Agenda of Development Assessment Panel

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 22/05/2019

Item: 05

Subject: DA2019 - 213.1 Dwelling Lot 144 DP 1230897, No. 4 Shore Break Crescent, Lake Cathie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Robert Slater

Applicant: Matto Luke Corp Pty Ltd

Owner: W M Owen & S A Lievore

Estimated Cost: $305,214

Parcel no: 66612

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2019 - 213.1 for a dwelling at Lot 144, DP 1230897, No. 4 Shore Break Crescent, Lake Cathie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

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

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

The site has an area of 493 m².

The site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

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

The Seawide estate residential precinct comprises of a mix of single and two storey dwellings.

Photo 1 - Subject development site.

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Two storey dwelling.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 27/03/2019 - Application lodged

· 29/03/2019 - Application notified

· 10/04/2019 - Submission received

· 24/04//2019 - Site inspection

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 Rainbow Beach Koala Plan of Management applies to the site. The proposal does not require the removal of any koala browse trees and is not contrary to the plan.

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 (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is located within a coastal use area / coastal environment area.

Having regard to clauses 11 of the SEPP the proposed development is on land identified as “proximity area” for coastal wetlands. The proposed residential development is not considered likely to result in any of the following:

(a) any adverse impact on the biophysical, hydrological or ecological integrity of the adjacent coastal wetland or littoral rainforest, or

(b) any adverse impact on the quantity and quality of surface and ground water flows to and from the adjacent coastal wetland or littoral rainforest.

The proposed stormwater management measures are considered to be adequate to direct roof and surface waters from the site to the existing street stormwater infrastructure

Having regard to clauses 13 and 14 of the SEPP the proposed development is not considered likely to result in any of the following:

a) adverse impact on integrity and resilience of the biophysical, hydrological (surface and groundwater) and ecological environment;

b) adverse impacts coastal environmental values and natural coastal processes;

c) adverse impacts on marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms;

d) adverse impact on marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms;

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

f) adverse impacts on the cultural and built environment heritage;

g) adverse impacts the use of the surf zone;

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

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

j) adverse impacts on existing public open space and safe access to and along the foreshore, beach, headland or rock platform for members of the public, including persons with a disability;

The bulk, scale and size of the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding coastal and built environment. The site is predominately cleared and located within an area zoned for residential purposes.

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

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

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Clause 101 refers to development with frontage to a classified road. In this case, the proposed development does not have frontage to a classified road or create any additional crossovers onto the classified road or substantial increase in traffic. Therefore, no adverse impact on the road network will occur

In terms of road traffic noise impacts, the proposed two storey dwelling is impacted by road traffic noise intrusion and therefore the property is burdened by a restriction on the use of the land requiring that category 2 construction measures be incorporated into its design to achieve the acceptable daytime and night time noise levels contained within AS/NZS 2107:2000 - Acoustics - Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors. Conditions of consent are recommended to achieve compliance with this standard.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

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

In accordance with Clause 2.2, the subject site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R3 zone landuse table, the dwelling is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the R1 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.

· 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. Whilst the development is not considered to represent medium density, the proposal is consistent with single dwellings in the immediate proximity of the site.

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is approximately 7.2m which complies with the standard height limit of 11.5m applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.37:1 which complies with the maximum 1.0:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

· Clause 7.9 - The development is subject to acoustic controls due to road traffic noise intrusion.

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	The verandah does not exceed 25% of the articulation zone, however it encroaches into the 3.0m front setback. Also a slab extension encroaches into the articulation zone.		No*
3.2.2.2		Front setback (Residential not R5 zone): • Min. 6.0m classified road • Min. 4.5m local road • Min. 3.0m secondary road • Min. 2.0m Laneway	Front building line setback is compliant with the minimum 4.5m front setback requirements.		No*
3.2.2.3		Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade. Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided	Garage door setback is compliant with the minimum front setback requirements. Garage door recessed.		Yes
		6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building	Width of garage door/s are compliant with the maximum width requirements		Yes
		Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width	Driveway crossing/s width are compliant with the maximum width requirements		Yes
3.2.2.4		4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space	The rear setback requirements are complied with.		Yes
3.2.2.5		Side setbacks: • Ground floor = min. 0.9m • First floors & above = min. 3m setback or where it can be demonstrated that overshadowing not adverse = 0.9m min. • Building wall set in and out every 12m by 0.5m	The minimum side setback requirements are complied with. The upper floor side (NE) setback is proposed to be less than 3m and the Applicant has submitted shadow diagrams demonstrating that building additions would not overshadow primary living areas or private open space for more than 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. The building wall articulation is compliant.		Yes No. Refer to comments below * Yes
3.2.2.6		35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade	The dwelling contains 35m² open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m space.		Yes
3.2.2.10		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. i.e. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed • Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m • Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m	The development will not compromise privacy to the adjoining properties due to a combination of minimising windows on side/rear boundaries, having high sill windows that face side/rear boundaries, limiting living areas that face adjoining living areas/open space, compliant separation and use of 1.8m high boundary fencing. No privacy screens are proposed.		Yes
*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
	Requirements		Proposed	Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline		No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls		Cut and fill <1.0m change 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Yes
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage		None proposed	N/A
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer		No retaining walls likely >1m	Yes
	Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway		No retaining wall front fence combination proposed.	N/A
2.3.3.8	Removal of hollow bearing trees		No trees proposed to be removed	N/A
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100m diameter trunk at 1m above ground level and 3m from external wall of existing dwelling)		No trees proposed to be removed	N/A
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater		Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads		No new access proposed to arterial or distribution road.	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking		Driveway crossing minimal in width including maximising street parking	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. 1 space per single dwelling (behind building line)		1 or capacity for more than 1 parking space behind the building line has been provided for.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions		Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas		Single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. No specific landscaping requirements recommended.	N/A
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified		Sealed driveway proposed	Yes
2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16	Driveway grades first 6m or ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade with transitions of 2m length		Driveway grades capable of satisfying Council standard driveway crossover requirements. Condition recommended for section 138 Roads Act permit	Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.		Single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.	Yes

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision 3.2.2.2 which provides that dwellings may incorporate an articulation zone to a street frontage at no less than 3m from the property boundary. The applicant proposes encroachments into the zone as follows:

Building Element	Proposed Setback (minimum)	Encroachment
NW: cnr bwk Front verandah	2.51m	490mm
NW: slab extension	800mm	2.20m

The relevant objectives are that front setbacks should support an attractive streetscape

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

· The proposed verandah encroachment is due to the site being constrained by a splayed front boundary. The encroachment is considered to be minor in nature and the applicant has adequately demonstrated through the built design that the encroachment will not have a detrimental impact on the streetscape.

· The slab extension encroachment while significant is expected not to have a detrimental impact on the streetscape. It is recommended that a condition be placed on the consent that the slab extension not be further enclosed or roofed without the prior written consent of port Macquarie Hastings Council.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision 3.2.2.2 which provides that primary and secondary front setbacks to dwellings should be 4.5m and 3.0m respectively. The applicant proposes encroachments into the primary setback to the extent of 1.49m and 1.35m at the north west corner of the proposed dwelling. The encroaching building elements include the stair void and the family room respectively.

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

· The site is constrained by a partial splay in the front boundary line and the proposed development has frontage to a curvature in the road reserve.

· Although technically the development site is not a corner block that would be subject to a secondary frontage, the proposed setbacks are compliant with the minimum secondary frontage requirements.

· The applicant has adequately demonstrated that the proposed encroachments will have minimal impact on the streetscape.

The proposal seeks to vary Development 3.2.2.5 which provides the first floors and above should be setback minimum of 3m from the side boundary or reduced down to 900mm where it can be demonstrated that the adjoining property primary living areas and primary private open space areas should not be adversely overshadowed for more than 3hrs between 9am-3pm on 21 June.

The applicant proposes a 2.3m first floor setback to the north-eastern boundary.

The relevant objectives are to reduce overbearing and perceptions of building bulk on adjoining properties and to maintain privacy and to provide for visual and acoustic privacy between buildings.

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

· The upper floor side setback is proposed to be 2.3m which is less than 3m and the Applicant has submitted shadow diagrams demonstrating that the proposed dwelling would not adversely overshadow primary living areas or private open space of the adjoining property (currently vacant) for more than 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June.

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

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

(iiia) Any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 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:

Demolition of buildings AS 2601 – Clause 92

No demolition is required and therefore the clause does not apply.

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

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

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

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

· The proposal does not have significant adverse lighting impacts.

· There are no significant adverse privacy impacts.

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

Access, Traffic and Transport

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

Water Supply Connection

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

Sewer Connection

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

Stormwater

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

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

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

The proposed development is 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 is 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 not require any removal/clearing of any native vegetation and therefore does not trigger the biodiversity offsets scheme. Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 is considered to be satisfied.

Waste

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

Energy

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

Noise and vibration

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

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

An assessment of bushfire risk having regard to section 4.3.5 of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 including vegetation classification and slope concludes that a Bushfire Attack Level 12.5 shall be required.

Management of bushfire risk is acceptable subject to BAL construction levels being implemented and APZ being maintained. An appropriate condition is recommended.

Safety, security and crime prevention

The proposed development is 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 increase in housing density will improve natural surveillance within the locality and openings from each dwelling overlook common and private areas.

Social impacts in the locality

Given the nature of the proposed development and its’ location the proposal will not 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.

Construction

Construction impacts are capable of being managed. Standard site management conditions recommended.

Cumulative impacts

The proposed development is not anticipated 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 is considered to be suitable for the proposed development and the variations proposed to the DCP have been appropriately justified

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

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

Following exhibition of the application in accordance with DCP 2013, one submission was received.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Overshadowing of our private open space and alfresco areas	Background: The dwelling under construction at 16 Summer Circuit has a rear boundary setback of 5.1.5m, while the alfresco area (recessed) has a rear boundary setback of approximately 6.7m. The subject two storey dwelling is situated 16.0m off the common boundary. This is compliant with the numerical standard requirement of the DCP, being 4.0m. The applicant has demonstrated that the impact is acceptable and that the POS and primary living areas will receive adequate natural light and ventilation and receive a minimum of 3 hours of sunlight between the hours of 9am and 3pm on the 21^st June.
Detrimental effect on privacy	There is no requirement for the windows on the ground and first floor to be obscured or screened as the windows are not situated within a 9m radius from any part of a window of the dwelling at 16 Summer Circuit. The proposed rear boundary setback is approximately 16.0m Additionally, although setback 16.0m from the rear boundary, the applicant has substituted the first floor living room (child’s retreat) window facing the rear boundary with a highlight window having a sill height of 1.5m. Any direct views from the ground floor will be adequately reduced by the proposed 1.8m high boundary fence. The applicant has demonstrated that the design and siting of the proposed two storey dwelling does not have direct views between primary indoor and outdoor living areas meets the objective of protecting the visual privacy on-site and nearby residents.

Submission Issue/Summary

Planning Comment/Response

Overshadowing of our private open space and alfresco areas

Background:

The dwelling under construction at 16 Summer Circuit has a rear boundary setback of 5.1.5m, while the alfresco area (recessed) has a rear boundary setback of approximately 6.7m.

The subject two storey dwelling is situated 16.0m off the common boundary. This is compliant with the numerical standard requirement of the DCP, being 4.0m.

The applicant has demonstrated that the impact is acceptable and that the POS and primary living areas will receive adequate natural light and ventilation and receive a minimum of 3 hours of sunlight between the hours of 9am and 3pm on the 21^st June.

Detrimental effect on privacy

There is no requirement for the windows on the ground and first floor to be obscured or screened as the windows are not situated within a 9m radius from any part of a window of the dwelling at 16 Summer Circuit. The proposed rear boundary setback is approximately 16.0m

Additionally, although setback 16.0m from the rear boundary, the applicant has substituted the first floor living room (child’s retreat) window facing the rear boundary with a highlight window having a sill height of 1.5m.

Any direct views from the ground floor will be adequately reduced by the proposed 1.8m high boundary fence.

The applicant has demonstrated that the design and siting of the proposed two storey dwelling does not have direct views between primary indoor and outdoor living areas meets the objective of protecting the visual privacy on-site and nearby residents.

(e) The Public Interest:

The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls and will not adversely impact on the wider public interest.

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

N/A

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.

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. DA2019 - 213.1 Recommended Conditions

2 View. DA2019 - 213.1 Plans

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 22/05/2019

Item: 06

Subject: DA2018 - 353.1 Commercial Premises and Tourist and Visitor Accommodation with Clause 4.6 Variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) and Clause 4.4 (Floor Space Ratio) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 at Lot 123 DP 1219042, No. 17 Clarence Street, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Benjamin Roberts

Applicant: David Pensini

Owner: Yogi Bear Holdings Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: $14,733,000

Parcel no: 65374

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2018 - 353.1 for a commercial premises and tourist and visitor accommodation with clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) and clause 4.4 (Floor Space Ratio) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 at Lot 123, DP 1219042, No. 17 Clarence Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a commercial premises and tourist and visitor accommodation with clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) and clause 4.4 (Floor Space Ratio) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 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, eight (8) submissions have been received.

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

1. BACKGROUND

Previous consideration of the application

In considering the matter, the Development Assessment Panel on 23 January 2019 was unable to reach consensus as follows:

Robert Hussey moved the following motion:

“That DA2018 – 353 be refused on the grounds that:

1. Insufficient on-site car parking has been provided (deficit of 21 spaces) as required by the Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013. In the context of this proposed tourist development located within an area with time limited parking the public interest would not be well served by allowing such a significant shortfall in parking spaces on site, or offsetting this number of spaces via the contribution plan.

2. The proposed turning movements at the reception area are unreasonably compromised and should be redesigned to avoid regular interruption to the in-out vehicular movements by the 3-point turn.”

For: Robert Hussey

Against: Paul Drake and Dan Croft.

The dissenting recommendation was:

“That DA2018 – 353 be deferred to allow the applicant to readdress non-compliance with development standards and provide further evidence to support parking provision on site so as to avoid significant dependence on contribution offsets.”

Given the Development Assessment Panel was unable to reach consensus at its meeting on 23 January 2019 the matter was reported to Council in accordance with the DAP charter on 20 February 2019 with the following recommendation from staff:

“That DA2018 - 353 for a commercial premises and tourist and visitor accommodation with clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) and clause 4.4 (Floor Space Ratio) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 at Lot 123, DP 1219042, No. 17 Clarence Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.”

In considering the matter at its meeting on 20 February 2019 Council resolved as follows:

RESOLVED: Intemann/Alley

That DA2018 – 353 be deferred to allow the applicant to readdress non-compliance with development standards and provide further car parking provision on site so as to avoid dependence on parking offsets.

CARRIED: 6/1

FOR: Alley, Cusato, Dixon, Hawkins, Intemann and Turner

AGAINST: Levido

The applicant subsequently lodged revised plans on 19 April 2019 to include a further level of basement parking to the proposed development.

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

The site has an area of 1518m².

The site is zoned B3 Commercial Core in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Construction of a seven (7) storey building comprising basement level parking.

· The building will comprise ground floor commercial and tourist accommodation over levels 1 to 6. Levels 1 to 6 will contain 47 apartments comprising 4 x 3 bed units (with dual key arrangement), 28 x 2 bed units (with dual key arrangement), 12 x 2 bed units and 3 x 1 bed units. With the combination of dual key arrangements, the proposal may provide for up to 79 leasable units.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 16 May 2018 – Application lodged.

· 22 May 2018 – Application placed on hold following applicant advice that revised plans are to be lodged.

· 25 June 2018 – Revised plans lodged.

· 5 July to 3 August 2018 – Public exhibition via neighbour notification and advertising.

· 3 July 2018 – Additional information request to applicant. Building height and off-street parking.

· 6 August 2018 – Additional information request to applicant. Traffic impact assessment required.

· 25 September 2018 – Additional information response from applicant addressing building height, parking and traffic requests.

· 23 January 2019 - Consideration by Development Assessment Panel.

· 20 February 2019 - Consideration by Council.

· 19 April 2019 - Revised plans lodged.

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 55 – Remediation of Land

In accordance with clause 7, 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 62 - Sustainable Aquaculture

In accordance with clause 15C, given the nature of the proposed development, proposed stormwater controls and its’ location, the proposal will be unlikely to have any identifiable adverse impact on any existing aquaculture industries within the nearby Hastings River approximately 150m to the north-west from the site.

State Environmental Planning Policy 64 - Advertising and Signage

There is no signage proposed as part of the application. Suitable condition has been recommended advising of consent requirements for future signage.

State Environmental Planning Policy 65 - Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

In accordance with clause 4 the policy does not apply to serviced apartments.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is located within the mapped coastal environment area.

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 13 and 14 of the SEPP and clause 5.5 of the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 the proposed development is not considered likely to result in any of the following:

a) any adverse impact on integrity and resilience of the biophysical, hydrological (surface and groundwater) and ecological environment;

b) any adverse impacts coastal environmental values and natural coastal processes;

c) any adverse impacts on marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms;

d) any adverse impact on marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms;

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

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

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

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

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

The bulk, scale and size of the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding coastal and built environment. The site is cleared and located within an area zoned for commercial purposes.

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

In accordance with clause 7, the proposal is not a BASIX affected building. Specifically, the definition of a BASIX affected building is as follows:

BASIX affected building means any building that contains one or more dwellings, but does not include a hotel or motel.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

The proposal is not traffic generating development for the purpose of schedule 3 of this policy. No referral to Roads and Maritime Services was undertaken.

State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011

The proposal is not identified as regionally or state significant development. The capital investment value is $14.7 million. The trigger for regionally significant development is $30 million.

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 B3 Commercial Core.

· Clause 2.3(1) and the B3 zone landuse table - The proposed development for commercial premises and tourist and visitor accommodation are permissible landuses with consent.

· Clause 2.3(2) - The consent authority must have regard to the objectives of a zone when determining a development application.

The objectives of the B3 Commercial Core zone are as follows:

o To provide a wide range of retail, business, office, entertainment, community and other suitable land uses that serve the needs of the local and wider community.

o To encourage appropriate employment opportunities in accessible locations.

o To maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.

o To ensure that new residential accommodation and tourist and visitor accommodation within the zone does not conflict with the primary function of the centre for retail and business use.

o To provide for the retention and creation of view corridors and pedestrian links throughout the Greater Port Macquarie city centre.

· Clause 2.3(2) - The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives having regard to the following:

o The proposal is a permissible land use;

o The development would provide additional ground floor retail and business use;

o The development will provide suitable tourist and visitor accommodation;

o The proposal is accessible and will provide employments opportunities.

· Clause 4.1 - It is noted that no subdivision is proposed as part of the application.

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the proposal above ground level (existing) is 23.65m. The maximum building height standard applicable to the site is 19m. As a result, the applicant has submitted a Clause 4.6 variation to the standard. The variation represents a 24.5% departure from the standard.

In gaining an appreciation of the extent of building height variation sought it is important to note the site has been excavated under a prior development consent. The ground level on site is now below that which previously existed. Specifically, in the western central portion of the site ground levels are at least 700mm lower than historic natural ground levels. Also of due consideration is that in marrying in with Town Centre Master Plan works along the Clarence Street frontage the finished ground level adjacent to the southern elevation of the building will be approximately 800mm above the existing ground level along this frontage.

To this extent the roof of the proposed building comparative to the existing footpath level along Clarence Street level will vary between 17.8m in the south-eastern corner and 19.5m in the south-western corner. Whereas within the site, at the excavated ground level, the building height would be 20.55m in the south-eastern corner and up to 22.65m in the south-western corner. Along the northern elevation of the proposed building, at the excavated ground level, the building height varies from between 22.65m and 23.65m. The height plane plans provided as an attachment to this report illustrate the extent of the height variation proposed. The height plane plans also illustrate the height of the previously approved buildings on the site.

· Clause 4.6(3) - Consent must not be granted for a proposal that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered a written request from the applicant that justifies the variation by showing that the subject standard is unreasonable or unnecessary and that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravening of the standard.

As a result of the above, the applicant submitted a Clause 4.6 variation to the standard based on the following reasons:

o The building design and height is consistent with the existing and future character of the locality in relation to height, bulk and scale.

o Existing building designs in the locality provide for lift overruns, roof top access and communal use rooftop areas in addition to the main building envelopes.

o There will be negligible impacts in relation to appearance, views, loss of privacy and loss of solar access.

o The proposal will have minimal impact on the heritage values of the site.

o The proposal will continue to provide for a transition in built form and land use intensity.

Having consideration to the above the applicant has demonstrated the proposal is consistent with the performance objectives of the height of building clause and will have limited impact on the environment. In addition, it is also considered that:

o The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the LEP and is unlikely to have any implications on State related issues or the broader public interest.

o When viewed from the street it will present as a six storey building. The 6^th floor is adequately setback from the perimeter of the main building, add minimal bulk and will articulate the built form.

o As per Planning Circular PS 18-003, Council can assume the Director-General’s concurrence for variations to height limits. The height variation is more than a 10% deviation from the standard and therefore the application needs to be determined by full council rather than under staff delegation.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the proposal is 3.52:1. The maximum floor space ratio standard applicable to the site is 3.5:1. As a result, the applicant has submitted a Clause 4.6 variation to the standard. The variation represents a 0.57% variation from the standard. This equates to an additional floor area of 34.03m²above the standard.

As a result of the above, the applicant submitted a Clause 4.6 variation to the standard based on the following reasons:

o The extent of the floor space variation is minor.

o The building design is consistent with the existing and future character of the locality in relation to building height, bulk and scale.

o The proposal is consistent with the floor space ratio objectives.

Having consideration to the above the applicant has demonstrated the proposal is consistent with the performance objectives of the floor space ratio clause. In addition, it is also considered that the proposal is unlikely to have any implications on State related issues or the broader public interest.

As per Planning Circulars PS 18-003, Council can assume the Director-General’s Concurrence for variations to floor space ratios. The floor space ratio variation is less than a 10% deviation from the standard and could be determined by staff under delegation. However, noting the building height variation proposed the application will be determined by full council in any event.

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

· Clause 5.10 the site is a listed archaeological site (A111). The applicant provided a preliminary archaeological assessment for a previous application being for the excavation of basement parking which was referred to the NSW Heritage Council. The prior consent contained conditions addressing heritage including a further requirement for a final archaeological report on findings during excavation. A final archaeological report prepared by I Vetta and J Baloh dated August 2018 supported this application. The application and final report were referred to the NSW Heritage Council. The heritage Council have reviewed the application and final report and concluded that no further investigation or approval under the Heritage Act 1977 is needed. The NSW Heritage Council has recommended the following consent condition be applied to any consent granted. The condition forms part of the recommended consent conditions attached to this report:

“Should any historical relics be unexpectedly discovered in any areas of the site not subject to an excavation permit, then all excavation or disturbance to the area is to stop immediately and the Heritage Council of NSW is to be informed in accordance with Section 146 of the Heritage Act 1977”.

· Clause 7.3 - The land is above the flood planning area and no flood related building controls apply to the site.

· Clause 7.4 - The north-western portion of the site is partly mapped within the flood plain risk management area. The development provides for adequate emergency evacuation onto Clarence Street and no specific flood related measures are required.

· Clause 7.7 - The proposed development does not penetrate the Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) of the Port Macquarie Airport. In particular the OLS for the site is approximately 60m. However, if a crane is to be utilised during construction, care will be required. A condition is recommended to ensure any crane used onsite does not penetrate the OLS and in the event that it does a controlled activity approval from the airport operator be obtained prior to works commencing.

· Clause 7.13 - Satisfactory arrangements are in place for provision of essential public utility infrastructure including stormwater, water and sewer infrastructure 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

Applicable general provisions

Requirements	Proposed	Complies
· Advertising & Signage	None proposed.	N/A
· Community Participation & Social Impact Assessment	Public exhibition undertaken in accordance with the requirements of this plan. Social Impact Assessment not considered necessary for the proposal.	Yes
· Crime Prevention	Adequate casual surveillance available and principles of crime prevention through environmental design achieved.	Yes
· Environmental Management	· Site is mapped as potential archaeological site. Refer to comments earlier within report. · No tree removal proposed. · Stormwater management details to be provided.	Yes N/A Stormwater capable of being managed. Details to be provided with section 68 application.
· Off-street parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1: - Motel accommodation requires 1.1 per unit + 1 per 2 employees (onsite at any one time) + 1 for on-site manager. - Commercial premises requires 1 per 30m² of Gross Leasable Floor Area (GLFA). - Function room requires 1 per 30m² serviced floor area in commercial zones.	Motel accommodation with dual key arrangement: - 79 units = 86.9 - No onsite manager = 0 - 6 employees = 3 Total for motel = 89.9 spaces. Commercial premises: - 195.3m² = 6.51 spaces. Function Room - 80.22m² = 2.674 spaces Total required parking for dual key arrangement = 99.084 spaces. Total parking proposed = 81 spaces.	No*

The proposal seeks a variation to clause 2.5.3 which requires onsite parking to be provided in accordance with Table 2.5.1. In accordance with the table above 99.084 (100) spaces are required to serve the development with 100% occupancy of all units inclusive of 32 dual key units. The proposal includes 81 spaces. Thus resulting in a parking shortfall of 18.084 spaces.

The DCP provides that Council may consider a reduced level of parking where it is supported by a parking demand study that assesses the peak parking demands for the overall development and completed by a suitably qualified and experienced person.

The relevant objectives of the plan are:

- Adequate provision is made for off-street parking commensurate with volume and turnover of traffic likely to be generated by the development.

- To ensure no adverse impacts on traffic and road function.

The application was supported by a traffic impact assessment that included a parking demand analysis. The assessment was prepared by TTM Consulting dated 9 August 2018. The assessment included a dual occupancy (i.e. dual key) parking sensitivity assessment. The assessment assumed an 80% occupancy rate and that 20% of guests would arrive via taxi, ride sharing or public transport. Based on these assumptions it was estimated that the parking demand for 79 units alone would be approximately 50-51 spaces. With the addition of the ground floor commercial parking demand of 6.51 spaces, employee parking demand of 3 spaces and function centre parking demand of 2.674 spaces the total peak parking demand equates to between 62.184 - 63.184 spaces. Under this scenario a parking surplus of 17.816 spaces would apply.

It is considered reasonable to assume a reduced occupancy rate for motel style accommodation. Data obtained from the Destination NSW website (source being Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), survey of Tourist Accommodation) suggests for the years ending 2014 and 2015 occupancy rates were 62% and 68% respectively for tourist style accommodation in Port Macquarie for establishments with 15 or more rooms. The adopted 80% occupancy rate is considered appropriate and probably on the conservative side having regard to these statistics.

However, assuming 20% of guests will not arrive via private vehicle is not substantiated within the parking study. No data, survey work or research has been provided that validates this assumption. In the absence of such evidence it is considered inappropriate to adopt this assumption. The traffic study acknowledges that during periods of high occupancy (peak holiday periods) that the car parking demand may be higher and recommend that a parking booking system be implemented to manage the available parking. However, this is considered inappropriate as there will likely be an increased reliance on on-street parking during these times. It is argued that the adopted parking demand rate within the DCP for motel style accommodation already accounts for a portion of guests arriving by alternate means. Council staff also consider that the assumption of an 80% occupancy ratio further accounts for a portion of persons arriving by alternate means during peak periods and that a further discount is not appropriate.

Council staff calculations of parking demand based on 80% occupancy rate is provided as follows:

· 79 lettable units at 80% occupancy equates to 63.2 units (i.e. 79 x 0.8 = 63.2). 63.2 units x 1.1 spaces per unit = 69.52 spaces.

· Employees: 6 at 1 per 2 employees (6/2) = 3 spaces.

· Commercial premises: 195.3m² (1 per 30m²) = 6.51 spaces.

· Function Room: 80.22m² (1 per 30m²) = 2.674 spaces.

· Total parking demand required = 81.704 spaces.

Parking proposed is 81 spaces. Therefore, a parking shortfall of 0.704 space is a result (i.e. 81.704 spaces required – 81 spaces proposed).

Having regard to the overall findings of the traffic impact assessment prepared by a suitably qualified professional, Council staff are comfortable that proposal will not result in any significant adverse impacts to traffic, parking or road function. Nevertheless, the site is located within the Port Macquarie-Hastings Contributions Plan 1993 – Part C – Car Parking and it is considered appropriate that a development contribution be made under this plan for the identified parking shortfall of 0.704 of a parking space. A condition has been recommended surrounding the payment of the parking shortfall contribution.

Part 5 - Area based provisions - Port Macquarie Town Centre

Requirements/Objectives	Proposed	Complies
Clarence Street precinct The future heritage and leisure focus of the town for visitors and residents, Clarence Street will be a distinctive tree lined pedestrian dominated area with hotels and holiday apartments above an active street frontage lined with restaurants, heritage buildings and sidewalk cafés. The new buildings should respond to the heritage buildings without mimicking them.	7 storey apartment style building with ground floor commercial. Ground floor commercial will provide active street frontage. Building design considered to be not out of character with existing flat buildings within the precinct.	Consistent with objectives.
Site amalgamation - Amalgamations are desired on land identified in Figure 26. - If applicants propose a different amalgamation pattern then they must demonstrate that orderly development, high levels of connectivity and vehicle access will occur and that mid-block connections are provided appropriately.	Proposal inconsistent with desired amalgamation plan. Refer to figure below table.	Three lots (minus the corner lot) have been amalgamated. Considered to be a good outcome.
Active Frontages and Shop Widths - Maximum shop widths comply with Figure 27: Maximum shop widths.	The ground floor shop front width is less than 30m.	Yes.
Façade Enclosure Façade enclosure complies with the block controls. Block 1: - Ground 60% - First 50% - Second/Third 40% - Top floor 40%	Façade enclosure considered acceptable.	Yes.
Roof Design Break up roofs where possible with hips, gables and changes in materials.	Roof broken up with lift overrun and root top terrace structures.	Yes

Requirements/Objectives

Proposed

Complies

Clarence Street precinct

The future heritage and leisure focus of the town for visitors and residents, Clarence Street will be a distinctive tree lined pedestrian dominated area with hotels and holiday apartments above an active street frontage lined with restaurants, heritage buildings and sidewalk cafés.

The new buildings should respond to the heritage buildings without mimicking them.

7 storey apartment style building with ground floor commercial.

Ground floor commercial will provide active street frontage.

Building design considered to be not out of character with existing flat buildings within the precinct.

Consistent with objectives.

Site amalgamation

- Amalgamations are desired on land identified in Figure 26.

- If applicants propose a different amalgamation pattern then they must demonstrate that orderly development, high levels of connectivity and vehicle access will occur and that mid-block connections are provided appropriately.

Proposal inconsistent with desired amalgamation plan. Refer to figure below table.

Three lots (minus the corner lot) have been amalgamated. Considered to be a good outcome.

Active Frontages and Shop Widths

- Maximum shop widths comply with Figure 27: Maximum shop widths.

The ground floor shop front width is less than 30m.

Yes.

Façade Enclosure

Façade enclosure complies with the block controls.

Block 1:

- Ground 60%

- First 50%

- Second/Third 40%

- Top floor 40%

Façade enclosure considered acceptable.

Yes.

Roof Design

Break up roofs where possible with hips, gables and changes in materials.

Roof broken up with lift overrun and root top terrace structures.

Yes

Summary - Block 1 controls

Maximum Building Depth. Ground whole site less setbacks, First/Second/Third/Top = 20m.

Building depth of approximately 22m considered appropriate.

Front Setback (Clarence Street). Ground/First/Second/Third = 0m. Top Floor = 3m.

Front lobby on front boundary 0m consistent. <1m first/second/third/fourth/fifth with elements within articulation zone. Noting top floor setback 3m.

Rear Setback. Minimum 0m to Block 1 Lane for Ground/First/Second/Third. Top Floor minimum 3m.

Proposed 8.7m to rear boundary. Further setback on top floor. Note future laneway not possible having regard to Macquarie Waters building.

Side Setback. Minimum 0m to Block 1 Pathway for Ground/First/Second/Third. Top Floor minimum 3m.

Proposed 0m side boundary setback from ground to 5^th level. The top floor setbacks range between 0m, (approximately 7.6m length of eastern aspect of building – stair shaft and portion of Unit 604), up to 13.695m (north-western aspect of building).

The side setback variation to the 3m top floor in relation to portions of the top floor is considered acceptable due to the:

· reasonably short wall lengths of the proposed building compared to the overall length of the site.

· the relationship of the non-compliant length of external wall of the proposed building with the existing western external wall of the adjoining building to east.

· the relationship of the proposed building to the bulk and scale of development to the east.

· the significant open area of the proposed development.

· the overall merits of the proposed development and the practical difficulties associated with compliance and achieving a viable project.

· the lack of detrimental overshadowing of the adjoining properties due to the existing lots orientation to north and south.

· the minimization of privacy impacts to the adjoining properties due to a lack of

· regular windows in the proposed side

· elevations,

· the size and scale of existing adjoining development to the east, west and north.

· the flow through ventilation for the proposed units which do not need to rely on side windows to provide ventilation.

· the use of varying finishes on the side elevations to create additional interest and relief and to decrease the vertical emphasis on the building as a whole.

· the non-compliance will result in no loss of primary views for residents of other buildings.

Façade Enclosure. Ground 60%, First 50%, Second/Third 40%, Top Floor 40%.

Façade enclosure considered acceptable.

Front articulation zone. Ground min 0m. First to fifth min 1.8m Max 4m. Top Floor N/a

Articulation provided to the street considered appropriate.

Rear/Side Articulation 0m.

Wall finish treatment is proposed to the western elevation which will provide an appropriate interim measure until the corner block is developed.

Vehicle entry from streets and paths. Off Block 1 Lane, Munster or Murray Streets

Access directly from Clarence Street.

New Streets, Laneways and Paths. Block 1 Lane. Min 7m wide – two way vehicle movement and 1m footpath.

Proposed level basement car parking. No provision for laneway. Full width footpath across frontage required.

Arcades. N/A.

Car Parking Underground, on street, some on grade.

Proposed basement car parking and commercial spaces at grade.

Landscaping. N/A.

Residential Flat Development, Tourist and Visitor Accommodation, Mixed Use Development Provisions.

Objectives/Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Site Design & Analysis - Attributes and constraints adequately considered in design. - Consideration to adjacent and adjoining sites in design.	Site analysis provided.	Yes.
Site Layout - Functional & integrated with neighbourhood. - Energy efficient design.	Detailed site plan provided with application demonstrating integration with potential integration with adjoining sites.	Yes.
Height Limits & FSR - Complies with LEP - Min floor to ceiling 2.7m. - FSR at least 1:1.	Variation to height proposed. Ceiling heights comply. FSR 3.52:1.	No. Refer to LEP clause 4.6 comments. Yes. Yes.
Streetscape & Front Setback - Front setback with 20% of average setback of adjoining buildings. - Tourist accommodation 9m max setback for pool. - Balconies may encroach up to 600mm into setbacks. - Building aligned to street boundary. - Openings align with street or rear of site.	Proposed 0m front setback. Swimming pool proposed on roof top. Balconies within setbacks. Building aligns with street. Openings face street.	Considered acceptable. N/A Yes. Yes. Yes.
Side & Rear Setbacks - Side setback min 1.5 for max 75% of building depth. - Windows in side walls setback 3m from side. - Adjoins existing strata building side set back min 3m. - Rear setback min 6m to building & sub basement. - Party wall development if site amalgamation not possible and higher density envisaged. - Corner sites consolidated with adjacent sites.	0m side setbacks No windows in side walls. Adjoins strata title flat building to the east. 8.7m rear setback to building. Site amalgamation as per DCP not achievable. Not a corner site.	Considered acceptable. N/A. Considered acceptable. Yes. Noted but considered best achievable outcome. N/A N/A
Building Depth - Max 18m	Building depth of approximately 22m.	Building depth considered acceptable. The depth is reflective of existing similar sized buildings adjoining.
Energy Conservation & Solar Access - Adequate light and ventilation. - Overshadowing. - Energy efficiency.	North facing balconies. No adverse shadow impacts given lot orientation.	Yes. Ventilation and solar access considered appropriate having regard to the short term use proposed.
Landscaping	Landscaping proposed along Clarence Street frontage.	Yes
Deep Soil - Buildings should be sited across frontage - Deep soil zones should extend width of the site and be minimum depth of 6m. - Deep soil zone should accommodate advanced plantings. - Integration with stormwater management system	No deep soil zone proposed.	The site is zoned B3 Commercial and consistent with the area based provisions above no deep soil zone requirement has been envisaged for this site.
Private Open Space - Ground floor dwelling min 35m2 with 4mx4m area. - Areas <2m in width be excluded from area. - Balconies on or above first floor min 8m2 with min 2m width with direct living area access.	No ground floor units proposed. The rooftop terrace area inclusive of BBQ, gym, pool and toilets facilities provides sufficient communal open space.	Yes. Each unit also contains access to external balconies of sufficient width and depth.
Fences and Walls - None proposed	None proposed	N/A
Acoustic Privacy - Living areas to face street - Parking and driveways separation >3m from bed windows - Openings of adjacent dwellings >3m separation. - Building wall design minimise noise transition comply with AS.	Noted that some bedrooms at front of building face street. N/A no ground floor units. No side wall openings. Designed to comply with noise transmission requirements.	Noise impacts considered to be minimal having regard to the short term nature of use. Additional glazing to bedroom windows possible. N/A Yes
Visual Privacy - Direct views between adjacent living areas screened if with distances. - Screening or fence requirements. - Window privacy screen requirements - Balcony privacy screen requirements	No side wall openings. Privacy walls and screening proposed where necessary.	Yes Yes
Accessibility - In accordance with AS1428 - Barrier free min 20% of dwellings - Layout for variety of groups - Building design capable of adaptation to whole of partial changes of use	Capable of compliance with AS1428. Details to be provided with Construction Certificate. Ground flood at grade access with lift proposed.	Yes.
Social Dimensions & Affordability - Located close to open space/recreation areas. - FSR not less than 1:1 - Variety of apartment types, 1, 2, 3+ beds. - Consider Affordable Housing Strategy	Close to Town Green open space and foreshore areas. FSR greater than 1:1. 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units.	Yes. Yes. Yes.
Roof Form - Variations in form & materials to be provided - Lift overruns & plant integrated within roof structure	Roof top structures provided varied roof form. Overrun and plant incorporated into roof top structures.	Yes.
Façade Composition & Articulation - Well balanced - Consistent & complimentary to elements & materials of existing buildings	Consistent with existing flat buildings within the locality.	Yes
Entries & Corridors - Clear line of transition - Sheltered & lit - Adequate circulation space - Corridor width min 2.5m wide & 3m high	Building entry well defined, sheltered and adequate circulation space.	Yes
Balconies - Min one balcony per apartment. - Main balcony min 2m width a 8m2. - Directly accessible from living area. - Balconies recessed, balustrade.	Balcony per unit. Complies. Off living area. Recessed and balustrade details provided.	Yes Yes Yes Yes
Emergency Services - Accessible	Capable of access from street hydrant.	Yes
Laundries & Clothes Drying Facilities	Rooftop communal laundry proposed.	Yes
Mailboxes	Not required.	N/A
Safety & Security	Design meets principles of crime prevention through environmental design.	Yes
Site Storage	Adequate storage proposed.	Yes
Waste Management - Communal bulk waste facilities to be provided. - Designated area at ground or basement	Garbage storage on ground floor behind commercial tenancies.	Yes
Utilities	Services available.	Yes
Strata Title Subdivision	No subdivision proposed.	N/A

Objectives/Provisions

Proposed

Complies

Site Design & Analysis

- Attributes and constraints adequately considered in design.

- Consideration to adjacent and adjoining sites in design.

Site analysis provided.

Yes.

Site Layout

- Functional & integrated with neighbourhood.

- Energy efficient design.

Detailed site plan provided with application demonstrating integration with potential integration with adjoining sites.

Yes.

Height Limits & FSR

- Complies with LEP

- Min floor to ceiling 2.7m.

- FSR at least 1:1.

Variation to height proposed.

Ceiling heights comply.

FSR 3.52:1.

No. Refer to LEP clause 4.6 comments.

Yes.

Streetscape & Front Setback

- Front setback with 20% of average setback of adjoining buildings.

- Tourist accommodation 9m max setback for pool.

- Balconies may encroach up to 600mm into setbacks.

- Building aligned to street boundary.

- Openings align with street or rear of site.

Proposed 0m front setback.

Swimming pool proposed on roof top.

Balconies within setbacks.

Building aligns with street.

Openings face street.

Considered acceptable.

N/A

Yes.

Side & Rear Setbacks

- Side setback min 1.5 for max 75% of building depth.

- Windows in side walls setback 3m from side.

- Adjoins existing strata building side set back min 3m.

- Rear setback min 6m to building & sub basement.

- Party wall development if site amalgamation not possible and higher density envisaged.

- Corner sites consolidated with adjacent sites.

0m side setbacks

No windows in side walls.

Adjoins strata title flat building to the east.

8.7m rear setback to building.

Site amalgamation as per DCP not achievable.

Not a corner site.

Considered acceptable.

N/A.

Considered acceptable.

Yes.

Noted but considered best achievable outcome.

N/A

Building Depth

- Max 18m

Building depth of approximately 22m.

Building depth considered acceptable. The depth is reflective of existing similar sized buildings adjoining.

Energy Conservation & Solar Access

- Adequate light and ventilation.

- Overshadowing.

- Energy efficiency.

North facing balconies. No adverse shadow impacts given lot orientation.

Yes. Ventilation and solar access considered appropriate having regard to the short term use proposed.

Landscaping

Landscaping proposed along Clarence Street frontage.

Yes

Deep Soil

- Buildings should be sited across frontage

- Deep soil zones should extend width of the site and be minimum depth of 6m.

- Deep soil zone should accommodate advanced plantings.

- Integration with stormwater management system

No deep soil zone proposed.

The site is zoned B3 Commercial and consistent with the area based provisions above no deep soil zone requirement has been envisaged for this site.

Private Open Space

- Ground floor dwelling min 35m2 with 4mx4m area.

- Areas <2m in width be excluded from area.

- Balconies on or above first floor min 8m2 with min 2m width with direct living area access.

No ground floor units proposed. The rooftop terrace area inclusive of BBQ, gym, pool and toilets facilities provides sufficient communal open space.

Yes. Each unit also contains access to external balconies of sufficient width and depth.

Fences and Walls

- None proposed

None proposed

N/A

Acoustic Privacy

- Living areas to face street

- Parking and driveways separation >3m from bed windows

- Openings of adjacent dwellings >3m separation.

- Building wall design minimise noise transition comply with AS.

Noted that some bedrooms at front of building face street.

N/A no ground floor units.

No side wall openings.

Designed to comply with noise transmission requirements.

Noise impacts considered to be minimal having regard to the short term nature of use. Additional glazing to bedroom windows possible.

N/A

Yes

Visual Privacy

- Direct views between adjacent living areas screened if with distances.

- Screening or fence requirements.

- Window privacy screen requirements

- Balcony privacy screen requirements

No side wall openings.

Privacy walls and screening proposed where necessary.

Yes

Accessibility

- In accordance with AS1428

- Barrier free min 20% of dwellings

- Layout for variety of groups

- Building design capable of adaptation to whole of partial changes of use

Capable of compliance with AS1428. Details to be provided with Construction Certificate. Ground flood at grade access with lift proposed.

Yes.

Social Dimensions & Affordability

- Located close to open space/recreation areas.

- FSR not less than 1:1

- Variety of apartment types, 1, 2, 3+ beds.

- Consider Affordable Housing Strategy

Close to Town Green open space and foreshore areas.

FSR greater than 1:1.

1, 2 and 3 bedroom units.

Yes.

Roof Form

- Variations in form & materials to be provided

- Lift overruns & plant integrated within roof structure

Roof top structures provided varied roof form.

Overrun and plant incorporated into roof top structures.

Yes.

Façade Composition & Articulation

- Well balanced

- Consistent & complimentary to elements & materials of existing buildings

Consistent with existing flat buildings within the locality.

Yes

Entries & Corridors

- Clear line of transition

- Sheltered & lit

- Adequate circulation space

- Corridor width min 2.5m wide & 3m high

Building entry well defined, sheltered and adequate circulation space.

Yes

Balconies

- Min one balcony per apartment.

- Main balcony min 2m width a 8m2.

- Directly accessible from living area.

- Balconies recessed, balustrade.

Balcony per unit.

Complies.

Off living area.

Recessed and balustrade details provided.

Yes

Emergency Services

- Accessible

Capable of access from street hydrant.

Yes

Laundries & Clothes Drying Facilities

Rooftop communal laundry proposed.

Yes

Mailboxes

Not required.

N/A

Safety & Security

Design meets principles of crime prevention through environmental design.

Yes

Site Storage

Adequate storage proposed.

Yes

Waste Management

- Communal bulk waste facilities to be provided.

- Designated area at ground or basement

Garbage storage on ground floor behind commercial tenancies.

Yes

Utilities

Services available.

Yes

Strata Title Subdivision

No subdivision proposed.

N/A

Business and Commercial Development Provisions

Requirements/Objectives	Proposed	Complies
Building Heights:	Proposed 23.65m. 19m LEP max height limit applies.	No. Refer to LEP clause 4.6 comments.
Setbacks: · A zero metre setback to ground floor is preferred in all business zone developments.	0m front setback.	Yes
Roof Form: · Variations in roof form including the use of skillions, gables and hips are to be provided in the development.	Variation with roof terrace proposed. Lift overrun and plant incorporated.	Yes.
Building Facades, Materials & Finishes: · Colours, construction materials and finishes shall be predominately pale in colour and textured, tonal and subtle.	Proposed colours appear acceptable and consistent with existing flat buildings within the street.	Yes
· Shopfront widths are to be between 15 and 20metres.	Shopfront widths acceptable.	Yes
· Architectural detailing is to be provided to promote articulation, character and visual interest in the streetscape.	Architectural detailing provided within the articulation zone. Incorporates overhangs and recesses.	Yes
Active Frontages: · Ground floor levels shall not be used for residential purposes in B1, B2, B3 and B4 zones.	Ground floor incorporates shop/retail.	Yes
· A minimum of 50% of the ground floor level front facade is to be clear glazed.	Approx 50% of street frontage clear glazed.	Yes
Arcades	No arcade proposed.	N/A
Awnings	Awning structure provides coverage for the extent of the active street frontage.	Yes
· Skylights may be provided in the awning for a maximum depth of 1/3 of the total awning depth.	None proposed.	N/A
· Under awning lighting shall comply with AS/NZS1158.	Capable of compliance.	Yes.
· Awnings are designed and constructed to encourage pavement dining in areas identified for pavement dining, along the foreshore and in piazzas.	Awnings designed to encourage outdoor dining opportunities.	Yes.
Landscaping: · A landscape plan shall be submitted with the development application	Landscape plan provided.	Yes
Gateways & landmark Sites:	N/A	N/A
Waste management: · A waste management plan for the construction and/or occupation of the development is provided	Waste management plan provided.	Yes
Vehicular Access Location and Design: · No direct vehicular access to at grade or basement car parking from the active street frontage will be permitted in B1 zones. · The number of vehicular crossovers shall be kept to a minimum and appropriate sight lines provided to ensure safe integration of pedestrian and vehicular movement.	B3 Zone. Single crossover proposed. Access to basement car park from main entrance off Clarence Street. Single crossover proposed at grade.	Yes. Yes
Pedestrian Entries & Access: · The development complies with AS1428—Design for Access and Mobility.	Designed to comply with standard.	Yes
Outdoor Dining:	None proposed.	N/A
Commercial Development Adjoining Residential Land uses: · The development is designed so that all vehicle movement areas and servicing areas are located away from adjoining residential areas.	Site adjoins residential units located to the east. Site does not adjoin residential zoned land.	Yes
· Waste areas are located and managed to minimise pests, noise and odour.	Garbage storage located on ground floor behind commercial tenancy and basement for residential units.	Yes

Requirements/Objectives

Proposed

Complies

Building Heights:

Proposed 23.65m.

19m LEP max height limit applies.

No. Refer to LEP clause 4.6 comments.

Setbacks:

· A zero metre setback to ground floor is preferred in all business zone developments.

0m front setback.

Yes

Roof Form:

· Variations in roof form including the use of skillions, gables and hips are to be provided in the development.

Variation with roof terrace proposed. Lift overrun and plant incorporated.

Yes.

Building Facades, Materials & Finishes:

· Colours, construction materials and finishes shall be predominately pale in colour and textured, tonal and subtle.

Proposed colours appear acceptable and consistent with existing flat buildings within the street.

Yes

· Shopfront widths are to be between 15 and 20metres.

Shopfront widths acceptable.

Yes

· Architectural detailing is to be provided to promote articulation, character and visual interest in the streetscape.

Architectural detailing provided within the articulation zone. Incorporates overhangs and recesses.

Yes

Active Frontages:

· Ground floor levels shall not be used for residential purposes in B1, B2, B3 and B4 zones.

Ground floor incorporates shop/retail.

Yes

· A minimum of 50% of the ground floor level front facade is to be clear glazed.

Approx 50% of street frontage clear glazed.

Yes

Arcades

No arcade proposed.

N/A

Awnings

Awning structure provides coverage for the extent of the active street frontage.

Yes

· Skylights may be provided in the awning for a maximum depth of 1/3 of the total awning depth.

None proposed.

N/A

· Under awning lighting shall comply with AS/NZS1158.

Capable of compliance.

Yes.

· Awnings are designed and constructed to encourage pavement dining in areas identified for pavement dining, along the foreshore and in piazzas.

Awnings designed to encourage outdoor dining opportunities.

Yes.

Landscaping:

· A landscape plan shall be submitted with the development application

Landscape plan provided.

Yes

Gateways & landmark Sites:

N/A

Waste management:

· A waste management plan for the construction and/or occupation of the development is provided

Waste management plan provided.

Yes

Vehicular Access Location and Design:

· No direct vehicular access to at grade or basement car parking from the active street frontage will be permitted in B1 zones.

· The number of vehicular crossovers shall be kept to a minimum and appropriate sight lines provided to ensure safe integration of pedestrian and vehicular movement.

B3 Zone. Single crossover proposed. Access to basement car park from main entrance off Clarence Street.

Single crossover proposed at grade.

Yes.

Yes

Pedestrian Entries & Access:

· The development complies with AS1428—Design for Access and Mobility.

Designed to comply with standard.

Yes

Outdoor Dining:

None proposed.

N/A

Commercial Development Adjoining Residential Land uses:

· The development is designed so that all vehicle movement areas and servicing areas are located away from adjoining residential areas.

Site adjoins residential units located to the east.

Site does not adjoin residential zoned land.

Yes

· Waste areas are located and managed to minimise pests, noise and odour.

Garbage storage located on ground floor behind commercial tenancy and basement for residential units.

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. See SEPP (Coastal Management) 2018 comments for further detail.

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

Context & Setting

The site was historically three single Torrens title lots with each containing old unit buildings. The old units have been demolished and the lots consolidated under a previous development consent. Site has also been subject to excavation under a previous development consent and slopes away from south to north approximately 2m. The site has a frontage of 45.25m to Clarence Street and an average depth of 33.53m.

Adjoining the site to the north is the North Point Apartments (9 storey residential flat building). Adjoining the site to the east is the Macquarie Waters apartments (six storey residential flat building). Adjoining the site to the south is Clarence Street and beyond is the Port Pacific Resort building. Adjoining the site to the west is a single storey commercial building fronting Murray Street.

The proposal is considered appropriate in terms of density and height and will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties and satisfactorily addresses the public domain. The proposal is considered to be consistent with other higher density developments in the locality.

The proposal will not compromise any important views or view corridors. Impact to views enjoyed from units of the Port Pacific building would be minimal given the change in grade on Clarence Street and the subject site, and the location of existing buildings adjacent to the site.

It is evident that the orientation of the block, units and subsequent balconies seek to maximise light and ventilation with the northern orientation. The building has been positioned in the southern portion of the block. This provides for adequate separation to the units in the North point apartment building. It is considered that sufficient spatial separation between the units will be provide for an acceptable level of privacy.

Roads

The site has road frontage to Clarence Street. Adjacent to the site, Clarence Street is a sealed public road under the care and control of Council. Clarence Street is local commercial road with a 22 metre carriageway within a 30 metre road reserve. The existing road includes SA kerb and gutter, footpath paving, and combination of parallel parking and angled parking.

Access, Transport & Traffic

The application was supported by a Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by TTM Consulting, dated 9 August 2018. The conclusions of the assessment are provided below:

8 Summary and Conclusions

8.1 Development Summary

The access is proposed to be via a 6.0m wide Category 2 access crossover.

The development access will provide an effective queue provision of 4 vehicles between the property boundary and the security access door.

8.2 Car Parking Arrangements

The car parking provision generally exceeds Council’s Development Control Plan’s minimum parking requirements.

The ground level and basement car park layouts, as a minimum, comply with the Australian Standard requirements. Overall, TTM considers the proposed car parking arrangements for this development are adequate.

8.3 Impact on Surrounding Road Network

Assessment of the proposed development indicates that the development will not have a significant impact on the future road network. As such, no further mitigating road works are required.

8.4 Service Vehicle Arrangements

Servicing for this development will be facilitated in the designated loading area on the ground level, accessed from Clarence Street. The largest design vehicle, a VAN, can enter, manoeuvre, service and exit the site in a forward gear. Overall, the proposed service vehicle arrangements are considered adequate to meet the needs of the proposed development.

8.5 Active Transport Facilities

The current public transport infrastructure and proposed site provisions for pedestrian/bicycle facilities is considered adequate for the development.

8.6 Conclusion

Based on the assessment contained within this report, TTM see no traffic engineering reason why the relevant approvals should not be granted.

Key issues or recommendations to be addressed by conditions.

To protect existing road facilities, existing road conditions shall be evaluated and bond securities held prior to any earthworks Details shall be provided as part of a Roads Act (Section 138) application.

Site Frontage & Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed though one access driveway to Clarence Street. All accesses shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards, and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

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

· Reconstruction of kerb and gutter to the east of improvement works (new kern and pavement) to marry in with works already carried out by Council as part of the Town Centre Master Plan.

· Concrete footpath paving (full width) along the full frontage

· A condition is recommended requiring that prior to the preparation of any engineering plans or submission of any applications for construction to Council, the applicant is to contact Councils Engineering Development to ensure any design accords with Town Centre Master Plan works already carried out on Clarence Street across subject property. The applicant is advised that works include altering verge, carriageway and kerb levels to improve surface drainage conditions for the full frontage of the development.

Parking and Manoeuvring

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

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

Refer to relevant conditions of consent.

Pedestrians

In accordance with the Port Macquarie Town Centre Master Plan, the proposed development will require full width concrete paving along the frontage of the site with specified materials and finishes. Suitable conditions recommended.

Public Domain

No adverse impacts on public spaces or access thereto.

Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Stormwater

The proposed preliminary stormwater design prepared by David Johnson Consulting Engineer, dated May 2014 is acceptable in principle.

The site naturally grades towards the rear and is benefitted by an easement 1 metre wide to drain water over SP65485, the development proposes to extinguish the easement and instead drain to the Council’s pipe network in Clarence Street.

The legal point of discharge for the proposed development is defined as a direct connection to Council’s stormwater pit/pipeline in Clarence Street, which is consistent with the development proposal.

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 building Construction Certificate.

In accordance with Councils AUSPEC requirements, onsite detention facilities must be incorporated into the stormwater drainage plan. Preliminary plans incorporate onsite detention facilities.

The statement of environmental effects (SOEE) outlines measures to be implemented during construction to manage stormwater. Details from the SOEE are provided below:

Appropriate controls will be installed to prevent soil erosion and sediment transport from the site during rainfall during the construction phase of the project. A variety of erosion and sediment controls will be used on the site. Strategies to be used on site will include:

· Hay bale retardation and sediment retention basin. The removal of stormwater from the excavated area will be via a temporary hay bale structure which will be provided on site. The size of the structure to be determined via the volume of water to be treated. In this regard the operation of the structure is to be inspected on a daily basis and the quality of discharge water monitored.

· Where necessary the size of the structure will be increased so as to ensure that acceptable discharge standards are met.

· All stormwater is to be collected and conveyed to the structure using suitable sized pumps. The foot valve of the pump is to be fitted with a silt sock. The hay bale structure will act as a two-stage sedimentation basin. Pumped water will be discharged into the larger section of the structure where it will be allowed to settle and seep through the straw bales into the final section where it will be allowed to settle before draining through the overflow to discharge into the stormwater drain servicing the site.

· The pond shall be regularly inspected, and excess sediment removed on a daily or more frequent basis as required.

· Sediment filter fencing, or gravel groynes/sausages will be used downstream of the discharge from the hay bale structure to provide additional treatment.

· Gravel groynes/sausages for sediment retention will be utilized around stormwater drains, inlets and pits once constructed.

· Tracking of sediment from the site by tucks entering and leaving will be controlled by the provision of a ‘shaker grid’ at the site entry together with the placing of a gravel driveway at the entry site.

· Discharges from dewatering operations shall be treated to remove excess suspended matter prior to discharge from the site. Discharges shall be free of pollutants, shall be within a pH range of 6.5-8.5 and shall have a maximum non-filterable residue (NFR) concentration of 50 mg/L to allow for discharge to the stormwater system within Environment Protection Authority requirements.

· Removal of suspended matter from dewatering discharges shall be achieved by treatment of discharges through the hay bale filtration/sedimentation pond detailed in 6.1 above.

Detailed plans for the management of stormwater will be required to be submitted for assessment with the infrastructure construction certificate and S.68 applications.

Water

Records indicate that the current development site has an existing 20mm metered water service from the 150mm PVC water main on the same side of Clarence Street.

Each residential and commercial unit will require individual water metering with the meters either located on the road frontage or at the unit with remote reading facility located adjacent to the road frontage or in an easily accessible area such as a foyer.

Final water service sizing will need to be assessed by a hydraulic consultant to suit the commercial, domestic and fire service components of the proposed development, as well as backflow protection requirements. The existing 20mm metered water service is to be disconnected. There is no charge for this disconnection service.

Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the infrastructure construction certificate and S.68 applications.

Sewer

Council records indicate that the development site is connected to sewer via junction to the existing sewer line that runs along the northern property boundary. A sewer reticulation strategy is to be provided. A manhole will be required at the high end of the line as it will be more than 40m long. If the main is subject to future extension an end of line terminal shaft (poo pit) will be required.

As the development will exceed 2ET discharge, sewer connection is to be made from a manhole. The hydraulic designer is to confer with Council sewer section prior to submitting sewer design plans.

Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the infrastructure construction certificate application and S.68 applications.

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 & Micro-climate

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

Flora & Fauna

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

Waste

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

Energy

The proposal is not BASIX affected building. The proposal will include measures to address energy efficiency in order to comply with the requirements of section J of the Building Code of Australia (BCA). No adverse impacts anticipated.

Noise & 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 and a condition requiring a construction management plan which includes a schedule of works and approximate timing, contact number of site supervisor and mechanism for providing notice to adjoining owners for schedule noisy works.

In terms of vibration impacts and proximity of adjoining sites which are built to boundary a condition has been recommended to require dilapidation reports prior to work and upon completion of works to adjoining properties.

In terms of the visitor accommodation use, it is noted that no onsite manager is proposed. 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 front of the building for any complaints.

Having regard to the short term nature of stays proposed and use of the communal roof top terrace facilities which includes a BBQ area, swimming pool and outdoor terrace the potential exists for noise during high activity times. It is noted that these roof top areas have been located in the north western part of the top floor which will provide adequate separation between adjoining flat buildings to the north and east of the site. It still considered that some type of management regarding the use of this rooftop area is required. A condition has been recommended requiring a rooftop management plan be development and approved by Council prior to issue of any occupation certificate. A further condition has been applied requiring the approved plan to be displayed in a prominent position on the rooftop area so guests are duly informed.

Natural Hazards

The site is not mapped as bushfire prone land. Refer to comments under clause 7.4 of LEP comments for flood considerations.

Safety, Security & Crime Prevention

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in a loss of safety or security in the area. The increase in housing density will improve natural surveillance within the locality and openings from each dwelling overlook common and private areas.

Social Impact 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.

Site Design and Internal Design

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

Construction

Having regard to the location of the site and nature of the development, there will be anticipated short term inconveniences during construction activities. No significant adverse construction impacts are identified to neighbouring properties that would warrant refusal of this application.

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:

Eight (8) 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 proposal provides no detail on overshadowing impacts. Private open space on the adjoining Macquarie Waters building is orientated north-west. Shadow diagrams should be provided to determine the extent of shadow impacts.	Having regard to the sites north south orientation it is evident that the adjoining properties will not be adversely overshadowed by the development for more than 3 hours between 9am -3pm on 21 June.
Based on the information lodged it is difficult to ascertain whether the building height proposed is being taken off pre-excavated site levels or existing level as excavated.	The applicant provided revised plans and clause 4.6 variation confirming building height proposed form existing ground level as excavated onsite.
The proposal bases its car parking demand on 47 units and 6 staff. The proposal however contains 79 separately lettable units. The DCP currently provides no mechanism for reduced parking for a dual key system. A shortfall of 36 parking spaces is not appropriate for the locality having regard to existing parking demand experienced.	Refer to DCP assessment table within this report.
The proposal does not propose a 6m wide deep soil zone as per DCP 2013, specifically provisions 3.3.2.6, 3.3.2.11 and 3.3.2.16.	Provision 3.3.2.6 refers to side and rear setbacks. The rear setback complies. Provision 3.3.2.11 refers to deep soil zone width and depth. The lack of deep soil is consistent with the area based provisions and commercial zoning of this site. Provision 3.3.2.16 refers to landscaping requirements. Having regard to the commercial zoning the minimal landscaping proposed along the street frontage is considered acceptable.
The current condition of the site is not acceptable. Currently stormwater collects and pools in the north-western corner and leaches into the basement of the north point building. It is requested that Council instruct the landowner to fix this stormwater problem immediately.	Noted Council staff are aware of the existing stormwater issue and will continue to monitor and managed accordingly. Stormwater for the proposed development can be adequately managed.
The building is excessive in size and height. There is no good reason for the height variation.	Refer to building height comments under LEP 2011 of the report. The proposed building is considered to be consistent with other buildings in the locality. The majority of the built form is contained within the height controls. The elements on the roof add further articulation to this form and are consistent with similar roof top elements on flat buildings in the locality.
There is insufficient parking proposed to accommodate the proposed development.	Refer to parking assessment comments under the table to DCP 2013 of the report.
The northern setback is insufficient to the north point building.	Refer to DCP 2013 assessment table within this report. Rear setback complies.
No details of expected building construction start and finish times. Potential noise impact to adjoining residents. Temporary noise blocking panels should be installed to existing adjoining units.	Standard building construction times will apply as per recommended consent conditions. No significant adverse building construction noise impacts are anticipated that would warrant refusal of this application.
No details of cranes have been provided. Safety hazard to existing adjoining units and traffic blocks likely. During construction items may fall onto my residence at 2 Murray Street.	The placement and management of cranes and any machinery during construction will be undertaken by site managers and subject to workplace safety measures.
Service disruptions would occur during construction. How will I be informed? Is there sufficient services to meet the demand of the proposed development?	Anticipated service disruptions during construction will be managed by the relevant service provider. Upgrading of services will be required as deemed appropriate by the relevant service provider.
Ongoing noise impacts from occupants utilising the open style communal roof top space with swimming pool.	A rooftop management has been provided for this space and will form part of the consent conditions. No significant adverse noise impacts are anticipated that would warrant refusal of this application.
Ongoing noise impacts from air-conditioning plant.	Standard noise control regulations apply to management of noise from such sources. No significant adverse noise impacts are anticipated that would warrant refusal of this application.
Open car parking is proposed at ground level with driveways at same level as North Point level 2 apartments. This will result in adverse noise and security impact.	Adequate building separation is proposed between the ground level parking and North Point building. The north point building is setback approximately 13m form the site boundary. No significant adverse noise impacts are anticipated that would warrant refusal of this application.
The proposed units will be only 20m from my bedroom and living space in North Point apartments. This will result in a significant loss of privacy.	The orientation of the block, building and subsequent balconies seek to maximise light and ventilation with the northern orientation. The building has been positioned in the southern portion of the block with the rear balconies setback approximately 8.7m from the rear boundary. This provides for approximately 20m separation to the units in the north point building. It is considered that sufficient spatial separation exists between the units.
The northern side of the building contains a large amount of glazing which will direct light and heat into the units of north point.	Adequate building separation is proposed. No adverse reflection or heat impact will result from the glazing proposed.
There is no discussion about potential liquid trade wastes that may be generated from the ground floor shop.	The proposal is for a ground floor commercial tenancy only. The use proposed is unknown and likely require further development consent under which waste management will be considered.
No details of solar panels or rainwater use provided. Council should require this as part of all new developments.	The proposal is not a BASIX affected building therefore such measures are optional.
Having regard to previous failures will Council require the building to start within a certain timeframe?	Planning legislation provides that should development consent be granted a proponent has 5 years to physically commence work. Once commenced there is no legal obligation to complete the development within a set time frame.
The units in north point will be greatly devalued if approved.	Impact upon property values is not a relevant planning consideration.
How will dust and debris be managed during construction noting location of clothes drying facilities adjoining in the north point building?	Standard site management conditions will apply including dust control.
The owner is extremely difficult to deal with and has ignored previous consent conditions and instruction by Council for stormwater management.	Noted.

(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, car parking, 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 - 353.1 Recommended Conditions

2 View. DA2018 - 353.1 Clause 4.6 Report (FSR)

3 View. DA2018 - 353.1 Clause 4.6 Report (Height)

4 View. DA2018 - 353.1 Additional Information Letter - September 2018

5 View. DA2018 - 353.1 Heritage Office Response Letter

6 View. DA2018 - 353.1 Archaeological Report

7 View. DA2018 - 353.1 Groundwater Assessment

8 View. DA2018 - 353.1 Traffic Impact Assessment Report

9 View. DA2018 - 353.1 SOEE

10 View. DA2018 - 353.1 Contributions Estimate

11 View. DA2018 - 353.1 Plans

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 22/05/2019

Item: 07

Subject: DA2018 - 427.1 Dual Occupancy and Torrens Title Subdivision, Boat Ramps and Jetty at Lot 7 DP 246284, No. 14 Sirius Close, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Chris Gardiner

Applicant: L G Wilkie

Owner: L G Wilkie

Estimated Cost: $700,000

Parcel no: 22355

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2018 - 427.1 for a Dual Occupancy and Torrens Title Subdivision, Boat Ramps and Jetty at Lot 7, DP 246284, No. 14 Sirius Close, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a Dual Occupancy and Torrens Title Subdivision, Boat Ramps and Jetty at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

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

This report recommends approval of the development application subject to conditions.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing sites features and Surrounding development

The site has an area of 860.6m².

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

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Demolition of existing dwelling and swimming pool;

· Construction of two-storey attached dual occupancy, boat ramps and shared jetty;

· 2 lot Torrens title subdivision;

· Removal of street tree.

Refer to attachments at the end of this report.

Application Chronology

· 8 June 2018 - Application lodged.

· 29 June 2018 to 12 July 2018 - Neighbour notification.

· 9 July 2018 - Additional information requested from Applicant.

· 28 March 2019 - Additional information submitted.

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

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 (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is located within a coastal use area and a coastal environment area.