Agenda of Development Assessment Panel

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 27/03/2019

Item: 04

Subject: DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

RECOMMENDATION

That Disclosures of Interest be presented

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST DECLARATION

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

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

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

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

…………………………………………………….……………...…..

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

Pecuniary:

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

Non-Pecuniary - Significant Interest:

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

Non-Pecuniary - Less than Significant Interest:

May participate in consideration and voting.

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

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

Name: …………………………………………………….

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

(Further explanation is provided on the next page)

Further Explanation

(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)

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

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

Pecuniary Interest

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

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

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

Non-Pecuniary

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

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

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

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

Non Pecuniary – Significant Interest

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Non Pecuniary – Less than Significant Interest

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

SPECIAL DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST DECLARATION

[insert full name of councillor]

In the matter of

[insert name of environmental planning instrument]

Which is to be considered at a meeting of the

[insert name of meeting]

Held on

[insert date of meeting]

PECUNIARY INTEREST

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

Relationship of identified land to councillor

[Tick or cross one box.]

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

 Associated person of councillor has interest in the land.

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

MATTER GIVING RISE TO PECUNIARY INTEREST

Nature of land that is subject to a change

in zone/planning control by proposed

LEP (the subject landⁱⁱⁱ

[Tick or cross one box]

 The identified land.

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

Current zone/planning control

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

Proposed change of zone/planning control

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

Effect of proposed change of zone/planning control on councillor

[Tick or cross one box]

 Appreciable financial gain.

 Appreciable financial loss.

Councillor’s Name: …………………………………………

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

Important Information

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

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

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

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

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

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

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 27/03/2019

Item: 05

Subject: DA2016 - 1000.1 Waste Management Facility and Caretaker's Residence at Lot 315 DP 1075670, No. 6 Enterprise Place, Wauchope

Report Author: Chris Gardiner

Applicant: G Peckham

Owner: G J Peckham (owned by Council at time of lodgement)

Estimated Cost: $350,000

Parcel no: 46335

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That it be recommended to Council that DA2016 – 1000.1 for a Waste Management Facility and Caretaker’s Residence at Lot 315, DP 1075670, No. 6 Enterprise Place, Wauchope, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a waste management facility and caretaker’s residence 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, 2 submissions have been received.

At the time of lodgement of the development application, the land was owned by Council and under a contract for sale to the Applicant subject to determination of the application. However, the Applicant has proceeded with the purchase of the land and Council no longer has an interest in the property as a land owner. Whilst no longer strictly triggering the need to consider Council’s Conflict of Interest Policy when finalising the assessment of the application, it is considered that it is still appropriate for the application to be determined by full Council given Council was a party to the application when lodged.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and surrounding development

The site has an area of 2118m².

The site is zoned IN1 General Industrial in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Construction of an industrial building for the purpose of processing grease trap waste.

· Construction of a caretaker’s residence within the building.

· Associated car parking and landscaping.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 22 December 2016 – Application lodged.

· 23 March 2017 to 21 April 2017 – Application notified to neighbours and advertised in local newspaper.

· 12 April 2017 – Additional information requested by NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA).

· 22 June 2017 – Additional information submitted by the Applicant.

· 19 September 2017 – General terms of approval for integrated development refused by EPA.

· 15 March 2018 – Additional information submitted by Applicant in response to EPA concerns.

· 1 August 2018 – Further additional information requested by EPA.

· 31 August 2018 - Additional information submitted by Applicant in response to EPA request.

· 6 December 2018 – Further additional information requested by EPA.

· 6 February 2019 - General terms of approval for integrated development issued by EPA.

· 8 February 2019 – Amended noise and odour assessments provided to objectors for further comment.

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. 33 - Hazardous and Offensive Development

The subject SEPP was introduced to clarify the definitions for hazardous and offensive industries and to apply guidelines for the assessment of industries that have the potential to create hazards or an offence. In this case, the development has the potential to be offensive given the potential odour impacts of the storage and processing of grease trap wastewater and the provisions of the SEPP apply. Having considered the SEPP and the Department of Planning and Environment’s Hazardous and Offensive Development Application Guidelines and with the imposition of conditions, the proposed development is not considered to be a hazardous or offensive industry.

Particularly, the Applicant has demonstrated that odour impacts from the development will be within acceptable levels and appropriate management practices have been recommended to reduce the likelihood of offensive odour emissions.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage

The proposed development does not include any signage in the form of business/building identification and/or general advertising. A condition is recommended requiring separate approval for any signage that is not Exempt Development.

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

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

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

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

· Clause 2.2 - The subject site is zoned IN1 General Industrial. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the IN1 zone landuse table, the proposed development for a waste management facility is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the IN1 zone are as follows:

o To provide a wide range of industrial and warehouse land uses.

o To encourage employment opportunities.

o To minimise any adverse effect of industry on other land uses.

o To support and protect industrial land for industrial uses.

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

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

o The proposal is a permissible landuse;

o The development is for an industrial use on industrial land;

o The development would encourage employment opportunities;

o The proposal has demonstrated that impacts on other land uses can be satisfactorily managed.

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

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

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

No draft instruments apply to the site.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force:

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: Chapter 3.5 - Industrial Development*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3.5.3.1	Minimum setbacks are provided as follows: · 10m from a classified road; · 7.6m from any other road boundary; · 3m from any secondary road frontage.	Minimum setback of 10.5m to Enterprise Place and 10m to King Creek Road.	Yes
3.5.3.2	Elevations of building which are visible from a public road, reserve or adjacent or adjoining residential areas are to be constructed using: · brick, masonry, pre-coloured metal cladding, or · appropriately finished ‘tilt-slab’ concrete; or · a combination of a number of these materials.	Pre-coloured metal cladding.	Yes
3.5.3.2	Large unrelieved expanses of wall or building mass are not favoured, and as such should be broken up by the use of suitable building articulation, fenestration or alternative architectural enhancements.	Front elevation broken up with door openings and provided with some articulation with upper floor balcony of caretaker’s flat.	Yes
3.5.3.3	Material storage/work areas and volumes to be provided with application.	Details of storage capacity for wastewater treatment provided in the application.	Yes
3.5.3.3	Open work and storage areas to be located at rear of premises and screen from view by landscaping and/or fencing minimum 2m high.	None proposed.	n/a
3.5.3.4	Detailed landscaping plan submitted.	Concept landscaping plan submitted.	Yes
	Landscaped strip 3m wide for 2/3 of each road frontage.	3m wide landscaping to 48% of Enterprise Place frontage, and 1.5m wide landscaping for a further 21% of the frontage. No landscaping proposed for King Creek Road frontage. Condition recommended requiring an amended landscape plan to be submitted prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, including an additional landscaped strip minimum 3m wide for 2/3 of the King Creek Road frontage.	No, but acceptable.
	No fencing in front setback unless for display items. High quality fencing and landscaping.	No front fencing to Enterprise Place identified on the plans. Existing security fencing to King Creek Road, which is essentially the rear boundary of the site.	Yes
3.5.3.5	An onsite recreation area is provided for staff that: · Includes seating, tables and rubbish bin. · If outside, is adequately protected from the weather · Is safely accessible to all staff. · Is separate private from public areas. · Is located away from noisy or odorous activities.	The Applicant has indicated that the business would only employ the resident manager and these facilities are not considered necessary.	No, but acceptable.
3.5.3.6	Provide onsite facilities for changing, showering and secure bike storage.	The caretaker’s residence includes such facilities for the resident manager.	Yes
3.5.3.7	Development complies with NSW Industrial Noise Policy.	Capable of complying. Condition recommended regarding offensive noise.	Yes
	Building openings located to minimise noise impacts if within 400m of residential zone.	Building openings oriented towards adjoining industrial activities.	Yes
	External plant such as generators, air conditioning plant and the like, should be enclosed to minimise noise nuisance and located away from residences.	None identified on plans.	n/a
	External and security lighting should be directed and shielded to avoid light spillage to adjoining residential areas.	No residential areas nearby.	n/a
	Driveways should be arranged or screened to avoid headlight glare on residential windows.	Properties opposite the driveway are industrial uses and would not be impacted by headlight glare.	Yes
3.5.3.8	Office space ancillary to the industrial use is permissible with consent, subject to satisfaction of the following matters: · That the office component of a proposed development is ancillary to the functions carried out in the factory, warehouse or other industrial use. · That the office area is not leased to a separate company or entity. · That parking facilities are adequate to cater for the size of the office development.	Office space is ancillary to the industrial use and is not proposed to be separately leased. Parking calculations for the development have accounted for the office component.	Yes
3.5.3.9	The site should be serviced by reticulated water (and dual reticulation where this is available), sewer and telecommunications.	Yes	Yes
3.5.3.10	Garbage storage areas are not visible from a public place.	Garbage capable of being stored out of public view. Condition recommended confirming this requirement.	Yes
3.5.3.11	Stormwater management strategy prepared.	Condition recommended requiring stormwater management plan prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.
3.5.3.11	Rainwater tank and dual reticulation for non-potable uses on the site.	Rainwater tank proposed. Dual reticulation not available to the site.	Yes

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline: · Casual surveillance and sightlines · Land use mix and activity generators · Definition of use and ownership · Lighting · Way finding · Predictable routes and entrapment locations	The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area. The caretaker’s residence would provide supervision and casual surveillance of the site.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Cut of up to 1.4m proposed more than 1m outside the external wall. Considered acceptable having regard to the scale of the building. Conditions recommended requiring engineering certification of the proposed retaining wall and detailed design of stormwater drainage.	No, but acceptable
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontages	None proposed.	Yes
2.3.3.2	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structural engineer	Condition recommended confirming this requirement.	Yes
2.3.3.8 onwards	Removal of hollow bearing trees	None proposed to be removed.	Yes
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100mm diameter trunk and 3m outside dwelling footprint	One Koala food tree located centrally on the site would be impacted by the development and is proposed to be removed. Two further trees adjacent to the eastern boundary are proposed to be retained, and adequate Tree Protection Zones have been provided to ensure their long term survival. Adequate area is available in the landscaped area along the King Creek Road frontage to provide 2 replacement trees. However, the location of the site in an established industrial area is not considered suitable for offset plantings, due to the risk of mortality. A condition is recommended requiring satisfactory arrangements with Council for 2 koala food trees to be provided at a suitable location off-site.	Yes
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads. Existing accesses rationalised or removed where practical	Access to Enterprise Place.	Yes
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking.	Single crossing of acceptable width.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Off-street parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. Reduction possible if supported by parking demand study.	Proposal includes: · 517m² of industrial use at 1 space per 70m² GFA; · 21m² of office at 1 space per 30m² GLFA. · Caretaker’s residence - 1 space required. The overall parking demand of the development is therefore 9.1 spaces (rounded to 10 spaces). The submitted plan identifies 11 parking spaces and complies with the minimum requirement.	Yes
2.5.3.7	Customer parking to be easily accessible.	Parking at front of the site and easily accessible.	Yes
2.5.3.7	Parking in accordance with AS 2890.1.	Capable of complying. Certification of compliance required prior to Construction Certificate and Occupation Certificate.	Yes
2.5.3.8	Aged and disabled persons and persons wheeling prams or trolleys are provided with suitable access and parking in accordance with AS 2890.1 and AS 2890.2.	One accessible parking space proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Appropriate perimeter landscaping proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Condition recommended confirming requirement for sealed surface.	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)	Capable of complying. Details to be submitted with CC/S138 applications.	Yes
2.5.3.16	Transitional grades min. 2m length	Capable of complying. Details to be submitted with CC/S138 applications.	Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Stormwater management plan to be submitted prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.	Yes
2.5.3.17	No direct discharge to K&G or swale drain	Development required to be connected to the piped drainage in Enterprise Place. Stormwater management plan to be submitted prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.	Yes
2.5.3.19	Off street commercial vehicles facilities are provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.2	Capable of complying.	Yes
	Loading bays will be provided in accordance with the following requirements; · Minimum dimensions to be 3.5m wide x 6m long. (This may increase according to the size and type of vehicle). · Vertical clearance shall be a minimum of 5m. · Adequate provision shall be made on-site for the loading, unloading and manoeuvring of delivery vehicles in an area separate from any customer car parking area. · A limited number of ‘employee only’ car parking spaces may be combined with loading facilities. · Loading areas shall be designed to accommodate appropriate turning paths for the maximum design vehicle using the site. · Vehicles are to be capable of manoeuvring in and out of docks without causing conflict with other street or on-site traffic. · Vehicles are to stand wholly within the site during such operations.	Loading bay 11m x 5.2m with 3.9m vertical clearance at roller door. Condition recommended requiring amended plans with the Construction Certificate application demonstrating that a minimum 5m vertical clearance can be achieved. The submitted plans demonstrate that delivery vehicles are able to manoeuvre within the site and exit driving forwards.	Yes
	Other commercial development shall provide one loading bay for the first 1,000m² floor space and one additional bay for each additional 2,000m².	One loading bay proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.20	The location and design of loading bays should integrate into the overall design of the building and car parking areas.	Satisfactory integration.	Yes
2.5.3.20	Where visible from the public domain, loading bays are located behind the building.	Loading bay will be visible from the public road, but is enclosed with a roller door. Landscaping in the site frontage would also screen the loading area to some extent. Considered acceptable.	Yes
2.5.3.21	Plans to confirm vehicular access, circulation and manoeuvring in accordance with AUSTROADS and AS 2890.	Submitted plans demonstrate that satisfactory circulation and manoeuvring areas are available.	Yes
	Adequate area provided for loading/unloading and manoeuvring of B-Doubles where access is available from approved B-Double routes.	B-Double access not proposed.	n/a
	Ingress and egress in a forward direction.	Submitted plans demonstrate that ingress and egress is possible in a forward direction	Yes
	Driveways >6m from tangent point of kerb radius and >1.5m from common side boundary with another lot.	Driveway location satisfactory.	Yes
	Driveways not locate within intersection or restricted areas, and adequate sight distance available.	Driveway location satisfactory.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
3.2.2.2	Front setback (Residential not R5 zone): • Min. 6.0m classified road • Min. 4.5m local road or within 20% of adjoining dwelling if on corner lot • Min. 3.0m secondary road Min. 2.0m Laneway	Minimum 24m front setback to caretaker’s residence.	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	First floor setback minimum 3m.	Yes
3.2.2.6	35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. Grade and directly accessible from ground floor living area.	Proposed caretaker’s residence is located at first floor level and has a balcony with dimensions of 2.5m x 7.18m. As there is no ground level access to the flat it is considered reasonable for private open space to be provided to the standards applicable to apartments (3.3.2.21 of the DCP). The proposal exceeds the minimum requirements for a 1 bedroom apartment (8m², minimum 2m wide). It is also noted that SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 allows caretaker’s flats with up to 100m² floor area without any private open space as Complying Development. Private open space is therefore considered acceptable for the proposed use.	No, but acceptable
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 adequately addressed through building design and separation.	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 relating to the site.

iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

No matters prescribed by the regulations are applicable to the proposal.

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

The site has a general north-easterly street frontage orientation to Enterprise Place and a southerly orientation to King Creek Road.

The site is located within an established industrial precinct with a range of uses. Adjoining the site to the west is a water reservoir maintenance business. Adjoining the site to the east is a depot. Adjoining the site to the north is a vehicle repair station. Vacant industrial land is located on the southern side of King Creek Road, and rural land is located approximately 250m to the east on the eastern side of the North Coast Railway.

The nearest dwelling (other than caretaker’s residences associated with industrial uses) is located approximately 350m east of the site.

Roads

The site has road frontage to Enterprise Place and King Creek Road. Adjacent to the site, both roads are sealed public roads under the care and control of Council.

Traffic and Transport

The traffic associated with the development is unlikely to have any adverse impacts to the existing road network within the immediate locality. The submitted Statement of Environmental Effects indicates that the maximum number of weekly deliveries would be 3, and the traffic generated by the resident caretaker would also be minimal.

Site Frontage & Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed through one access driveway to Enterprise Place. No vehicular access is permitted or proposed to King Creek Road. Access shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards, and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

Parking and Manoeuvring

A total of 11 parking spaces (including 1 disabled space) have been provided on-site. Parking and driveway widths on site can comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

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

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development has an existing sealed water service to the development lot.

Final water service sizing will need to be determined by a hydraulic consultant to suit the domestic and commercial components of the development, as well as fire service and backflow protection requirements.

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is connected to Sewer via junction located on the northern property boundary. The proposed development is to drain to the existing sewer junction.

The amount of sewage discharged into Council’s sewer system shall not exceed 520kL over a 12 month period. The proponent is required to install and maintain a flow-meter on the discharge outlet to Council’s sewer system.

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

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards the street frontage and is currently serviced via a direct connection to the public piped drainage system.

The legal point of discharge for the proposed development is defined as a direct connection to Council’s stormwater pit/pipeline within Enterprise Place via the existing junction.

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 CC.

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

· The original industrial subdivision included a detention basin assuming all lots would comprise a certain percentage of impervious area. If the proposal exceeds this assumed quantity of impervious area, additional on-site stormwater detention facilities (or similar) may be required, to ensure that the post development site stormwater discharge rate does not exceed the pre development discharge rate for all storm events up to 100 year ARI.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

No known items of Aboriginal or European heritage significance exist on the property. No adverse impacts anticipated.

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

Minimal adverse impacts expected as the treatment facility is within an indoor bunded area and all unloading will take place inside the building. The facility must be operated and maintained properly. The bunding provided must comply with the EPA guideline “Storing and Handling Liquids: Environmental Protection Participant’s Manual” and it is recommended that spill kits be provided in locations inside the building that are outside of the proposed bunded area.

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

An Odour Impact Assessment prepared by The Odour Unit Pty Ltd and dated July 2016 was submitted with the application. The report has been amended during the assessment process, with the latest version being dated March 2018.

The odour impact assessment for the project is noted to have been carried out in accordance with the methods outlined by the NSW EPA documents:

· “Approved Methods for the Modelling and Assessment of Air Pollutants in New South Wales” (2005), and

· “Technical Framework: Assessment and Management of Odour from Stationary Sources in NSW” (2006).

The assessment has adopted an Odour Performance Criterion of 5 Odour Units, based on a population of the affected area of 30 persons. The consultant has carried out modelling using AUSPLUME software for the following scenarios:

· Scenario 1 – Deliveries once per week (10,000L per week);

· Scenario 2 – Deliveries once per week (20,000L per week);

· Scenario 3 – Deliveries once per day (70,000L per week).

The modelling indicates that odour emissions would comply with EPA odour criteria for all three scenarios. Some key assumptions that were made in the modelling include:

· All transfer of waste will occur via sealed systems;

· The delivery and processing areas would be enclosed and mechanically ventilated;

· Sludge removal will be carried out via a sealed system;

· A self-sealing flap or carbon filter will be installed on the vents at the top of the sludge holding tanks.

· Deliveries will be carried out during daylight hours, generally around 10.30am.

The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has reviewed the odour assessment and issued General Terms of Approval for the proposal dated 6 February 2019. The General Terms of Approval include conditions to implement the above recommendations, and additional controls restricting deliveries to a maximum of 10,000L (once per week) between the hours of 10.00am and 3.00pm, requiring the construction of a stack as part of the mechanical ventilation system, and requiring an appropriate management plan. A condition has been recommended incorporating the EPA requirements.

In addition to the EPA requirements, conditions are recommended in relation to the following practices to assist in the management of odour emissions from the premises.

· Roller doors of the delivery dock and processing area are to be fitted with appropriate seals and are to remain closed during waste transfer and processing activities.

· The external door to the delivery dock is to be fitted with an appropriate seal to prevent the escape of odours, or provide for an air lock.

· The internal door between the processing area and the bioreactor area is to be self-closing and fitted with an appropriate seal to prevent the escape of odours, or provide for an air lock.

· Delivery vehicles are to remain within the delivery dock for a sufficient period to allow all odorous air to be mechanically extracted prior to the roller door being opened and the delivery vehicle exiting the building.

With the above controls in place it is considered that the proposal can satisfy the EPA odour criteria.

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will require removal of one koala food tree as discussed earlier under the DCP section. Offset plantings will be required for the tree, and the proposal will be unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on biodiversity or threatened species of flora and fauna.

Waste

Satisfactory arrangements are in place for proposed storage and collection of the office and domestic waste and recyclables.

Liquid wastes will be treated and disposed to sewer in accordance with a Trade Waste Agreement. Sludge from the storage tanks is proposed to be collected via a sealed system on disposed of at an appropriate waste management facility.

Standard precautionary site management condition also recommended during construction.

Energy

The proposal includes measures to address energy efficiency and will be required to comply with the requirements of BASIX and Section J of the Building Code of Australia. No adverse impacts anticipated.

Noise and vibration

The Applicant has submitted a Noise Impact Assessment prepared by Matrix Thornton and dated 20 December 2018. The assessment identifies the main noise sources for the development to be:

· Bio Reactor Treatment System running continuously, 7 days a week. The system requires an electric motor to operate a mechanical trommel and two electric air pumps.

· Delivery of wastewater to the facility, during daylight hours, 2-3 times per week. A rigid, 16-tonne truck will be required for this purpose.

· Split system, household air conditioning unit, running continuously, 7 days a week.

· Exhaust fan system for the living area and work space. The system requires two electric roof fans, rated at 2,150m³/h each, for air extraction from the processing area, plus a small electric exhaust fan. The fans will be run continuously, 7 days a week.

The Matrix Thornton assessment has modelled the noise levels from the proposed development to be below the relevant criteria in the NSW Noise Policy for Industry.

A Construction Noise Assessment prepared by Matrix Thornton and dated 20 December 2018 has also been submitted. The assessment indicates that the construction activities would exceed noise goals for detail excavation and car park construction at the residence at 483 King Creek Road, and in all categories at 4 Enterprise Place. However, neither location would be ‘highly noise affected’ as defined in the Interim Construction Noise Guideline (>75dBA).

Section 12 of the report includes a list of measures that should be implemented during construction to minimise noise impacts.

The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has reviewed the noise impact assessment and construction noise assessment and issued General Terms of Approval for the proposal dated 6 February 2019. The General Terms of Approval include conditions relating to the management of noise and a condition has been recommended incorporating the EPA requirements.

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

The main part of the proposal is for a building of Class 5 – 8 under the Building Code of Australia (BCA). Compliance with the deemed to satisfy provisions of the BCA is taken to be an acceptable solution in terms of construction standards.

The proposal is considered to be consistent with the aims and objectives of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 in terms of access, water and services, emergency planning and landscaping/vegetation management.

The building also includes a caretaker’s residence. BAL 12.5 construction will be required for the dwelling and a condition is recommended confirming this requirement.

Safety, security and crime prevention

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area. The caretaker’s residence would provide supervision and casual surveillance of the site.

Social impacts in the locality

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

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

See comments under Noise and Vibration regarding construction noise impacts.

Cumulative impacts

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

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

The proposal will fit into the locality and the site attributes are conducive to the proposed development. Site constraints have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

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 submitted Statement of Environmental Effects has omitted details of existing development in proximity to the site.	Noted. The assessment of the application has considered the context of the site and surrounding land uses.
The adjoining business at 4 Enterprise Place relies on clean air for recharging of dive cylinders and the provision of surface supplied breathing apparatus. A diver training tank and air compressor are located within close proximity to the proposed development. Reduced air quality would affect the health and safety of employees at this property.	The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) have reviewed the proposal and are satisfied that with the recommended conditions the development can operate within the EPA odour criteria. It is noted that the highest risk of odour impacts occurs during the delivery of liquid waste to the treatment system. Deliveries will be limited to once per week between the hours of 10.00am and 3.00pm.
The Applicant’s SEPP 33 assessment fails to identify sensitive receivers of a diving operations centre and food manufacturing industry.	Noted. The assessment of the application has considered the context of the site and surrounding land uses.
The proposal is inconsistent with the IN1 zone objectives as it will result in adverse odour impacts to nearby properties.	See comments under Air and Microclimate earlier in this report.
The evaluation of whether the proposal is designated development listed in Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 does not identify the caretaker’s residence at 4 Enterprise Place, which is located within 250m of the development.	The relevant provisions of the Regulation have been considered as noted in Part 5 of this report below.
Systems that rely upon biological processes and best practice are prone to failure, and can take a long time to recover.	The EPA is satisfied that practical and effective systems and practices are able to be put in place to manage the risk of failure. The development would be subject to an ongoing Environment Protection Licence and would need to continuously demonstrate that the management regime is effective.
The Odour Impact Assessment relies upon model weather and odour data that is not from the site and does not account for local weather conditions such as inversion layers that could prevent odours from dispersing into the atmosphere.	The EPA guidelines allow for the development of a weather model where detailed meteorological information is not available for the subject site. The EPA General Terms of Approval restrict delivery times to between 10.00am and 3.00pm to avoid the times that temperature inversions typically occur. The Applicant will be required monitor meteorological conditions continuously.
The building is unlikely to contain offensive odours unless combined with substantial engineering controls and filtered extractors	The EPA General Terms of Approval require the delivery and processing areas to be enclosed and provided with continuous mechanical ventilation to a stack. Ventilation openings of the sludge storage tanks are also required to be fitted with carbon filters.
Sludge removal is expected to be odorous as it requires storage prior to collection and can be subject to delays in transportation.	Sludge removal will be required to be carried out using a sealed system
Night time emergency deliveries are not considered appropriate due to meteorological conditions.	Agreed. The EPA General Terms of Approval specify that all receipt, transfer and removal of wastewater from the premises is to be carried out between 10am and 3pm Monday to Friday. Delivery outside these hours is only permitted in the event that delivery is required by the police or other authorities for safety reasons, and/or the operation or personnel or equipment are endangered. In such circumstances, prior notification is to be provided to the EPA and affected residents as soon as possible, or within a reasonable period in the case of an emergency.
Evidence from similar facilities suggests that greater separation front surrounding land uses is beneficial in the event of a pollution incident.	Greater separation is beneficial in the management of both noise and odour. Facilities with less separation will require a greater degree of construction, technological, and management solutions to achieve the same level of impact. The impacts of the proposal have been considered in the context of the separation distances available on the site.
It does not seem economically viable for the facility to process only 10,000 litres per week. It is likely that there will be future applications to expand the business.	The consent authority must assess the proposal as submitted. Any future expansion would be subject to a separate application.
How can Council be independent when they are both the vendor of the land and the adjudicator on the development application?	The sale of the land has settled and Council no longer has an interest in the application as a property owner. However, to manage any perception of a conflict of interest and ensure the most transparent process possible, the application will be reviewed by the Development Assessment Panel, and determined by full Council.
The submitted reports have many errors of fact that should be taken into account.	The noise and odour assessments have been reviewed by Council’s Environmental Health Officer and the EPA’s air pollution experts and considered acceptable subject to the recommended conditions.
Council should give others the opportunity to purchase the property and maintain it as open space.	The sale of the land has settled and it is not possible for other parties to be given the opportunity to purchase the land.
The reports are inconsistent in relation to the amount of waste to be processed.	The EPA have amended their General Terms of Approval to clarify that the facility must not receive more than 10,000 litres of waste per week. The recommended conditions clarify this restriction. A flow meter will also be required to be fitted to monitor the amount of treated water that will be discharged to sewer. This will provide an additional means of regulating the capacity of the facility.

(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 7.11 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 towards roads, open space, community cultural services, emergency services and administration buildings.

5. DESIGNATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposal does not meet the threshold for designated development in Part 1 (32) of Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. The development is within 500m of a residential zone and within 250m of a dwelling not associated with the development. However, Council has previously provided the Applicant with correspondence confirming that in the opinion of the consent authority, the proposed development is not considered likely to significantly affect the amenity of the neighbourhood by reason of noise, visual impacts, air pollution (including odour, smoke, fumes or dust), vermin or traffic.

6. INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposal is integrated development, requiring and Environment Protection Licence in accordance with Sections 43(b), 48, and 55 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. The NSW Environment Protection Authority has reviewed the proposal and issued General Terms of Approval dated 6 February 2019.

A condition is recommended incorporating the EPA’s conditions into the consent.

7. CONCLUSION AND STATEMENT OF REASON

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

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

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

Attachments

1 View. DA2016 - 1000.1 Recommended Conditions

2 View. DA2016 - 1000.1 Contribution Estimate

3 View. DA2016 - 1000.1 Plans

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 27/03/2019

Item: 06

Subject: DA2018 - 582.1 Signage at Lot 1 DP 831145, No. 140 Pacific Drive, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Chris Gardiner

Applicant: Collins W Collins Pty Ltd

Owner: Wei Chen Superannuation Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: $10,000

Parcel no: 19758

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2018 – 582.1 for Signage at Lot 1, DP 831145, No. 140 Pacific Drive, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for signage 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, 4 submissions have been received.

This report recommends that the development application be approved subject to conditions.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and surrounding development

The site has an area of 1189m².

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

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

History of compliance investigations

The existing digital fuel pricing sign located adjacent to the northern boundary has been erected without consent and Council’s Compliance staff commenced investigations in mid-2018. A decision on the appropriate action to take in this regard has been deferred pending the outcome of this application.

If this application is granted consent, it is recommended that a condition be imposed requiring removal of the existing sign within 3 months of the date of determination.

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Demolition/removal of an existing (unlawful) digital fuel pricing sign;

· Erection of the sign in an alternative location.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 6 August 2018 – Application lodged.

· 14 August 2018 to 27 August 2018 – Neighbour notification.

· 24 September 2018 – Site inspected by assessing officer.

· 24 September 2018 – Additional information requested.

· 12 October 2018 – Additional information submitted by Applicant.

· 17 October 2018 – Further additional information requested.

· 15 February 2019 – Amended plans submitted by Applicant, and provided to objectors for further comment.

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) Any Environmental Planning Instrument:

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

The site is identified as being potentially contaminated due to underground fuel storage and use as a service station. However, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development in its current state as it relates to the continued use of an existing structure and does not include any change of use or excavation work.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage

The proposed development includes proposed advertising signage in the form of business/building identification and/or general advertising.

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

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

Applicable clauses for consideration	Comments	Satisfactory
Clause 8(a) Consistent with objectives of the policy as set out in Clause 3(1)(a).	The proposal is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the policy.	Yes
Clause 14(1) Duration of consents	Consent will expire after 15 years and a condition is recommended confirming this requirement.	Yes
Clause 23 Freestanding advertisements	The sign would not protrude above the dominant skyline when viewed within a 1km visual catchment. While the top of the sign is slightly above the ridge of the roof of the building, the site is at a low point in the local topography along Pacific Drive and there are many taller buildings in the visual catchment. The tree canopy (particularly along the eastern side of Pacific Drive) is substantially higher than the top of the sign.
Schedule 1(1) Character of the area.	While the site is located in a residential area with limited signage, the proposal is considered to be compatible with the existing character of the site. A pylon sign was approved in the same location under DA1990/315, and signage of different forms has been retained since that time.	Yes
Schedule 1(2) Special areas.	With appropriate controls the signage is considered likely to have any greater amenity or visual impacts on the residential locality than the existing approved signage.	Yes
Schedule 1(3) Views and vistas.	The sign would not adversely affect views or vistas.	Yes
Schedule 1(4) Streetscape, setting or landscape.	The top of the sign is approximately 200mm lower than the highest part of the existing building, and is well below the maximum permissible building height of 8.5m applying to the area. Two other pole signs of similar height and scale (relating to tourist accommodation) exist on Pacific Drive within the visual catchment.	Yes
Schedule 1(5) Site and building.	The proposal does not affect any important features of the site or building and is compatible with the scale of the building.	Yes
Schedule 1(6) Associated devices and logos with advertisements and advertising structures.	Liberty logo integrated into sign design.	Yes
Schedule 1(7) Illumination.	The illumination of the existing unauthorised sign (particularly the digital fuel pricing information) has been subject to complaint due to glare and amenity impacts on neighbouring properties. Applicant has indicated that the sign is only illuminated during business hours of the neighbourhood shop (7.00am to 8.00pm) and is capable of being adjusted to reduce the intensity. Conditions are recommended restricting the illumination to between 7.00am and 8.00pm, and also requiring certification that the intensity of the illumination has been set at a level consistent with AS4282 – Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.	Yes
Schedule 1(7) Safety.	The proposed sign overhangs the Pacific Drive road reserve by 500mm. The vertical clearance above the footpath is proposed to be sufficient to allow for safe passage of pedestrians and cyclists. Approval under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 will be required for the structure. As the proposed sign overhangs public land, a condition is also recommended requiring structural certification to ensure public safety.	Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is located within a coastal use area and proximity area for littoral rainforest.

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

In accordance with clause 11 of the SEPP, the proposal is not expected to adversely impact the biophysical, hydrological or ecological integrity of the adjacent littoral rainforest, or affect water flows to or from the littoral rainforest. The sign has been installed on an existing pole over a concrete hardstand area.

Having regard to clause 14 of the SEPP the proposed development is not considered likely to result in any of the following:

a) any adverse impact on existing, safe access to and along the foreshore, beach, headland or rock platform for members of the public, including persons with a disability,

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

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

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

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

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

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

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

· Clause 2.2 - The subject site is zoned R1 General Residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table, the proposed development for signage is a prohibited landuse.

However, Council granted consent for advertising signs (including a pole sign in the same location as the proposal) under DA1990/315. The signage has been retained since that time, although the content appears to have been changed without consent. The signage is therefore considered to be an existing use as defined in Section 4.65 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The existing use is not considered to have been abandoned for the purpose of Section 4.66 of the Act, and the regulations make provision for the existing use to be altered, extended, and intensified.

In accordance with Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, consent is required for the alteration, extension, or intensification of an existing use. The proposal relates to the same land on which the existing use is located, and is for the purpose of the existing use (signage) and no other use. The proposal is therefore permissible on this basis.

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 having regard to the following:

o The proposed signage relates to services provided at the site for the day to day needs of residents.

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the structure above ground level (existing) is 4.85m which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

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

· Clause 7.13 - Satisfactory arrangements are in place for provision of essential services to service the development.

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

No draft instruments apply to the site.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force:

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
2.2.2.1	Signs primarily identifying products or services are not acceptable, even where relating to products or services available on that site.	The proposed sign displays information about fuel products and pricing and does not meet this provision. However, it is a legal requirement for all fuel retailers in NSW to display fuel pricing information that is visible to motorists. The content of the sign is limited to this information and does not extend to general advertising of other products or services.	No, but acceptable
	Signage is not permitted outside property boundaries except where mounted upon buildings and clear of pedestrians and road traffic. No signage is permitted upon light or power poles or upon the nature strip (the area between the property boundary and constructed roadway). Limited directional signage and “A” frame signage may separately be approved by Council under the Roads Act 1993 or section 68 of the Local government Act 1993.	The proposed sign overhangs the Pacific Drive road reserve by 500mm. The vertical clearance above the footpath is proposed to be 2.6m to allow for safe passage of pedestrians and cyclists. Approval under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 will be required for the structure. As the proposed sign overhangs public land, a condition is also recommended requiring structural certification to ensure public safety.	Yes
	An on-building 'chalkboard' sign, for the purpose of describing services or goods for sale which vary on a regular basis generally should not be any larger than 1.5m2, and should contain a sign written heading indicating the premises to which it refers.	Not proposed.	N/A
	On-premise signs should not project above or to the side of building facades	N/A	N/A
2.2.2.2	Where there is potential for light spill from signage in a non residential zone adjoining or adjacent to residential development, illuminated signage is to be fitted with a time switch to dim by 50% or turn off the light by 11pm each night, depending on the nature of the development.	The illumination of the existing unauthorised sign (particularly the digital fuel pricing information) has been subject to complaint due to glare and amenity impacts on neighbouring properties. Applicant has indicated that the sign is only illuminated during business hours of the neighbourhood shop (7.00am to 8.00pm) and is capable of being adjusted to reduce the intensity. Conditions are recommended restricting the illumination to between 7.00am and 8.00pm, and also requiring certification that the intensity of the illumination has been set at a level consistent with AS4282 – Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.	Yes
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline: · Casual surveillance and sightlines · Land use mix and activity generators · Definition of use and ownership · Lighting · Way finding · Predictable routes and entrapment locations	The proposed development 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.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	None proposed.	Yes
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontages	None proposed.	N/A
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structural engineer	None proposed.	N/A
	Combination of retaining wall and front fence height	None proposed.	N/A
2.3.3.8 onwards	Removal of hollow bearing trees	None proposed to be removed.	N/A
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100mm diameter trunk and 3m outside dwelling footprint	None proposed to be removed.	N/A
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.

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

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

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

iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations:

No matters prescribed by the regulations are applicable to the proposal.

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

The site has a general easterly street frontage orientation to Pacific Drive and a southerly frontage to Shelly Beach Road. The proposed signage is located on the Pacific Drive frontage.

Adjoining the site to the north, west and south are residential land uses. Adjoining the site to the east is the Sea Acres Nature Reserve.

Traffic and Transport

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

Water Supply Connection

The proposed sign does not require water supply.

Sewer Connection

The proposed sign does not require sewer connection.

Stormwater

The proposal would not alter existing stormwater management for the site.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

No known items of Aboriginal or European heritage significance exist on the property. No adverse impacts anticipated.

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

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

Air and microclimate

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

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will not require any removal/clearing of any significant vegetation and therefore will be unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on biodiversity or threatened species of flora and fauna. Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act is considered to be satisfied.

Waste

No adverse impacts anticipated.

Energy

No adverse impacts anticipated.

Noise and vibration

No adverse impacts anticipated.

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

The proposal is a replacement of a previously approved sign that is detached from an existing commercial building. The proposal is not expected to increase the bushfire hazard to the site having regard to the aims and objectives of Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006.

Safety, security and crime prevention

Social impacts in the locality

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

Economic impact in the locality

No adverse impacts anticipated.

Site design and internal design

The proposed sign location has been changed from adjacent to the northern boundary to a central location of the Pacific Drive frontage. The location is considered to better respond to the site constraints and sensitive residential uses adjoining the site.

Construction

The proposal with require a S138 approval, which will address safety issues associated with works on/over the public road.

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 site has a long history of use as a general store and signage associated with the sale of fuel from the premises has existed since the early 1990’s. The proposed new signage is considered to be compatible with the locality, and the location would be lower impact than the previously approved sign.

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

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

Four (4) 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
Illumination is too bright and causing loss of amenity adjoining residents. The intensity of the illumination is much greater than the 80 watt mercury vapour lamp allowed for the sign originally approved in 1990.	The proposed sign is approximately 15m further from the adjoining residential property than the sign approved in 1990 under DA1990/315. A condition has also been recommended requiring certification that the intensity of the illumination has been set at a level consistent with AS4282 – Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.
Sign has been erected without Council approval.	Noted. Compliance action has been commenced in relation to the unauthorised sign, but was suspended pending the outcome of the development application.
The sign is incompatible with the environmentally sensitive Sea Acres Nature Reserve and the character of the area.	The illumination of the proposed sign would be restricted to between 7.00am and 8.00pm and is not expected to impact fauna in the adjacent nature reserve to any greater extent than the existing street lighting or vehicle headlights on Pacific Drive. There are two other examples of illuminated pole signs of a similar scale in the visual catchment on Pacific Drive (Shelly Beach Resort and Seychelles Holiday Apartments). The site itself has a history of commercial uses and associated signage. The proposal is considered to be compatible with the character of the area.
The sign will reduce the effective width of the internal driveway and make it more difficult for fuel tankers to safely access the site for deliveries. Tankers currently reverse into the site from Pacific Drive and obstruct both lanes of traffic.	The proposal has been modified and the sign is no longer proposed to be located on the northern side of the driveway. The new location would not obstruct tanker deliveries.
The application provides a number of different sign sizes and types and it is not clear which one is being applied for.	The type and size of the proposed sign has been clarified in the amended plans.
The sign should be located at ground level in a location that has less impact on neighbouring residents.	It is agreed that a ground mounted sign would likely have less impact on neighbouring residents, and this suggestion has been provided to the Applicant. The consent authority must consider the merits of the proposal submitted.
Fuel prices could be displayed without illumination, as they have been in the past.	Noted. The trading hours include a period after dark, particularly in winter, and it is necessary for the fuel pricing to be visible to motorists.
The sign is substantially higher and has a larger display area than the sign originally approved in the same location in 1990.	The previous sign approved in 1990 under DA1990/315, and as modified in 1992 was located adjacent to the northern boundary and had the following key controls in the conditions of consent: · Maximum height: 3.6m; · Maximum display area: 1.1m x 2.5m (2.75m²); · Maximum boundary overhang: 350mm. While it is not necessary for the current proposal to be the same as originally approved in 1990, it has the following characteristics for comparison: · Height: 4.85m (4.45m as modified by the recommended conditions); · Display area: 1.2m x 2.2m (2.64m²); · Boundary overhang: 500mm. It is noted that the current proposal is located approximately 15m further from the adjoining residential property than the sign approved under DA1990/315.
The sign will increase business at the premises and result in more vehicles queuing into Pacific Drive, causing a traffic safety hazard.	The site has previously had signage displaying the fuel company branding and fuel pricing information. It is not considered that an updated digital sign displaying the same information would increase traffic to the business.
The fuel company should be asked to provide Council with the dimensions of the smallest possible sign, or otherwise have a smaller sign custom made.	The submitted proposal is the smallest of the standard sized signs used by the fuel company, and the display area is less than the maximum previously permitted under DA1990/315. The height of the pole is able to be varied for this type of sign, but in this instance the minimum clearance to the underside of the sign where it overhangs the public road, restricts the extent that it is possible to reduce the height. In accordance with AUS-SPEC, the minimum permitted clearance between the footpath and the underside of the sign is 2.2m. The submitted proposal provided a 2.6m clearance and could be reduced by 0.4m. With the above change the overall height could be reduced to 4.45m, which is considered more compatible with the residential context. A condition is recommended requiring amended plans including these changes to be submitted prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

(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 not 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 not be required under Section 7.11 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 towards roads, open space, community cultural services, emergency services and administration buildings.

5. CONCLUSION AND STATEMENT OF REASON

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

Attachments

1 View. DA2018 - 582.1 Recommended Conditions

2 View. DA2018 - 582.1 Plans.pdf

Member	19/12/18	23/01/19	13/02/19	27/02/19	13/03/19
Paul Drake	P	P	P	P	P
Robert Hussey	A	P	P	P
David Crofts (alternate member)	P				P
Dan Croft (Acting Director Development & Environment) Clinton Tink (Acting GM Development Assessment (alternates) - Director Development & Environment - Development Assessment Planner	P	P	P	P	P

1.0 OBJECTIVES

2.0 KEY FUNCTIONS

Delegated Authority of Panel

3.0 MEMBERSHIP

3.2 Non-Voting Members

3.3 Obligations of members

3.4 Member Tenure

3.5 Appointment of members

4.0 TIMETABLE OF MEETINGS

5.0 MEETING PRACTICES

5.2 Decision Making

5.3 Quorum

5.4 Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson

5.5 Secretariat

5.6 Recording of decisions

6.0 CONVENING OF “OUTCOME SPECIFIC” WORKING GROUPS

7.0 CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST

8.0 LOBBYING