Agenda of Development Assessment Panel

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 23/10/2019

Item: 04

Subject: DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST

RECOMMENDATION

That Disclosures of Interest be presented

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST DECLARATION

Name of Meeting:

Meeting Date:

Item Number:

Subject:

I, the undersigned, hereby declare the following interest:

Pecuniary:

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

Non-Pecuniary – Significant Interest:

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

Non-Pecuniary – Less than Significant Interest:

May participate in consideration and voting.

For the reason that:

Name:

Signed:

Date:

Please submit to the Governance Support Officer at the Council Meeting.

(Refer to next page and the Code of Conduct)

Pecuniary Interest

4.1 A pecuniary interest is an interest that you have in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to you or a person referred to in clause 4.3.

4.2 You will not have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the interest is so remote or insignificant that it could not reasonably be regarded as likely to influence any decision you might make in relation to the matter, or if the interest is of a kind specified in clause 4.6.

4.3 For the purposes of this Part, you will have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the pecuniary interest is:

(a) your interest, or

(b) the interest of your spouse or de facto partner, your relative, or your partner or employer, or

4.4 For the purposes of clause 4.3:

(a) Your “relative” is any of the following:

i) your parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descendant or adopted child

ii) your spouse’s or de facto partner’s parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descendant or adopted child

iii) the spouse or de facto partner of a person referred to in paragraphs (i) and (i)

(b) “de facto partner” has the same meaning as defined in section 21C of the Interpretation Act 1987.

4.5 You will not have a pecuniary interest in relation to a person referred to in subclauses 4.3(b) or (c)

(a) if you are unaware of the relevant pecuniary interest of your spouse, de facto partner, relative, partner, employer or company or other body, or

(b) just because the person is a member of, or is employed by, a council or a statutory body, or is employed by the Crown, or

(c) just because the person is a member of, or a delegate of a council to, a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter, so long as the person has no beneficial interest in any shares of the company or body.

Non-Pecuniary

5.1 Non-pecuniary interests are private or personal interests a council official has that do not amount to a pecuniary interest as defined in clause 4.1 of this code. These commonly arise out of family or personal relationships, or out of involvement in sporting, social, religious or other cultural groups and associations, and may include an interest of a financial nature.

5.2 A non-pecuniary conflict of interest exists where a reasonable and informed person would perceive that you could be influenced by a private interest when carrying out your official functions in relation to a matter.

5.3 The personal or political views of a council official do not constitute a private interest for the purposes of clause 5.2.

5.4 Non-pecuniary conflicts of interest must be identified and appropriately managed to uphold community confidence in the probity of council decision-making. The onus is on you to identify any non-pecuniary conflict of interest you may have in matters that you deal with, to disclose the interest fully and in writing, and to take appropriate action to manage the conflict in accordance with this code.

5.5 When considering whether or not you have a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in a matter you are dealing with, it is always important to think about how others would view your situation.

Managing non-pecuniary conflicts of interest

5.6 Where you have a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in a matter for the purposes of clause 5.2, you must disclose the relevant private interest you have in relation to the matter fully and in writing as soon as practicable after becoming aware of the non-pecuniary conflict of interest and on each occasion on which the non-pecuniary conflict of interest arises in relation to the matter. In the case of members of council staff other than the general manager, such a disclosure is to be made to the staff member’s manager. In the case of the general manager, such a disclosure is to be made to the mayor.

5.7 If a disclosure is made at a council or committee meeting, both the disclosure and the nature of the interest must be recorded in the minutes on each occasion on which the non-pecuniary conflict of interest arises. This disclosure constitutes disclosure in writing for the purposes of clause 5.6.

5.8 How you manage a non-pecuniary conflict of interest will depend on whether or not it is significant.

5.9 As a general rule, a non-pecuniary conflict of interest will be significant where it does not involve a pecuniary interest for the purposes of clause 4.1, but it involves:

a) a relationship between a council official and another person who is affected by a decision or a matter under consideration that is particularly close, such as a current or former spouse or de facto partner, a relative for the purposes of clause 4.4 or another person from the council official’s extended family that the council official has a close personal relationship with, or another person living in the same household

b) other relationships with persons who are affected by a decision or a matter under consideration that are particularly close, such as friendships and business relationships. Closeness is defined by the nature of the friendship or business relationship, the frequency of contact and the duration of the friendship or relationship.

c) an affiliation between the council official and an organisation (such as a sporting body, club, religious, cultural or charitable organisation, corporation or association) that is affected by a decision or a matter under consideration that is particularly strong. The strength of a council official’s affiliation with an organisation is to be determined by the extent to which they actively participate in the management, administration or other activities of the organisation.

d) membership, as the council’s representative, of the board or management committee of an organisation that is affected by a decision or a matter under consideration, in circumstances where the interests of the council and the organisation are potentially in conflict in relation to the particular matter

e) a financial interest (other than an interest of a type referred to in clause 4.6) that is not a pecuniary interest for the purposes of clause 4.1

f) the conferral or loss of a personal benefit other than one conferred or lost as a member of the community or a broader class of people affected by a decision.

5.10 Significant non-pecuniary conflicts of interest must be managed in one of two ways:

a) by not participating in consideration of, or decision making in relation to, the matter in which you have the significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest and the matter being allocated to another person for consideration or determination, or

b) if the significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest arises in relation to a matter under consideration at a council or committee meeting, by managing the conflict of interest as if you had a pecuniary interest in the matter by complying with clauses 4.28 and 4.29.

5.11 If you determine that you have a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in a matter that is not significant and does not require further action, when disclosing the interest you must also explain in writing why you consider that the non-pecuniary conflict of interest is not significant and does not require further action in the circumstances.

5.12 If you are a member of staff of council other than the general manager, the decision on which option should be taken to manage a non-pecuniary conflict of interest must be made in consultation with and at the direction of your manager. In the case of the general manager, the decision on which option should be taken to manage a non-pecuniary conflict of interest must be made in consultation with and at the direction of the mayor.

5.13 Despite clause 5.10(b), a councillor who has a significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest in a matter, may participate in a decision to delegate consideration of the matter in question to another body or person.

5.14 Council committee members are not required to declare and manage a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in accordance with the requirements of this Part where it arises from an interest they have as a person chosen to represent the community, or as a member of a non-profit organisation or other community or special interest group, if they have been appointed to represent the organisation or group on the council committee.

SPECIAL DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST DECLARATION

This form must be completed using block letters or typed.

If there is insufficient space for all the information you are required to disclose,

you must attach an appendix which is to be properly identified and signed by you.

[insert full name of councillor]

In the matter of

[insert name of environmental planning instrument]

Which is to be considered at a meeting of the

[insert name of meeting]

Held on

[insert date of meeting]

PECUNIARY INTEREST

Address of the affected principal place of residence of the councillor or an associated person, company or body (the identified land)

Relationship of identified land to councillor

[Tick or cross one box.]

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

 An associated person of the councillor has an interest in the land.

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

MATTER GIVING RISE TO PECUNIARY INTEREST[1]

Nature of land that is subject to a change

in zone/planning control by proposed

LEP (the subject land2

[Tick or cross one box]

 The identified land.

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

Current zone/planning control

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

Proposed change of zone/planning control

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

Effect of proposed change of zone/planning control on councillor or associated person

[Tick or cross one box]

 Appreciable financial gain.

 Appreciable financial loss.

[If more than one pecuniary interest is to be declared, reprint the above box and fill in for each additional interest]

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

This form is to be retained by the council’s general manager and included in full in the minutes of the meeting

Last Updated: 3 June 2019

Important Information

This information is being collected for the purpose of making a special disclosure of pecuniary interests under clause 4.36(c) of the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW (the Model Code of Conduct).

The special disclosure must relate only to a pecuniary interest that a councillor has in the councillor’s principal place of residence, or an interest another person (whose interests are relevant under clause 4.3 of the Model Code of Conduct) has in that person’s principal place of residence.

Clause 4.3 of the Model Code of Conduct states that you will have a pecuniary interest in a matter because of the pecuniary interest of your spouse or your de facto partner or your relative or because your business partner or employer has a pecuniary interest. You will also have a pecuniary interest in a matter because you, your nominee, your business partner or your employer is a member of a company or other body that has a pecuniary interest in the matter.

“Relative” is defined by clause 4.4 of the Model Code of Conduct as meaning your, your spouse’s or your de facto partner’s parent, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, lineal descendant or adopted child and the spouse or de facto partner of any of those persons.

You must not make a special disclosure that you know or ought reasonably to know is false or misleading in a material particular. Complaints about breaches of these requirements are to be referred to the Office of Local Government and may result in disciplinary action by the Chief Executive of the Office of Local Government or the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

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

[1] Clause 4.1 of the Model Code of Conduct provides that a pecuniary interest is an interest that a person has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to the person. A person does not have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the interest is so remote or insignificant that it could not reasonably be regarded as likely to influence any decision the person might make in relation to the matter, or if the interest is of a kind specified in clause 4.6 of the Model Code of Conduct.

2 A pecuniary interest may arise by way of a change of permissible use of land adjoining, adjacent to or in proximity to land in which a councillor or a person, company or body referred to in clause 4.3 of the Model Code of Conduct has a proprietary interest

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 23/10/2019

Item: 05

Subject: DA2019 - 621 Medical Centre - Lot 27 DP 253280, No 6 Browallia Place, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Fiona Tierney

Applicant: Ian Sercombe Architect

Owner: S & J Kennedy

Estimated Cost: $353,120

Parcel no: 2775

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2019 - 621 for Medical Centre at Lot 27, DP 253280, No. 6 Browallia Place, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a medical centre 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 was received.

This report recommends the development application be approved subject to the conditions included as Attachment 1.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 984.2m².

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

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Demolition of the existing dwelling (retain existing slab)

· Construction of a medical centre and associated parking.

Refer to Attachment 2 at the end of this report for plans of the proposed development.

Application Chronology

· 30 August 2019 - Application lodged.

· 9 September - 23 September 2019 - Public exhibition via neighbour notification.

· 13 September - Additional information requested on staff/practitioner numbers.

· 13 September 2019 - Additional Information received.

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 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 64 - Advertising and Signage

The proposed development includes proposed advertising signage in the form of a single business/building identification sign.

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

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

Applicable clauses for consideration	Comments	Satisfactory
Clause 8(a) Consistent with objectives of the policy as set out in Clause 3(1) (a).	Proposed business identification signage considered consistent with the objectives.	Yes
Schedule 1(1) Character of the area.	The proposed scale and number of signs is considered acceptable having regard to the character of the residential area. Similar signage exists for other medical centres in the locality.	Yes
Schedule 1(2) Special areas.	The site is not located in a special area.	Yes
Schedule 1(3) Views and vistas.	The signage would not compromise existing views or vistas and would not project into the skyline.	Yes
Schedule 1(4) Streetscape, setting or landscape.	The proposed scale and number of signs is considered acceptable having regard to the character of the residential area. The signage would not require ongoing vegetation management.	Yes
Schedule 1(5) Site and building.	The proposed signage is compatible with the scale of the building.	Yes
Schedule 1(6) Associated devices and logos with advertisements and advertising structures.	None proposed.	n/a
Schedule 1(7) Illumination.	The signage is proposed to be illuminated. Conditions of consent are to be applied that restrict illumination to approved hours of operation of the business and no light overspill to adjoining properties. External illumination only.	Yes
Schedule 1(7) Safety.	The proposal would not reduce safety on Browallia Pl or reduce sightlines from public areas.	Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

In accordance with clause 57(1), health services facilities (including medical centres) are permissible with consent in the R1 General Residential zone, which is a prescribed zone.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

· Clause 2.2 - The subject site is zoned R1 General Residential.

· Clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table - The proposed development for a change of use from a single dwelling house to medical centre is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

o To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

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

o The proposal is a permissible landuse.

o The development will provide a medical facility and service to meet the needs of residents.

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 5.05m which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

· Clause 5.9 - No trees are proposed to be removed, however one tree (Melaleuca) in the rear yard may have root systems impacted. The applicant has advised of his desire to keep the tree and will propose a parking area adjoining the tree that will allow root systems to be minimally impacted and water infiltration. Council’s arborist has advised this is acceptable and Melaleuca trees are quite tolerant of compaction over root systems as long as area around trunk is kept well drained to prevent rotting.

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

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

Nil

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline: · Casual surveillance and sightlines · Land use mix and activity generators · Definition of use and ownership · Lighting · Way finding · Predictable routes and entrapment locations	The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	<1m cut or fill outside the external walls of the building.	Yes
2.3.3.8 onwards	Removal of hollow bearing trees	None proposed to be removed.	Yes
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100m diameter trunk and 3m outside dwelling footprint	None proposed to be removed.	Yes
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Off-street parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1: · 3 per consultant + 1 per 2 employees. The proposal includes 1 practitioner and 2 employees, therefore 5 spaces required.	It is proposed to construct 6 spaces including 1 disabled accessible space. One additional space is available over the required number of spaces on site for staff parking.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 A contributions	Refer to main body of report.	N/A

(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

Nil

(iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulation

New South Wales Coastal Policy:

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

Demolition of buildings AS 2601:

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

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

Context and Setting

The site is located within an existing residential area. The precinct is located in an area in close proximity to the private hospital and several other medical centres. This has encouraged a cluster of associated medical professionals to locate their premises within this area.

The proposal is the second medical centre within the cul-de-sac and is considered to be a low scale development that does not involve external additional bulk and scale to the existing building and is not considered to be at odds with the character of the locality. The development adequately responds to planning controls for the area.

Access, Transport and Traffic Roads

The site has road frontage to Browallia Place, a sealed public road under the care and control of Council, with an 8m wide carriageway within a 16m road reserve. Upright (SA) type kerb and gutter is present in the street, with a small section of footpath paving existing outside the medical centre at 2 Browallia Place. Browallia Place is an Urban Access Place under the AUSPEC standard, and is a cul-de-sac with access to Lake Road via Wyandra Crescent.

Traffic and Transport

It is likely the existing land use as a residential dwelling generates around 9 vehicle trips per day on average. The RMS Guide to Traffic Generating Developments (2002) provides guidance on traffic generation for commercial developments. Using the rate for medical centres we can assume a lower range rate of 3.1 vehicle trips per 100 square metres of floor area per hour during the evening peak hour. This equates to daily traffic generation of between 20 and 40 vehicle trips per day.

Public submissions received during exhibition of the DA mention that under existing conditions Browallia Place is congested by parked vehicles, sometimes restricting available traffic width to one lane. Safety concerns are highlighted by nearby residents with the visibility of pedestrian and bicycle users under these conditions.

However, the AUSPEC ‘Access Place’ standard has capacity for up to 30 dwellings, and the low speed, low traffic environment of the short cul-de-sac is consistent with the standard of an ‘Access Place’. With regard to the above factors, the increase in traffic associated with the development is within the capacity of the existing public road network.

Site Frontage and Access

The existing driveway access to the site is approximately 3.0m wide. This crossover will need to be removed and replaced with a ‘heavy duty’ commercial driveway to Council’s AUSPEC Standard Drawing 202 due to the increase in traffic. The minimum width of the crossing shall be 5.5m to allow two vehicles to pass and provide additional manoeuvring clearance.

Council’s footpath policy specifies that for new developments, a concrete footpath shall be provided along one side of Access Place roads. A 1.5m wide footpath will be required along the full frontage of the development site. This is consistent with the change in use of the site to a medical centre, and the likely increase in pedestrian traffic using the existing footpath directly to Lake Road is considered to warrant it.

Parking and Manoeuvring

A total of six parking spaces (including one disabled space and adjacent shared area) have been shown on the plans. For use as a public carpark with short term turnover (such as a medical centre), the minimum dimensions of spaces and aisles are required to meet User Class 3 of AS2890. The dimensions shown on the plans do not meet this standard. However, the dimensions on Construction Certificate plans can comply and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

Commercial developments are required to provide vehicles with the ability to exit to the public road in a forward direction. Additionally, if all spaces are full and another vehicle enters the carpark, they must have the opportunity to turn around and exit. One of the parking spaces shall be line marked with ‘No Parking’ for use as a dedicated turning bay, unless the Construction Certificate details provide an adequate area for turning.

A condition is recommended requiring the number of spaces to be provided on site as set out in the DCP. Any proposed increase in the number of consultants will require a modification application.

Water Supply Connection

Records indicate that the current development site has a 20mm metered water service from the 100mm AC water main on the same side of Browallia Place. Final water service sizing will need to be determined by a hydraulic consultant to suit the domestic and commercial components of the development, as well as fire service and backflow protection requirements. Minimum containment backflow protection for medical facilities is an RPZD at the property boundary. Minimum water service size for commercial development is 25mm.

Sewer Connection

Sewer is available and connected to the site via a 150mm main that traverses the adjacent properties at the rear of the lot. Council records indicate that the existing junction is on the north western property boundary. The existing junction can be used for the proposed development.

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards Browallia Place street frontage and is currently serviced via an existing kerb outlet. There are no known issues relating to stormwater infrastructure in this location.

The legal point of discharge for the proposed development is defined as a direct connection to Council’s kerb and gutter with the use of an approved adaptor (one per lot only), as there is no public piped drainage system in close proximity to the frontage of the site. Nearest public stormwater pit is approximately 70 metres west of the site.

Due to an increase in impervious area the development will require on-site detention (OSD) to limit site discharge to pre-development flow rates, as per the requirements of AUSPEC D5, where pre-development conditions suitable for this location is existing conditions.

Submitted plans do not demonstrate stormwater provisions, including OSD, however, preliminary assessment of the development site indicates that adequate fall towards the street frontage, and upstream neighbouring properties having access to an interallotment system should allow for conventional OSD design suitable for this development i.e. Rainwater re-use tanks (for roof catchments) and / or above ground OSD in car parking areas.

Preliminary assessment of expected OSD volume required for this development, consistent with similar sized developments, should be less than 11m³ of storage volume, as the proposed approximate impervious area is 60%, which is typical for residential developments.

A detailed site stormwater management plan will be required to be submitted for assessment with the Section 68 application and prior to the issue of a CC.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Soils

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

Air and Micro-climate

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

Flora and Fauna

Construction of the proposed development will not require removal/clearing of any significant vegetation.

Waste

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

Energy

No adverse impacts. The proposal will be required to comply with the Building Code of Australia.

Noise and Vibration

No adverse impacts anticipated. A condition is recommended to restrict construction to standard construction hours.

The proposed operating hours are considered appropriate for the residential zoning applicable to the site. The proposed operating hours are: Monday to Friday: 8.30am to 8pm.

Natural Hazards

The site is not identified as bushfire prone.

Safety, Security and Crime Prevention

Social Impact in the Locality

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

Economic Impact in the Locality

No adverse impacts. Likely positive impacts can be attributed to the construction of the development and associated flow on effects (i.e. increased 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 are likely.

Construction

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

Cumulative Impacts

The proposed health consulting rooms are located in an area where there are increasing pressures in relation to parking and traffic generation (particularly at either end of Wyandra Cr). Given that the proposal is for a single practitioner that is located in a cul-de-sac where there are one other health service facilities it is considered that the proposed development is not expected to have sufficiently adverse cumulative impacts that would justify refusal of the application.

(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 of have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

One (1) written submission has been received following public exhibition of the application. Copies of the written submission has been provided under separate cover to members of the DAP.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Overdevelopment in the street- inconsistent with residential use.	The proposal is for a single specialist practitioner. This is considered appropriately compatible for a residential area. The proposed development does not include weekend opening times.
Traffic and parking issues	The applicant has provided 6 spaces on site and complies with the requirements of the Development Control Plan. (See assessment DCP table). It is acknowledged that the area is undergoing significant change in character with significant demand for medical practitioners to be close to the private hospital. One additional space has been provided above the minimum requirements of the DCP.
Sign illuminated-unsuitable impacts	A condition of consent is recommended to limit illumination only during the approved hours of operation and no flashing or light overspill to adjoining properties is permitted. (Attachment 1)
Tree removal	The applicant has advised that their intention is to remove some shrubs but that all trees in the rear yard would be retained. The tree adjoining the fence has root systems that may be impacted and the applicant has advised that they are proposing to use a surface around this area that allows water infiltration rather than a solid concrete and required minimal ground surface disturbance. A condition of consent has been recommended to address this matter (Attachment 1).

(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

· Development contributions will be required in accordance with Section 7.12 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

· A copy of the contribution estimate is included as Attachment 3.

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 - 621.1 Recommended Conditions

2 View. DA2019 - 621.1 Plans

3 View. DA2019 - 621.1 Development Contribution Estimate

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 23/10/2019

Item: 06

Subject: DA2019 - 476.1 Change of Use from Medical Centre to Dual Occupancy and Torrens Title Subdivison, Lot 5 DP 226787, 70 Hill Street, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Benjamin Roberts

Applicant: Rob Beukers

Owner: J L Hill

Estimated Cost: $250,000

Parcel no: 9187

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2019 - 476 for a change of use from medical centre to dual occupancy and Torrens title subdivision at Lot 5, DP 226787, No. 70 Hill Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a change of use from medical centre to dual occupancy and Torrens title subdivision at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

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

This report recommends that the development application be approved subject to the conditions included as Attachment 1.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of approximately 620m².

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:

· Conversion of existing medical centre building to a dwelling.

· Construction of a new dwelling.

· Torrens title subdivision.

Refer to Attachment 2 at the end of this report for plans of the proposed development.

Application Chronology

· 3 July 2019 - Application lodged.

· 5 July 2019 - Additional information request.

· 9 - 22 July 2019 - Public exhibition via neighbour notification.

· 2 September 2019 - Additional information provided.

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. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

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

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

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

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environnemental Plan 2011

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

· Clause 2.2 -The subject site is zoned R1 General Residential.

· Clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table - dual occupancy and subdivision is a permissible landuse with consent.

· The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

o To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

· 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. The proposal will contribute to the range of housing options available.

· Clause 4.1A - The proposal includes the construction of a new dwelling and Torrens subdivision. The Torrens subdivision to create lots smaller than the 450m² minimum lot size specified on the Lot Size Map is therefore permitted.

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the new building above ground level (existing) complies with the height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

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

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

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

No draft instruments apply.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
3.2.2.2	Articulation zone: · Min. 3m front setback · An entry feature or portico · A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah · A window box treatment · A bay window or similar feature · An awning or other feature over a window · A sun shading feature	The new dwelling contains an entry porch feature setback 3m to the Grant Street property boundary.	Yes
3.2.2.2	Front setback (Residential not R5 zone): · Min. 4.5m local road · Min. 3.0m secondary road	No change to setbacks of existing building. 3m setback provided to Grant Street boundary, which is the secondary frontage.	Yes
3.2.2.3	Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade. Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided	The garage to the new dwelling is setback 5.5m and greater than 1m behind the building line to the Grant Street frontage. There is no change to the existing setback to Hill Street via conversion of the ground floor office to a garage. The garage doors are recessed behind the main building lines.	Yes
	6m max. width of garage doors and 50% max. width of building	Width of garage door requirements are complied with.	Yes
	Driveway crossovers 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width	Driveway crossing width requirements are complied with.	Yes
3.2.2.4	4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space	The site is a corner block. No rear setback requirement.	N/A
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	New dwelling single storey. South side setback = 1.05m. East side setback = 1.1m. The wall articulation is compliant and satisfies the objectives of the development provision.	Yes
3.2.2.6	35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade	Each occupancy contains minimum of 35m² open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m area directly off the ground floor living area.	Yes
3.2.2.7	Front fences: · If solid 1.2m max height and front setback 1.0m with landscaping · 3x3m min. splay for corner sites · Fences >1.2m to be 1.8m max. height for 50% or 6.0m max. length of street frontage with 25% openings · 0.9x0.9m splays adjoining driveway entrances	No new fencing proposed.	N/A
3.2.2.8	Front fences and walls to have complimentary materials to context No chain wire, solid timber, masonry or solid steel front fences	No new fencing proposed.	N/A
3.2.2.10	Privacy: · Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed · Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m · Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m	The new dwelling is single storey in construction and the primary living and open space area are orientated north. There are no elevated living areas orientated south that would compromise privacy to the adjacent dwelling.	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	No cut or fill more than 1m proposed.	Yes
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage	No retaining walls proposed along rod frontages.	N/A
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer	No retaining walls proposed.	N/A
	Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway	No retaining wall or fencing combination proposed.	N/A
2.3.3.8	Removal of hollow bearing trees	No hollow bearing 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 tree removal proposed.	N/A
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.	Yes
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads	No new access proposed to arterial or distributor road.	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Driveway crossings are existing and acceptable.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. Dual Occupancy 1 space per dwelling/occupancy (behind building line).	Proposal involves a double garage to the new dwelling and conversion of ground floor area to provide a single garage to the existing dwelling. Sufficient parking is proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Contributions apply - refer to ET calc and NOP.	Yes
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Suitable existing landscaping around driveway/parking locations.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Existing driveways are sealed.	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	Driveways are existing.	Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.	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

No matters prescribed by the regulations apply.

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

Context and setting

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

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

· There are no significant adverse impacts on existing view sharing. Specifically, the view currently enjoyed across the site from 80 Grant Street is not special or iconic and is across the side boundary. The impacts to this view are negligible. The proposal is single storey in nature and below the maximum 8.5m building height control applicable to the site. The complete retention of the existing view is unrealistic having regard to the planning controls.

· No adverse privacy impacts would result from the proposal. Specifically, the new dwelling is single storey in construction and the primary living and open space area is orientated north. There are no elevated living areas or living rooms orientated south that would compromise privacy to the adjacent dwelling at 80 Grant Street.

· There are no identified adverse overshadowing impacts to the adjoining property at 80 Grant Street. Specifically, the new dwelling is single storey in nature, the adjoining property contains a side access down this boundary and the dwelling is setback approximately 2.5m from the boundary. The adjoining dwelling is also two storey with elevated living and deck areas. The proposal does not prevent the adjoining property from receiving 3 hours of sunlight to private open space and primary living areas on 21 June.

Roads

The site has road frontages to Grant Street and Hill Street.

Adjacent to the site, Grant Street is a sealed public road under the care and control of Council. Grant Street is a Local road with a 14m road width within a 30m road reserve. There is SA kerb and gutter, a pedestrian refuge island at the intersection and on-street parking available.

Adjacent to the site, Hill Street is a sealed public road under the care and control of Council. Hill Street is a Collector road with an 11m road width within a 20m road reserve. There is SA kerb and gutter and a 1.2m wide footpath on the northern side and on-street parking available.

Traffic and Transport

This development proposes to generate an additional 9 daily trips. The addition in traffic associated with the development is unlikely to have any adverse impacts to the existing road network within the immediate locality.

Site Frontage and Access

Vehicle access to the existing and new building are proposed through existing driveways with direct frontages to Grant and Hill Streets, being Council-owned public roads. As these remain in good condition, no further driveway works will be required under the subdivision application.

Parking and Manoeuvring

Parking and driveway widths comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890).

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site has an existing 20mm meter. The site is fronted by 150mm diameter PVC water mains on the opposite side of Hill Street and the opposite side of Grant Street. An additional water service is required to service the development. Engineering plans are required to show all proposed water services to the lot.

Details will be required to accompany the section 68 application. Refer to recommended conditions of consent.

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site has an existing junction from the sewer main which runs inside the eastern boundary of the development lot. Torrens title subdivision shall require provision of a sewer service to each lot. Engineering plans shall be required as part of the Construction Certificate (Infrastructure) application.

Details will also be required to accompany the section 68 application. Refer to recommended conditions of consent.

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards the northeast corner of the property and is currently serviced via an existing inter-allotment drainage system connecting to a kerb outlet on Hill Street.

The legal point of discharge for the proposed development is defined as a direct connection to the existing inter-allotment drainage system servicing the site, providing that a suitably qualified plumber inspects the line and deems it to be in good condition. A new 600 x 600 grated surcharge pit will also need to be installed into the line, inside the property boundary adjacent to the road reserve.

Stormwater from the proposed development is planned to be disposed via inter-allotment drainage, which is consistent with the above requirements.

A detailed site stormwater management plan will be required to be submitted for assessment with the Section 68 application and prior to the issue of a building construction certificate.

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

· Provision of inter-allotment drainage to allow the proposed development to drain to the nominated point of discharge via a single suitably sized conduit. If after inspection by a suitably qualified plumber the existing inter-allotment line is deemed to be in an unserviceable condition, then a new inter-allotment arrangement will need to be established, in a dedicated easement, clear of any conflicting services.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

No known items of Aboriginal or European heritage significance exist on the property. No adverse impacts anticipated. The site is in a residential context and considered to be disturbed land.

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

The proposed development will not have any significant adverse impacts on soils in terms of quality, erosion, stability and/or productivity subject to a standard condition requiring erosion and sediment controls to be in place prior to and during construction.

Air and microclimate

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

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will 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 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 not identified as being bushfire prone.

Safety, security and crime prevention

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

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

Construction impacts are considered capable of being managed, standard construction and site management conditions have been recommended.

Cumulative impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

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

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

One (1) written submission was received following public exhibition of the application. Copies of the written submissions have been provided under separate cover to members of the DAP.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
The new dwelling would significantly impact on existing solar access to the north facing living room and kitchen of the adjoining dwelling at 80 Grant Street.	There are no identified adverse overshadowing impacts to the adjoining property at 80 Grant Street. The new dwelling is single storey in nature, the adjoining property contains a side access down the boundary and the dwelling is setback approximately 2.5m from the boundary. The adjoining dwelling is also two storey with elevated living and deck areas. The proposal does not prevent the adjoining property from receiving 3 hours of sunlight to private open space and primary living areas on 21 June.
The new dwelling would block a significant view enjoyed from the adjoining dwelling at 80 Grant Street.	There are no significant adverse impacts on existing view sharing. The view currently enjoyed across the site from 80 Grant Street is not special or iconic and is across the side boundary. The impacts to this view are negligible. The proposal is single storey in nature and below the maximum 8.5m building height control applicable to the site.

(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

· 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 in accordance with Section 7.11 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 towards roads, open space, community cultural services, emergency services and administration buildings.

· A copy of the contribution estimate is included as Attachment 3.

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. DA2019 - 476.1 Recommended Conditions

2 View. DA2019 - 476.1 Plans

3 View. DA2019 - 476.1 Contributions Quote

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 23/10/2019

Item: 07

Subject: DA2019 - 203.1 Demolition of Existing Buildings and Construction of Restaurant at 24 Clarence Street, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planning Coordinator, Patrick Galbraith-Robertson

Applicant: All About Planning

Owner: Darzi Group Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: $1,200,000

Parcel no: 4539

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2019 - 203.1 for a demolition of existing buildings and construction of restaurant at Lot 1, DP 713378, No. 24 Clarence Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a Development Application for demolition of existing buildings and construction of restaurant 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 on two (2) occasions, five (5) submissions were received.

The proposal has been amended during the assessment of the application in response to assessment issues. Amendments have been made to the design of the proposed building and removal of outdoor dining and parklet dining.

This report recommends that the development application be approved subject to the conditions included in Attachment 1.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 614m2.

The site is currently occupied by two (2) existing commercial buildings and concrete slabs. The remainder of site is vacant and grassed.

The site is located between and adjoining heritage listed items being the Port Macquarie Historical Museum and the Garrison Building and opposite the heritage listed Port Macquarie Historic Court House.

The site is located within the Port Macquarie Town Centre and adjoins the Port Central Shopping Centre.

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:

· Demolition of two (2) existing single storey brick buildings;

· Construction of a masonry single storey restaurant building.

Amended plans submitted include the following changes to the proposed design to address assessment issues:

o Relocation of the office/ store room from the front north eastern corner of the site towards the rear.

o Opening up of the proposed courtyard for the length of the Historic Museum existing side wall facing the site, with a 1m high planter bed.

o Lengthening to the rear of the services and storeroom opposite the above on the front north western corner.

o The on street parklet outside the site within the existing carparking spaces has been deleted.

o Revised delineation and calculation of serviced area for the restaurant; and

o The services store rooms are now single storey to reduce the scale from the previously (2) storey height.

Refer to Attachment 2 at the end of this report for plans of the proposed development.

Application Chronology

· 22 March 2019 - DA lodged with Council.

· 28 March 2019 - Referral of proposal to NSW Heritage Council for comment.

· 12 to 30 April 2019 - Neighbour notification of proposal.

· 30 April 2019 - Redacted copies of submissions forwarded to Applicant for consideration.

· 9 April 2019 - Review of proposal by Council’s Heritage Advisor.

· 30 April 2019 - Advice received from the NSW Heritage Council (attached to this report).

· 2 May 2019 - Site visit by Assessing Officer.

· 2 May 2019 - Meeting with Applicant to discuss assessment issues and request additional information.

· 3 May 2019 - Additional information requested from Applicant in regards to stormwater management.

· 31 July 2019 - Additional information including heritage impact statement and amended plans received from Applicant.

· 1 August 2019 - Assessment update provided to Applicant.

· 6 to 19 August 2019 - Neighbour notification of amended proposal.

· 13 August 2019 - Review of amended proposal by Council’s Heritage Advisor.

· 15 August 2019 - Heritage Advisor’s advice forwarded to Applicant for consideration.

· 10 September 2019 - Amended stormwater plans received from Applicant.

· 11 October 2019 - Applicant’s Consulting Engineer queried on stormwater design concept.

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. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage

The proposed development includes proposed advertising signage in the form of business identification sign. The proposed sign will be 1.8m x 0.6m, with a total area of 1.08m2 and does not protrude more than 300mm from the wall or above the building parapet or eave.

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

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

Applicable clauses for consideration	Comments	Satisfactory
Clause 8(a) Consistent with objectives of the policy as set out in Clause 3(1)(a).	The proposed signage is consistent with the objectives of this policy.	Yes
Schedule 1(1) Character of the area.	The proposed “The Sicilian’ signage is considered consistent and compatible with the existing and desire future character of the locality noting the adjoining heritage items and advertising in the area. The signage is modest in scale.	Yes
Schedule 1(2) Special areas.		Yes
Schedule 1(3) Views and vistas.	No impacts to existing views or vistas with the proposed signage.	Yes
Schedule 1(4) Streetscape, setting or landscape.	The proposed sign is considered to be integrated with the overall design, it does not obscure significant architectural elements of the building (and other business identification signs are not elsewhere displayed on the building elevation). The signage is compatible with the Clarence Street streetscape. The proposal is compatible with the scale, proportion and other characteristics of the building and is rationalised and simplified in its context.	Yes
Schedule 1(5) Site and building.		Yes
Schedule 1(6) Associated devices and logos with advertisements and advertising structures.	No logos are proposed.	N/A
Schedule 1(7) Illumination.	The sign is not proposed to be illuminated and will not result in unacceptable glare, affect safety for pedestrians, vehicles or aircraft and will not impact on any residences.	Yes
Schedule 1(7) Safety.	The signage does not reduce the safety for any public road, pedestrians or cyclists or obscure sightlines from public areas.	Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is located within a coastal environment area within the Port Macquarie Town Centre.

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 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 funneling and the loss of views from public places to foreshores;

j) any 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 located within an area zoned for commercial purposes.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Under the provisions of clause 104, the proposal is not identified as a traffic generating development and does not front a classified road.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environnemental 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 a restaurant (as a form of commercial premises) is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the B3 zone are as follows:

• 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.

• To encourage appropriate employment opportunities in accessible locations.

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

• 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.

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

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

o the proposal is a permissible landuse; and

o the proposal will provide a suitable retail landuse to serve the community.

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

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 4.7m which complies with the standard height limit of part 13m (north) and part 16m (south) applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the proposal is below 1:1.0 which complies with the maximum part 2.5:1(north) and part 3:1(south) floor space ratio applying to the site.

· Clause 5.10 – The property is not listed as a heritage item in Schedule 5 Part 1 however is listed as an archaeological site in Schedule 5 Part 3.

(a) The proposal has been referred to the NSW Heritage Council for comment and their advice is attached to this report. The recommendations of the advice have been satisfactorily responded to by the Applicant inclusive of making design amendments to the building and providing a specialist Heritage Impact Statement prepared by John Oultram Heritage and Design. Council’s Heritage Advisor has also reviewed the amended proposal and makes recommendation to support the proposal. With regards to the potential for European archaeological impacts appropriate conditions have been recommended.

· Clause 7.3 - The site is not on land within a mapped “flood planning area” (Land subject to flood discharge of 1:100 annual recurrence interval flood event (plus the applicable climate change allowance and relevant freeboard).

(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

The following tables provide an assessment of the proposal against the development provisions of Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013 and Development Control Plan 2011 - Port Macquarie Greater Town Centre.

*Parts 2 & 3 - General and commercial provisions*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
2.2.2.1	a) Signs identifying products or services are not acceptable, even where relating to products or services available on that site. b) Signage is not permitted outside property boundaries. c) An on-building ‘chalkboard’ sign for the purposes of describing services to goods for sale should not be larger than 1.5m2. d) On-premise signs should not project above or to the side of building facades	The proposed signage is of a high quality design and finish, contributing to the streetscape and identification of the premises. The sign does not dominate the streetscape, do not obscure or limit motorist or pedestrian activity or their safety. An assessment of the proposed signage has been included under the discussion of SEPP 64 Advertising and Signage earlier in this report.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Development shall not exceed a maximum cut of 1.0m and fill of 1.0m measured vertically above the ground level (existing) at a distance of 1.0m outside the perimeter of the external walls of the building.	As a relatively level site, the proposed development will only require minimal site disturbance through cut and fill.	Yes
2.2.3.6	All stormwater infrastructure is designed in accordance with the Council’s Auspec Design Specification Documents.	All stormwater from the proposed development will be collected and managed in accordance with a stormwater management plan prepared by David Johnson Engineer as submitted with the subject DA in compliance with the DCP. Refer to assessment comments later in this report. Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to address this matter.	Yes - capable
2.5.3.3	Off-street Parking is provided in accordance with Table 2.5.1 Restaurants in Commercial Zones: 1 per 30m2 Serviced Floor Area.	The site does not currently provide for any off-street carparking. The proposal does not propose to change this arrangement. The proposal includes 225m² of serviceable restaurant floor area which requires 225/30m² = 7.5 parking spaces. The site has a 5.5 parking space credit for current approved uses on the site which equates to 165m²of commercial/retail floor space.	No*
2.5.3.11	Parking requirements of the community are met without imposing an additional liability on general rating revenue. To provide a mechanism to offset parking shortfalls. Contributions will be accepted in commercial areas of Port Macquarie.	As noted above, a deficiency of 2 carparking space is associated with the subject development. Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan and DCP 2013 makes provision for the levying of contributions for any shortfall in onsite carparking (in the CBD) which is recommended to be used to address the parking shortfall.	Yes
2.7.2.2	The development is to address the generic principles of crime prevention; • Casual surveillance and sightlines; • Land use mix and activity generators; • Definition of use and ownership; • Basic exterior building design; • Lighting; • Way-finding; and • Predictable routes and entrapment locations; as described in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.	The site layout of the proposal achieves: Effective access control through the following: 1. Providing clearly visible access from the street, and differentiating the various areas within the restaurant/café. 2. Minimising unintended access by intruders to the building including secure gates locked after hours; 3. Clear delineation of private and public areas is made; Surveillance: The proposal achieves effective surveillance through the following: 1. The proposed buildings and structures have clear and active orientations to the sites street frontage. 2. The building entrances on Clarence Street are open and have a wide angle of visibility from the street. 3. There are no public areas with blind corners. 4. Appropriate lighting (in accordance with relevant Australian Standards) will be installed. 5. Only suitable site landscaping that does not provide concealment opportunities will be installed (ref submitted landscaping plan). Territorial Reinforcement: The proposal achieves effective territorial reinforcement through the following: 1. Clear building identification. 2. Front boundary delineation by the use of design elements, planting and other features which clearly define public and private areas. Space Management: The proposal achieves effective space management and maintenance through the following: 1. Using building materials and design aspects such as avoiding blank walls, and lighting design to minimise opportunities for vandalism. 2. Use of hard wearing materials to reduce maintenance and provide the basis for an attractive,	Yes
3.4.3.1	A zero metre or consistent setback to ground floor is preferred in all business zone developments.	The proposal has adopted a zero-street setback, consistent with businesses in Clarence Street for the framed entry to the restaurant premises and the remainder of the building setback is suitable having regard to the existing context with adjoining heritage items.	Yes
3.4.3.3	a) Variations in roof form including the use of skillions, gables and hips are to be provided in the development. b) Variations in roof materials should be used. c) Parapets and flat roofs should be avoided. d) In an established street, roof form and materials should be consistent or complementary to those developments in that street. e) Lift over-runs and service plant should be concealed within roof structures. f) All roof plant should be represented on plans and elevations. g) Outdoor recreation areas on flat roofs should be landscaped and incorporate shade structures and wind screens to encourage use. h) Roof design should generate an interesting skyline and be visually interesting when viewed from adjoining developments.	The proposed high arched entrances provide a visually interesting design feature in this location, and hides the various sections of the roof design that sits behind. Variations in roof materials, and design style have been incorporated within the building to add interest and architectural detail to the restaurant. These details hide parts of the large domineering wall of the Port Central Plaza which is located on its rear southern boundary. The side elevations of the adjoining building do not include any windows therefore avoiding any privacy, bulk and scale and overshadowing impacts. The proposal will provide a positive contribution to the Clarence Street streetscape.	Yes
3.4.3.4	Colours, construction materials and finishes should respond in a positive manner to the existing built form, character and architectural qualities of the street.	The proposed front archway entrance will be subservient in height and form to both of the adjoining heritage items and will not physically dominate either. Additionally, the proposed colours and finish for the archway will be uncomplicated and formal and will visually be complementary to the Garrison Building and less intense than the Historical Museum. The design adds positively to the streetscape, and does not detract from the surrounding heritage building’s built form or character.	Yes
3.4.3.5	Building facades should be designed to reflect the orientation of the site incorporating environmental control devices eg. sun sheds, ventilation vents, overhangs, building recesses, eaves as an integrated design feature of the building.	The building has been designed taking into consideration its orientation. The arched entranceway is a high quality architectural feature adding diversity to the streetscape facade. The entry to the restaurant has alfresco open-air eating including natural ventilation, landscaping and elements of sunshade features which will make a positive contribution to reducing bulk of the building as the main roof structure is setback from the street facade. The restaurant incorporates quality architectural features in its design adding to its contemporary, unique and vibrant appearance.	Yes
3.4.3.6	Any security grilles should be provided inside the building, behind glazing and designed to ensure transparency to the interior.	Open decorative metal gates will provide safety being locked and secured after hours. The transparency of the gates provide surveillance internally within the building. The arched entranceway also designates the public streetscape from the restaurant or private area for diners. The internal layout of the restaurant has been designed to provide a sense of space, safety and openness for patrons.	Yes
3.4.3.7	a) Infill development or alterations should respect the form, scale and massing of existing traditional buildings. b) Where traditional frontages and facades set the architectural theme for parts of a Centre, infill buildings or alterations respect and reflect the architectural qualities and traditional materials of those buildings, but do not necessarily imitate historical architectural styles.	The building has been designed to complement the existing form, scale and massing of the existing adjoining buildings. The Port Macquarie CBD has a mix of various frontages and architectural detailing. The new restaurant frontage adds to the diversity within the commercial centre. Given the proximity to heritage items, the design of the restaurant has been made distinctive so as to avoid imitating or lessen the worth of, the adjoining historical architectural features.	Yes
3.4.3.9	a) Active frontages should consist of a shop front, café or restaurant if accompanied by an entry from the street. b) A minimum of 50% of the ground floor level front facade should be clear glazed. c) Active ground floor uses are to be accessible and at the same level as the footpath. d) Restaurants, cafés and the like should provide openable shop fronts to the footpath but should not encroach into footpath. e) Colonnade structures should not be used unless it is demonstrated that the design would not restrict visibility into the shop or commercial premise or limit natural daylight along footpaths and do not create opportunities for concealment.	The proposed building design has incorporated an active frontage, being accessible from the streetscape, and several open arched entries provides direct visual contact through the building. The restaurant design will not impede pedestrian access along the streetscape. Further activation and liveliness will be provided by the proposed outdoor footpath dining immediately adjoining the entrance archways and the parklet dining within the roadway. Each of these are proposed under Council’s policies for each component within the PMQ CBD. The openness of the entry provides natural light and ventilation, and the restaurant layout has been designed to reduce opportunities for concealment.	Yes
3.4.3.11	Continuous shelter from the weather is to be provided for the full extent of the active street frontage.	No awning is proposed across public footpath	No*
3.4.3.15	a) A landscaping plan to be submitted with the development application. b) Vegetation is provided on top of podium levels fronting the street below podium level.	Satisfactory landscaping proposed within the site.	Yes
3.4.3.22	a) Any ramps are to be integrated into the overall building and landscape design. b) The development complies with AS1428 - Design for Access and Mobility.	Due to the flat nature of the site and its levels relative to the footpath, the proposed development will not require access ramps and the like to provide the required access. Nevertheless, a continuous accessible path of travel will be provided through the development including to the uni-sex accessible/ disabled compliant toilet.	Yes
3.4.3.24 to 3.4.3.26	Waste management both construction and operational.	A waste management plan will be submitted as part of the construction certificate. As indicated on the submitted architectural plans, a dedicated roofed and sealed garbage and recycling bin storage area is provided in the front western corner of the development with direct access off the street for servicing. Required drainage and services to this area will be provided. Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to reflect these requirements.	Yes

*Part 5 Port Macquarie Town Centre*
Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
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.	The proposed restaurant development is complimentary to the variety of businesses and building styles along Clarence Street. The building promotes its own style, and does not mimic the heritage buildings interspersed along Clarence Street. The proposed building is single storey, maintaining through its design a distinctive character which is consistent with the shops/cafes/restaurants within the locality. Materials and finishes will be pale in colour, and incorporate lightweight indoor/outdoor spaces. Smaller roof forms are proposed, setback from the street behind the hard built form edge established by the entrance archway without dominating the streetscape or adjoining heritage buildings. The proposed front archway entrance will be subservient in height and form to both of the adjoining heritage items	Yes
Façade Enclosure OB6 - To have the ground floor have a high percentage of enclosures to provide a consistent edge to the streets and an urban character.	The design of the proposal has been assessed as being suitable particularly having regard to the existing adjoining heritage items.	Yes/No - acceptable
Roof Design OB7 – To improve the roofscapes impression of the Town Centre	The architectural plans/design of this single storey restaurant building has considered the adjoining heritage building features including roof forms.	Yes
Block controls B(12)	The design of the proposal has been assessed as being suitable particularly having regard to the existing adjoining heritage items. The treatment of the eastern section of the building in consultation with Council’s Heritage Advisor is acceptable.	Yes/No

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to the standard requirements for provision of calculated off-street parking. As detailed above, the proposal has a calculated shortfall of two (2) parking spaces.

The relevant objectives 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 Applicant has submitted a request to support the variation to 2 space parking requirement and also waive any the requirement for payment of development contributions for the following reasons:

· The degree of variation is only minor and not significant;

· The proposal represents a significant investment in the Port Macquarie CBD by the proponent who is a motivated and experienced restauranteur who has wanted to open a premises in Port Macquarie for an extended period of time;

· The development will be a highly prominent addition to the hospitality sector of Port Macquarie that will be a significant enhancement to the dining options currently available;

· As a restaurant the nature of trade will be such that much of its operation is outside of regular daytime business hours thereby reducing potential impacts on parking demand in the CBD.

· Much trade of the proposal as a restaurant involves multi-purpose trips where patrons can be undertaking a number of tasks in the one trip to the CBD including working in businesses, shopping, utilising one form or the other of commercial, legal or real estate services, attending a medical practice for an appointment, tourists staying in CBD accommodation, enjoying a concert or show at The Glasshouse, or a movie at the Majestic Cinema Complex, all in addition to enjoying a meal at the proposed restaurant. This will reduce the actual parking demand from the proposal.

The above request has been carefully considered and assessed. It is recommended that above request not be supported however the parking space variation be supported subject to payment of the development contributions in accordance with Section 2.5.3.11 of the DCP 2013.

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

· The parking variation is minor;

· A Development Contributions Plan and DCP 2013 permits the payment of contributions in lieu of provision of parking on-site;

· The proposal does not reduce the amount of street parking in Clarence Street with any new proposed driveway access noting this is the only access to the site; and

· The site does not currently have off-street parking.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to not providing a street awning.

The relevant objectives are:

· To provide pedestrian amenity by the provision of weather protection.

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

· The design of the proposal has been assessed as being suitable particularly having regard to the existing adjoining heritage items; and

· Council’s Heritage Advisor has recommended that a street awning not be provided given the existing context between the existing adjoining heritage items.

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

Demolition of the existing buildings on the site are capable of compliance with this Australian Standard. An appropriate standard consent condition is recommended.

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

Context and setting

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

The proposal is considered to be sufficient compatible with other existing commercial development in the locality including existing heritage buildings 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.

Access, Traffic and Transport

The proposal will not have any significant adverse impacts in terms access, transport and traffic. The existing immediate road network will satisfactorily cater for any increase in traffic generation as a result of the development.

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site an existing 20mm metered water service.

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

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

Appropriate consent conditions have been recommended to address water supply requirements.

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is connected to sewer via junction to the existing sewer line that runs along the southern property boundary.

The development must drain sewage to an existing point of connection to Council’s sewer system.

The proposal will require a trade waste system to be installed and sized accordingly to meet the sewerage intakes of the development.

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

Appropriate consent conditions have been recommended to address sewer servicing requirements.

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards the Clarence Street frontage and is currently drained to the existing kerb inlet pit at that site frontage. This pit will also be the legal point of discharge for the proposed development.

A stormwater drainage plan has been submitted in support of the development application and includes the on-site stormwater detention facilities which have conceptually been designed to limit site stormwater discharge to a rate less than or equal to pre-development rates.

This detention system is located beneath the floor of the building, adjoining the Clarence Street frontage of the site and is drained directly to the stormwater pit referred to above.

A review of the proposed detention system and associated summary calculations indicate that the system achieves compliance with AUSPEC requirements with regard to stormwater discharge rates pre and post development. Furthermore, correspondence between Council’s Senior Stormwater Engineer and the applicants Engineer confirm that the system has been designed in accordance with the current version of Australian Rainfall and Runoff 2019 and having regard for the likely elevated tail water levels in the downstream drainage system.

Appropriate consent conditions have been recommended to address stormwater servicing requirements.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

Refer to comments provided earlier in this report addressing the heritage requirements of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011.

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

Air and microclimate

Flora and fauna

Waste

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

Energy

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

Noise and vibration

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

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

Safety, security and crime prevention

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area. The design of the restaurant and orientation will improve natural surveillance within this section of the Port Macquarie Town Centre locality.

Social impacts in the locality

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

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

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

Site constraints of existing European heritage and adjoining and adjacent heritage has been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

Five (5) written submissions were received following public exhibition of the application on two (2) occasions. Copies of the written submissions have been provided separately to members of the DAP.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Concern with removal of 4 parking spaces in Clarence Street with parklet.	Proposal has been amended to remove parklets in Clarence Street.
The sewer mains within the locality are at capacity.	Council’s Water & Sewer section have reviewed the proposal and raised no objections to the proposal subject to conditions. Refer to comments earlier in this report.
The demolition and construction processes at 24 Clarence Street has the potential to highly impact the businesses and their customers at 26 Clarence Street. To minimise any disruption to these businesses trading capacity, it would be strongly preferred that works could be undertaken outside of normal trading hours.	Appropriate standard conditions are recommended with flexibility for Council to approve variations to construction hours in certain circumstances.
The proposal fails to appropriately acknowledge or respect the cultural precinct in which the development will be taking place, nor the architectural features of the nearby State significant buildings.	The proposal has been amended to address compatibility of the proposal within the existing context. Council’s Heritage Advisor supports the proposal as amended.
Proximity of proposed structures to the external western wall of the adjoining Museum building which are too close and jeopardise any conservation work and place it at permanent risk of future damage both during the construction phase and afterwards given we will have restricted external access to it.	A revised proposal has been submitted. Changes have been incorporated in the principal areas of assessment and submissions concern including: • Removal of potential abutments to the Port Macquarie Museum building, setting the Office back to the south of the building. • Setting the street front façade back from the principal street alignment. • Providing clearance between the built elements of the proposal to any built element on the adjacent eastern site. • Adjustment of the colonnaded façade elemental heights and relating the components to the adjacent buildings. • The provision of a street elevation demonstrating the fit of the intervention. • Provision of a Statement of Heritage Impact prepared by John Oultram Heritage and Design. Council’s Heritage Advisor supports the proposal as amended.
Suggest that the development be set back to enable not only access to our building but that it could form an interesting feature of the new development.
The proposal has failed to adequately assess the heritage impacts of the development on both the streetscape and the heritage buildings in the precinct, nor does it adequately address the requirements of its Archaeological Management Zoning.	A heritage impact statement has been submitted during the assessment of the DA. This has been reviewed as being acceptable together with the amendments made to the proposal.
The idea of a ‘screen’ type street-edge structure at the front boundary is broadly supported. However, the proposed faux- “Roman” detail and proportions of the masonry rendered and arched wall are not appropriate in this case. This element does not reference the proportions, form and fenestration pattern of the Museum or Garrison buildings nor is it an appropriate use of this architectural language in an Australian colonial context.	The proposal has been amended to address compatibility of the proposal within the existing context. Council’s Heritage Advisor supports the proposal as amended.

(e) The Public Interest

The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls including justified variations to standard planning controls and will not adversely 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 in accordance with Section 7.11 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 towards public parking.

(b)

· A copy of the contributions estimate is included as Attachment 3.

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. DA2019 - 203.1 Recommended Conditions

2 View. DA2019 - 203.1 Plans and Supporting Documents

3 View. DA2019 - 203.1 Contribution Estimate

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 23/10/2019

Item: 08

Subject: DA2019 - 400 Concept Proposal for Staged Residential Subdivision (25 torrens title lots) & Staged Residential Subdivision (19 torrens title lots) - 165 John Oxley Drive, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planning Coordinator, Patrick Galbraith-Robertson

Applicant: N & P Mann, P & J Mann, P & B Pye CARE King & Campbell Pty Ltd

Owner: N & P Mann, P & J Mann, P & B Pye

Estimated Cost: $750,000

Parcel no: 16155

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2019 - 400 for a concept proposal for staged residential subdivision (25 Torrens title lots) & staged residential subdivision (19 Torrens title lots) at Lot 3 DP 533058, No. 165 John Oxley Drive, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a concept proposal for staged residential subdivision & staged residential subdivision at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

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

The proposal has been amended during the assessment of the application in response to assessment issues.

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 2.4132 hectares.

The site has recently been rezoned to part R1 General Residential and part E2 Environmental Conservation with the gazettal of Amendment No.39 to the Port Macquarie Hastings LEP 2011.

The site is subject to an existing Planning Agreement known as the South Lindfield Urban Release Area Planning Agreement (Mann VPA).

The site is zoned part R1 general residential and part E2 Environmental Conservation 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:

· Concept proposal for a Torrens title subdivision of the site into 25 lots; and

· A Stage 1 works development which includes:

- Vegetation clearing within the development footprint (R1 zone);

- Confirmation of the bushfire asset protection (APZs) for the concept proposal;

- Demolition of existing dwelling and sheds;

- Construction of the northern sewer route within the John Oxley Drive road reserve and Lot 1 DP 22676 to the existing sewerage reticulation infrastructure; and

- The subdivision of the northern catchment, including road no.1, road no.2, part road no.3 and residential subdivision to provide 19 lots, which will be released in 3 sub-stages.

· The subsequent Stage 2 Works DA will provide for the residential subdivision of the southern catchment to provide 6 Torrens title lots:

- The Stage 2 Works DA will include details of the downstream connections to the existing pump station and stormwater treatment via a bio-retention swale within the adjoining property to the south (Lot 399 DP 1241278), which is held in separate ownership.

- The proposed subdivision has been concurrently lodged with a Concept DA and Stage 1 Works DA on the adjoining property to the west, described as Lot 3 DP 533058. The required servicing (sewer and stormwater) for the northern catchments of both the subject site and adjoining Lot 1 will be provided on a shared arrangement.

· The concept proposal has been made pursuant to Part 4 Division 4.4 of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act) and relates to land identified within the South Lindfield Urban Release Area.

· The Act establishes at clause 4.22 (5) that Council’s assessment of a Concept DA need only consider the likely impact of the concept proposal, including any first stage and does not need to consider the likely impact of the carrying out of development (the works) that may be the subject of subsequent Development Applications.

· The proposal is also an Integrated Development requiring Bushfire Safety Authority under the Rural Fires Act 1997.

Refer to Attachment 2 at the end of this report for plans of the proposed development.

Application Chronology

· 5 June 2019 - DA lodged with Council.

· 6 June 2019 - Referral of proposal to NSW Rural Fire Service to obtain Bushfire Safety Authority.

· 12 to 25 June 2019 - Neighbour notification of proposal.

· 24 June 2019 - Referral of Biodiversity Assessment Report (BDAR) to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment.

· 1 July 2019 - Site inspection by Assessing Officer with Applicant and request for additional information - approach to noise assessment and Vegetation Management Plan (VMP).

· 3 July 2019 - Copy of submissions forwarded to Applicant for consideration.

· 18 July 2019 - Bushfire Safety Authority issued by the NSW Rural Fire Service.

· 28 August 2019 - Meeting with Applicant to discuss assessment issues.

· 4 September 2019 - Copy of correspondence received from Applicant of additional information sent to the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) in regards to an exemption request to the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.

· 5 September 2019 - Amended VMP received from Applicant.

· 17 September 2019 - DPIE provided advice on BDAR received.

· 19 September 2019 - Additional information requested from Applicant - arborist report queries, VMP suggestions, copy of BDAR issues raised by DPIE and bushfire risk queries.

· 9 October 2019 - Additional information received from Applicant - response to all assessment queries and updated BDAR.

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. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

The site is identified within Council’s Koala Plan of Management for South Lindfield Stage 3 (KPoM) dated November 2018.

An extract of KPoM is provided below and it confirms the proposed approach to trees being removed within the development footprint and those trees that are to be retained on the northern and southern property boundary and within the E2 zoned lands.

The Applicant has submitted a Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) (as required by the Planning Agreement applying to the site) which satisfactorily addresses the requirements of this KPoM. The VMP is recommended to be supported and an appropriate consent condition is recommended.

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 not located within a coastal use area or coastal environment area.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

The site does not have frontage to a classified road. John Oxley Drive has been declassified from previously being the Oxley Highway.

On the basis that the site is not adjacent to the road corridor for a freeway, a tollway or a transit way or any other road with an annual average daily traffic volume of more than 40,000 vehicles, clause 102 does not apply.

Under the provisions of clause 104, the proposed subdivision is not identified as a traffic generating development.

Under the provisions of clause 106, the proposed northern sewer route is a permissible landuse outside the development site in the RU1 primary production zone to the north of the site.

Based on the above, the proposed development addresses relevant clauses in the SEPP and will not to create any significant adverse conflict in terms of traffic or noise.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environnemental Plan 2011

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

· Clause 2.2 - The subject site is zoned part R1 general residential and part E2 environmental conservation.

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

• To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

The objectives of the E2 zone are as follows:

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

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

• To protect coastal wetlands and littoral rainforests.

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

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

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

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

o The proposal will ensure the protection of the section of the site which is zoned E2 which has high ecological value.

o The proposal will increase the ecological value of the E2 zoned section of the site with the proposed VMP works and koala offset plantings;

o The subdivision is a permissible landuse; and

o The subdivision will provide for new housing needs of the community.

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

· Clause 4.1 - The lot sizes within the proposed Stage 1 subdivision development area range from 497.6m2 to 819.5m2. All proposed lots comply with the minimum 450m2 lot size standard identified in the Lot Size Map relating to the site.

· Clause 5.10 – Heritage. The site does not contain or adjoin any known heritage items or sites of significance. A standard precautionary condition is recommended to stop works should any aboriginal archaeological items be discovered during any works.

· Clause 7.5 – Koala Habitat. This clause applies to land that is shown as “Koala Habitat area” on the Koala Habitat Map. The site is identified within Council’s Koala Plan of Management for South Lindfield Stage 3. Koala trees are proposed to be removed as detailed in the submitted plans and offset plantings of trees are proposed within the planned location within the E2 environmental conservation zone. The E2 zoned section of the site is intended to be dedicated to Council under the Mann VPA.

· Clause 7.8 - The site is not subject to any identifiable adverse aircraft noise associated with the operations of the Port Macquarie Airport.

· Clause 7.9 - The site is subject to acoustic controls as shown on the ‘acoustic controls map’. A specialist site specific Road Noise Assessment has been submitted to address any potential amenity impacts to future residential uses on the site. This report recommends that a continuous 1.8m fence (either standard colorbond or timber lapped), to the northern property boundary will ensure that the relevant requirements for road traffic noise intrusion will be achieved for all future dwellings that are constructed to normal residential standards.

· Clause 7.13 - Satisfactory arrangements are in place for provision of essential services including water supply, electricity supply, sewer infrastructure, stormwater drainage and suitable road access to service the development. Provision of electricity will be subject to obtaining satisfactory arrangements certification prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate as recommended by a condition of consent.

(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

The relevant provisions of the Development Control Plan 2013 include:

· Part 4 – Chapter 4.4.3 - South Lindfield precinct;

· Part 3 – Chapter 3.6 Subdivision; and

· Part 2 - General Provisions.

The South Lindfield Precinct is identified in the below image:

*Part 4 - Chapter 4.4.3 South Lindfield Precinct*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
4.4.3.1 & 4.4.3.2	Subdivision layouts to provide a road network that conforms with the connectivity shown in Figure 4.4.3-2 - (refer above Figure extract). New development within the western sub precinct has access via a single access from Philip Charley Drive from the south.	The proposed internal road network is consistent with Figure 4.4.3-2, which provides for an extension to Anabella Drive. All proposed lots will only be accessible from the new internal road network.	Yes
4.4.3.3 & 4.4.3.4	All stormwater infrastructure is consistent with the outcomes of the stormwater management strategy summarised in Figure 4.4.3-2. All stormwater infrastructure (including access) is to be dedicated to Council.	The location of the proposed stormwater basin to serve the northern catchment of the site (Lot 3) and the adjoining property at Lot 1, is consistent with Figure 4.4.3-2. It is proposed to dedicate the stormwater infrastructure which will serve a number of properties, to Council.	Yes
4.4.3.5	Development is to provide an integrated solution for sewerage services with adjoining properties. Development will require approval from relevant landowners for gravity sewerage mains connecting to the existing sewerage network. In the northern catchment: • the sewer mains are to connect to an existing gravity main connecting to Sewer Pump Station 54, until a sewer pumping station on Lindfield Park Road is operational • the alignment should cater for possible extension to serve the bulk of the 4 lots west of Philip Charley Drive • development yields of the land zoned Residential are not to exceed 16 et/ha prior to provision of upgraded local sewerage main capacity. In the southern catchment the sewer mains are to connect to Sewer Pump Station 80 to the south.	The proposed sewer strategy for the Concept DA is illustrated on the plans submitted. The northern catchment, the subject of the Stage 1 Works DA, will ultimately drain to Pump Station 54 via a connection through Lot 1 DP 22675 to PM54P010MH. The owner’s consent from the landowner of Lot 1 DP 22675 has been submitted. The development of the southern catchment, the subject of the future Stage 2 Works DA, will drain to Pump Station 80 through Lot 399 DP1241278 to PM80P001MH. The point of the future connection within the site is shown on the plans submitted.	Yes
4.4.3.6	Compliance with requirements of the South Lindfield Koala Plan of Management. The areas shown on Figure 4.4.3-2 for Conservation are to be dedicated to Council for long term management, following embellishment planting of koala food trees: • in forested areas - within available canopy spaces where the space has a radius of at least 5 m, or • in cleared areas - at 10 m centres. Alternatively, with Council approval planting in cleared areas can be provided elsewhere in the vicinity at an offset ratio of 4 trees for each koala food tree removed, with trees at 10 m centres. Where land zoned E2 or land containing offset planning is held in private ownership, satisfactory arrangements will be required for ongoing maintenance in perpetuity. Development adjoining the land zoned E2 Environmental Conservation must ensure that the long-term habitat integrity of that E2 land is not compromised by the development activities.	Figure 6 of the South Lindfield KPoM confirms that will the proposed removal of the existing koala food trees these will be required to be offset within the E2 environmental conservation area which is to be dedicated to Council. The VMP submitted sets out a satisfactory approach to addressing these requirements.	Yes
4.4.3.8	Applications for subdivisions should provide site-specific updated traffic noise assessments, with adequate information to simplify subsequent assessment of building proposals. Acoustic mitigation measures should not use high visual barriers.	A specialist Road Noise Assessment has been submitted. This report confirms that a continuous 1.8m fence (either standard colorbond or timber lapped), to the northern property boundary will ensure that the relevant requirements for road traffic noise intrusion will be achieved for all future dwellings that are constructed to conventional residential development standards.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Chapter 3.6 - Subdivision*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3.6.3.1	A site analysis is required for all development and shall illustrate: · microclimate; · lot dimensions; · north point; · existing contours and levels to AHD; · flood affected areas; · overland flow patterns, drainage and services; · any contaminated soils or filled areas, or areas of unstable land; · easements and/or connections for drainage and utility services; · identification of any existing trees and other significant vegetation; · any existing buildings and other structures, including their setback distances; · heritage and archaeological features; · fences; · existing and proposed road network, including connectivity and access for all adjoining land parcels; · pedestrian and vehicle access; · views to and from the site; · overshadowing by neighbouring structures; and · any other notable features or characteristics of the site.	A satisfactory site analysis plan has been submitted.	Yes
3.6.3.2	Torrens title lots minimum width of 15m when measured at a distance of 5.5m from front property boundary.	All lots have a minimum or greater width of 15m when measured at a distance of 5.5m from front property boundary.	Yes
	Minimum width of 7m when boundaries are extended to kerb line.	All lots have a width greater than 7m for lots which have boundaries extended to the kerb line.	Yes
	Minimum depth of 25m.	All lots have a depth greater than 25m.	Yes
	For lots where average slope of the site is equal to, or exceeds 16%, indicative road and driveway grades are required demonstrating satisfactory access.	No indicative driveway grades are required for individual lots as the slope grades are less than 16%.	N/A
3.6.3.3	Battle-axe lots discouraged in greenfield development.	No battle-axe lots are proposed.	Yes
3.6.3.4	Lots are to be designed to allow the construction of a dwelling, which does not involve more than 1m cut, or fill, measured from natural ground level, outside the dwellings external walls.	All proposed lots are designed to allow for future construction of dwellings, which will be unlikely to require more than 1m cut or fill.	Yes
3.6.3.4	Additional information provided for slope categories in accordance with Table 3.6.2.	All proposed lots will meet the criteria for Slope A standards with no special lot designs required.	Yes
3.6.3.5	Wherever possible orientate streets to maximise the number of east, west and south facing lots and to minimise the number of narrow north facing lots. Residential street blocks should preferably be orientated north-south with dimensions generally limited to 60-80m by 120-150m as illustrated in Figure 3.6-2.	The orientation of the proposed lots has been determined primarily having regard to the position of the east-west extension of Annabella Drive and planned road corridors.	Yes
3.6.3.5	Lot size and shape are to reflect orientation to ensure future dwelling construction has optimal opportunity for passive solar design.		Yes
3.6.3.6	Kerb and guttering, associated street drainage, pavement construction and foot paving across the street frontages should be constructed as part of the subdivision works where these do not exist (may be varied subject to criteria in this clause)	The proposed street pattern has been determined having regard to the position of the east-west extension of Annabella Drive and includes a pathway network and consideration of the future external connections in the South Lindfield neighbourhood.	Yes + appropriate consent conditions recommended.
3.6.3.7	Subdivisions close to urban centres or along arterial roads serviced by public transport achieve yield of >35 dwellings per hectare.	The proposal will achieve a yield of approximately 10-11 dwelling per hectare. Satisfactory density achieved particularly having regard to general residential zoning of land and noting there is no minimum floor space ratio controls. There is also potential for more than 1 dwelling on some of the proposed lots.	Satisfactory
3.6.3.8	All new roads are to be dedicated to Council designed in accordance the Council’s adopted AUSPEC design specification documents. All applications to subdivide land should include a road layout plan that meets the Council’s design requirements including providing connectivity and access for all land parcels consistent with Council’s road hierarchy.	All proposed roads meet Councils current Aus-Spec requirements and provides for connectivity within the South Lindfield neighbourhood.	Yes
3.6.3.9	The design of roads identified for bus routes should comply with the AUSTROADS standards, including the design of bus bays and stops.	The site is adjacent John Oxley Drive and it is anticipated that all future bus stops will be provided for in this existing road reserve. No bus stops are proposed within the subdivision.	Yes
3.6.3.9	Development should provide the bus stops, including bus bays and shelters not more than 600m apart.		Yes
3.6.3.10	The design of roads should aspire to achieve standards illustrated in Figure 3.6-3 to Figure 3.6-11.	The proposed road network provides for the following: - Street trees on the opposite side of the roads are proposed to allow for the water services/ footpaths; - Underground utilities; - Formed kerb and guttering; and - 1.5m wide footpaths.	Yes
3.6.3.10	At a minimum all new roads should include: • street trees at a rate of 1 per 20m along the street frontage and in accordance with Council’s Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List; • underground utilities; • formed kerb and guttering; • 1.2metres pedestrian path.		Yes
3.6.3.11	Perimeter roads adjoining bushland should be designed in accordance with Figure 3.6-8 and may be considered part of the APZ requirements for the adjoining land.	The positioning of the Annabella Drive extension, as required by the DCP provisions for South Lindfield, has generally determined the road layout within each property. An edge road to the southern boundary is acceptable and accordingly the lots that front this boundary will include 10m wide APZ’s.	Yes
3.6.3.12	Perimeter roads should be designed in accordance with Figure 3.6-8		Yes
3.6.3.13	Development for the subdivision for land or major residential development should provide footpaths on both sides of all collector and arterial roads.	All proposed footpaths have been designed to one street frontage, ensuring street tree planting can be undertaken on the opposite side of each street. All proposed lots have frontage to a public road ensuring future casual surveillance.	Yes
	Footpaths should be provided on one side of the street for access places and local streets in accordance with Council’s adopted AUSPEC design specification documents.
	Off street share-ways and on road cycle ways should be provided.
	Footpaths and cycleway are to have regard for Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.
	The choice of direction and possible routes should be maximised, with streets and footpaths substantially capable of surveillance by residents.
3.6.3.14	Local roads are to be designed for a maximum vehicle speed of 50kph.	The road network has been designed to restrict vehicle speeds to 50km/hr. This also supported in the KPoM that applies to the South Lindfield neighbourhood.	Yes
	Traffic management schemes may be appropriate to discourage speeding in long stretches of local roads or to discourage ‘rat-running’.
	On street parking should be discouraged along local roads.
3.6.3.15	Cycling infrastructure should be provided in accordance with the Council’s Cycling Plan.	N/A	N/A
3.6.3.15	Where physical infrastructure or land dedication cannot be provided or is not identified, a contribution in accordance with the Councils’ contribution plan/s.	Development contributions recommended for contribution to recreation facilities in accordance with Council’s adopted Development Contributions Plans.	Yes
3.6.3.16	An application for subdivision should be accompanied by an a Integrated Water Cycle Management Strategy prepared by a certified practicing engineer and in accordance with Council’s adopted design specification documents.	A satisfactory Stormwater and Servicing Strategy has been submitted. This Plan includes the stormwater management provisions for the development of the northern catchments for the site (Lot 3) and the adjoining property at Lot 1 DP 369206. The plans submitted illustrate the extent of the stormwater management provisions within the northern catchment of both Lot 3 (the site) and adjoining Lot 1. Note: The proposed works for the stormwater infrastructure and bio-retention swale within the adjoining property to the south (Lot 399 DP 1241278), will be undertaken as part of the Stage 2 DA to this Concept DA. In relation to the proposed stormwater management provisions, the impact of the proposed development on stormwater quantity and stormwater quality was modelled in the 12d and MUSIC programs respectively, comparing existing pre-development conditions to proposed post-development conditions, and the change to water quality from source to outlet. The modelling has demonstrated that the subject land has the capability to provide the necessary mitigation measures to ensure protection of the downstream environment and hydrology.	Yes
3.6.3.17 - 3.6.3.19	An application for subdivision should be accompanied by a Stormwater Management Strategy prepared by a certified practicing engineer and in accordance with Council’s adopted Aus-Spec design specification documents. The finished floor level of buildings should be above the 100 year ARI flood level (plus freeboard) and in accordance with the council’s current flood policy.		Yes
3.6.3.20	Water supply to meet Council’s design specifications.	It is proposed to connect to the existing 200mm water main in Annabella Drive and run reticulated water through the development as shown on the Stormwater and Servicing Strategy. The future Stage 2 DA for the development of the southern catchment will provide a connection to either the 450mm DICL or 525mm AC main to the south of the property and will be subject of further consultation with the PMHC Water and Sewer Section.	Yes
3.6.3.21 - 3.6.3.22	All lots connected to reclaimed water if available.		Yes
3.6.3.24	Separate sewer junction provided for each lot.	The northern catchment, the subject of the Stage 1 Works DA will ultimately drain to Pump Station 54 via a connection through Lot 1 DP 22675 to PM54P010MH, as shown in the submitted plans. The owner’s consent from the landowner of Lot 1 DP 22675 accompanies this submission. The development of the southern catchment, the subject of the future Stage 2 Works DA, will drain to Pump Station 80 through Lot 399 DP1241278 to PM80P001MH. The point of connection within the site is shown in the submitted plans.	Yes
3.6.3.25	Extension of sewer infrastructure at cost of developer.		Yes
3.6.3.26 - 3.6.3.27	Erosion and sediment control plan to be provided.	A silt and sediment control plan will be provided with the Construction Certificate for the subdivision works.	Yes - capable with consent condition recommender.
3.6.3.28	Saving and re-using top soil and the incorporation of additives to improve existing soils is preferred to the importation of soils for landscaping.	Construction details will be required to be provided with the Construction Certificate for the subdivision works.	Yes
3.6.3.29	Neighbourhood parks area to be provided so that all residential areas are generally within 500m of the nearest park.	The subject site is not identified to make provision for public open space for recreational purposes.	N/A
	The location of neighbourhood parks is to be optimised so that a minimal number of parks are required.
	Neighbourhood parks and playing fields should be connected to the cycleway and pedestrian path networks.
	Neighbourhood parks should provide a range of facilities.
	Sports fields should be located close to school facilities.
	As a minimum 1.5 hectares active open space (sports fields); 5000m2 neighbourhood park; 1 hectare of linkage/amenity space (total 3 hectares open space) to be provided per 1,000 people.
3.6.3.30	Neighbourhood parks are to be dedicated as development occurs, and are to include the following: • Minimum size of 5,000m2. • At least 2000m2 should be level to gently sloping land. • Street frontage to the same standard as adjoining residential areas (i.e. kerb and gutter, or drainage swales where appropriate). • Any landform grooming to ensure the park is to a standard to suit Council’s maintenance regime. • Any drainage works to ensure the functionality of the park. • Access via more than one street. • Integration with other community facilities. • Should be located to cause minimal disruption to traffic.
3.6.3.30	Neighbourhood park embellishment is to incorporate: • Park furniture including seats with shelters, barriers and any appropriate path and cycleway linkages along desire lines or linking to the cycleway network. • Any boardwalks necessary to achieve the required functionality of the park. • Works should generally be required to be undertaken prior to dedication to Council.
3.6.3.31	An open space management strategy should accompany any subdivision application where open space that connects to natural linkages, drainage and wildlife corridors.	N/A	N/A
3.6.3.32	All street plantings are to be selected from Council's Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List from the relevant vegetation community adjacent to the Development.	The proposed street planting will be consistent with Council’s Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List.	Yes
3.6.3.33	Lot layout should address areas of open space or public environmental management areas.	The positioning of the Annabella Drive extension, as required by the DCP provisions for South Lindfield, has generally determined the road layout within each property. Not providing an edge road to the southern boundary is acceptable and accordingly the lots that front this boundary will included 10m wide APZ’s.	Yes
	Perimeter roads should border any area of open space or public environmental management areas.		Yes
	An assessment against the generic elements of crime prevention through environmental design described in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles is provided with the subdivision application.	No battle axe lots are proposed. All lots have street frontage connection to provide for casual observation of street.	Yes
3.6.3.34	All service infrastructure should be underground unless otherwise approved by Council.	All services will be provided underground, in accordance with the relevant construction codes.	Yes
	All service infrastructure should be installed in a common trench.
	Conduits for the main technology network system should be provided in all streets.
	Conduits are to be installed in accordance with the National Broadband Network Company Limited’s ‘Guidelines for Fibre to the Premises Underground Deployment’.
	Access pits are to be installed at appropriate intervals along all streets.
3.6.3.35	All new roads are to be designed in accordance the Council’s Aus-Spec design specification documents. All applications to subdivide land should include a road layout plan that meets the Council’s design requirements.	All proposed roads are compliant with Council’s Aus-Spec design specification documents.	Yes
3.6.3.45	Street lighting should be provided in accordance with Australian Standards	Street lighting should be provided in accordance with Australian Standards.	Yes
3.6.3.46	All new development should use energy efficient street lighting.
3.6.3.47	Lighting should be provided along pathways, cycle ways and in public places.
3.6.3.51	Street trees should be provided along all road frontages generally at a rate of 1 per 20m interval.	Street trees are provided to one side of every street, enabling footpaths and water services to be provided on the alternate side. The proposed street planting will be consistent with Councils’ Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List.	Yes
3.6.3.51	Street trees should not affect solar access.
3.6.3.52	Street trees from Council’s list.
3.6.3.53 - 3.6.3.54	CPTED assessment required	All proposed lots have frontage to a public road, allowing for casual surveillance.	Yes

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
2.3.3.8 onwards	Removal of hollow bearing trees	A specialist site specific ecological assessment has been submitted. This assessment confirms that Hollow bearing trees are not present within the site.	N/A
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100mm diameter trunk and 3m outside dwelling footprint	Tree removal is proposed which has been satisfactorily addressed with the submitted ecological Biodiversity Assessment Report.	Yes
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Refer to main body of report.	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

There is an existing planning agreement in place between the landowner’s and Council known as the South Lindfield Planning Agreement (Mann VPA) which has been entered into relating to the site. The Ramm VPA sets out the following provisions:

· Roads Contribution - requires payment of the current Roads Contribution or the Roads Contribution determined by the next review of the Roads Contribution Plan (Clause 8)

· Clause 9 - provides the landowner of the adjoining western property with the opportunity to construct and dedicate the Link Road across the subject property in order to connect to Annabella Drive.

· Clause 10 - includes provisions facilitating payment of compensation by the subject landowner to the adjoining western landowner in the event that the adjoining landowner has constructed and dedicated the Link Road across the subject property.

· Clauses 13 – 15 - includes provisions that provide for the construction of Stormwater Catchment Work and where appropriate reimbursement of the cost of those works on a catchment share basis.

· Clause 16 - provides for the payment of the Sewerage Services Contribution and Sewerage Services Contribution Local.

· Clause 17 - provides for the payment of the current Open Space Contribution or the Open Space Contribution determined by the next review of the Open Space Contribution Plan.

· Clauses 18 to 23 - includes provisions relating to the Environmental Management Land within the subject property. These clauses require the establishment, management and dedication of the Environmental Management Land (EML) in conjunction with the subdivision of the subject land. It is proposed to undertake the establishment, management and dedication of the EML, as detailed in the attached VMP and the South Lindfield KPOM, as part of the Stage 1 Works DA.

The proposed subdivision is consistent with this VPA and appropriate conditions are recommended to require the VPA to be performed.

(iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations

Demolition of buildings AS 2601 – Clause 92

The submitted plan of subdivision includes demolition of the existing dwelling and sheds.

Demolition of the existing buildings on the site are capable of compliance with this Australian Standard and an appropriate standard condition is recommended.

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

Context and setting

The proposal will not have any significant adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties or the public domain.

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

The concept Development Application component of the proposal provides for the following:

· The identification of the future vegetation clearing within the site and tree removal within the John Oxley Drive road reserve;

· The indicative future residential lot layout that will provide for 25 Torrens title lots to satisfy the minimum lot size requirements set out in the PMH LEP 2011;

· The location of the future internal road network and the locations for connections to the existing road network to the east and the proposed adjacent network to the west;

· The identification of the location for a future stormwater basin, to be provided within a public reserve and straddle the boundaries of the subject site and adjoining Lot 1 DP 369206;

· The identification of the connection locations for the future upstream and downstream servicing through adjoining properties; and

· The identification of the location for future Asset Protection Zones.

Pursuant to Section 4.22(2) of the Act the DA also provides for the first stages of subdivision development, being the Staged Works DA within the northern section of the site. The environmental, social and economic impacts of the concept DA have been assessed as being acceptable under Section 4.22(5) of the Act. In particular, the justification details submitted for the southern section/catchment of the site are considered acceptable.

An appropriate condition is recommended to restrict development of the southern section/catchment which will need to be the subject of a separate DA and development consent.

Roads

The site has road frontage to John Oxley Drive and Annabella Drive via an adjoining proposed subdivision under DA2019 - 401, also reported to this DAP meeting.

John Oxley Drive is classified as a Sub-Arterial road which is in the care and control of Council. It is a sealed road with a pavement formation of 6m, with shoulders to both sides of the pavement. The road reserve is approximately 24m wide.

Annabella Drive is classified as a local road with a pavement formation of 9m wide in a 20m road reserve. The pavement has layback kerb.

Annabella drive is connected to the Ruins Way (which is a collector road) via a single lane roundabout.

Traffic and Transport

Anabella Drive is classified as a Local Road with a 9m pavement width. Based on the number of existing dwellings and the proposed lots, the calculated daily vehicle trips along Anabella Drive will be approximately 1806vpd (using RMS guidelines of 7 daily vehicles trips per day, over approx. 258 lots (existing and proposed DA2019 - 400.1 and DA2019 - 401.1)). In accordance with Aus-Spec, the design criteria of a local road is 100 - 2000vpd. In this regard, the development is unlikely to have any adverse impacts to the existing road network within the immediate locality. The immediate existing road network has capacity for the anticipated additional traffic.

Site Frontage & Access

This development has proposed an internal road network in accordance with our current DCP for the Lindfield Area development. The Development Control Plan 2013 refers to this precinct the “South Lindfield precinct” and has defined the future road layout to minimise road connections to John Oxley Drive, noting that it is a sub-arterial road. This application does not include the lot required to make the second connection to John Oxley Drive (refer to image below and circled). This future access will be subject to a future DA on Lot 2 DP 533058 (i.e. lot 171, refer to image extracted from DCP2013 below). This will ultimately require all vehicles movements associated with this development to use the existing Annabella Drive exit via the Ruins Way until Lot 2 DP533058 develops further.

The plans provided are generally in accordance with this strategic plan.

The development proposal is for vehicle access to the development via Annabella Drive, which is a 9m wide road running east west through the development site. Annabella Drive is classified as a local road with a 9m wide pavement formation.

This DA application proposes to extend Annabella Drive to the west, (Road 1, east-west) providing access to the Ruins Way and ultimately John Oxley drive. Additional local roads in the development are proposed in a north-south direction (off Road 1) providing access to all residential lots.

It should be noted that once the development lot to the west of the development site (Lot 171 in the above image) develops, a further extension of Annabella Drive and connection to John Oxley Drive shall be required in accordance with DCP2013. This will provide an additional entry/exit to this residential area, which will ultimately alleviate traffic movements to the east along Annabella Drive/The Ruins Way. The construction of this connection to John Oxley Drive is a requirement of the Voluntary Planning Agreement for the South Linfield Urban Release Area and will be a development requirement once the applicable stage generates a demand for the link road.

The internal roads shall be classified as follows:

Road Name	Pavement width
Road 1	9m - Local Anabella Drive is a local road with a 9m wide formation. Road 1 is an extension of Anabella drive and would require a similar 9m wide pavement width.
Road 2	8m - Local with min. 9m radius turning head (northern side only)
Road 3	8m - Local with a 12m radius turning head (subject to future DA)

All internal roads 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:

· Concrete footpath paving along on one side of all local roads

· Concrete footpath connecting the development site to the bus-stops on John Oxley Drive

· A temporary construction access from John Oxley Drive. No construction traffic is recommended via Annabella Drive on the basis that the construction of the development will have significant impacts to Council’s existing road network.

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to address new road and impact to existing road requirements.

Parking and Manoeuvring

N/A

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site has an existing 20mm metered water service from the 200 PVC water main on the opposite side of John Oxley Drive. Upon development of the adjoining western property (Lot 2 DP 533058) an extension of Council’s 200mm water main in Annabella Drive and connection made to the existing water main in John Oxley Drive, at no cost to Council, can service the proposed development.

Pipe sizes shall be confirmed by PMHC’s Water and Sewer Section with application for the Construction Certificate.

Each proposed lot is to have an individual service connection.

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to address water supply requirements.

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the proposed development site does not currently have a connection to sewer. Council’s sewer infrastructure is to be extended at no cost to Council to provide each lot with an individual connection. In accordance with Council’s adopted specifications, sewer shall be provided to enable 100% of building areas within lots to drain to sewer

The proposed development is to provide an integrated solution for sewerage services with adjoining properties. Any proposed gravity sewerage mains connections to the existing sewerage network requires approval from relevant landowners.

In the northern catchment:

· the sewer mains are to connect to an existing gravity main connecting to Sewer Pump Station 54

· the alignment is to consider a possible extension to serve the bulk of the following lots west of Philip Charley Drive; Lot 2 DP1186806, Lot 21 DP1089272, Lot 2 DP578793, Lot 4 DP 630393.

In the southern catchment, the sewer mains are to connect to Sewer Pump Station 80 to the south of the proposed development lot.

PMHC’s Water and Sewer Section shall confirm proposed pipe locations with application for the Construction Certificate.

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to address sewer servicing requirements.

Stormwater

The site contains two catchments separated by a ridge line in the East –West direction and draining to the northern & southern boundary respectively. Drainage is primarily directed by overland means to the proposed pit and pipe stormwater network for both catchments.

The overall site catchment is composed of two catchments, with both being of a roughly rectangular shape. The northern catchment drains northwards, crossing the John Oxley Drive & Oxley Highway via existing stormwater culverts and drainage swales to the Hastings River Floodplain and ultimately the Hastings River itself. The southern catchment drains southwards over land and via a series of small creeks and swales to enter the Lake Innes Floodplain and ultimately Lake Innes itself.

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

A detailed site stormwater management plan will be required to be submitted for assessment with the Section 68 application and prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

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

· On site stormwater detention facilities

· Water quality

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

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to address stormwater servicing requirements.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Evidence of satisfactory arrangements with the relevant utility authorities for provision to each proposed lot will be required prior to Subdivision Certificate approval.

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to address utility servicing requirements.

Heritage

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

As a precaution, a condition of consent has been recommended that works are to cease in the unexpected event heritage items are found. Works can only recommence when appropriate approvals are obtained for management and/or removal of the heritage item.

Other land resources

The site is within a planned urban release context and will not sterilise any significant mineral or agricultural resource.

Water cycle

The proposed development will not have any significant adverse impacts on water resources and the water cycle.

Soils

Air and microclimate

The construction and/or operations of the proposed development will not result in any significant adverse impacts on the existing air quality or result in any pollution. Standard precautionary site management condition recommended.

Flora and fauna

The proposed development includes clearing of approximately 0.45 hectares of native vegetation. Under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016, the Biodiversity Offset Scheme (BoS) applies for the following reasons:

· The extent of clearing is above the thresholds in Clause 7.2 of the Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2017;

Minimum lot size of land (LEP Lot Size Map)	Area of Clearing
Less than 1 hectare	0.25 hectare or more

The Applicant has submitted a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR as amended) prepared by an authorised person - Biodiversity Australia. The report has been reviewed and it is considered that adequate measures have been taken to avoid or minimise impacts, and the development would not result in serious and irreversible impacts on biodiversity.

The offset area specified in section 7.2 of the submitted Biodiversity Development Assessment Report | Lot 3 John Oxley Drive | October 2019 to reduce ecosystem and species credit requirements is recommended to not supported. The BAM calculated credits are to be used for this development. The development will require the retirement of the following ecosystem credits and/or species credits to offset the impacts of the development: No 690: Blackbutt - Tallowwood moist ferny open forest of the coastal ranges of the NSW North Coast Bioregion 8 Credits and Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) 9 Credits:

Impacted plant community type

Number of ecosystem credits

IBRA sub-region

Plant community type(s) that can be used to offset the impacts from development

No 690: Blackbutt - Tallowwood moist

ferny open forest of the coastal ranges of

the NSW North Coast Bioregion

Impacted species	Number of species credits	IBRA sub-region
Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus)	9	Anywhere in NSW

Conditions have been recommended requiring evidence of retirement of the relevant credits prior to the commencement of any clearing on the land.

The Applicant has also submitted a Vegetation Management Plan (VMP as amended) which has been reviewed as being acceptable and recommended to be approved. An appropriate standard condition is recommended to approve the VMP.

Waste

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

Energy

No adverse energy impacts are anticipated.

Noise and vibration

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

In accordance with Section 100B - Rural Fires Act 1997 - the application proposes subdivision of bush fire prone land that could lawfully be used for residential purposes. As a result, the applicant has submitted a bushfire report prepared by a Certified Consultant. The report was forwarded to the NSW Rural Fire Service who have since issued a Bushfire Safety Authority, which will be incorporated into the consent.

Safety, security and crime prevention

Social impacts in the locality

Given the nature of the proposed development and its location the proposal is not considered to have any significant adverse social impacts.

Economic impact in the locality

The proposal is not considered to have any significant adverse economic impacts on the locality. 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.

Construction

Construction impacts are considered capable of being managed, standard construction and site management conditions have been recommended.

Cumulative impacts

The proposed development is not considered to have any significant 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 of bushfire risk have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

Three (3) written submissions were received following public exhibition of the application. Copies of the written submissions have been provided separately to members of the Development Assessment Panel.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Footpaths do not show kerb ramps and are on one side of the road	The proposed footpath locations are illustrated diagrammatically on the subdivision plans that accompany the DA submission. The detail design will be provided with the Construction Certificate submission for the civil works and will be consistent with D1.16 of Councils AUSPEC, which includes the requirement for pram ramps. The proposed footpath locations are consistent with chapter 3.6 of the PMH DCP 2013 and Council’s adopted AUSPEC design specification documents, including 1.2m wide footpath provision to one side of the local street network. This provision will also provide for street tree plantings on the opposite of each street.
Construction noise	Any consent issued by Council will include hours of operation for construction, which will limit potential disturbance to existing adjoining residential premises. Additionally, construction for both subdivision works and future dwellings will be limited in overall duration, i.e.; construction noise will cease when development is completed. It is noted that safety reversing alarms will need to comply with the relevant Australian Standards and as such, cannot be conditioned Council. It is proposed that the future Construction Certificate documentation for the subdivision civil works will be required to make provision for a temporary construction access directly from John Oxley Drive. The intention of this temporary construction access arrangement is to minimise potential amenity impacts on the existing adjoining residential areas. An appropriate condition is recommended in this regard.
Traffic impact	The matters raised with respect to overall traffic congestion and general cumulative impacts are outside the scope of the subject Development Applications. These matters should be dealt with in Council’s Regional Traffic Plan and review of the Major Roads Contribution Plan. The proposed subdivision as presented is consistent with Chapter 4.4.3 of Councils DCP 2013 for the South Lindfield Precinct. The proposed internal road network is consistent with Figure 4.4.3-2, which provides for an extension to Anabella Drive, an edge road to the E2 zoned land and a footpath connection to the south. In accordance with the DCP, Annabella Drive will extend further to the west to facilitate an intersection connection onto John Oxley Drive. This future intersection connection will provide a secondary means of access for the subject properties and the locality generally. Annabella Drive is currently constructed to a collector road standard (9m carriageway) and that pursuant to Table D1.5 of Councils AUSPEC, and sufficient capacity for the likely additional traffic. Until such time as the new intersection is provided onto John Oxley Drive (as per the DCP), all 200 lots (includes existing and subject properties) will be required to enter/exit The Ruins Way via Annabella Drive. The proposed extension to Annabella Drive is therefore an efficient use of the existing road infrastructure. When a new intersection is available onto John Oxley Drive to the west, in accordance with Councils DCP, the existing 200 lots will have a choice of access onto John Oxley Drive, either to the west or to the east.
Cumulative impacts	The subject properties are part of the South Lindfield Urban Release Area where cumulative impacts and servicing were considered as part of the Planning Proposal process. The area has been included in Council’s Urban Growth Strategies since 1998. The proposed subdivision is consistent with Chapter 4.4.3 of the DCP, including an extension to Anabella Drive, an edge road to the E2 zoned land and a footpath connection to the south. In addition as noted above, Annabella Drive will continue to operate within its capacity as a collector road and its extension to the west has been consistently included in the planning process to date.
SEPP 55 Remediation of Land	The Planning Proposal to support the rezoning the site included assessment of the site consistent with the provisions of this Policy. Geotechnical assessment was undertaken at areas with a previous land use history of potential contamination (nursery). The subject properties do not have a landuse history that would indicate potential contamination. The Planning Proposal noted that there was a presumption that asbestos could be found in the older dwellings. Suitable conditions can be included in the consent to ensure consideration of this matter when demolition of the existing structures are undertaken. The site may contain rock that contains Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA). A standard condition is recommended to ensure preparation of a NOA management plan and to ensure compliance with WorkCover. Potential general dust nuisance can be addressed with a recommended standard condition for management of the site for the entirety of the works.
Additional access to John Oxley Drive	The subject Development Applications do not include a secondary access onto John Oxley Drive, however a temporary construction access for the civil works is proposed. The road network presented in the subject Development Application is consistent with Council’s DCP and will enable a future connection to the west that will provide a secondary access to John Oxley Drive. Annabella Drive is constructed to a collector road standard (9m carriageway) and that pursuant to Table D1.5 of Councils AUSPEC.
Public Open Space	Council’s DCP does not require the provision of additional areas of open space however development contributions are required to the provision of recreation facilities in accordance with Council’s adopted Development Contribution Plan.

(e) The Public Interest

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

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

Ecologically Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle

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

The four principles of ecologically sustainable development are:

· the precautionary principle,

· intergenerational equity,

· conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity,

· improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms.

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

Climate change

The proposal is not considered to be vulnerable to any risks associated with climate change.

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.

· A copy of the contributions estimate will be tabled at the DAP meeting.

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. DA2019 - 400.1 Recommended Conditions

2 View. DA2019 - 400.1 Plans and Supporting Documents

ATTACHMENT

Development Assessment Panel

23/10/2019

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 23/10/2019

Item: 09

Subject: DA2019 - 401.1 - Concept proposal for residential subdivision (25 torrens title lots) & staged residential subdivision (16 torrens title lots) at 153 John Oxley Drive, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planning Coordinator, Patrick Galbraith-Robertson

Applicant: Lifestyle Design Homes CARE King & Campbell Pty Ltd

Owner: RW & JM Ramm

Estimated Cost: $750,000

Parcel no: 16156

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2019 - 401.1 for a concept proposal for residential subdivision (25 Torrens title lots) & staged residential subdivision (16 Torrens title lots) at Lot 1 DP 369206, No. 153 John Oxley Drive, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a Development Application for a concept proposal for residential subdivision and staged residential subdivision at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Following exhibition of the application, four (4) submissions were received.

The proposal has been amended during the assessment of the application in response to assessment issues.

This report recommends that the Development Application be approved subject to the attached conditions.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 2.4225 hectares.

The site has recently been rezoned to R1 General Residential with the gazettal of Amendment No.39 to the Port Macquarie Hastings LEP 2011.

The site is subject to an existing Planning Agreement known as the South Lindfield Urban Release Area Planning Agreement (Ramm VPA).

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:

· Concept proposal for a Torrens title subdivision of the site into 25 lots; and

· A Stage 1 works development which includes:

- Vegetation clearing within the development footprint (R1 zone) and removal of two (2) trees in the John Oxley Drive road reserve;

- Confirmation of the bushfire asset protection (APZs) for the concept proposal;

- Demolition of existing dwelling on proposed Lot 6 and sheds on proposed Lots 4 and 5;

- Construction of the northern sewer route within the John Oxley Drive road reserve and Lot 1 DP 22676 to the existing sewerage reticulation infrastructure; and

- The subdivision of the northern catchment, including road no.1, road no.2, part road no.3 and residential subdivision to provide 16 lots, which will be released in 3 sub-stages.

· The subsequent Stage 2 Works DA will provide for the residential subdivision of the southern catchment to provide 9 Torrens title lots:

· The concept proposal has been made pursuant to Part 4 Division 4.4 of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act) and relates to land identified within the South Lindfield Urban Release Area.

· The proposal is also an Integrated Development requiring Bushfire Safety Authority under the Rural Fires Act 1997.

Refer to Attachment 2 at the end of this report for plans of the proposed development.

Application Chronology

· 4 June 2019 - DA lodged with Council.

· 6 June 2019 - Confirmation of estimated cost of works.

· 6 June 2019 - Referral of proposal to the NSW Rural Fire Service to seek Bushfire Safety Authority.

· 11 June to 24 June 2019 - Neighbour notification of proposal.

· 1 July 2019 - Assessing Officer site meeting with Applicant and request for additional information: confirmation of zoning boundaries, queries relating to approach of road noise assessment and queries in relation to demolition of existing sheds.

· 3 July 2019 - Redacted copies of submissions forwarded to Applicant for consideration.

· 18 July 2019 - Bushfire Safety Authority granted by the NSW Rural Fire Service.

· 5 September 2019 - Additional information received from the Applicant: confirmation of zoning boundaries, additional noise assessment justification details and queries in relation to demolition of existing sheds.

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. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

The site is identified within Council’s Koala Plan of Management for South Lindfield Stage 3 (KPoM) dated November 2018.

The Plan confirms that no existing Koala feed trees are mapped within the site and that no specific offset works are required to be provided as part of this development.

No further considerations under this SEPP are therefore required.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

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

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is not located within a coastal use area or coastal environment area.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

The site does not have frontage to a classified road. John Oxley Drive has been declassified from previously being the Oxley Highway.

Under the provisions of clause 104, the proposed subdivision is not identified as a traffic generating development.

Under the provisions of clause 106, the proposed northern sewer route is a permissible landuse outside the development site in the RU1 primary production zone to the north of the site.

Based on the above, the proposed development addresses relevant clauses in the SEPP and will not to create any significant adverse conflict in terms of traffic or noise.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environnemental Plan 2011

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

· Clause 2.2 - The subject site is zoned R1 general residential.

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

o To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

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

o the subdivision is a permissible landuse; and

o the subdivision will provide for new housing needs of the community.

· Clause 2.7 - The demolition of the existing sheds and dwelling on proposed Lot 6 requires consent as it does not fit within the provisions of SEPP (Exempt and Complying) 2008.

· Clause 4.1 - The lot sizes within the proposed Stage 1 subdivision development area range from 466.4m2 to 1274.4m2. All proposed lots comply with the minimum 450m2 lot size standard identified in the Lot Size Map relating to the site.

· Clause 7.5 – Koala Habitat. This clause applies to land that is shown as “Koala Habitat area” on the Koala Habitat Map. The site is identified within Council’s Koala Plan of Management for South Lindfield Stage 3. In this regard, no removal of koala food trees is proposed and therefore no further considerations of this clause is required.

· Clause 7.8 - The site is not subject to any identifiable adverse aircraft noise associated with the operations of the Port Macquarie Airport.

(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

The relevant provisions of the Development Control Plan 2013 include:

· Part 4 – Chapter 4.4.3 - South Lindfield precinct;

· Part 3 – Chapter 3.6 Subdivision; and

· Part 2 - General Provisions.

The South Lindfield Precinct is identified in the below image:

*Part 4 - Chapter 4.4.3 South Lindfield Precinct*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
4.4.3.1 & 4.4.3.2	Subdivision layouts to provide a road network that conforms with the connectivity shown in Figure 4.4.3-2 - (refer above Figure extract). New development within the western sub precinct has access via a single access from Philip Charley Drive from the south.	The proposed internal road network is consistent with Figure 4.4.3-2, which provides for an extension to Anabella Drive. All proposed lots will only be accessible from the new internal road network.	Yes
4.4.3.3 & 4.4.3.4	All stormwater infrastructure is consistent with the outcomes of the stormwater management strategy summarised in Figure 4.4.3-2. All stormwater infrastructure (including access) is to be dedicated to Council.	The location of the proposed stormwater basin to serve the northern catchment of the site (Lot 1) and the adjoining property at Lot 3, is consistent with Figure 4.4.3-2. It is proposed to dedicate the stormwater infrastructure which will serve a number of properties, to Council.	Yes
4.4.3.5	Development is to provide an integrated solution for sewerage services with adjoining properties. Development will require approval from relevant landowners for gravity sewerage mains connecting to the existing sewerage network. In the northern catchment: • the sewer mains are to connect to an existing gravity main connecting to Sewer Pump Station 54, until a sewer pumping station on Lindfield Park Road is operational • the alignment should cater for possible extension to serve the bulk of the 4 lots west of Philip Charley Drive • development yields of the land zoned Residential are not to exceed 16 et/ha prior to provision of upgraded local sewerage main capacity. In the southern catchment the sewer mains are to connect to Sewer Pump Station 80 to the south.	The proposed sewer strategy for the Concept DA is illustrated on the plans submitted. The northern catchment, the subject of the Stage 1 Works DA, will ultimately drain to Pump Station 54 via a connection through Lot 1 DP 22675 to PM54P010MH. The owner’s consent from the landowner of Lot 1 DP 22675 has been submitted. The development of the southern catchment, the subject of the future Stage 2 Works DA, will drain to Pump Station 80 through Lot 399 DP1241278 to PM80P001MH. The point of the future connection within the site is shown on the plans submitted.	Yes
4.4.3.6	Compliance with requirements of the South Lindfield Koala Plan of Management. The areas shown on Figure 4.4.3-2 for Conservation are to be dedicated to Council for long term management, following embellishment planting of koala food trees: • in forested areas - within available canopy spaces where the space has a radius of at least 5 m, or • in cleared areas - at 10 m centres. Alternatively, with Council approval planting in cleared areas can be provided elsewhere in the vicinity at an offset ratio of 4 trees for each koala food tree removed, with trees at 10 m centres. Where land zoned E2 or land containing offset planning is held in private ownership, satisfactory arrangements will be required for ongoing maintenance in perpetuity. Development adjoining the land zoned E2 Environmental Conservation must ensure that the long-term habitat integrity of that E2 land is not compromised by the development activities.	Figure 6 of the South Lindfield KPOM confirms that no existing Koala feed trees are mapped within the site and that no offset works are required to be provided.	Yes
4.4.3.8	Applications for subdivisions should provide site-specific updated traffic noise assessments, with adequate information to simplify subsequent assessment of building proposals. Acoustic mitigation measures should not use high visual barriers.	A specialist site specific Road Noise Assessment has been submitted. This report confirms that a continuous 1.8m fence (either standard colorbond or timber lapped), to the northern property boundary will ensure that the relevant requirements for road traffic noise intrusion will be achieved for all future dwellings that are constructed to normal residential development standards.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Chapter 3.6 - Subdivision*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3.6.3.1	A site analysis is required for all development and shall illustrate: · microclimate; · lot dimensions; · north point; · existing contours and levels to AHD; · flood affected areas; · overland flow patterns, drainage and services; · any contaminated soils or filled areas, or areas of unstable land; · easements and/or connections for drainage and utility services; · identification of any existing trees and other significant vegetation; · any existing buildings and other structures, including their setback distances; · heritage and archaeological features; · fences; · existing and proposed road network, including connectivity and access for all adjoining land parcels; · pedestrian and vehicle access; · views to and from the site; · overshadowing by neighbouring structures; and · any other notable features or characteristics of the site.	A satisfactory site analysis plan has been submitted.	Yes
3.6.3.2	Torrens title lots minimum width of 15m when measured at a distance of 5.5m from front property boundary.	All lots have a minimum or greater width of 15m when measured at a distance of 5.5m from front property boundary.	Yes
	Minimum width of 7m when boundaries are extended to kerb line.	All lots have a width greater than 7m for lots which have boundaries extended to the kerb line.	Yes
	Minimum depth of 25m.	All lots have a depth greater than 25m.	Yes
	For lots where average slope of the site is equal to, or exceeds 16%, indicative road and driveway grades are required demonstrating satisfactory access.	No indicative driveway grades are required for individual lots as the slope grades are less than 16%.	N/A
3.6.3.3	Battle-axe lots discouraged in greenfield development.	No battle-axe lots are proposed.	Yes
3.6.3.4	Lots are to be designed to allow the construction of a dwelling, which does not involve more than 1m cut, or fill, measured from natural ground level, outside the dwellings external walls.	All proposed lots are designed to allow for future construction of dwellings, which will be unlikely to require more than 1m cut or fill.	Yes
3.6.3.4	Additional information provided for slope categories in accordance with Table 3.6.2.	All proposed lots will meet the criteria for Slope A standards with no special lot designs required.	Yes
3.6.3.5	Wherever possible orientate streets to maximise the number of east, west and south facing lots and to minimise the number of narrow north facing lots. Residential street blocks should preferably be orientated north-south with dimensions generally limited to 60-80m by 120-150m as illustrated in Figure 3.6-2.	The orientation of the proposed lots has been determined primarily having regard to the position of the east-west extension of Annabella Drive and planned road corridors.	Yes
3.6.3.5	Lot size and shape are to reflect orientation to ensure future dwelling construction has optimal opportunity for passive solar design.		Yes
3.6.3.6	Kerb and guttering, associated street drainage, pavement construction and foot paving across the street frontages should be constructed as part of the subdivision works where these do not exist (may be varied subject to criteria in this clause)	The proposed street pattern has been determined having regard to the position of the east-west extension of Annabella Drive and includes a pathway network and consideration of the future external connections in the South Lindfield neighbourhood.	Yes + appropriate consent conditions recommended.
3.6.3.7	Subdivisions close to urban centres or along arterial roads serviced by public transport achieve yield of >35 dwellings per hectare.	The proposal will achieve a yield of approximately 10-11 dwelling per hectare. Satisfactory density achieved particularly having regard to general residential zoning of land and noting there is no minimum floor space ratio controls. There is also potential for more than 1 dwelling on some of the proposed lots.	Satisfactory
3.6.3.8	All new roads are to be dedicated to Council designed in accordance the Council’s adopted AUSPEC design specification documents. All applications to subdivide land should include a road layout plan that meets the Council’s design requirements including providing connectivity and access for all land parcels consistent with Council’s road hierarchy.	All proposed roads meet Councils current Aus-Spec requirements and provides for connectivity within the South Lindfield neighbourhood.	Yes
3.6.3.9	The design of roads identified for bus routes should comply with the AUSTROADS standards, including the design of bus bays and stops.	The site is adjacent John Oxley Drive and it is anticipated that all future bus stops will be provided for in this existing road reserve. No bus stops are proposed within the subdivision.	Yes
3.6.3.9	Development should provide the bus stops, including bus bays and shelters not more than 600m apart.		Yes
3.6.3.10	The design of roads should aspire to achieve standards illustrated in Figure 3.6-3 to Figure 3.6-11.	The proposed road network provides for the following: - Street trees on the opposite side of the roads are proposed to allow for the water services/ footpaths; - Underground utilities; - Formed kerb and guttering; and - 1.5m wide footpaths.	Yes
3.6.3.10	At a minimum all new roads should include: • street trees at a rate of 1 per 20m along the street frontage and in accordance with Council’s Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List; • underground utilities; • formed kerb and guttering; • 1.2metres pedestrian path.		Yes
3.6.3.11	Perimeter roads adjoining bushland should be designed in accordance with Figure 3.6-8 and may be considered part of the APZ requirements for the adjoining land.	The positioning of the Annabella Drive extension, as required by the DCP provisions for South Lindfield, has generally determined the road layout within each property. An edge road to the southern boundary is acceptable and accordingly the lots that front this boundary will include 10m wide APZ’s.	Yes
3.6.3.12	Perimeter roads should be designed in accordance with Figure 3.6-8		Yes
3.6.3.13	Development for the subdivision for land or major residential development should provide footpaths on both sides of all collector and arterial roads.	All proposed footpaths have been designed to one street frontage, ensuring street tree planting can be undertaken on the opposite side of each street. All proposed lots have frontage to a public road ensuring future casual surveillance.	Yes
	Footpaths should be provided on one side of the street for access places and local streets in accordance with Council’s adopted AUSPEC design specification documents.
	Off street share-ways and on road cycle ways should be provided.
	Footpaths and cycleway are to have regard for Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.
	The choice of direction and possible routes should be maximised, with streets and footpaths substantially capable of surveillance by residents.
3.6.3.14	Local roads are to be designed for a maximum vehicle speed of 50kph.	The road network has been designed to restrict vehicle speeds to 50km/hr. This also supported in the KPoM that applies to the South Lindfield neighbourhood.	Yes
	Traffic management schemes may be appropriate to discourage speeding in long stretches of local roads or to discourage ‘rat-running’.
	On street parking should be discouraged along local roads.
3.6.3.15	Cycling infrastructure should be provided in accordance with the Council’s Cycling Plan.	N/A	N/A
3.6.3.15	Where physical infrastructure or land dedication cannot be provided or is not identified, a contribution in accordance with the Councils’ contribution plan/s.	Development contributions recommended for contribution to recreation facilities in accordance with Council’s adopted Development Contributions Plans.	Yes
3.6.3.16	An application for subdivision should be accompanied by an a Integrated Water Cycle Management Strategy prepared by a certified practicing engineer and in accordance with Council’s adopted design specification documents.	A satisfactory Stormwater and Servicing Strategy has been submitted. This Plan includes the stormwater management provisions for the development of the northern catchments for the site (Lot 1) and the adjoining property at Lot 3 DP 533058. The plans submitted illustrate the extent of the stormwater management provisions within the northern catchment of both Lot 1 (the site) and adjoining Lot 3. Note: The proposed works for the stormwater infrastructure and bio-retention swale within the adjoining property to the south (Lot 399 DP 1241278), will be undertaken as part of the Stage 2 DA to this Concept DA. In relation to the proposed stormwater management provisions, the impact of the proposed development on stormwater quantity and stormwater quality was modelled in the 12d and MUSIC programs respectively, comparing existing pre-development conditions to proposed post-development conditions, and the change to water quality from source to outlet. The modelling has demonstrated that the subject land has the capability to provide the necessary mitigation measures to ensure protection of the downstream environment and hydrology.	Yes
3.6.3.17 - 3.6.3.19	An application for subdivision should be accompanied by a Stormwater Management Strategy prepared by a certified practicing engineer and in accordance with Council’s adopted Aus-Spec design specification documents. The finished floor level of buildings should be above the 100 year ARI flood level (plus freeboard) and in accordance with the council’s current flood policy.		Yes
3.6.3.20	Water supply to meet Council’s design specifications.	It is proposed to connect to the existing 200mm watermain in Annabella Drive and run reticulated water through the development as shown on the Stormwater and Servicing Strategy. The future Stage 2 DA for the development of the southern catchment will provide a connection to either the 450mm DICL or 525mm AC main to the south of the property and will be subject of further consultation with the PMHC Water and Sewer Section.	Yes
3.6.3.21 - 3.6.3.22	All lots connected to reclaimed water if available.		Yes
3.6.3.24	Separate sewer junction provided for each lot.	The northern catchment, the subject of the Stage 1 Works DA will ultimately drain to Pump Station 54 via a connection through Lot 1 DP 22675 to PM54P010MH, as shown in the submitted plans. The owner’s consent from the landowner of Lot 1 DP 22675 accompanies this submission. The development of the southern catchment, the subject of the future Stage 2 Works DA, will drain to Pump Station 80 through Lot 399 DP1241278 to PM80P001MH. The point of connection within the site is shown in the submitted plans.	Yes
3.6.3.25	Extension of sewer infrastructure at cost of developer.		Yes
3.6.3.26 - 3.6.3.27	Erosion and sediment control plan to be provided.	A silt and sediment control plan will be provided with the Construction Certificate for the subdivision works.	Yes - capable with consent condition recommender.
3.6.3.28	Saving and re-using top soil and the incorporation of additives to improve existing soils is preferred to the importation of soils for landscaping.	Construction details will be required to be provided with the Construction Certificate for the subdivision works.	Yes
3.6.3.29	Neighbourhood parks area to be provided so that all residential areas are generally within 500m of the nearest park.	The subject site is not identified to make provision for public open space for recreational purposes.	N/A
	The location of neighbourhood parks is to be optimised so that a minimal number of parks are required.
	Neighbourhood parks and playing fields should be connected to the cycleway and pedestrian path networks.
	Neighbourhood parks should provide a range of facilities.
	Sports fields should be located close to school facilities.
	As a minimum 1.5 hectares active open space (sports fields); 5000m2 neighbourhood park; 1 hectare of linkage/amenity space (total 3 hectares open space) to be provided per 1,000 people.
3.6.3.30	Neighbourhood parks are to be dedicated as development occurs, and are to include the following: • Minimum size of 5,000m2. • At least 2000m2 should be level to gently sloping land. • Street frontage to the same standard as adjoining residential areas (i.e. kerb and gutter, or drainage swales where appropriate). • Any landform grooming to ensure the park is to a standard to suit Council’s maintenance regime. • Any drainage works to ensure the functionality of the park. • Access via more than one street. • Integration with other community facilities. • Should be located to cause minimal disruption to traffic.
3.6.3.30	Neighbourhood park embellishment is to incorporate: • Park furniture including seats with shelters, barriers and any appropriate path and cycleway linkages along desire lines or linking to the cycleway network. • Any boardwalks necessary to achieve the required functionality of the park. • Works should generally be required to be undertaken prior to dedication to Council.
3.6.3.31	An open space management strategy should accompany any subdivision application where open space that connects to natural linkages, drainage and wildlife corridors.	N/A	N/A
3.6.3.32	All street plantings are to be selected from Council's Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List from the relevant vegetation community adjacent to the Development.	The proposed street planting will be consistent with Council’s Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List.	Yes
3.6.3.33	Lot layout should address areas of open space or public environmental management areas.	The positioning of the Annabella Drive extension, as required by the DCP provisions for South Lindfield, has generally determined the road layout within each property. Not providing an edge road to the southern boundary is acceptable and accordingly the lots that front this boundary will included 10m wide APZ’s.	Yes
	Perimeter roads should border any area of open space or public environmental management areas.		Yes
	An assessment against the generic elements of crime prevention through environmental design described in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles is provided with the subdivision application.	No battle axe lots are proposed. All lots have street frontage connection to provide for casual observation of street.	Yes
3.6.3.34	All service infrastructure should be underground unless otherwise approved by Council.	All services will be provided underground, in accordance with the relevant construction codes.	Yes
	All service infrastructure should be installed in a common trench.
	Conduits for the main technology network system should be provided in all streets.
	Conduits are to be installed in accordance with the National Broadband Network Company Limited’s ‘Guidelines for Fibre to the Premises Underground Deployment’.
	Access pits are to be installed at appropriate intervals along all streets.
3.6.3.35	All new roads are to be designed in accordance the Council’s Aus-Spec design specification documents. All applications to subdivide land should include a road layout plan that meets the Council’s design requirements.	All proposed roads are compliant with Council’s Aus-Spec design specification documents.	Yes
3.6.3.45	Street lighting should be provided in accordance with Australian Standards	Street lighting should be provided in accordance with Australian Standards.	Yes
3.6.3.46	All new development should use energy efficient street lighting.
3.6.3.47	Lighting should be provided along pathways, cycleways and in public places.
3.6.3.51	Street trees should be provided along all road frontages generally at a rate of 1 per 20m interval.	Street trees are provided to one side of every street, enabling footpaths and water services to be provided on the alternate side. The proposed street planting will be consistent with Councils’ Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List.	Yes
3.6.3.51	Street trees should not affect solar access.
3.6.3.52	Street trees from Council’s list.
3.6.3.53 - 3.6.3.54	CPTED assessment required	All proposed lots have frontage to a public road, allowing for casual surveillance.	Yes

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
2.3.3.8 onwards	Removal of hollow bearing trees	A specialist site specific ecological assessment has been submitted. This assessment confirms that Hollow bearing trees are not present within the site.	N/A
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100mm diameter trunk and 3m outside dwelling footprint	Tree removal is proposed which has been satisfactorily addressed with the submitted ecological assessment.	Yes
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Refer to main body of report.	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

There is an existing planning agreement in place between the landowner’s and Council known as the South Lindfield Planning Agreement (Ramm VPA) which has been entered into relating to the site. The Ramm VPA sets out the following provisions:

· Clause 8 - requires payment of the current Roads Contribution or the Roads Contribution determined by the next review of the Roads Contribution Plan.

· Clause 9 - provides the landowner of the adjoining western property with the opportunity to construct and dedicate the Link Road across the subject property in order to connect to Annabella Drive.

· Clauses 13 – 15 - includes provisions that provide for the construction of Stormwater Catchment Work and where appropriate reimbursement of the cost of those works on a catchment share basis.

· Clause 16 - provides for the payment of the Sewerage Services Contribution and Sewerage Services Contribution Local.

· Clause 17 - provides for the payment of the current Open Space Contribution or the Open Space Contribution determined by the next review of the Open Space Contribution Plan.

The proposed subdivision is consistent with this VPA and appropriate conditions are recommended to require the VPA to be performed.

(iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations

Demolition of buildings AS 2601 – Clause 92

Existing Lot 1 includes a number of existing sheds/outbuildings (note that the aerial image includes an existing caravan on proposed Lot 3). The submitted plan of subdivision includes demolition of the existing sheds on proposed Lots 4 and 6. In relation to proposed Lot 2, it is proposed that this lot will not be released until such time as the sheds are removed. An appropriate condition of consent is recommended in this regard.

Demolition of the existing buildings on the site are capable of compliance with this Australian Standard and an appropriate standard condition is recommended.

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

Context and Setting

The proposal will not have any identifiable significant adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties or the public domain.

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

Concept proposal for residential subdivision

The concept Development Application component of the proposal provides for the following:

· The identification of the future vegetation clearing within the site and tree removal within the John Oxley Drive road reserve;

· The indicative future residential lot layout that will provide for 25 Torrens title lots to satisfy the minimum lot size requirements set out in the PMH LEP 2011;

· The location of the future internal road network and the locations for connections to the existing road network to the east and the proposed adjacent network to the west;

· The identification of the location for a future stormwater basin, to be provided within a public reserve and straddle the boundaries of the subject site and adjoining Lot 3 DP 533058;

· The identification of the connection locations for the future upstream and downstream servicing through adjoining properties; and

· The identification of the location for future Asset Protection Zones.

Pursuant to Section 4.22(2) of the Act the DA also provides for the first stages of subdivision development, being the Staged Works DA within the northern section of the site. The environmental, social and economic impacts of the concept DA have been assessed as being acceptable under Section 4.22(5) of the Act. The justification details submitted for the southern section/catchment of the site are considered acceptable.

An appropriate condition is recommended to restrict development of the southern section/catchment which will need to be the subject of a separate DA and development consent.

Roads

The site has road frontage to John Oxley Drive and Annabella Drive.

John Oxley Drive is classified as a Sub-Arterial road, which is in the care and control of Council. It is a sealed road with a pavement formation of 6m, with shoulders to both sides of the pavement. The road reserve is approximately 24m wide.

Annabella Drive is classified as a local road with a pavement formation of 9m wide in a 20m road reserve. The pavement has layback kerb.

Annabella drive is connected to the Ruins Way (which is a collector road) via a single lane roundabout.

Traffic and Transport

Site Frontage and Access

The plans provided are generally in accordance with this strategic plan and are supported.

This proposal includes the extension to Annabella Drive to the west, (Road 1, east-west) providing access to the Ruins Way and ultimately John Oxley drive. Additional local roads in the development are proposed in a north-south direction (off Road 1) providing access to all residential lots.

It should be noted that once the development lot to the west of the development site (Lot 171 in the above image) develops, a further extension of Annabella Drive and connection to John Oxley Drive shall be required in accordance with DCP2013. This will provide an additional entry/exit to this residential area, which will ultimately alleviate traffic movements to the east along Annabella Drive/The Ruins Way. The construction of this connection to John Oxley Drive is a requirement of the Voluntary Planning Agreement/s for the South Linfield Urban Release Area and will be a development requirement once the applicable stage generates a demand for the link road.

The internal roads shall be classified as follows:

Road Name	Pavement width
Road 1	9m - Local Anabella Drive is a local road with a 9m wide formation. Road 1 is an extension of Anabella drive and would require a similar 9m wide pavement width.
Road 2	8m - Local with min. 9m radius turning head (northern side only)
Road 3	8m - Local with a 12m radius turning head (subject to future DA)

All internal roads 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:

· Concrete footpath paving along on one side of all local roads

· Concrete footpath connecting the development site to the bus-stops on John Oxley Drive

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to address the new road and impact to existing road requirements.

Parking and Manoeuvring

N/A

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site has an existing 20mm metered water service from the 200 PVC water main on the opposite side of John Oxley Drive. An extension of Council’s 200mm water main in Annabella Drive, at no cost to Council, can service the proposed development.

Pipe sizes shall be confirmed by PMHC’s Water and Sewer Section with application for the Construction Certificate.

Each proposed lot is to have an individual service connection.

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to address water supply requirements.

Sewer Connection

In the northern catchment:

· the sewer mains are to connect to an existing gravity main connecting to Sewer Pump Station 54

· the alignment is to consider a possible extension to serve the bulk of the following lots west of Philip Charley Drive; Lot 2 DP1186806, Lot 21 DP1089272, Lot 2 DP578793, Lot 4 DP 630393.

In the southern catchment, the sewer mains are to connect to Sewer Pump Station 80 to the south of the proposed development lot.

PMHC’s Water and Sewer Section shall confirm proposed pipe locations with application for the Construction Certificate.

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to address sewer servicing requirements.

Stormwater

The site contains two catchments separated by a ridge line in the East –West direction and draining to the northern and southern boundary respectively. Drainage is primarily directed by overland means to the proposed pit and pipe stormwater network for both catchments.

The overall site catchment is composed of two catchments, with both being of a roughly rectangular shape. The northern catchment drains northwards, crossing the John Oxley Drive and Oxley Highway via existing stormwater culverts and drainage swales to the Hastings River Floodplain and ultimately the Hastings River itself. The southern catchment drains southwards over land and via a series of small creeks and swales to enter the Lake Innes Floodplain and ultimately Lake Innes itself.

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

A detailed site stormwater management plan will be required to be submitted for assessment with the Section 68 application and prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

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

· On site stormwater detention facilities

· Water quality

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

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to address stormwater servicing requirements.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Evidence of satisfactory arrangements with the relevant utility authorities for provision to each proposed lot will be required prior to Subdivision Certificate approval.

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended to address utility servicing requirements.

Heritage

Other land resources

The site is within a planned urban release context and will not sterilise any significant mineral or agricultural resource.

Water cycle

The proposed development will not have any significant adverse impacts on water resources and the water cycle.

Soils

Air and microclimate

Flora and fauna

A specialist ecological assessment prepared by Biodiversity Australia has been submitted to support the proposal.

In summary the Biodiversity report states that:

· A bloodwood tree in the John Oxley Drive road reserve will require removal to establish the proposed sewer line running to the north of the site.

· A large Blackbutt also in the road reserve has been assessed by an Arborist who has found it to be unsound and recommended its removal.

· No preferred Koala food trees or hollow-bearing trees are present within the subject site. The proposal will require the removal of garden ornamentals and exotic trees only as well as a Bloodwood tree in the John Oxley Drive road reserve which will be impacted by a sewer line.

· No threatened flora species or Endangered Ecological Communities were found on the site during the survey.

· No threatened fauna species were detected during the survey. Eight threatened fauna species are considered to potentially occur.

· The site does not contain Core Koala habitat and no evidence of the Koala was found on the subject site. The Koala has been recorded on adjacent land however and has been assessed for potential impacts from the proposed development.

Construction of the proposed development will not require any removal/clearing of any significant 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 recommended.

Energy

No adverse energy impacts are anticipated.

Noise and vibration

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

Safety, security and crime prevention

Social impacts in the locality

Given the nature of the proposed development and its location the proposal is not considered to have any significant adverse social impacts.

Economic impact in the locality

Site design and internal design

The proposed development design satisfactorily responds to the site attributes and will fit into the locality.

Construction

Construction impacts are considered capable of being managed, standard construction and site management conditions have been recommended.

Cumulative impacts

The proposed development is not considered to have any significant 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 of bushfire risk have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

Four (4) written submissions were received following public exhibition of the application. Copies of the written submissions have been provided separately to members of the Development Assessment Panel.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Rear boundary fence between proposed Lots 3, 4 and 5 in existing Lot 1 DP 369206 and no. 36 Rivergum Drive.	An existing well maintained boundary fence currently divides existing Lot 1 DP 369206 and no.36 Rivergum Drive. Any future negotiations between the future residents of proposed lots 3, 4 and 5 within existing Lot 1 DP 369206 and no.36 Rivergum Drive will need to be consistent with the Dividing Fences Act, which is not administered by Council. On the basis that proposed lots 4 and 5 have minimum widths of 15m, an amendment to the subdivision layout is not proposed.
Footpaths do not show kerb ramps and are on one side of the road	The proposed footpath locations are illustrated diagrammatically on the subdivision plans that accompany the DA submission. The detail design will be provided with the Construction Certificate submission for the civil works and will be consistent with D1.16 of Councils AUSPEC, which includes the requirement for pram ramps. The proposed footpath locations are consistent with chapter 3.6 of the PMH DCP 2013 and Council’s adopted AUSPEC design specification documents, including 1.2m wide footpath provision to one side of the local street network. This provision will also provide for street tree plantings on the opposite of each street.
Construction noise	Any consent issued by Council will include hours of operation for construction, which will limit potential disturbance to existing adjoining residential premises. Additionally, construction for both subdivision works and future dwellings will be limited in overall duration, i.e.; construction noise will cease when development is completed. It is noted that safety reversing alarms will need to comply with the relevant Australian Standards and as such, cannot be conditioned Council. It is proposed that the future Construction Certificate documentation for the subdivision civil works will be required to make provision for a temporary construction access directly from John Oxley Drive. The intention of this temporary construction access arrangement is to minimise potential amenity impacts on the existing adjoining residential areas. An appropriate condition is recommended in this regard.
Traffic impact	The matters raised with respect to overall traffic congestion and general cumulative impacts are outside the scope of the subject Development Applications. These matters should be dealt with in Council’s Regional Traffic Plan and review of the Major Roads Contribution Plan. The proposed subdivision as presented is consistent with Chapter 4.4.3 of Councils DCP 2013 for the South Lindfield Precinct. The proposed internal road network is consistent with Figure 4.4.3-2, which provides for an extension to Anabella Drive, an edge road to the E2 zoned land and a footpath connection to the south. In accordance with the DCP, Annabella Drive will extend further to the west to facilitate an intersection connection onto John Oxley Drive. This future intersection connection will provide a secondary means of access for the subject properties and the locality generally. Annabella Drive is currently constructed to a collector road standard (9m carriageway) and that pursuant to Table D1.5 of Councils AUSPEC, and sufficient capacity for the likely additional traffic. Until such time as the new intersection is provided onto John Oxley Drive (as per the DCP), all 200 lots (includes existing and subject properties) will be required to enter/exit The Ruins Way via Annabella Drive. The proposed extension to Annabella Drive is therefore an efficient use of the existing road infrastructure. When a new intersection is available onto John Oxley Drive to the west, in accordance with Councils DCP, the existing 200 lots will have a choice of access onto John Oxley Drive, either to the west or to the east.
Cumulative impacts	The subject properties are part of the South Lindfield Urban Release Area where cumulative impacts and servicing were considered as part of the Planning Proposal process. The area has been included in Council’s Urban Growth Strategies since 1998. The proposed subdivision is consistent with Chapter 4.4.3 of the DCP, including an extension to Anabella Drive, an edge road to the E2 zoned land and a footpath connection to the south. In addition as noted above, Annabella Drive will continue to operate within its capacity as a collector road and its extension to the west has been consistently included in the planning process to date.
SEPP 55 Remediation of Land	The Planning Proposal to support the rezoning of the site included assessment of the site consistent with the provisions of this Policy. Geotechnical assessment was undertaken at areas with a previous land use history of potential contamination (nursery). The subject properties do not have a landuse history that would indicate potential contamination. The Planning Proposal noted that there was a presumption that asbestos could be found in the older dwellings. Suitable conditions can be included in the consent to ensure consideration of this matter when demolition of the existing structures are undertaken. The site may contain rock that contains Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA). A standard condition is recommended to ensure preparation of a NOA management plan and to ensure compliance with WorkCover. Potential general dust nuisance can be addressed with a recommended standard condition for management of the site for the entirety of the works.
Additional access to John Oxley Drive	The subject Development Applications do not include a secondary access onto John Oxley Drive, however a temporary construction access for the civil works is proposed. The road network presented in the subject Development Application is consistent with Council’s DCP and will enable a future connection to the west that will provide a secondary access to John Oxley Drive. Annabella Drive is constructed to a collector road standard (9m carriageway) and that pursuant to Table D1.5 of Councils AUSPEC.
Public Open Space	Council’s DCP does not require the provision of additional areas of open space however development contributions are required to the provision of recreation facilities in accordance with Council’s adopted Development Contribution Plan.

(e) The Public Interest

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

The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls and will not have any significant adverse impacts on the wider public interest.

Ecologically Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle

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

The four principles of ecologically sustainable development are:

· the precautionary principle,

· intergenerational equity,

· conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity,

· improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms.

Climate change

The proposal is not considered to be vulnerable to any risks associated with climate change.

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.

· A copy of the contributions estimate will be tabled at the DAP meeting.

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. DA2019 - 401.1 Recommended Conditions

2 View. DA2019 - 401.1 Plans and Supporting Documents

Member	12/06/19	24/07/19	28/08/19	11/09/19	25/09/19	09/10/19
Paul Drake	P	P	P	P	P	P
Robert Hussey			P	P		P
David Crofts (alternate member)	P	P			P
Dan Croft (Group Manager Development Assessment) (alternates) - Director Development & Environment - Development Assessment Planner	P	P	P	A P	P	A P

1.0 OBJECTIVES

2.0 KEY FUNCTIONS

Delegated Authority of Panel

3.0 MEMBERSHIP

3.2 Non-Voting Members

3.3 Obligations of members

3.4 Member Tenure

3.5 Appointment of members

4.0 TIMETABLE OF MEETINGS

5.0 MEETING PRACTICES

5.2 Decision Making

5.3 Quorum

5.4 Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson

5.5 Secretariat

5.6 Recording of decisions

6.0 CONVENING OF “OUTCOME SPECIFIC” WORKING GROUPS

7.0 CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST

8.0 LOBBYING

4.1 A pecuniary interest is an interest that you have in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to you or a person referred to in clause 4.3.

4.2 You will not have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the interest is so remote or insignificant that it could not reasonably be regarded as likely to influence any decision you might make in relation to the matter, or if the interest is of a kind specified in clause 4.6.

4.3 For the purposes of this Part, you will have a pecuniary interest in a matter if the pecuniary interest is:

4.4 For the purposes of clause 4.3:

4.5 You will not have a pecuniary interest in relation to a person referred to in subclauses 4.3(b) or (c)

5.2 A non-pecuniary conflict of interest exists where a reasonable and informed person would perceive that you could be influenced by a private interest when carrying out your official functions in relation to a matter.

5.3 The personal or political views of a council official do not constitute a private interest for the purposes of clause 5.2.

5.5 When considering whether or not you have a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in a matter you are dealing with, it is always important to think about how others would view your situation.

Managing non-pecuniary conflicts of interest

5.7 If a disclosure is made at a council or committee meeting, both the disclosure and the nature of the interest must be recorded in the minutes on each occasion on which the non-pecuniary conflict of interest arises. This disclosure constitutes disclosure in writing for the purposes of clause 5.6.

5.8 How you manage a non-pecuniary conflict of interest will depend on whether or not it is significant.

5.9 As a general rule, a non-pecuniary conflict of interest will be significant where it does not involve a pecuniary interest for the purposes of clause 4.1, but it involves:

5.10 Significant non-pecuniary conflicts of interest must be managed in one of two ways:

5.13 Despite clause 5.10(b), a councillor who has a significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest in a matter, may participate in a decision to delegate consideration of the matter in question to another body or person.