.

·    22 May 2018 – Applicant advised flooding impacts still not adequately addressed.

·    1 June 2018 – Advice from applicant and revised plans received with villas (V60, V61 and V62) on the eastern side of Wrights Creek removed from application.

 

3.       STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

 

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

 

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

 

(a)     The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i)      any Environmental Planning Instrument:

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

The land is greater than one hectare in size and this policy applies.

 

The policy outlines a three step process for determining a development application, as follows:

·  Is the land potential koala habitat (Clause 7)?

·  Is the land core koala habitat (Clause 8)?

·  Can development consent be granted in relation to core koala habitat (Clause 9)?

 

Consistent with clause 7 of this policy and before a Council may grant consent to an application for consent to carry out development on land to which this Part applies, it must satisfy itself whether or not the land is potential koala habitat.

 

Potential koala habitat is defined as:

 

“potential koala habitat means areas of native vegetation where the trees of the types listed in Schedule 2 constitute at least 15% of the total number of trees in the upper or lower strata of the tree component”.

 

Trees listed in Schedule 2 are:

 

Scientific Name

Common Name

Eucalyptus tereticornis

Forest red gum

Eucalyptus microcorys

Tallowwood

Eucalyptus punctata

Grey Gum

Eucalyptus viminalis

Ribbon or manna gum

Eucalyptus camaldulensis

River red gum

Eucalyptus haemastoma

Broad leaved scribbly gum

Eucalyptus signata

Scribbly gum

Eucalyptus albens

White box

Eucalyptus populnea

Bimble box or poplar box

Eucalyptus robusta

Swamp mahogany

 

Of the schedule 2 species both Tallowwood and Swamp mahogany were recorded on the site. There were 21 Tallowwoods and 31 Swamp Mahogany trees recorded to which the ecologist concluded they were likely to constitute 15% of the total number of trees and therefore qualify as potential koala habitat.

 

Consistent with clause 8 of this policy and before a Council may grant consent to an application to carry out development on land to which this Part applies, to which it is satisfied is a potential koala habitat, it must satisfy itself whether or not the land is core koala habitat. A council may satisfy itself as to whether or not land is core koala habitat only on information obtained by it, or by the applicant, from a person with appropriate qualifications and experience in biological science and fauna survey and management.

 

Core koala habitat is defined as follows:

 

“core koala habitat means an area of land with a resident population of koalas, evidenced by attributes such as breeding females (that is, females with young) and recent sightings of and historical records of a population”.

 

Based on historical information and information provided by an appropriately qualified person engaged by the applicant, there is anecdotal evidence that there is a resident koala on the site and Council is satisfied that the land is core koala habitat. 

 

If the Council is satisfied that the land is core koala habitat, it must comply with clause 9. This clause provides that before Council may grant consent to a development application for consent to carry out development on land to which this part applies, there must be a plan of management prepared and the Council’s determination of the development application must not be inconsistent with the plan of management.

 

The application was supported by a Koala Plan of Management (KPOM) prepared by Biolink Ecological Consultants which has been prepared in accordance with the published guidelines. The KPOM lodged was revised following a request by Council to address concerns surrounding proposed offset replanting’s and conflict with required Asset Protection Zones (APZ). Consistent with clause 13, the revised KPOM, dated March 2018, was referred to and approved by the Director of NSW Department of Planning. The Departments letter advises Council to ensure conditions of consent reflect the management provisions outlined in the Part B of the KPOM and the action plan and monitoring program as detailed in parts five and six of the associated Vegetation Management Plan (VMP). Suitable conditions have been recommended reinforcing that these provisions form part of any consent issued.

 

The Department letter also pointed out that the KPOM indicates a total of eight primary koala feed trees will be removed, while supporting information dated 23 January 2018 indicates eleven primary koala feed trees will be removed. The Department advised Council to ensure that prior to determining the development application, the total number of primary koala feed trees to be removed be confirmed and that all primary koala feed trees to be removed are replaced at the specified three to one replacement ratio.

 

A review of the information provided and referenced has confirmed that eight (8) koala feed trees are proposed to be removed consistent with that stipulated in the KPOM and the tree removal/retention plan. Specifically koala trees to be removed are those numbered 25, 26 (comprising a clump of 6 trees) and 44 as indicated in the tree/removal retention plan. The supporting information prepared by Ann Clements and dated 23 January 2018, referenced by the Department, is outdated. Specifically the proposal was revised to incorporate a change to footing and pier design of cabins enabling retention of additional koala food trees. 

 

Consistent with clause 9 and via the imposition of conditions, Council staff are satisfied that the development proposal is not inconsistent with the koala plan of management.     

 

Council staff do not have delegation to approve a KPOM and hence the recommendation for DAP to approve this aspect (ie DAP has delegation to approve KPOMs).

 

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.64 – Advertising and Signage

No signage or advertising proposed. Internal signage conditioned to be installed for environmental/educational awareness will not be visible from the public domain and is considered consistent with the aims and objectives of this policy.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 71 – Coastal Protection

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 71 – Coastal Protection and Clause 5.5 of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011. The site is located within a coastal zone as defined in accordance with clause 4 of SEPP 71.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In particular, the site is located within an area zoned for medium density residential purposes and the riparian corridor is zoned for environmental conservation and shall be protected and enhanced. The requirements of this SEPP are therefore satisfied.

 

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

The proposal does not contain any dwellings and is not BASIX affected development.  

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 

Consistent with clause 45 the site contains no easements for electricity or electricity supply infrastructure.

 

Consistent with clause 104 the proposal is not traffic generating development for the purpose of this policy.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011

Consistent with clause 20 the proposal is not regionally significant development.

 

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

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

·    Clause 2.2, the subject site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential and E2 Environmental Conservation. The proposed building development is contained to the R3 zoned land. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R3 zone landuse table, tourist and visitor accommodation is a permissible landuse with consent. The proposed café, recreational facilities, reception space and sales room are all ancillary to the primary tourist and visitor accommodation use.

Adjoining the existing building to the east there is an existing driveway and access partly within the E2 zoned land. This driveway is proposed to be formalised by providing a porous paving with access to staff and visitor parking. The existing driveway and access serving the tourist and visitor accommodation is considered to be an existing use under division 4.11 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. Consistent with Part 5, clause 43 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000, a consent may be sought for the alteration and intensification of an existing use. It is considered that providing porous paving to the existing driveway and provision of access to staff and visitor parking is an alteration and intensification to the existing use and is permissible with consent.

The objectives of the R3 zone are as follows:

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

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

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 R3 zone objectives as it is a permissible landuse and is compatible with the character of the surrounding medium density residential environment.

The objectives of the E2 zone are as follows:

To protect, manage and restore areas of high ecological, scientific, cultural or aesthetic values.

To prevent development that could destroy, damage or otherwise have an adverse effect on those values.

To protect coastal wetlands and littoral rainforests.

To protect land affected by coastal processes and environmentally sensitive land.

To prevent development that adversely affects, or would be adversely affected by, coastal processes.

To enable development of public works and environmental facilities where such development would not have an overall detrimental impact on ecological, scientific, cultural or aesthetic values.

In accordance with clause 2.3(2), the proposal is consistent with the E2 zone objectives in that protection and rehabilitation of the Wright Creek riparian zone is proposed. No buildings are proposed in the E2 zone. The alteration and intensification of the existing driveway and access is limited to the area to which the existing access and driveway is located. Only a very small part of the visitor and staff parking spaces are located in the E2 zone along on the western side of the access driveway. Consistent with the findings of the flora and fauna impact assessment these works will result in no adverse environmental impact to the Wrights Creek riparian corridor.    

·    Clause 2.7, the part demolition of the existing building for internal alterations forms part of this development application seeking consent.

·    Clause 4.1, no subdivision is proposed. A condition of consent is recommended requiring lot consolidation. The minimum lot size provision applicable to the land is 1000m2. The consolidated lot would exceed the minimum lot size standard.

·    Clause 4.3, the maximum overall height of all buildings proposed above ground level (existing) comply with the maximum building height limit of 11.5m applying to the land.

·        

·    Clause 4.4, the floor space ratio of the proposal (inclusive of the existing apartment building) is 0.49:1.0, which complies with the maximum 1:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

 

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

·                      

·    Clause 7.3, the site is mapped as within the “Flood planning area” on the Flood Planning Map as illustrated below:

 

 

Consistent with this clause, development consent must not be granted to development on land to which this clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that the development:

 

(a)  is compatible with the flood hazard of the land, and

(b)  is not likely to significantly adversely affect flood behaviour resulting in detrimental increases in the potential flood affectation of other development or properties, and

(c)  incorporates appropriate measures to manage risk to life from flood, and

(d)  is not likely to significantly adversely affect the environment or cause avoidable erosion, siltation, destruction of riparian vegetation or a reduction in the stability of river banks or watercourses, and

(e)  is not likely to result in unsustainable social and economic costs to the community as a consequence of flooding.

 

The application was supported by a flooding assessment report prepared by GHD dated September 2017. Numerous additional information requests were made to the applicant in an attempt to quantify flood risk and flood impact of the proposed development consistent with Councils adopted flood policy. The most recent flood assessment report prepared by GHD dated May 2018 supports the application.

 

The site is impacted by localised flooding stemming from the Wrights Creek catchment. The flood characteristics applicable to this site are detailed under the Wrights Creek Flood Study (2007). This flood study and model has been used as the basis of assessment of the development from a floodplain management perspective. The 2007 flood study and model has been used by the consultant to generate a localised TUFLOW model to assess both the impacts of the additional cabins within flood prone areas and evacuation of the site. The TUFLOW model has been updated by incorporating additional feature survey and localised floodplain details.

 

The development is required to meet the provisions of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Flood Policy (2015). The Flood Policy contains the relevant flood related planning controls applicable to the proposed development. In this regard the development must meet the following prescriptive controls:

 

·    Floor Level

·    Flood Proofing

·    Flood Impact on Other Properties

·    Site Access and Flood Evacuation Requirements

 

Noting that the three villas (V60, V61 and V62) on the eastern side of Wrights Creek no longer form part of this development application it is considered that:

 

·    The proposal is compatible with the flood hazard of the land.

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

·    The proposal incorporates measures to manage risk to life from flood.

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

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

·    The impacts of the development on the floodplain are manageable and that no adverse impacts will be experienced both on the subject site and on adjoining land.

 

Specific conditions have been recommended to ensure flooding impacts are managed in an appropriate fashion. Matters that are capable of being demonstrated to Council prior to the issue of any construction certificate and are recommended as consent conditions include:

 

·    Finished floor level confirmation on numerous ancillary structures including the café building and laundry/staffroom building.

·    Specifications and details of the porous pavement material for the driveway and parking located on the eastern side of the existing resort structure to ensure it is appropriate given its located partially within designated floodway.

·    Confirmation that no obstructions or land reshaping will occur for the proposed driveway located on the eastern side of the existing resort structure.

·    Submission of a detailed flood evacuation plan.

 

The above requirements are considered achievable with minimal to little change to the design. In particular, the majority of the development meets the necessary floor levels or requires minimal change to meet the floor levels (ie floor levels on some buildings located closer to the creek will need to be raised approx. 1m) - refer to conditions of consent on required floor levels and site survey plan for context. 

 

·    Clause 7.4, consistent with subclause 2 this provision does not apply as the land is below the flood planning level. Refer to comments above under clause 7.3.

·                      

·    Clause 7.5, the site is not mapped as a “Koala habitat area” on the Koala Habitat Map. This clause is not applicable. Refer to comments under State Environmental Planning Policy 44 – koala habitat protection heading.

 

·    Clause 7.13, provides that development consent must not be granted to development unless the consent authority is satisfied that any of the following services that are essential for the proposed development are available or that adequate arrangements have been made to make them available when required:

 

(a)  the supply of water,

 

Comments: Reticulated water supply is existing and available. Council’s water supply section are satisfied that adequate arrangements will be made for the supply of water expected to be generated from the development. Specifically consent conditions have been recommended requiring final water service sizing to be determined by a hydraulic consultant consistent with the requirements of Australian Standard 3500: Plumbing and Drainage with details to be provided as part of the infrastructure construction certificate. 

 

(b)  the supply of electricity,

 

Comments: Electricity supply is existing and available. Council is satisfied that satisfactory arrangements will be made with the electricity service provider to accommodate the proposed development. 

 

(c)  the disposal and management of sewage,

 

Comments: Reticulated sewer supply is existing and available. Council’s sewer supply section are satisfied that adequate capacity is available and arrangements will be made for connection and disposal of sewage expected to be generated from the development. Specifically consent conditions have been recommended requiring sewer reticulation details to be provided as part of the infrastructure construction certificate application. 

 

(d)  stormwater drainage or on-site conservation,

 

Comments: A stormwater management plan has been submitted demonstrating how the site is proposed to be drained to Wrights Creek. The proposal includes the provision of a number of proprietary gross pollution traps which have been sized to treat stormwater runoff such that the site meets the discharge parameters of AUSPEC D7. Conceptual modelling has been submitted to demonstrate compliance in this regard.

 

The stormwater management plan also demonstrated how on-site stormwater detention facilities can be incorporated into the proposed development, providing two options. In particular, the plan indicates that the required onsite detention volume can be accommodated within either a large end of line basin beneath the common driveway area or within numerous individual tanks located within the deck area of each proposed holiday unit. Either solution is acceptable from an AUSPEC compliance perspective.

 

Council’s stormwater engineer is satisfied that adequate arrangements will be made for stormwater drainage and onsite detention for the proposed development. Specifically consent conditions have been recommended requiring a detailed site stormwater management plan to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application and prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

(e)  suitable road access.

 

Comments: Suitable road access is existing via Flynns Street.

 

·       Council staff are satisfied that satisfactory arrangements are in place for the provision of essential services.

 

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

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

 

This policy commenced on 3 April 2018. The development application was lodged 4 October 2017. Consistent with the savings and transitional provisions the former planning provisions continue to apply (and this policy does not apply) to a development application lodged, but not finally determined, immediately before the commencement of this Policy in relation to the land to which this Policy applies. Refer to comments under SEPP 71 – Coastal Protection heading of this report

 

(iii)    any Development Control Plan in force:

 

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

DCP 2013: Residential Flat Development, Tourist and Visitor Accommodation and Mixed Use Development

DCP Objective

Development Provisions

Proposed

Complies

3.3.2.2

Satisfactory site analysis plan submitted.

Site analysis plan provided.

Yes

3.3.2.3

Statement addressing site attributes and constraints submitted.

Suitable statement of environmental effects provided.

Yes

3.3.2.4

Streetscape and front setback:

· Within 20% of the average setback of the adjoining buildings.

· 3m setback to all frontages if no adjoining development.

· 2m setback to secondary frontages.

· Max. 9m setback for tourist development to allow for swimming pool.

The proposed buildings are located behind the existing building and setback approximately 50m from the front boundary.

Yes

3.3.2.5

Balconies and building extrusions can encroach up to 600mm into setback.

No balconies proposed in front setback.

N/A

Buildings generally aligned to street boundary.

Buildings proposed behind existing building line.

N/A

Primary openings aligned to street boundary or rear of site.

Openings of each villa building front pathway

 

3.3.2.6

Side setbacks comply with Figure 3.3-1:

· Min. Side setback 1.5m for 75% of building depth.

· Windows on side walls min. 3m from side boundary.

· 3m minimum where adjacent to existing strata titled building.

Side setback to villas along the western side boundary are 1m to villa 18 and 1.133m to villas 15, 16 and 17.

 

Eastern side setback is approximately 40m to villa 59.

No but considered acceptable noting the intent of the side setback requirement being applicable to residential flat buildings. The proposed villas are of a scale and nature (ie similar to dwellings that only need a 900mm setback) that allows adequate natural light and ventilation between buildings and private open space areas.

Side walls adjacent to existing strata-titled buildings should be articulated and modulated to respond to the existing buildings.

No extended wall lengths proposed along side boundaries.

N/A

Min. 6m rear setback (including sub basements)

Rear setback varies from minimum 1.095m out to 4.394m. Refer to site plan.

No but considered acceptable. Larger setbacks have been provided to other boundaries and no adverse overshadowing or privacy impacts to adjoining dwellings/units have been identified that would warrant refusal of the application.  

3.3.2.7

A party wall development may be required if site amalgamation is not possible and higher density development is envisaged by these controls.

No zero side setbacks proposed. No party walls proposed or required.

N/A

3.3.2.8

Party wall development can occur only with the agreement and consent of the adjoining property owner. Exposed party walls should be finished in a quality comparable to front facade finishes.

No party walls proposed.

N/A

3.3.2.9

Corner sites consolidated with adjacent land where possible.

The site is not a corner site.

N/A

Where consolidation not possible a minimum setback of 6m should extend to secondary street (see Fig 3.3-2 and 3.3-3).

The site is not a corner site.

N/A

3.3.2.10

Where sites adjacent to open space are to be developed the edge of the open space should be defined with a public road and buildings address the open space.

The site does not adjoin any areas of public open space.

N/A

3.3.2.11

Deep soil zones:

· Extend the width of the site and have minimum depth of 6m.

· Are contiguous across sites and within sites (see Fig 3.3-4).

The proposal does not include any residential flat buildings but rather individual villa type buildings at grade providing for greater retention of trees and landscaping. The landscaping treatment and specifically retention and enhancement of the Wrights Creek riparian corridor will provide a better outcome than a 6m wide deep soil zone.

Yes

3.3.2.12

Deep soil zones accommodate existing advanced trees, and allow for advanced tree planting.

The proposal has been designed to accommodate retention of advanced Koala trees. Where not possible advanced compensatory re-planting is proposed. 

Yes

3.3.2.13

Deep soil zones integrated with stormwater management measures.

Stormwater to be directed to Wrights Creek, the site of replanting and enhancement of the riparian corridor.

Yes

3.3.2.14

Sunlight to the principal area of ground-level private open space of adjacent properties should not be reduced to less than 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on June 22.

The single and double storey design of villa buildings combined with setbacks to boundaries and buildings on adjoining properties will not reduce sunlight to principal areas of ground level private space to less than 3 hours between 9am to 3pm on June 22.  

Yes

Where existing overshadowing by buildings and fences is greater than this, sunlight should not be reduced by more than 20%.

No change to existing buildings or fences that would result in more than 20% further overshadowing impacts.

N/A

Buildings should not reduce the sunlight available to the windows of living areas that face north in existing adjacent dwellings to less than the above specification.

The single and double storey design of the villa buildings combined with setbacks to boundaries and buildings on adjoining properties will not reduce sunlight available to windows of living areas that face north in adjacent dwellings to less than 3 hours between 9am to 3pm on June 22. 

Yes

3.3.2.15

Internal clothes drying space provided (not mechanical).

Sufficient area available within villas to provide for clothes drying.

Yes

Ceiling fans provided in preference to air conditioning.

Details not provided but given the tourist accommodation use assessment has assumed air conditioning.

Yes

Solar hot water systems (or equivalent technology) provided.

None proposed. However the proposal is not BASIX affected development.

Yes

Photovoltaic arrays installed where practical.

None proposed. However the proposal is not BASIX affected development.

Yes

3.3.2.16

Landscape plan provided including:

· 35% soft landscaping with minimum width of 3m.

· Existing vegetation and proposed treatment.

· Details of hard landscaping.

· Location of communal recreational facilities.

· Species not to obscure doors, paths, etc.

· Street trees in accordance with Council’s list.

Landscaping strategy and Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) provided for enhancement of the Wrights Creek riparian corridor and offset plantings for koala food trees.

Yes

3.3.2.17

Existing vegetation to be retained and nutrient-rich water prevented from entering native gardens.

Retention of koala food trees proposed where practical with enhancement of riparian corridor proposed.

Yes

3.3.2.18

Landscape plan to demonstrate how trees and vegetation contribute to energy efficiency and prevent winter shading on neighbouring properties.

Landscaping plan provided is acceptable.

Yes

3.3.2.20

Street trees in accordance with Council’s list.

Having regard to the location of services within the street, street tree planting not considered appropriate. Existing landscaping within the frontage of the site considered acceptable. A condition has been recommended requiring this landscaping to be extended in front of the new visitor parking.

N/A

3.3.2.20

All dwellings at ground floor level have minimum 35m2 of private open space, including one area 4m x 4m at maximum grade of 5% and directly accessible from living area.

The villas/apartments are for tourist accommodation use and not permanent dwellings.

 

Adequate communal recreation facilities and areas are proposed.

Yes

Separate private open space for any resident manager or permanent occupant of a tourist facility.

No change to existing onsite manager arrangements.

N/A

3.3.2.21

Dwellings on or above first floor to have balconies as follows:

· Studio - 4m2

· 1 bedroom - 8m2, minimum 2m wide

· 2 bedroom - 10m2, minimum 2m wide

· 3 bedroom - 12m2, minimum 2.4m wide

No first floor unit balconies proposed. However, it is noted that each villa/apartment is provided with the following:

• 1 bedroom – 10.8m2

• 2 bedroom – 10.8m2

• 3 bedroom – 16.5m2

• 4 bedroom – 45m2

With minimum widths provided.

Yes

3.3.2.22

Fencing or landscaping defines public/communal and private open space.

All villas/apartments orientated toward communal open space areas including pool and play areas. Private open space contained to deck areas of villas/apartments.

Yes

3.3.2.23

Solid fences should be:

· Max. 1.2m high,

· Setback 1m,

· Suitably landscaped,

· Provide 3m x 3m splay.

Front fencing is existing. No change proposed.

N/A

Where front fences higher than 1.2m:

· Max. 1.8m high,

· Landscaped recesses for 50% of frontage, or length of fence not more than 6m or 50% of street frontage.

· Min. 25% transparent,

· 3m x 3m splay for corner sites.

· 900mm x 900mm splay at vehicle driveways.

Front fencing is existing. No change proposed.

N/A

3.3.2.24

Fencing materials consistent with or complimentary to existing fencing in the street.

Front fencing is existing. No change proposed.

N/A

3.3.2.25

Fences constructed of chain wire, solid timber or masonry and solid street not permitted, even if consistent with existing fencing in the locality.

Front fencing is existing. No change proposed.

N/A

3.3.2.26

Building to be designed so that:

· Busy, noisy areas face the street.

· Quiet areas face the side or rear of the lot.

· Bedrooms have line of site separation of at least 3m from parking areas, streets and shared driveways.

Buildings are adequately setback from Flynn Street.

Yes

Openings of adjacent dwellings separated by at least 3m.

Adequate building separation proposed. Window placement in villas have retained privacy between dwellings/units on adjoining properties.

Yes

3.3.2.27

Building designed so noise transmission between apartments is minimised.

The design of the villa layouts and specifically the deck/open space areas has been orientated toward the centre of the site containing the recreation facilities.

Yes

Uses are to be coupled internally and between apartments i.e. noisy internal and noisy external spaces should be placed together. (See Figure 3.3-6).

As per above.

Yes

3.3.2.28

Development complies with AS/NZS2107:2000 Acoustic – Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors for residential development.

There are no noise generating developments within proximity of this site. Further Flynn Street does not experience traffic volumes that would warrant any noise attenuation measures.

Yes

3.3.2.29

Impact of noise from key public places to be considered.

The site does not adjoin any areas of public open space where noise generating activities or events take place.

N/A

3.3.2.30

Direct views between living room windows to be screened where:

· Ground floor windows are within 9m of windows in an adjoining dwelling.

· Other floors are within a 12m radius.

· Living room windows are within 12m radius of the principal area of private open space of other dwellings.

The villas/apartments will not result in any adverse privacy impacts to adjoining dwellings. Specifically the following is noted:

-     Each villas open space, livings areas and decking is orientated toward the central recreational facilities of the site.

-     Windows facing side or rear boundaries are to utility, bathrooms or bedrooms only. 

Yes

Direct views may be screened with either a 1.8m high fence or wall, or screening that has maximum 25% openings.

No window screening required having regard to rooms in which the windows serve.

Yes

Windows in habitable rooms screened if >1m above ground level and wall set back <3m.

No window screening required having regard to rooms in which the windows serve.

Yes

Balconies, decks, etc screened if <3m from boundary and floor area >3m2 and floor level >1m above ground level.

No first floor elevated decks/balconies proposed. No screening required. Each villas open space, livings areas and decking is orientated toward the central recreational facilities of the site away from side or rear boundary.

Yes

3.3.2.31

Developments to be designed in accordance with AS 1428.

Capable of being disabled access compliant. Details to be provided for compliance with Building Code of Australia at construction certificate stage.

Yes

3.3.2.32

Barrier free access to at least 20% of dwellings provided.

Barrier free access provided to at least 20% of villas/apartments.

Yes

3.3.2.33

Developments located close to open space, recreation, entertainment and employment.

The development site is located less than 100m from retail/café spaces located on the corner of Flynn Street & Pacific Drive. Flynns Beach and associated open space area is within 200m.

Yes

Where LEP permits FSR > 1:1, FSR not less than 1:1 should be achieved.

FSR of 0.49:1 proposed.

No but having regard to environmental constraints on the site, the proposed FSR is considered acceptable.

3.3.2.34

Variety of types - studio, 1, 2, 3 and 3+ bedroom apartments

The proposal incorporates a range of unit types, featuring 1, 2, 3 and 4 bedroom configurations.

Yes

Studio and 1 bedroom apartments not > 20% of total number of apartments.

1 bedroom apartments comprise 38% of the total number of apartments

No but considered acceptable given the tourist/short stay use.

Mix of 1 and 3 bedroom apartments at ground level.

A mixture of 1, 2 and bedroom apartments accessible at ground level.

Yes

3.3.2.35

Council’s Affordable Housing Strategy to be considered for residential flat buildings.

Residential flat building not proposed.

N/A

3.3.2.36

Lift over-runs and plant integrated within roof structures.

Residential flat building not proposed.

N/A

Outdoor recreation areas on roof tops to be landscaped and incorporate shade structures and wind screens.

Residential flat building not proposed.

N/A

Outdoor roof areas oriented to the street.

Residential flat building not proposed.

N/A

Roof design to generate interesting skyline.

Residential flat building not proposed.

N/A

3.3.2.37

Facade composition should:

· Have balance of horizontal and vertical elements.

· Respond to environmental and energy needs.

· Incorporate wind mitigation.

· Reflect uses within the buildings.

· Include combination of building elements.

The façade composition of the villas/apartment is acceptable.

Yes

3.3.2.38

Building elements, materials and colours consistent or complimentary to those existing in the street.

Contemporary building elements, materials and colours consistent with existing and within the street.

Yes

3.3.2.39

Entrances clearly identifiable from street level.

No change to exiting entry to the site and main building fronting the site.

N/A

Entries provide clear transition between public street and shared private circulation spaces/apartments.

Each villa/apartment provided with clearly defined entry point.

Yes

Entries provide clear line of sight between one circulation space and the next.

Each villa/apartment provided with clearly defined entry point.

Yes

Entries avoid ambiguous and publicly accessible small spaces in entry areas.

Each villa/apartment provided with clearly defined entry point.

Yes

Entries sheltered and well lit.

Each villa/apartment provided with clearly defined entry point.

Yes

Entries and circulation spaces sized for movement of furniture.

Each villa/apartment provided with clearly defined entry point.

Yes

Corridors minimum 2.5m wide and 3.0m high.

No residential flat building proposed.

N/A

Corridor lengths minimised and avoid tight corners.

No residential flat building proposed.

N/A

Longer corridors articulated by:

· Changing direction and width.

· Utilising series of foyers.

· Incorporating windows.

No residential flat building proposed.

N/A

3.3.2.40

Minimum 1 balcony per apartment.

Suitable private open space areas compliant with deck requirements provided to each villa/apartment.

Yes

Main balcony accessible from living area.

Private open space accessible from main living area.

Yes

Balconies take advantage of favourable climatic conditions.

Decking open space suitably orientated.

Yes

Balconies and balustrades balance privacy and views.

Decking open space orientated toward the centre of the site containing recreational facilities. Not orientated to side or rear boundaries.

Yes

3.3.2.42

Secure open air clothes drying facilities that are:

· easily accessible,

· screened from public domain and communal spaces,

· located with high degree of solar access.

While no permanent dwellings are proposed, sufficient area exists to provide open air clothes drying facilities.

Yes

3.3.2.43

Mailboxes integrated into building design and sighted to ensure accessibility and security.

No mailboxes required. Tourist accommodation only.

N/A

3.3.2.44

Public and private space clearly defined.

Public and private space areas clearly defined by existing fencing.

Yes

Entrances:

· oriented to public street,

· provide direct and well lit access between car parks, lift lobbies and unit entrances,

· optimise security by grouping clusters (max. 8) around a common lobby

No change to the existing clearly defined entrances to the site.

Yes

Surveillance facilitated by:

· views over public space from living areas,

· casual views of common internal areas,

· provision of windows and balconies,

· separate entries to ground level apartments.

Villas/apartments orientated toward the centre of the site containing recreational facilities, which provides suitable casual surveillance.

Yes

Concealment avoided by:

· preventing dark or blind alcoves,

· providing lighting in all common areas,

· providing graded car parking illumination (greater at entrances).

A Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design assessment was undertaken and supported the application. The recommendations of the assessment have been considered in the design of the development proposal.

Yes

Access to all parts of the building to be controlled.

No residential flat building proposed.

N/A

3.3.2.45

Accessible storage provided for tenants in basement car park or garages.

No residential flat building proposed.

N/A

One bike storage space per dwelling provided.

No residential flat building proposed.

N/A

3.3.2.46

For developments of < 6 dwellings individual waste management permitted. Designated area to be provided for storage of bins:

· not visible from street,

· easily accessible,

· not adjoining private or communal space, windows or clothes drying areas,

· on hard stand area,

· close to street and a tap for washing,

· maintained free of pests.

Private waste collection service to be provided. Suitable areas onsite to accommodate service and bin storage. Condition recommended to require service to be in place prior to issue of any occupation certificate.

Yes

Communal bulk waste required where:

· > 6 dwellings, or

· Number of bins wouldn’t fit in street frontage, or

· Topography would make street collection difficult.

See above comments.

Yes

Communal bulk waste facilities integrated into development and located at ground or sub-basement level.

· Not visible from street,

· Easily accessible,

· Can be serviced by collection vehicles,

· Not adjoining private or communal space, windows or clothes drying areas,

· Has water and drainage facilities for cleaning,

· Maintained free of pests.

See above comments.

Yes

Evidence provided that site can be serviced by waste collection service.

See above comments.

Yes

3.3.2.47

Common trenching of utility services where possible.

A preliminary servicing plan supported the application which is considered acceptable in principle. Details will be provided with infrastructure construction certificate.

Yes

Above ground utility infrastructure integrated with building design.

No above ground utilities on the site.

N/A

Site and individual units numbered.

Apartment/villas will be numbered.

Yes

Common aerials and satellite dishes provided.

No residential flat building proposed.

N/A

 

DCP 2013: General Provisions

DCP Objective

Development Provisions

Proposed

Complies

2.7.2.2

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

· Casual surveillance and sightlines

· Land use mix and activity generators

· Definition of use and ownership

· Lighting

· Way finding

· Predictable routes and entrapment locations

A Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design assessment was undertaken by Barker Ryan Stewart – Total Project Solutions dated September 2017. The recommended strategies are summarised as follows:

• Access to the site shall be restricted by perimeter fencing and security gates.

• Low level planting shall be maintained in appropriate locations to provide good visibility of the site from surrounding streets, and clear sight lines across the grounds of the resort.

• Surveillance of pathways, and concealed areas should be maximised through a combination of CCTV, proper lighting and passive surveillance.

• The car park should be well lit at night and covered by CCTV.

• Public spaces and private areas will be clearly delineated.

• An on-going maintenance plan shall be implemented.

 

It is considered that the recommendations have been incorporated into the design of the development proposal and there is scope for the ongoing management measures to be implemented.

Yes

2.3.3.1

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

No cut or fill >1m proposed outside perimeter of external walls.

Yes

2.3.3.2

1m max. height retaining walls along road frontages

No retaining walls proposed.

N/A

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

No retaining walls proposed.

N/A

Combination of retaining wall and front fence height

No retaining walls proposed. Front fence existing.

N/A

2.3.3.4

For coastal flood plan endangered ecological communities a minimum, fully vegetated buffer of 35m must be provided.

The Wrights Creek riparian corridor was recognised as an Endangered Ecological Community – Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on Coastal Floodplains. It is proposed to retain the EEC with a buffer of 20m each side of the water course as per the recommended 2nd order creek provisions of the Water Management Act, 2000.

No. However the reduction to the 35m buffer standard is accepted because of the Water Management Act standard and the highly modified nature of the site at present. The active development consent also only provides for a 5m wide corridor on each side of the creek. The ecological impact assessments have concluded that the proposal inclusive of the reduced buffer will not have a significant adverse environmental impact.

Stormwater management facilities may be considered in buffer area where justified on practical engineering grounds but still consistent with objectives.

The existing stormwater discharges to the Wrights Creek catchment within the buffer area. The preliminary stormwater plans adopt a similar approach.

Having regard to the site constraints, disposal of stormwater in the buffer is accepted as there are no other feasible options available. It is noted that onsite detention forms part of the preliminary stormwater analysis. The ecological impact assessments have concluded that the proposal, inclusive of the stormwater facilities, will not have a significant adverse environmental impact.

Fully vegetated buffers cannot contain road infrastructure or an asset protection zone.

No roads are proposed. The driveway, visitor and staff parking and part APZ is proposed within the buffer.

Having regard to the highly modified nature of the site at present and proposed retention and enhancement measures allowing these components of the development within in the buffer area is considered reasonable. The ecological impact assessment have concluded that these components, being located within the buffer area, will not have a significant adverse environmental impact.

2.3.3.5

Habitat/vegetation to be lost is to be offset.

Koala food trees to be removed within the development footprint are to be offset with compensatory plantings in suitable locations within the site. Riparian corridor to be retained and enhanced.

Yes

Improvement and maintenance of existing habitat and corridors first preference.

Riparian corridor to be retained and enhanced.

Yes

Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) for environmental land to be retained or used to offset.

Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) provided for protection and enhancement of Wrights Creek riparian corridor.

Yes

2.3.3.6

Minimum fully vegetated buffers from top of bank to both sides of a water course as follows:

· 10m for 1st order streams that flow intermittently.

· 30m for 1st order streams that flow permanently.

· 40m for 2nd order streams.

· 50m for 3rd order streams.

· 65m for 4th order streams.

20m buffer proposed to each side of Wrights Creek which is a 2nd order stream.

No. However the reduction to the 40m buffer standard is accepted because of the Water Management Act standard and the highly modified nature of the site at present. The active development consent also only provides for a 5m wide corridor on each side of the creek. The ecological impact assessments have concluded that the proposal, inclusive of the reduced buffer, will not have a significant adverse environmental impact.

2.3.3.8 onwards

Removal of hollow bearing trees

A hollow bearing tree assessment was undertaken by a qualified ecologist. Two trees were identified as having hollow bearing potential. Both are to be retained.

Yes

2.4.3.4

Asset Protection Zones to be located outside of environmental protection zones and within private land.

The NSW Rural Fire Service (NSW RFS) have required the whole site, apart from the Wrights Creek corridor, to be managed as an APZ (inner protection area). Part of the Asset Protection Zone will be within the E2 zone.

No however the 10m riparian corridor either side of the creek to be protected and enhanced does not contain any APZ obligation.

2.4.3.5

Development must comply with Council’s Floodplain Management Plan and Flood Policies.

Refer to comments under clause 7.3 of the LEP heading within this report.

Yes

2.4.3.6

All stormwater infrastructure to be designed in accordance with AUSPEC.

Concept stormwater management plan provided. Council’s stormwater engineering has reviewed the plan and advised that the design is suitable and capable of compliance with AUSPEC standards. The specific detailed design is to be provided as part of application for construction certificate. 

Yes

2.6.3.1

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

Trees identified in the plan are proposed to be removed. Refer to detailed comments under SEPP 44 and the flora and flora headings of this report for impacts and offset measures.

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 rationalised or removed where practical

No new access permitted from and arterial or distributor road.

N/A

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

No new crossovers proposed. Confined to two existing crossovers to Flynn Street.

Yes

2.5.3.3

Off-street parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1:

· 1.1 per unit + 1 per 2 employees (onsite at any one time) + 1 for on-site manager.

Existing 60 units + 59 new villas = 119 units x 1.1 = 130.9 spaces.

Addition of two new units to existing apartment building = 2.2 spaces.

Conversion of 1 unit to sales area within existing building = -1.1 spaces.

10 staff = 5 spaces

1 onsite manager = 1 space

A total of 138 spaces required.

 

It is noted that the proposed café is only accessible and available for staying guests. No additional parking demand would be generated from this component.

Yes. There are 61 existing basement parks under the apartment building and 9 existing visitor spaces along the entrance driveway. 70 new parking spaces at grade. A total of 140 spaces are proposed. 

2.5.3.5

On-street parking permitted subject to justification

The proposal is not reliant on on-street parking.

N/A

2.5.3.7

Visitor parking to be easily accessible

Visitor parking easily identified and accessible form the Flynn Street.

Yes

Stacked parking permitted for medium density where visitor parking and 5.5m length achieved

No stacked parking proposed.

N/A

Parking in accordance with AS 2890.1

Plans indicate parking generally in accordance with AS2890. Suitable condition recommended requiring certification prior to issue of construction certificate.

Yes

2.5.3.9

Bicycle and motorcycle parking considered and designed generally in accordance with the principles of AS2890.3

Suitable areas available to accommodate bicycle and motor cycle parking consistent with AS2890.

Yes

2.5.3.10

Parking concessions possible for conservation of heritage items

Not a heritage listed site and no parking concession proposed.

N/A

2.5.3.11

Section 94 contributions

Refer to main body of report.

Yes

2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13

Landscaping of parking areas

Suitable landscaping proposed.

Yes

2.5.3.14

Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified

Driveways to be sealed to a suitable standard.

Yes

2.5.3.15

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

(Note AS/NZS 2890.1 permits steeper grades)

Driveways existing.

N/A

2.5.3.16

Transitional grades min. 2m length

Driveways existing.

N/A

2.5.3.17

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

Parking and hardstand areas accommodated in preliminary stormwater management plans.

Yes

 

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

 

No planning agreement has been offered or entered into.

 

iv)     any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

 

New South Wales Coastal Policy:

 

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

 

Demolition of buildings AS 2601:

 

Part demolition of the existing building is capable of compliance with AS 2601. Condition of consent has been recommended to reinforce.

 

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

 

No Coastal Zone Management Plan applies to the subject site.

 

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

 

Context and setting

The site comprises an area of 18,053.87m2. The property is relatively flat with Wrights Creek traversing its eastern portion.

 

The site currently comprises a four (4) storey serviced apartment building fronting Flynn Street, with sixty (60) serviced apartments in three blocks with basement parking, swimming pool and children’s playground area.

Adjoining the site to the east is a mixture of both 3 and 4 storey walk up style apartment and commercial buildings fronting Pacific Drive and Flynn Street. Adjoining the site immediately to the north is Council owned land containing the Wrights Creek riparian corridor. Adjoining development to the northeast comprises a mixture of 3 to 4 storey unit buildings. Adjoining development to the northwest is 3 storey unit complex with single storey dwellings further along the northern side of Flynn Street. Adjoining the site to the west is a combination of both 2 and 3 storey unit complexes. Adjoining the site to the south is a manufactured home estate often referred to as “Taskers Village” comprising single storey cabin style manufactured homes.

 

Having regard to existing development with the locality and adopted building height and floor space ratio controls, the proposal is considered to be consistent with the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area.

 

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

 

There are no adverse impacts on existing view sharing and there are no adverse privacy impacts. Refer to comment within Development Control Plan compliance table.

 

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

 

Roads

The site has road frontage to Flynn Street, a Council-owned and maintained urban collector road with a carriageway width of approximately 12.5m within a 20.1m wide road reserve. The road is bordered by upright (SA) type kerb and gutter on both sides. There is a local sag point within Flynn Street in front of the site where the road crosses the creek.

 

An existing 1.2m wide concrete footpath fronting the site within Flynn Street provides continuous access for pedestrians, wheelchairs and so on to Flynns Beach and the shopping precinct to the east of the site.

 

Traffic and Transport

The site currently operates as a 60-unit four storey visitor accommodation building and resort. The original proposal was to create an additional 63 self-contained visitor accommodation cabins comprising a combination of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units. The application has been revised since the original traffic impact assessment was undertaken. Specifically 59 self-contained cabins are now proposed.   

 

The traffic and parking impact assessment dated September 2017 prepared by Barker Ryan Stewart supported the development application for 63 cabins. The assessment included counts of existing traffic at the nearby intersections of Flynn and Lord Streets, and Flynn Street with Pacific Drive.

 

The traffic assessment adopts a trip generation rate of 0.31 trips and 0.42 trips per accommodation unit during the AM and PM daily peak periods respectively, which it has sourced from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook 9th Edition.

 

While a reputable source, this data has been obtained in the US context and may not reflect user mode preferences and low public transport use typical in a region such as Port Macquarie. As each accommodation unit will have more than one bedroom, this rate appears to be low. For a peak factor of 0.1 (typical), the rate implies each unit may generate 4.2 trips per day, which is not considered to represent tourist arrival, trips to local attractions, procuring supplies, return for meal times and departure.

 

The RMS Guide to Traffic Generating Developments 2002 does not provide rates for visitor accommodation but in comparison with dwellings of similar numbers of bedrooms, Council has adopted a worst case likely trip rate of 7 per day per accommodation unit, or 0.7 during the daily AM and PM peak hours.

 

The proposed increase in local traffic is therefore expected to be approximately 62 x 7 = 434 trips per day, or 44 trips during each of the peak hours. To determine likely impacts on local roads, trip distribution factors assumed by Council staff are illustrated below, having regard to likely desire lines to nearby attractions. These are indicative only but help to identify where key constraints may be present.

·    During the AM peak 90% of trips are outbound from the site and 10% are inbound to the site. During the PM peak 10% are outbound and 90% are inbound.

·    An 80%-20% split distribution of trips via Lord St versus Pacific Dr respectively, during the daily peaks.

·    At the intersection of Lord/Flynn Streets, trips are distributed 80% to/from the north (CBD) and 20% to/from the south.

·    At the intersection of Pacific Dr/Flynn St, trips are distributed evenly north and south.

 

 

The intersection of Lord and Flynn Streets is considered to be the main concern. Existing traffic counts by the consultant indicate that this intersection experiences 1,100 trips during the AM peak hour (to 09:00) and 1,200 trips during the PM peak hour (to 17:45).

 

The applicant has provided SIDRA analysis to show that the current operation of this intersection has an acceptable level of service and that the proposed development will not significantly increase delays for users, particularly during the morning peak hour when the greatest number of users would attempt to turn right out of Flynn Street towards Port Macquarie CBD.

 

However, analysis of the PM peak turning volumes raises concern, with 87 southbound vehicles turning left into Flynn Street and 26 northbound vehicles turning right into Flynn Street. With reference to the AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Management Part 6: Intersections, Interchanges and Crossings (2017), the warrants for upgrading the intersection to safer channelised turn treatments are already considered triggered as a result of existing traffic. The proposal would further increase the numbers of turning movements by 29% on existing trips for the southbound left turn (CHL) and 23% for the northbound right turn (CHR), which represents a significant increase in risk of safety incidents.

 

It is therefore recommended that the intersection be upgraded to CHL and CHR turn treatments prior to occupation certificate being issued for the development. This upgrade will ensure that the proposed increase in traffic will be safely and efficiently catered for within the local road network. The line marking required to achieve this is likely to fit within the existing wide carriageway of Lord Street without realigning kerb and gutter or widening the pavement. Suitable consent conditions have been recommended.

 

Site Frontage & Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed through two driveways. The existing resident access driveway and existing driveway to the east for staff and visitor vehicle parking. Access shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements. 

 

Parking and Manoeuvring

Existing and proposed parking requirements are provided in the table to the DCP heading earlier within this report. In summary a total of seventy (70) new parking spaces are indicated on the site plan, which satisfies the minimum parking provision.

 

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. A dedicated turning bay has been made available at the end of the blind aisle, which is not open to the public.

 

Water Supply Connection

Reticulated water supply is existing and available. Council’s water supply section are satisfied that adequate arrangements will be made for the supply of water expected to be generated from the development. Specifically consent conditions have been recommended requiring final water service sizing to be determined by a hydraulic consultant consistent with the requirements of Australian Standard 3500: Plumbing and Drainage with details to be provided as part of the infrastructure construction certificate.

 

Sewer Connection

Reticulated sewer supply is existing and available. Council’s sewer supply section are satisfied (via conditions of consent) that adequate arrangements will be made for the supply of sewer expected to be generated from the development.

 

Stormwater

The site grades to Wrights Creek, located within the eastern portion of the site.

 

The legal point of discharge for the proposed development is defined as a new outlet to Wrights Creek, subject to the provision of a suitable outlet design to protect against erosion. The applicant’s stormwater concept plan is consistent with this requirement.

 

A stormwater management plan has been submitted demonstrating how the site is proposed to be drained to Wrights Creek. The proposal includes the provision of a number of proprietary gross pollution traps, which have been sized to treat stormwater runoff such that the site meets the discharge parameters of AUSPEC D7. Conceptual modelling has been submitted to demonstrate compliance in this regard.

 

The stormwater management plan also demonstrated how on-site stormwater detention facilities can be incorporated into the proposed development, providing two options. In particular, the plan indicates that the required onsite detention volume can be accommodated within either a large end of line basin beneath the common driveway area or within numerous individual tanks located within the deck area of each proposed holiday unit. Either solution is acceptable from an AUSPEC compliance perspective.

 

The site is also affected by the flooding of Wrights Creek. Assessment of the associated risks have been made by a flooding engineer. From a stormwater drainage perspective, the provision of on-site stormwater detention facilities which have been designed to limit site stormwater discharge to pre-development rates mean that the development will have no impacts on the extent of downstream flooding as a consequence of an increase in stormwater runoff from the site.

 

The detailed design submission will need to demonstrate that the proposed detention facilities continue to function during a flood event. A detailed site stormwater management plan will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application and prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site. Any substation required to provide for the additional load is to be contained within private property unless accepted in writing by Council.

 

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. Standard precautionary site management condition recommended.

 

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will require removal of scatter trees throughout the site in order to accommodate buildings, services and bushfire protection measures. The protection and enhancement of the Wright Creek riparian corridor also forms part of the proposal.

It is noted that the application was lodged on 4 October 2017. The Biodiversity Conservation (Savings and Transitional) Amendment Regulation 2017 released on 24 November 2017 extended the application of the former planning provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act to the biodiversity assessment of Part 4 development applications to 25 February 2018.

Having regard to the tree removal proposed to accommodate the development (inclusive of buildings, services and bushfire protection measures), the application was supported by a three part report prepared by Anne Clements and Associates Pty Ltd, dated 29 September 2017. The three part report provided the following:

·    Part A – Assessment of flora constraints.

·    Part B – Assessment of significance of the proposal on the listed Coastal Floodplain community.

·    Part C – Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) for the riparian corridors and offsets, incorporating the Koala Plan of Management (KPOM).

The flora assessment concluded that there were 58 Eucalypt trees on the site. Of these 54 were identified as preferred koala feed trees. Refer to detailed comments under SEPP 44 heading for koala impacts.

The flora assessment also concluded that an area of vegetation comprising 950m2 in two patches approximately 10m wide and approximately 40m and 55m long within the Wrights Creek riparian corridor represents a coastal flood plain Endangered Ecological Community (EEC).

The assessment gave consideration to the impact of the proposal on the identified EEC. The assessment concluded that the proposal will result in no direct clearing of the EEC but rather indirectly modify approximately 145m2 (within 10m of the proposal) of the 950m2 of mapped EEC. The assessment concludes that the proposal is not likely to result in a significant impact on the EEC and that a Species Impact Statement is not required.

The flora assessment recommends the following key ameliorative measures:

·    That a 20m buffer be provided to either side of Wrights Creek consistent with a 2nd order stream consistent with the guidelines for riparian corridors on waterfront land provided under the Water Management Act.

·    A VMP incorporating a KPOM be prepared to establish a fully structured vegetated riparian corridor consistent with the NSW Office of Water guidelines.

·    This riparian corridor is to provide a conservation link along Wrights Creek. It is to be conserved and enhanced through careful bush regeneration with plantings of only local provenance species consistent with the Coastal Floodplain, especially the preferred koala feed tree Eucalyptus robusta.

·    Any landscaping on the site should also consider the use of preferred koala feed tree, Eucalyptus robusta.

Consistent with the above, the proposal incorporates a 20m buffer either side of Wrights Creek. A VMP has been provided which aims to conserve and enhance the riparian corridor noting its importance as a conservation link along Wrights Creek. The VMP and KPOM provide for compensatory replanting of preferred koala feed trees within the riparian corridor and site at a ratio of 3:1.

A separate fauna impact assessment supported the application. The assessment was prepared by JB Enviro, dated 7 March 2018 and addresses the requirements of the ‘7 part test’ under section 5A of the Act. The report concluded that the proposal is unlikely to have a significant impact on any threatened species and that a Species Impact Statement is not required.

Both the flora and fauna impact assessments conclude that the proposal is unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on any threatened flora and fauna species and that Species Impact Statements are not required.

Conditions of consent have been recommended specifying that the commitments and obligations provided in both the VMP and KPOM form part of any consent issued and shall be implemented at their respective stages throughout the development if consent is granted.

In addition to the above, an Arboriculture impact assessment report was undertaken by Woodvale Tree services. In summary it was demonstrated that the koala feed trees nominated from retention can be retained long term. However it was recommended that further canopy impact assessments and pre-non-destructive below grade examination of areas within chosen tree protection zones may be necessary to determine the final location of piers.

 

Waste

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

 

Energy

The proposal is not BASIX affected development. However, the development will be required to comply with section J of the Building Code of Australia (BCA).

 

Noise and vibration

Having regard to the location of the site and nature of the development, there will be anticipated short term noise impacts during construction activities. Consent condition has been recommended to restrict construction to standard construction hours.

 

In terms of the visitor accommodation use, it is noted that the existing onsite manager is to remain. A condition of consent has been recommended to require a complaints register to be established by management and this be made available upon request to Council. The condition also requires that a telephone number be provided on the sign located on the front fence for any complaints.  

 

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone. In accordance with Section 100B of the Rural Fires Act, 1997, the application proposes development for a Special Fire Protection Purpose. The application was supported by a bushfire assessment report prepared by a Certified Consultant.

 

The application and supporting bushfire assessment report were referred to the NSW Rural Fire Service. The Commissioner has assessed the application and issued a Bushfire Safety Authority consisting of a series of conditions which are recommended to form part of the consent conditions.

 

Safety, security and crime prevention

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

 

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

 

Social impacts in the locality

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

 

Economic impact in the locality

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

 

Site design and internal design

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

 

Construction

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

 

Cumulative Impacts

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

 

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

 

The proposal will fit into the locality. Site constraints have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

 

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

 

Five (5) written submissions have been received following public exhibition of the application.

 

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

 

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

The residents of the gateway lifestyle village have lost their right of pedestrian access through the site to Pacific Drive via the right of footway over SP61661 being 55-56 Pacific Drive.

A title search of SP61661 reveals a reference to dealing 5040496 - Right of Footway 1.5m wide burdening the property. The land burdened being Lot 18 DP17542 (being the land prior to strata subdivision). Land benefited is Lot 331 DP828346. The land containing the gateway lifestyle village (Lot 332 DP828346) does not benefit from use of the footway. There is also no right of footway over Lot 331 DP828346 to this pathway. 

If no pedestrian access is permitted through the site the developer should provide a footpath connection along Ocean Street to Pacific Drive.

There is no nexus between the proposed development and suggested footpath. Council could not impose such a requirement. Full frontage footpath paving already exists along the Flynns Street frontage. 

The adopted occupancy rate in the supporting parking assessment is not appropriate. Parking proposed is insufficient noting the peak seasonal demand likely to be experienced from this and surrounding developments. Limited on-street parking exists.

Refer to parking calculations in Development Control Plan (DCP) table of this report. The application has been revised to provide additional parking consistent with DCP provisions.

Occasional queues are experienced at the existing entrance driveway waiting for the automatic gate to open. The proposal will exacerbate this problem creating a traffic and pedestrian safety problem.   

Refer to comments under roads, traffic and transport heading of this report. Council’s development engineering section are comfortable the additional traffic likely to be generate from the proposal can be safely accommodated via the existing entrance arrangement.

The doubling of tourist accommodation will increase night time noise levels experienced by adjoining residents. The sliding gate and intercom are loud. No consideration of this has been given.

Management of guests within the site will be the responsibility of centre management. An onsite manger already exist and is to be retained. Condition of consent has been recommended requiring a complaints register to be developed with contact number made available to the public.

The site is subject to flooding and impacts need to be considered.

Refer to comments under Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 heading of this report, specifically clause 7.3.

The application should have regard to the shire wide KPoM to be considered by Council at its December 2017 meeting.

This site is subject to its own Koala Plan of Management. Refer to comments under State Environmental Planning Policy 44 heading of this report.

Construction noise will impact on adjoining residents within the locality. It is suggested that standard construction hours be reduced to minimise impacts.

Standard building construction hours are considered appropriate.

In terms of planned noisy construction activities the developer undertake community consultation with adjoining property owners and residents.

A condition has been recommended requiring a construction management plan. The plan shall provide a contact number for the site supervisor/manager, works schedule and notification procedure to adjoining land owners for noisy works.

The area on the eastern side of the creek is subject to high flooding and contains Koala trees and fauna and is not suitable for development.

The application has been revised since lodgement and the villas/units originally proposed on the eastern side of the creek do not form part of this application.

The roof of the existing amenities block on the eastern side of the creek catches leaves and is a fire hazard.

Noted, however the building is existing and there is no change proposed.

 

(e)     The Public Interest:

 

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

 

 

4.       DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

 

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

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

 

 

5.       CONCLUSION

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

Attachments

 

1View. DA2017 - 885.1 Recommended DA conditions

2View. DA2017 - 885.1 Site Survey Plan

3View. DA2017 - 885.1 Wrights Creek survey

4View. DA2017 - 885.1 SoEE

5View. DA2017 - 885.1 Site Plan

6View. DA2017 - 885.1 Floor Plans

7View. DA2017 - 885.1 Roof Plan

8View. DA2017 - 885.1 Foundation Plan

9View. DA2017 - 885.1 Elevation Plans

10View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Sections

11View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Existing Building Alterations Ground Floor Plan

12View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Reception and Cafe Plan

13View.           DA2017 - 885.1 BBQ and Utilities Pavilions Plans

14View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Utilities Pavilions Elevations

15View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Maintenance and Staff Amenities Plan

16View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Villa Suite Plans

17View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Riparian Corridor and Offset Plan

18View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Riparian Corridor Plan showing encroachments

19View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Landscape Plan

20View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Tree Removal Retention Plan

21View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Tree removal & proposed offset planting - Anne Clements

22View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Services Plan - StormwaterWaterSewer

23View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Stormwater Drainage Strategy Plan & Modelling

24View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Koala Plan of Management and Vegetation Management Plan

25View.           DA2017 - 885.1 NSW Planning Department letter advising of KPoM approval

26View.           DA2017 - 855.1 Revised Flood Impact Assessment

27View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Arboricultural Impact Assessment

28View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Bushfire Assessment Report

29View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Confirmation of APZ compliance with proposed offset plantings

30View.           DA2017 - 885.1 NSW Rural Fire Service - Bushfire Safety Authority conditions

31View.           DA2017 - 885.1 NSW Office of Water General Terms of Approval

32View.           DA2017 - 885.1 CPTED Assessment Report

33View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Ecology Report Parts 1-4

34View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Seven Part Test ecological assessment

35View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment Report

36View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Submission - Barry

37View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Submission - Bryen

38View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Submission - Harris for Owners SP61661 6779

39View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Submission - Lyons

40View.           DA2017 - 885.1 Submission - Wells

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018

 


 


 


  ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

13/06/2018