Agenda of Development Assessment Panel - Wednesday, 8 April 2020

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 08/04/2020

Item: 05

Subject: DA2019 - 676.1 Residential Flat Building including Clause 4.6 Objection to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 at Lot 1 DP 1211682, 5 Drew Close, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Benjamin Roberts

Applicant: Wayne Ellis Architect

Owner: Drew Close Developments Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: $6,108,000

Parcel no: 64675

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That it be recommended to Council that DA 2019 - 676.1 for a residential flat building including clause 4.6 objection to clause 4.3 (height of buildings) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 at Lot 1, DP 1211682, No. 5 Drew Close, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a residential flat building including clause 4.6 objection to clause 4.3 (height of buildings) of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

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

The proposal has been amended during the assessment of the application.

The application includes a variation to the building height development standard in the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 by more than 10%. The application is therefore required to be determined by Council following consideration by the Development Assessment Panel.

The site is considered suitable for the proposed development and the proposal adequately addresses relevant planning controls as justified. 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.

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 1684m².

The site is zoned R3 medium density residential in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following

zoning plan:

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Construction of a residential flat building comprising 3 x 2 bedroom units and 12 x 3 bedroom units providing a total of 15 residential units.

· Building height variation.

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

Application Chronology

· 1 October 2019 - Application lodged.

· 10 October to 8 November 2019 - Public exhibition via neighbour notification.

· 17 October 2019 - Additional information request (parking layout and shortfall).

· 31 October 2019 - Additional information and revised plans provided addressing parking layout and shortfall.

· 24 December 2019 - Referral to NSW Rural Fire Service seeking advice on adjoining land management and intended building construction standard.

· 22 January 2020 - Advice provided from NSW RFS with recommended conditions.

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 (Koala Habitat Protection) 2019

Clause 15 - A development application made, but not finally determined, before the commencement of this Policy in relation to land to which this Policy applies must be determined as if this Policy had not commenced. The application was made and not finally determined prior to the commencement of this policy, and the application is therefore required to be assessed under the relevant provisions of State Environmental Policy No 44 - Koala Habitat Protection. See assessment comments below.

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

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.

The requirements of this SEPP are therefore satisfied.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No 64 - Advertising and Signage

The proposed development does not include any signage. Standard conditions recommended advising of further consent requirements for signage that is not exempt development.

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 - Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development

This Policy applies to development for the purpose of a residential flat building, shop top housing or mixed use development with a residential accommodation component if:

(a) the development consists of any of the following:

(i) the erection of a new building,

(ii) the substantial redevelopment or the substantial refurbishment of an existing building,

(iii) the conversion of an existing building, and

(b) the building concerned is at least 3 or more storeys (not including levels below ground level (existing) or levels that are less than 1.2 metres above ground level (existing) that provide for car parking), and

Based on the above, the SEPP must be considered.

In accordance with clause 28, the proposal has adequately addressed the design principles contained in the Residential Flat Design Code. The following table provides an assessment against the design quality principles:

Requirement

Proposed

Comments

Principle 1: Context and neighbourhood character

Good design responds and contributes to its context. Context is the key natural and built features of an area, their relationship and the character they create when combined. It also includes social, economic, health and environmental conditions.

Responding to context involves identifying the desirable elements of an area’s existing or future character. Well-designed buildings respond to and enhance the qualities and identity of the area including the adjacent sites, streetscape and neighbourhood.

Consideration of local context is important for all sites, including sites in established areas, those undergoing change or identified for change.

The proposal is for a six level residential flat building facing Drew Close with driveway access direct to Drew Close. The area is characterised by a mixture of low rise and high rise developments. A number of similar scale residential flat buildings exist in the immediate area. Encouraging higher density in areas with close proximity to the settlement city precinct and business zones is desirable for the area.

The design responds to the site’s slope and steps down in height to the north of the site. The design also provides for the majority of apartments to benefit north aspect.

The site provides an opportunity for higher density. This density is clearly visible to the East of the proposal where a range of similar scale buildings exist.

Yes. The proposed building design is compatible with existing development and the desired future character of the area as stated in the relevant planning and design policies. It is considered that the building will contribute to the quality and identity of the area. The design responds to the site and density envisaged for the area. It is also in keeping with similar developments to the east and the objectives of the R3 - medium density residential zoning.

Principle 2: Built form and scale

Good design achieves a scale, bulk and height appropriate to the existing or desired future character of the street and surrounding buildings.

Good design also achieves an appropriate built form for a site and the building’s purpose in terms of building alignments, proportions, building type, articulation and the manipulation of building elements.

Appropriate built form defines the public domain, contributes to the character of streetscapes and parks, including their views and vistas, and provides internal amenity and outlook.

The proposal incorporates a variation to the LEP control for building height, being a maximum 2.9m over the maximum 14.5m specifically for the lift overrun. The bulk of the building being under the height control. Refer to clause 4.6 of LEP 2011 comments for consideration of the proposed variation.

The height and bulk of the proposed building are considered to be acceptable in the streetscape and future desired character of the area.

The six level residential building is oriented to the north to provide optimal solar access for residents. Landscaped zones are satisfactorily implemented into the building surrounds and entrance to define the public domain and formalise the proposal’s streetscape.

Satisfactory articulation and variation in building colours and materials are proposed (see drawing No. D15 for surface finishes).

The site is visible from the public space of Drew Close and provides a satisfactory contribution to the existing vistas from this location.

Impacts on existing views from nearby properties are considered in detail later in this report.

The height and scale of the building is considered to be appropriate having regard to the desired future character of the area. The height and scale is considered to be sufficiently compatible with existing buildings in the locality.

The building is considered to achieve an appropriate built form and incorporates interesting building elements and treatments.

The proposed internal unit floorplans provide for internal amenity. The orientation of the block takes advantage of the northern aspect. The design and orientation limits any lateral views/vistas over southern and eastern boundaries.

Principle 3: Density

Good design achieves a high level of amenity for residents and each apartment, resulting in a density appropriate to the site and its context.

Appropriate densities are consistent with the area’s existing or projected population. Appropriate densities can be sustained by existing or proposed infrastructure, public transport, access to jobs, community facilities and the environment.

The proposal provides for 15 units over six storeys with a mixture of 2 and 3 bedroom configurations, which provide for a high level of amenity.

The proposal has a floor space ratio (FSR) of 1.15:1, which complies with the maximum 1.5:1 adopted in the LEP.

The proposed FSR is consistent with the objectives of the R3 Medium Density Residential zone and the height of buildings envisaged for the area.

The proposed development is consistent with surrounding densities of the existing buildings within the precinct.

The proposed density is also considered to be sustainable having regard to availability of proximity to infrastructure, and public transport, services and community facilities and the environmental quality of the area.

The design has adopted an appropriate density that is sustainable and consistent with surrounding densities.

Principle 4: Sustainability

Good design combines positive environmental, social and economic outcomes.

Good sustainable design includes use of natural cross ventilation and sunlight for the amenity and liveability of residents and passive thermal design for ventilation, heating and cooling reducing reliance on technology and operation costs. Other elements include recycling and reuse of materials and waste, use of sustainable materials and deep soil zones for groundwater recharge and vegetation.

The north - south orientation of the block has been adequately responded to. All apartments contain a north facing terrace/aspect.

All dwellings are naturally cross-ventilated. All dwellings are designed with more than one aspect.

The proposed materials of the building have been selected to both ensure robustness and longevity, as well as the potential of material recycling. Material selection has also been considered to minimise maintenance requirements.

BASIX certificate has been provided demonstrating that the design satisfies acceptable energy and water efficiency measures.

Suitable landscaping areas are proposed.

Principle 5: Landscape

Good design recognises that together landscape and buildings operate as an integrated and sustainable system, resulting in attractive developments with good amenity. A positive image and contextual fit of well designed developments is achieved by contributing to the landscape character of the streetscape and neighbourhood.

Good landscape design enhances the development’s environmental performance by retaining positive natural features which contribute to the local context, co-ordinating water and soil management, solar access, micro-climate, tree canopy, habitat values and preserving green networks.

Good landscape design optimises useability, privacy and opportunities for social interaction, equitable access, respect for neighbours’ amenity and provides for practical establishment and long term management.

A satisfactory landscaping plan has been submitted which includes substantial landscaping details.

The interface with the neighbouring properties to the east is alleviated by screen planting.

The communal pool and recreation area provides landscaping opportunities to be enjoyed by residents.

The south-western corner of the site is proposed to provide for a generous low native planting area.

Suitable landscaping is proposed. The soil depth and area available is consistent with the objectives of the Residential Flat Design Code.

Principle 6: Amenity

Good design positively influences internal and external amenity for residents and neighbours. Achieving good amenity contributes to positive living environments and resident well being.

Good amenity combines appropriate room dimensions and shapes, access to sunlight, natural ventilation, outlook, visual and acoustic privacy, storage, indoor and outdoor space, efficient layouts and service areas and ease of access for all age groups and degrees of mobility.

The building incorporates generous unit layouts and design which optimise the northern orientation, ventilation, privacy etc.

The design achieves

requirements of SEPP 65 pertaining to solar access, natural ventilation, private open space and privacy.

Accessibility is possible via a mixture of ramps, stairs and lifts.

The layout of the units has taken advantage of the northern orientation with an emphasis of natural sunlight and ventilation via extensive north facing windows and balconies.

The design and layout will provide a good level of amenity.

All units are accessible via lifts.

All units include a sufficient amount of private open space.

Communal space is available via a large, useable, communal and recreation facilities area on the ground floor. All units have a range of outlooks.

Principle 7: Safety

Good design optimises safety and security within the development and the public domain. It provides for quality public and private spaces that are clearly defined and fit for the intended purpose. Opportunities to maximise passive surveillance of public and communal areas promote safety.

A positive relationship between public and private spaces is achieved through clearly defined secure access points and well lit and visible areas that are easily maintained and appropriate to the location and purpose.

A range of appropriate strategies/design elements have been included to optimise safety and security. The various array of windows, doors and balconies throughout the building provide surveillance of the site and also the public domain.

Access to the site is predominately controlled via secure access direct from Drew Close. Electronic access is proposed for the building. Residents will have direct access to their residential floors via lift access.

The interface between public and private/communal space is clearly defined at the site frontage.

The proposal adequately addresses the principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design.

Where potential exists for concealment areas, surveillance is provided from within the building.

Principle 8: Housing diversity and social interaction

Good design achieves a mix of apartment sizes, providing housing choice for different demographics, living needs and household budgets.

Well designed apartment developments respond to social context by providing housing and facilities to suit the existing and future social mix.

Good design involves practical and flexible features, including different types of communal spaces for a broad range of people and providing opportunities for social interaction among residents.

The unit mix is:

• 2 Bedroom Apartments - 20%

• 3 Bedroom Apartments - 80%

This proposal encourages market diversity and will cater to the changing population dynamics.

Each apartment has open plan living with access to large private balconies which provides for flexibility and is additionally supported by large communal areas and facilities.

The proposal adequately addresses social dimensions and housing affordability.

Principle 9: Aesthetics

Good design achieves a built form that has good proportions and a balanced composition of elements, reflecting the internal layout and structure. Good design uses a variety of materials, colours and textures.

The visual appearance of a well designed apartment development responds to the existing or future local context, particularly desirable elements and repetitions of the streetscape.

The plans (See drawing No. D15) provide examples of the colours, textures and finishes.

The colours and materials provided on the plans indicate a contemporary high quality design and finish. The aesthetics of the building will respond appropriately to the surrounding environment and context of the existing and desired character of the locality.

Clause 28(2) - The proposal has adequately addressed the NSW Planning Apartment Design Guide requiring consideration. The following table provides an assessment against the Apartment Design Guide with assessment comments considering the design criteria and design objectives where applicable:

Apartment Design Guide (ADG) Objective	Design Guidance/Design Criteria (Italics)	Proposed	Complies
3A Site analysis
3A - 1 Site analysis illustrates that design decisions have been based on opportunities and constraints of the site conditions and their relationship to the surrounding context.	Each element in the Site Analysis Checklist should be addressed (Appendix 1 of ADG)	Suitable site analysis completed.	Yes
3B Orientation
3B - 1 Building types and layouts respond to the streetscape and site while optimising solar access within the development.	Buildings along the street frontage define the street, by facing it and incorporating direct access from the street (see figure 3B.1). Where the street frontage is to the east or west, rear buildings should be orientated to the north. Where the street frontage is to the north or south, overshadowing to the south should be minimised and buildings behind the street frontage should be orientated to the east and west (see figure 3B.2).	Orientation acceptable. Main building designed to face Drew Close. Living areas are orientated to the north. Building has been designed to achieve north aspect. All dwellings have satisfactory outlooks and solar access.	Yes
3B - 2 Overshadowing of neighbouring properties is minimised during mid-winter.	Living areas, private open space and communal open space should receive solar access in accordance with sections 3D Communal and public open space and 4A Solar and daylight access. Solar access to living rooms, balconies and private open spaces of neighbours should be considered. Where an adjoining property does not currently receive the required hours of solar access, the proposed building ensures solar access to neighbouring properties is not reduced by more than 20%. If the proposal will significantly reduce the solar access of neighbours, building separation should be increased beyond minimums contained in section 3F Visual privacy. Overshadowing should be minimised to the south or down hill by increased upper level setbacks. It is optimal to orientate buildings at 90 degrees to the boundary with neighbouring properties to minimise overshadowing and privacy impacts, particularly where minimum setbacks are used and where buildings are higher than the adjoining development. A minimum of 4 hours of solar access should be retained to solar collectors on neighbouring buildings.	The proposal minimises overshadowing of neighbouring properties during mid-winter (refer drawing D16). The proposal maintains current solar access for greater than 3 hours each day between 9am and 3pm to the adjoining sites to east and south.	Yes
3C Public domain interface
3C - 1 Transition between private and public domain is achieved without compromising safety and security	Terraces, balconies and courtyard apartments should have direct street entry, where appropriate. Changes in level between private terraces, front gardens and dwelling entries above the street level provide surveillance and improve visual privacy for ground level dwellings (see figure 3C.1). Upper level balconies and windows should overlook the public domain. Front fences and walls along street frontages should use visually permeable materials and treatments. The height of solid fences or walls should be limited to 1m. Length of solid walls should be limited along street frontages. Opportunities should be provided for casual interaction between residents and the public domain. Design solutions may include seating at building entries, near letter boxes and in private courtyards adjacent to streets. In developments with multiple buildings and/or entries, pedestrian entries and spaces associated with individual buildings/entries should be differentiated to improve legibility for residents, using a number of the following design solutions: · architectural detailing · changes in materials · plant species · colours Opportunities for people to be concealed should be minimised	Ground floor areas and fence design is consistent with ADG. Balconies and windows overlook communal areas and the public domain. Communal areas, entrances, courtyards and fencing provide for privacy as well as opportunities for casual interaction between residents.	Yes
3C - 2 Amenity of the public domain is retained and enhanced.	Planting softens the edges of any raised terraces to the street, for example above sub-basement car parking. Mail boxes should be located in lobbies, perpendicular to the street alignment or integrated into front fences where individual street entries are provided. The visual prominence of underground car park vents should be minimised and located at a low level where possible. Substations, pump rooms, garbage storage areas and other service requirements should be located in basement car parks or out of view. Ramping for accessibility should be minimised by building entry location and setting ground floor levels in relation to footpath levels. Durable, graffiti resistant and easily cleanable materials should be used. Where development adjoins public parks, open space or bushland, the design positively addresses this interface and uses a number of the following design solutions: · street access, pedestrian paths and building entries which are clearly defined · paths, low fences and planting that clearly delineate between communal/private open space and the adjoining public open space · minimal use of blank walls, fences and ground level parking. On sloping sites protrusion of car parking above ground level should be minimised by using split levels to step underground car parking	Satisfactory landscaping has been incorporated into the design to soften the built form. Mailbox design and location acceptable. Mailboxes are to be located at the street frontage. Car park design, garbage and other services create no identifiable adverse amenity impacts. The design does not detract from the adjoining public open space. Building entries are clearly defined, landscaping and articulation delineates communal private open space and public. There is minimal use of blank walls and unarticulated elements.	Yes
3D Communal and public open space
3D - 1 An adequate area of communal open space is provided to enhance residential amenity and to provide opportunities for landscaping	Design Criteria 1. Communal open space has a minimum area equal to 25% of the site (see figure 3D.3) 2. Developments achieve a minimum of 50% direct sunlight to the principal usable part of the communal open space for a minimum of 2 hours between 9 am and 3 pm on 21 June (mid-winter). Communal open space should be consolidated into a well-designed, easily identified and usable area. Communal open space should have a minimum dimension of 3m, and larger developments should consider greater dimensions. Communal open space should be co-located with deep soil areas. Direct, equitable access should be provided to communal open space areas from common circulation areas, entries and lobbies. Where communal open space cannot be provided at ground level, it should be provided on a podium or roof. Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, such as on small lots, sites within business zones, or in a dense urban area, they should: · provide communal spaces elsewhere such as a landscaped roof top terrace or a common room · provide larger balconies or increased private open space for apartments · demonstrate good proximity to public open space and facilities and/or provide contributions to public open space	The communal open space on the ground floor comprises more than 25% of the site area. The communal open space will receive 2 hours of solar access to at least 50% of the principal communal open space in mid-winter. Noted balconies are larger and north facing for all proposed dwellings.	Acceptable as the design meets the objectives of this clause.
3D - 2 Communal open space is designed to allow for a range of activities, respond to site conditions and be attractive and inviting	Facilities are provided within communal open spaces and common spaces for a range of age groups (see also 4F Common circulation and spaces), incorporating some of the following elements: · seating for individuals or groups · barbecue areas · play equipment or play areas · swimming pools, gyms, tennis courts or common rooms. The location of facilities responds to microclimate and site conditions with access to sun in winter, shade in summer and shelter from strong winds and down drafts. Visual impacts of services should be minimised, including location of ventilation duct outlets from basement car parks, electrical substations and detention tanks.	The nominated communal area is capable of being used for barbeques, seating and recreation, allowing a mixture of opportunities to enjoy the area. The communal area satisfactorily responds to the microclimate and site conditions by allowing the apartments to enjoy the northern aspect and the communal area to be based around shade and ventilation.	Yes
3D - 3 Communal open space is designed to maximise safety	Communal open space and the public domain should be readily visible from habitable rooms and private open space areas while maintaining visual privacy. Design solutions may include: · bay windows · corner windows · balconies. Communal open space should be well lit. Where communal open space/facilities are provided for children and young people they are safe and contained	The communal open space area is satisfactory in regards to safety. All units have a window or living area that overlooks the communal area. The area can be well lit and is also fenced for security.	Yes
3D - 4 Public open space, where provided, is responsive to the existing pattern and uses of the neighbourhood	The public open space should be well connected with public streets along at least one edge. The public open space should be connected with nearby parks and other landscape elements. Public open space should be linked through view lines, pedestrian desire paths, termination points and the wider street grid. Solar access should be provided year round along with protection from strong winds. Opportunities for a range of recreational activities should be provided for people of all ages. A positive address and active frontages should be provided adjacent to public open space. Boundaries should be clearly defined between public open space and private areas	No public open space proposed.	N/A
3E Deep soil zones
3E - 1 Deep soil zones provide areas on the site that allow for and support healthy plant and tree growth. They improve residential amenity and promote management of water and air quality	Design Criteria 1. Deep soil zones are to meet the following minimum requirements: a) < 650m², no min dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. b) 650-1500m², 3m dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. c) >1500m², 6m dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. On some sites it may be possible to provide larger deep soil zones, depending on the site area and context: · 10% of the site as deep soil on sites with an area of 650m² - 1,500m² · 15% of the site as deep soil on sites greater than 1,500m². Deep soil zones should be located to retain existing significant trees and to allow for the development of healthy root systems, providing anchorage and stability for mature trees. Design solutions may include: · basement and sub basement car park design that is consolidated beneath building footprints · use of increased front and side setbacks · adequate clearance around trees to ensure long term health · co-location with other deep soil areas on adjacent sites to create larger contiguous areas of deep soil. Achieving the design criteria may not be possible on some sites including where: · the location and building typology have limited or no space for deep soil at ground level (e.g. central business district, constrained sites, high density areas, or in centres) · there is 100% site coverage or non-residential uses at ground floor level. Where a proposal does not achieve deep soil requirements, acceptable stormwater management should be achieved and alternative forms of planting provided such as on structure.	The site is 1684m² and therefore requires 7% of site area to be deep soil zones with a minimum width of 3m. A deep soil zone area of approximately 120m² complies with a minimum 3m dimension and equal to 7% of the site area. Additional plantings are also proposed along the eastern portion of the site. It should be noted that there are no existing trees within the site.	Yes
3F Visual privacy
3F - 1 Adequate building separation distances are shared equitably between neighbouring sites, to achieve reasonable levels of external and internal visual privacy	Design Criteria 1. Separation between windows and balconies is provided to ensure visual privacy is achieved. Minimum required separation distances from buildings to the side and rear boundaries are as follows: a) Building height up to 12m (4 storey) need 6m setback to habitable and 3m to non habitable. b) Buildings up to 25m (5-8 storeys) need 9m to habitable and 4.5m to non habitable. c) Buildings over 25m (9+ storeys) need 12m to habitable and 6m to non habitable. Note: Separation distances between buildings on the same site should combine required building separations depending on the type of room (see figure 3F.2). Gallery access circulation should be treated as habitable space when measuring privacy separation distances between neighbouring properties Generally, one step in the built form as the height increases due to building separations is desirable. Additional steps should be careful not to cause a 'ziggurat' appearance. For residential buildings next to commercial buildings, separation distances should be measured as follows: · for retail, office spaces and commercial balconies use the habitable room distances · for service and plant areas use the non-habitable room distances. New development should be located and oriented to maximise visual privacy between buildings on site and for neighbouring buildings. Design solutions include: · site layout and building orientation to minimise privacy impacts (see also section 3B Orientation) · on sloping sites, apartments on different levels have appropriate visual separation distances (see figure 3F.4). Apartment buildings should have an increased separation distance of 3m (in addition to the requirements set out in design criteria 1) when adjacent to a different zone that permits lower density residential development to provide for a transition in scale and increased landscaping (figure 3F.5). Direct lines of sight should be avoided for windows and balconies across corners. No separation is required between blank walls	The block is unique in shape and setbacks to boundaries are illustrated on the site plan (D01). Setbacks to the eastern side boundary are 7.728m to the front section of the building and 3.368m to the rear portion. Habitable and non-habitable areas are proposed within the desired 9m and 4.5m setback. The rear setback proposed is 3.29m to the rear section of the building and 1.509m to the front dogleg section. Habitable and non-habitable areas are proposed within the desired 9m and 4.5m rear setback. The western side setback is 13.747m to front section of the building and 3.027m to the middle section and 13.453m to the rear section. Non habitable areas are proposed within the 9m setback. There is no detrimental privacy impact to the neighbouring development. Note the northern orientation maximises visual privacy. Windows in the proposal facing the eastern boundary are mainly bedroom and utility rooms. The kitchen windows are provided with privacy screening as proposed and conditioned.	While the preferred setbacks are not achieved, all habitable rooms within the preferred setbacks are provided with privacy screening to protect privacy between neighbouring sites. It is also noted that the adjoining the site to the west is recreationally zoned undeveloped land. The setback and privacy measures proposed and conditioned and are considered to be acceptable
3F - 2 Site and building design elements increase privacy without compromising access to light and air and balance outlook and views from habitable rooms and private open space	Communal open space, common areas and access paths should be separated from private open space and windows to apartments, particularly habitable room windows. Design solutions may include: · setbacks · solid or partially solid balustrades to balconies at lower levels · fencing and/or trees and vegetation to separate spaces · screening devices · bay windows or pop out windows to provide privacy in one direction and outlook in another · raising apartments/private open space above the public domain or communal open space · planter boxes incorporated into walls and balustrades to increase visual separation · pergolas or shading devices to limit overlooking of lower apartments or private open space · on constrained sites where it can be demonstrated that building layout opportunities are limited, fixed louvres or screen panels to windows and/or balconies. Bedrooms, living spaces and other habitable rooms should be separated from gallery access and other open circulation space by the apartment’s service areas. Balconies and private terraces should be located in front of living rooms to increase internal privacy. Windows should be offset from the windows of adjacent buildings. Recessed balconies and/or vertical fins should be used between adjacent balconies	· Communal areas are satisfactorily separated from private open space areas. · Balconies and terraces adjoin internal living areas providing separation and privacy. · Windows to habitable areas do not directly adjoin other units or windows of adjoining apartments. · Screening has been used to maintain privacy between units and adjoining properties. · Privacy to adjoining properties’ private open space is provided through satisfactory design layout to ensure attractive and appropriate boundary interface.	Yes
3G Pedestrian access and entries
3G - 1 Building entries and pedestrian access connects to and addresses the public domain	Multiple entries (including communal building entries and individual ground floor entries) should be provided to activate the street edge. Entry locations relate to the street and subdivision pattern and the existing pedestrian network. Building entries should be clearly identifiable and communal entries should be clearly distinguishable from private entries. Where street frontage is limited and multiple buildings are located on the site, a primary street address should be provided with clear sight lines and pathways to secondary building entries.	Development provides pedestrian access on the primary street frontage to Drew Close. The entrances will be identifiable from the street and are considered to be satisfactory.	Yes
3G - 2 Access, entries and pathways are accessible and easy to identify	Building access areas including lift lobbies, stairwells and hallways should be clearly visible from the public domain and communal spaces. The design of ground floors and underground car parks minimise level changes along pathways and entries. Steps and ramps should be integrated into the overall building and landscape design. For large developments ‘way finding’ maps should be provided to assist visitors and residents (see figure 4T.3). For large developments electronic access and audio/video intercom should be provided to manage access	Access is visible. No major level changes along proposed pathways and entry points. Steps and ramps are integrated to the building design. Electronic access is proposed for the apartments.	Yes
3G - 3 Large sites provide pedestrian links for access to streets and connection to destinations	Pedestrian links through sites facilitate direct connections to open space, main streets, centres and public transport. Pedestrian links should be direct, have clear sight lines, be overlooked by habitable rooms or private open spaces of dwellings, be well lit and contain active uses, where appropriate	Clear line of site is provided to and from entry point to the first floor car park and building entry.	Yes
3H Vehicle access
3H - 1 Vehicle access points are designed and located to achieve safety, minimise conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles and create high quality streetscapes	Car park access should be integrated with the building’s overall facade. Design solutions may include: · the materials and colour palette to minimise visibility from the street · security doors or gates at entries that minimise voids in the facade · where doors are not provided, the visible interior reflects the facade design and the building services, pipes and ducts are concealed. Car park entries should be located behind the building line. Vehicle entries should be located at the lowest point of the site minimising ramp lengths, excavation and impacts on the building form and layout. Car park entry and access should be located on secondary streets or lanes where available. Vehicle standing areas that increase driveway width and encroach into setbacks should be avoided. Access point locations should avoid headlight glare to habitable rooms. Adequate separation distances should be provided between vehicle entries and street intersections. The width and number of vehicle access points should be limited to the minimum. Visual impact of long driveways should be minimised through changing alignments and screen planting. The need for large vehicles to enter or turn around within the site should be avoided. Garbage collection, loading and servicing areas are screened. Clear sight lines should be provided at pedestrian and vehicle crossings. Traffic calming devices such as changes in paving material or textures should be used where appropriate. Pedestrian and vehicle access should be separated and distinguishable. Design solutions may include: · changes in surface materials · level changes · the use of landscaping for separation	Standard car park access provided, at grade and into the first floor. Satisfactory landscaping provided around the entry to help soften the entry. Headlight glare to unit 101 on ground floor is minimised to the bedroom via a screening feature. The proposed driveway off Drew Close has provided suitable separation to intersections and is considered to be acceptable. Pedestrian and vehicle access points have been separated. Garbage storage is proposed at the front boundary and accessible for collection and removal via private collection arrangement.	Yes
3J Bicycle and car parking
3J - 1 Car parking is provided based on proximity to public transport in metropolitan Sydney and centres in regional areas Notes Port Macquarie is a nominated regional centre. In terms of using Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, Port Macquarie is a “sub-regional centre” as by definition it does not have access to rail. Medium density is 2 - <20 dwellings. High Density is 20 or more dwellings	Design Criteria 1. For development in the following locations: a) on sites that are within 800 metres of a railway station or light rail stop in the Sydney Metropolitan Area; or b) on land zoned, and sites within 400 metres of land zoned, B3 Commercial Core, B4 Mixed Use or equivalent in a nominated regional centre the minimum car parking requirement for residents and visitors is set out in the Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, or the car parking requirement prescribed by the relevant council, whichever is less The car parking needs for a development must be provided off street. Where a car share scheme operates locally, provide car share parking spaces within the development. Car share spaces, when provided, should be on site. Where less car parking is provided in a development, council should not provide on street resident parking permits Guide to Traffic Generating Developments Medium density residential flat buildings require: - 1 space per unit + - 1 space for every 5 x 2 bedroom unit + - 1 space for every 2 x 3 bedroom unit + - 1 space for 5 units (visitor parking). High density residential flat buildings for metropolitan sub-regional centres require: - 0.6 spaces per 1 bedroom unit - 0.9 spaces per 2 bedroom unit - 1.40 spaces per 3 bedroom unit + - 1 space per 5 units (visitor parking)	The site is in a nominated regional centre. Site is within 400m of a B3 zone. 15 Apartments - 3 x 2 bed units - 12 x 3 bed units Under the RTA guide a total of 25 spaces are required. Under the DCP 2013 25 spaces are also required. Total of 29 spaces are proposed.	Yes
3J - 2 Parking and facilities are provided for other modes of transport	Conveniently located and sufficient numbers of parking spaces should be provided for motorbikes and scooters. Secure undercover bicycle parking should be provided that is easily accessible from both the public domain and common areas. Conveniently located charging stations are provided for electric vehicles, where desirable	The car park allows for vehicle spaces to be used for motorbikes etc. Storage areas are available for bicycles.	Yes
3J - 3 Car park design and access is safe and secure	Supporting facilities within car parks, including garbage, plant and switch rooms, storage areas and car wash bays can be accessed without crossing car parking spaces. Direct, clearly visible and well lit access should be provided into common circulation areas. A clearly defined and visible lobby or waiting area should be provided to lifts and stairs. For larger car parks, safe pedestrian access should be clearly defined and circulation areas have good lighting, colour, line marking and/or bollards	Support facilities available and carpark design satisfactory. The proposal does not include a car wash bay as there is no requirement under the PMHC DCP or the Apartment Design Guide. Commercial car wash facilities are available in close proximity to the site.	Yes
3J - 4 Visual and environmental impacts of underground car parking are minimised	Excavation should be minimised through efficient car park layouts and ramp design. Car parking layout should be well organised, using a logical, efficient structural grid and double loaded aisles. Protrusion of car parks should not exceed 1m above ground level. Design solutions may include stepping car park levels or using split levels on sloping sites. Natural ventilation should be provided to basement and sub basement car parking areas. Ventilation grills or screening devices for car parking openings should be integrated into the facade and landscape design	Excavation minimised to that practical given the desired density for the site. Layout is well organised with a logical layout and design has utilised a split level layout with ground level entry.	Yes
3J - 5 Visual and environmental impacts of on-grade car parking are minimised	On-grade car parking should be avoided. Where on-grade car parking is unavoidable, the following design solutions are used: · parking is located on the side or rear of the lot away from the primary street frontage · cars are screened from view of streets, buildings, communal and private open space areas · safe and direct access to building entry points is provided · parking is incorporated into the landscape design of the site, by extending planting and materials into the car park space · stormwater run-off is managed appropriately from car parking surfaces • bio-swales, rain gardens or on site detention tanks are provided, where appropriate · light coloured paving materials or permeable paving systems are used and shade trees are planted between every 4-5 parking spaces to reduce increased surface temperatures from large areas of paving	Visitor parking is proposed at grade. This parking area is suitably screened from the street by landscaping and bin storage area.	Yes
3J - 6 Visual and environmental impacts of above ground enclosed car parking are minimised	Exposed parking should not be located along primary street frontages Screening, landscaping and other design elements including public art should be used to integrate the above ground car parking with the facade. Design solutions may include: · car parking that is concealed behind the facade, with windows integrated into the overall facade design (approach should be limited to developments where a larger floor plate podium is suitable at lower levels) · car parking that is ‘wrapped’ with other uses, such as retail, commercial or two storey Small Office/Home Office (SOHO) units along the street frontage (see figure 3J.9). Positive street address and active frontages should be provided at ground level	Ground level parking is adequately screened form the street frontage.	Yes
4A Solar and daylight access
4A - 1 To optimise the number of apartments receiving sunlight to habitable rooms, primary windows and private open space	Design Criteria 1. Living rooms and private open spaces of at least 70% of apartments in a building receive a minimum of 2 hours direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid winter in the Sydney Metropolitan Area and in the Newcastle and Wollongong local government areas. 2. In all other areas, living rooms and private open spaces of at least 70% of apartments in a building receive a minimum of 3 hours direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid winter. 3. A maximum of 15% of apartments in a building receive no direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid winter The design maximises north aspect and the number of single aspect south facing apartments is minimised. Single aspect, single storey apartments should have a northerly or easterly aspect. Living areas are best located to the north and service areas to the south and west of apartments. To optimise the direct sunlight to habitable rooms and balconies a number of the following design features are used: · dual aspect apartments · shallow apartment layouts · two storey and mezzanine level apartments · bay windows To maximise the benefit to residents of direct sunlight within living rooms and private open spaces, a minimum of 1m² of direct sunlight, measured at 1m above floor level, is achieved for at least 15 minutes. Achieving the design criteria may not be possible on some sites. This includes: · where greater residential amenity can be achieved along a busy road or rail line by orientating the living rooms away from the noise source · on south facing sloping sites · where significant views are oriented away from the desired aspect for direct sunlight Design drawings need to demonstrate how site constraints and orientation preclude meeting the design criteria and how the development meets the objective.	The proposal orientates all living rooms and private open spaces to the north. Living rooms and private open spaces of apartments and townhouses receive greater than 3 hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm on the winter solstice. Northern aspects have been maximised in the design. No single aspect apartment or townhouses proposed. More than 1m² sunlight for 15min achieved to living areas. The Design has achieved the desired criteria under this clause.	Yes
4A - 2 Daylight access is maximised where sunlight is limited	Courtyards, skylights and high level windows (with sills of 1,500mm or greater) are used only as a secondary light source in habitable rooms. Where courtyards are used: · use is restricted to kitchens, bathrooms and service areas · building services are concealed with appropriate detailing and materials to visible walls · courtyards are fully open to the sky · access is provided to the light well from a communal area for cleaning and maintenance · acoustic privacy, fire safety and minimum privacy separation distances (see section 3F Visual privacy) are achieved. Opportunities for reflected light into apartments are optimised through: · reflective exterior surfaces on buildings opposite south facing windows · positioning windows to face other buildings or surfaces (on neighbouring sites or within the site) that will reflect light · integrating light shelves into the design · light coloured internal finishes	The proposal maximises solar access. There is no need to incorporate design solutions to achieve daylight access.	Yes
4A - 3 Design incorporates shading and glare control, particularly for warmer months	A number of the following design features are used: · balconies or sun shading that extend far enough to shade summer sun, but allow winter sun to penetrate living areas · shading devices such as eaves, awnings, balconies, pergolas, external louvres and planting · horizontal shading to north facing windows · vertical shading to east and particularly west facing windows · operable shading to allow adjustment and choice · high performance glass that minimises external glare off windows, with consideration given to reduced tint glass or glass with a reflectance level below 20% (reflective films are avoided)	The design incorporates appropriate passive sun control elements. Most of the northern façade includes balconies. Glazing is minimised to eastern and facade and where it is used the majority is screened with vertical louvres angled to maintain views.	Yes
4B Natural ventilation
4B - 1 All habitable rooms are naturally ventilated	The building's orientation maximises capture and use of prevailing breezes for natural ventilation in habitable rooms. Depths of habitable rooms support natural ventilation. The area of unobstructed window openings should be equal to at least 5% of the floor area served. Light wells are not the primary air source for habitable rooms. Doors and openable windows maximise natural ventilation opportunities by using the following design solutions: · adjustable windows with large effective openable areas · a variety of window types that provide safety and flexibility such as awnings and louvres · windows which the occupants can reconfigure to funnel breezes into the apartment such as vertical louvres, casement windows and externally opening doors	Design and location of openings make use of natural ventilation.	Yes
4B - 2 The layout and design of single aspect apartments maximises natural ventilation	Apartment depths are limited to maximise ventilation and airflow (see also figure 4D.3) Natural ventilation to single aspect apartments is achieved with the following design solutions: · primary windows are augmented with plenums and light wells (generally not suitable for cross ventilation) · stack effect ventilation / solar chimneys or similar to naturally ventilate internal building areas or rooms such as bathrooms and laundries · courtyards or building indentations have a width to depth ratio of 2:1 or 3:1 to ensure effective air circulation and avoid trapped smells	Depth of units is acceptable given multiple aspect to allow light and ventilation.	Yes
4B - 3 The number of apartments with natural cross ventilation is maximised to create a comfortable indoor environment for residents	Design Criteria 1. At least 60% of apartments are naturally cross ventilated in the first nine storeys of the building. Apartments at ten storeys or greater are deemed to be cross ventilated only if any enclosure of the balconies at these levels allows adequate natural ventilation and cannot be fully enclosed. 2. Overall depth of a cross-over or cross-through apartment does not exceed 18m, measured glass line to glass line. The building should include dual aspect apartments, cross through apartments and corner apartments and limit apartment depths. In cross-through apartments external window and door opening sizes/areas on one side of an apartment (inlet side) are approximately equal to the external window and door opening sizes/areas on the other side of the apartment (outlet side) (see figure 4B.4). Apartments are designed to minimise the number of corners, doors and rooms that might obstruct airflow. Apartment depths, combined with appropriate ceiling heights, maximise cross ventilation and airflow	Units are adequately naturally ventilated. Depth of apartments does not exceed 18m and designed with limited number of corners, doors and rooms that might obstruct airflow.	Yes
4C Ceiling heights
4C - 1 Ceiling height achieves sufficient natural ventilation and daylight access	Design Criteria 1. Measured from finished floor level to finished ceiling level, minimum ceiling heights are: Minimum ceiling height for apartment and mixed use buildings Habitable rooms = 2.7m Non-habitable = 2.4m For 2 storey apartments = 2.7m for main living area floor and 2.4m for second floor, where its area does not exceed 50% of the apartment area Attic spaces = 1.8m at edge of room with a 30 degree minimum ceiling slope If located in mixed use areas = 3.3m for ground and first floor to promote future flexibility of use These minimums do not preclude higher ceilings if desired. Ceiling height can accommodate use of ceiling fans for cooling and heat distribution.	Units have 2.7m ceiling heights in habitable rooms and 2.4m for non-habitable rooms. Development not located in mix use area.	Yes
4C - 2 Ceiling height increases the sense of space in apartments and provides for well proportioned rooms	A number of the following design solutions can be used: · the hierarchy of rooms in an apartment is defined using changes in ceiling heights and alternatives such as raked or curved ceilings, or double height spaces · well proportioned rooms are provided, for example, smaller rooms feel larger and more spacious with higher ceilings · ceiling heights are maximised in habitable rooms by ensuring that bulkheads do not intrude. The stacking of service rooms from floor to floor and coordination of bulkhead location above non-habitable areas, such as robes or storage, can assist	Ceiling heights are acceptable throughout the development.	Yes
4C - 3 Ceiling heights contribute to the flexibility of building use over the life of the building	Ceiling heights of lower level apartments in centres should be greater than the minimum required by the design criteria allowing flexibility and conversion to non-residential uses (see figure 4C.1)	Development is not located in a commercial or mixed use zone.	N/A
4D Apartment size and layout
4D - 1 The layout of rooms within an apartment is functional, well organised and provides a high standard of amenity	Design Criteria 1. Apartments are required to have the following minimum internal areas: Studio = 35m² 1 bedroom = 50m² 2 bedroom = 70m² 3 bedroom = 90m² The minimum internal areas include only one bathroom. Additional bathrooms increase the minimum internal area by 5m² each. A fourth bedroom and further additional bedrooms increase the minimum internal area by 12m² each. 2. Every habitable room must have a window in an external wall with a total minimum glass area of not less than 10% of the floor area of the room. Daylight and air may not be borrowed from other rooms. Kitchens should not be located as part of the main circulation space in larger apartments (such as hallway or entry space). A window should be visible from any point in a habitable room. Where minimum areas or room dimensions are not met apartments need to demonstrate that they are well designed and demonstrate the usability and functionality of the space with realistically scaled furniture layouts and circulation areas. These circumstances would be assessed on their merits	The development provides 3 x 2 bedroom units and 12x 3 bedroom units. The 2 bedroom units exceed 70m² and the 3 bedroom units exceed 90m². Every habitable room has access to a window with compliant glass area. Kitchens are not part of hallways etc.	Yes
4D - 2 Environmental performance of the apartment is maximised	Design Criteria 1. Habitable room depths are limited to a maximum of 2.5 x the ceiling height. 2. In open plan layouts (where the living, dining and kitchen are combined) the maximum habitable room depth is 8m from a window. Greater than minimum ceiling heights can allow for proportional increases in room depth up to the permitted maximum depths. All living areas and bedrooms should be located on the external face of the building. Where possible: · bathrooms and laundries should have an external openable window. · main living spaces should be oriented toward the primary outlook and aspect and away from noise sources	All units include an open plan layout and generally complies with the maximum habitable room depth of 8m. Living areas and bedrooms are located on the external face of the building.	Yes
4D - 3 Apartment layouts are designed to accommodate a variety of household activities and needs	Design Criteria 1. Master bedrooms have a minimum area of 10m² and other bedrooms 9m² (excluding wardrobe space). 2. Bedrooms have a minimum dimension of 3m (excluding wardrobe space). 3. Living rooms or combined living/dining rooms have a minimum width of: • 3.6m for studio and 1 bedroom apartments • 4m for 2 and 3 bedroom apartments 4. The width of cross-over or cross-through apartments are at least 4m internally to avoid deep narrow apartment layouts. Access to bedrooms, bathrooms and laundries is separated from living areas minimising direct openings between living and service areas. All bedrooms allow a minimum length of 1.5m for robes. The main bedroom of an apartment or a studio apartment should be provided with a wardrobe of a minimum 1.8m long, 0.6m deep and 2.1m high. Apartment layouts allow flexibility over time, design solutions may include: · dimensions that facilitate a variety of furniture arrangements and removal · spaces for a range of activities and privacy levels between different spaces within the apartment · dual master apartments · dual key apartments Note: dual key apartments which are separate but on the same title are regarded as two sole occupancy units for the purposes of the Building Code of Australia and for calculating the mix of apartments · room sizes and proportions or open plans (rectangular spaces (2:3) are more easily furnished than square spaces (1:1)) · efficient planning of circulation by stairs, corridors and through rooms to maximise the amount of usable floor space in rooms	Master bedrooms comply with the 10m² minimum standard and other bedrooms comply with the 9m² standard. Bedrooms comply with 3m minimum dimension. Living rooms comply with 4m minimum dimension. Suitable separation of rooms and bathrooms exists. Robes in bedrooms considered acceptable. Layouts contain flexibility for adaptable uses.	Yes
4E Private open space and balconies
4E - 1 Apartments provide appropriately sized private open space and balconies to enhance residential amenity	Design Criteria 1. All apartments are required to have primary balconies as follows: a) Studio apartments = 4m² b) 1 bedroom apartments = 8m² and 2m min depth. c) 2 bedroom apartments = 10m² and 2m min depth. d) 3+ bedroom apartments = 12m² and 2.4m min depth. The minimum balcony depth to be counted as contributing to the balcony area is 1m. 2. For apartments at ground level or on a podium or similar structure, a private open space is provided instead of a balcony. It must have a minimum area of 15m² and a minimum depth of 3m. Increased communal open space should be provided where the number or size of balconies are reduced. Storage areas on balconies is additional to the minimum balcony size. Balcony use may be limited in some proposals by: · consistently high wind speeds at 10 storeys and above · close proximity to road, rail or other noise sources · exposure to significant levels of aircraft noise · heritage and adaptive reuse of existing buildings In these situations, juliet balconies, operable walls, enclosed wintergardens or bay windows may be appropriate, and other amenity benefits for occupants should also be provided in the apartments or in the development or both. Natural ventilation also needs to be demonstrated	All units have balconies and primary open space that exceeds minimum ADG dimensions (Minimum 35m2).	Yes
4E - 2 Primary private open space and balconies are appropriately located to enhance liveability for residents	Primary open space and balconies should be located adjacent to the living room, dining room or kitchen to extend the living space. Private open spaces and balconies predominantly face north, east or west. Primary open space and balconies should be orientated with the longer side facing outwards or be open to the sky to optimise daylight access into adjacent rooms.	Private open space areas adjoin living areas and are not located on southern elevations. Balconies contain suitable access.	Yes
4E - 3 Private open space and balcony design is integrated into and contributes to the overall architectural form and detail of the building	Solid, partially solid or transparent fences and balustrades are selected to respond to the location. They are designed to allow views and passive surveillance of the street while maintaining visual privacy and allowing for a range of uses on the balcony. Solid and partially solid balustrades are preferred. Full width full height glass balustrades alone are generally not desirable. Projecting balconies should be integrated into the building design and the design of soffits considered. Operable screens, shutters, hoods and pergolas are used to control sunlight and wind. Balustrades are set back from the building or balcony edge where overlooking or safety is an issue. Downpipes and balcony drainage are integrated with the overall facade and building design. Air-conditioning units should be located on roofs, in basements, or fully integrated into the building design. Where clothes drying, storage or air conditioning units are located on balconies, they should be screened and integrated in the building design. Ceilings of apartments below terraces should be insulated to avoid heat loss. Water and gas outlets should be provided for primary balconies and private open space	Suitable mixture of solid and glass balustrades used to provide views and privacy. Balconies comply with requirements.	Yes
4E - 4 Private open space and balcony design maximises safety.	Changes in ground levels or landscaping are minimised. Design and detailing of balconies avoids opportunities for climbing and falls.	Balcony design will need to comply with the Building Code of Australia for safety reasons.	Yes
4F Common circulation and spaces
4F - 1 Common circulation spaces achieve good amenity and properly service the number of apartments	Design Criteria 1. The maximum number of apartments off a circulation core on a single level is eight. 2. For buildings of 10 storeys and over, the maximum number of apartments sharing a single lift is 40. Greater than minimum requirements for corridor widths and/ or ceiling heights allow comfortable movement and access particularly in entry lobbies, outside lifts and at apartment entry doors. Daylight and natural ventilation should be provided to all common circulation spaces that are above ground. Windows should be provided in common circulation spaces and should be adjacent to the stair or lift core or at the ends of corridors. Longer corridors greater than 12m in length from the lift core should be articulated. Design solutions may include: · a series of foyer areas with windows and spaces for seating · wider areas at apartment entry doors and varied ceiling heights Design common circulation spaces to maximise opportunities for dual aspect apartments, including multiple core apartment buildings and cross over apartments. Achieving the design criteria for the number of apartments off a circulation core may not be possible. Where a development is unable to achieve the design criteria, a high level of amenity for common lobbies, corridors and apartments should be demonstrated, including: · sunlight and natural cross ventilation in apartments · access to ample daylight and natural ventilation in common circulation spaces · common areas for seating and gathering · generous corridors with greater than minimum ceiling heights · other innovative design solutions that provide high levels of amenity Where design criteria 1 is not achieved, no more than 12 apartments should be provided off a circulation core on a single level. Primary living room or bedroom windows should not open directly onto common circulation spaces, whether open or enclosed. Visual and acoustic privacy from common circulation spaces to any other rooms should be carefully controlled	Maximum number of units off a circulation core is less than the ADG recommendation of 8. Design complies with natural light and ventilation requirements. Living areas do not directly access core area. Additional design mitigation elements are not recommended for visual or acoustic privacy.	Yes
4F - 2 Common circulation spaces promote safety and provide for social interaction between residents	Direct and legible access should be provided between vertical circulation points and apartment entries by minimising corridor or gallery length to give short, straight, clear sight lines. Tight corners and spaces are avoided. Circulation spaces should be well lit at night. Legible signage should be provided for apartment numbers, common areas and general wayfinding. Incidental spaces, for example space for seating in a corridor, at a stair landing, or near a window are provided. In larger developments, community rooms for activities such as owners corporation meetings or resident use should be provided and are ideally co-located with communal open space. Where external galleries are provided, they are more open than closed above the balustrade along their length.	Common areas are short in length and contain suitable width to allow access. Tight corners and spaces have been avoided. Circulation areas are provided with daylight access and able to be well lit at night. Communal open space is available for residential meetings.	Yes
4G Storage
4G - 1 Adequate, well designed storage is provided in each apartment	Design Criteria 1. In addition to storage in kitchens, bathrooms and bedrooms, the following storage is provided: a) Studio apartments = 4m³. b) 1 bedroom apartments = 6m³. c) 2 bedroom apartments 8m³. d) 3+ bedroom apartments = 10m³. At least 50% of the required storage is to be located within the apartment. Storage is accessible from either circulation or living areas. Storage provided on balconies (in addition to the minimum balcony size) is integrated into the balcony design, weather proof and screened from view from the street. Left over space such as under stairs is used for storage	The 2 and 3 bed units comply with the 8m³ additional storage requirements. At least 50% is provided in the unit.	Yes
4G - 2 Additional storage is conveniently located, accessible and nominated for individual apartments	Storage not located in apartments is secure and clearly allocated to specific apartments. Storage is provided for larger and less frequently accessed items. Storage space in internal or basement car parks is provided at the rear or side of car spaces or in cages so that allocated car parking remains accessible. If communal storage rooms are provided they should be accessible from common circulation areas of the building. Storage not located in an apartment is integrated into the overall building design and is not visible from the public domain.	Storage has been integrated into the design of the car park and not visible to the public.	Yes
4H Acoustic privacy
4H - 1 Noise transfer is minimised through the siting of buildings and building layout	Adequate building separation is provided within the development and from neighbouring buildings/adjacent uses (see also section 2F Building separation and section 3F Visual privacy). Window and door openings are generally orientated away from noise sources. Noisy areas within buildings including building entries and corridors should be located next to or above each other and quieter areas next to or above quieter areas. Storage, circulation areas and non-habitable rooms should be located to buffer noise from external sources. The number of party walls (walls shared with other apartments) are limited and are appropriately insulated. Noise sources such as garage doors, driveways, service areas, plant rooms, building services, mechanical equipment, active communal open spaces and circulation areas should be located at least 3m away from bedrooms.	The use of separation, screening and location of high use living areas ensures no adverse acoustic issues. Living areas are also grouped through the levels of the building and townhouses. Noisy areas such as entries and corridors grouped together. Internal noise sources are located at least 3m away from bedrooms. Other acoustic provisions of ADG have been suitably implemented.	Yes
4H - 2 Noise impacts are mitigated within apartments through layout and acoustic treatments	Internal apartment layout separates noisy spaces from quiet spaces, using a number of the following design solutions: · rooms with similar noise requirements are grouped together · doors separate different use zones · wardrobes in bedrooms are co-located to act as sound buffers Where physical separation cannot be achieved noise conflicts are resolved using the following design solutions: · double or acoustic glazing · acoustic seals • use of materials with low noise penetration properties · continuous walls to ground level courtyards where they do not conflict with streetscape or other amenity requirements	Apartments are typically mirrored so avoiding shared walls between conflicting residential uses. The design is considered to have met the criteria of this clause.	Yes
4J Noise and pollution
4J - 1 In noisy or hostile environments the impacts of external noise and pollution are minimised through the careful siting and layout of buildings	To minimise impacts the following design solutions may be used: · physical separation between buildings and the noise or pollution source · residential uses are located perpendicular to the noise source and where possible buffered by other uses · non-residential buildings are sited to be parallel with the noise source to provide a continuous building that shields residential uses and communal open spaces · non-residential uses are located at lower levels vertically separating the residential component from the noise or pollution source. Setbacks to the underside of residential floor levels should increase relative to traffic volumes and other noise sources · buildings should respond to both solar access and noise. Where solar access is away from the noise source, nonhabitable rooms can provide a buffer · where solar access is in the same direction as the noise source, dual aspect apartments with shallow building depths are preferable (see figure 4J.4) · landscape design reduces the perception of noise and acts as a filter for air pollution generated by traffic and industry. Achieving the design criteria in this Apartment Design Guide may not be possible in some situations due to noise and pollution. Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, alternatives may be considered in the following areas: · solar and daylight access · private open space and balconies · natural cross ventilation	Development implements and has regard for ADG requirements. The building includes deep balconies to mitigate any noise concerns. This allows for a balance between providing solar access and views. There are no non-residential uses proposed within the development or adjoining the subject site.	Yes
4J - 2 Appropriate noise shielding or attenuation techniques for the building design, construction and choice of materials are used to mitigate noise transmission	Design solutions to mitigate noise include: · limiting the number and size of openings facing noise sources · providing seals to prevent noise transfer through gaps · using double or acoustic glazing, acoustic louvres or enclosed balconies (wintergardens) · using materials with mass and/or sound insulation or absorption properties e.g. solid balcony balustrades, external screens and soffits	Development implements and has regard for ADG requirements.	Yes
4K Apartment mix
4K - 1 A range of apartment types and sizes is provided to cater for different household types now and into the future	A variety of apartment types is provided The apartment mix is appropriate, taking into consideration: · the distance to public transport, employment and education centres · the current market demands and projected future demographic trends · the demand for social and affordable housing · different cultural and socioeconomic groups Flexible apartment configurations are provided to support diverse household types and stages of life including single person households, families, multi-generational families and group households.	A suitable apartment mix is provided. The units provide for a diverse household makeup.	Yes
4K - 2 The apartment mix is distributed to suitable locations within the building	Different apartment types are located to achieve successful facade composition and to optimise solar access (see figure 4K.3). Larger apartment types are located on the ground or roof level where there is potential for more open space and on corners where more building frontage is available.	Location of apartments provides acceptable compliance with ADG.	Yes
4L Ground floor apartments
4L - 1 Street frontage activity is maximised where ground floor apartments are located	Direct street access should be provided to ground floor apartments. Activity is achieved through front gardens, terraces and the facade of the building. Design solutions may include: · both street, foyer and other common internal circulation entrances to ground floor apartments · private open space is next to the street · doors and windows face the street Retail or home office spaces should be located along street frontages. Ground floor apartment layouts support small office home office (SOHO) use to provide future opportunities for conversion into commercial or retail areas. In these cases provide higher floor to ceiling heights and ground floor amenities for easy conversion.	No units proposed on the ground floor. No commercial uses proposed. Landscaping to the street frontage is proposed. Design has adequately addressed the ADG.	Yes
4L - 2 Design of ground floor apartments delivers amenity and safety for residents	Privacy and safety should be provided without obstructing casual surveillance. Design solutions may include: · elevation of private gardens and terraces above the street level by 1-1.5m (see figure 4L.4) · landscaping and private courtyards · window sill heights that minimise sight lines into apartments · integrating balustrades, safety bars or screens with the exterior design Solar access should be maximised through: · high ceilings and tall windows · trees and shrubs that allow solar access in winter and shade in summer	The use of appropriate fencing, screening and landscaping provides a suitable mixture of privacy and surveillance. Orientation to the north and large windows have been incorporated in the design to achieve solar access, which complies with the ADG.	Yes
4M Facades
4M - 1 Building facades provide visual interest along the street while respecting the character of the local area	Design solutions for front building facades may include: · a composition of varied building elements · a defined base, middle and top of buildings · revealing and concealing certain elements · changes in texture, material, detail and colour to modify the prominence of elements Building services should be integrated within the overall façade. Building facades should be well resolved with an appropriate scale and proportion to the streetscape and human scale. Design solutions may include: · well composed horizontal and vertical elements · variation in floor heights to enhance the human scale · elements that are proportional and arranged in patterns · public artwork or treatments to exterior blank walls · grouping of floors or elements such as balconies and windows on taller buildings Building facades relate to key datum lines of adjacent buildings through upper level setbacks, parapets, cornices, awnings or colonnade heights. Shadow is created on the facade throughout the day with building articulation, balconies and deeper window reveals.	The building façade contains suitable elements that comply with ADG requirements creating visual interest.	Yes
4M - 2 Building functions are expressed by the facade	Building entries should be clearly defined. Important corners are given visual prominence through a change in articulation, materials or colour, roof expression or changes in height. The apartment layout should be expressed externally through facade features such as party walls and floor slabs	Entry is clearly defined. The building provides suitable articulation and apartment layout expressed externally through façade features.	Yes
4N Roof design
4N - 1 Roof treatments are integrated into the building design and positively respond to the street	Roof design relates to the street. Design solutions may include: · special roof features and strong corners · use of skillion or very low pitch hipped roofs · breaking down the massing of the roof by using smaller elements to avoid bulk · using materials or a pitched form complementary to adjacent buildings Roof treatments should be integrated with the building design. Design solutions may include: · roof design proportionate to the overall building size, scale and form · roof materials compliment the building · service elements are integrated	Roof design is acceptable. Bulk of the roof has been minimised by using architectural details. Service elements are located central to the building and away from the street frontage.	Yes
4N - 2 Opportunities to use roof space for residential accommodation and open space are maximised	Habitable roof space should be provided with good levels of amenity. Design solutions may include: · penthouse apartments · dormer or clerestory windows · openable skylights Open space is provided on roof tops subject to acceptable visual and acoustic privacy, comfort levels, safety and security considerations.	Top floor apartments proposed with large balcony. Acceptable privacy levels achieved.	Yes
4N - 3 Roof design incorporates sustainability features	Roof design maximises solar access to apartments during winter and provides shade during summer. Design solutions may include: · the roof lifts to the north · eaves and overhangs shade walls and windows from summer sun. Skylights and ventilation systems should be integrated into the roof design	Roof design provides suitable shading and solar access.	Yes
4O Landscape design
4O - 1 Landscape design is viable and sustainable	Landscape design should be environmentally sustainable and can enhance environmental performance by incorporating: · diverse and appropriate planting · bio-filtration gardens · appropriately planted shading trees · areas for residents to plant vegetables and herbs · composting - green roofs or walls Ongoing maintenance plans should be prepared. Microclimate is enhanced by: · appropriately scaled trees near the eastern and western elevations for shade · a balance of evergreen and deciduous trees to provide shading in summer and sunlight access in winter · shade structures such as pergolas for balconies and courtyards Tree and shrub selection considers size at maturity and the potential for roots to compete (see Table 4) Table 4 requires · For site area up to 850m² = 1 medium tree per 50m² of deep soil zone · Between 850 - 1,500m² = 1 large tree or 2 medium trees per 90m² of deep soil zone · Greater than 1,500m² = 1 large tree or 2 medium trees per 80m² of deep soil zone	Suitable landscape plan provided. The landscape has been designed with great diversity in planting stock and size reinforcing communal open space. Trees and shrub selection has considered size and roots.	Yes
4O - 2 Landscape design contributes to the streetscape and amenity	Landscape design responds to the existing site conditions including: · changes of levels · views · significant landscape features including trees and rock outcrops Significant landscape features should be protected by: · tree protection zones (see figure 4O.5) · appropriate signage and fencing during construction Plants selected should be endemic to the region and reflect the local ecology	Suitable landscaping provided.	Yes
4P Planting on structures
4P - 1 Appropriate soil profiles are provided	Structures are reinforced for additional saturated soil weight Soil volume is appropriate for plant growth, considerations include: · modifying depths and widths according to the planting mix and irrigation frequency · free draining and long soil life span · tree anchorage Minimum soil standards for plant sizes should be provided in accordance with Table 5. Table 5 requires · Large trees 12-18m high, up to 16m crown spread at maturity = need 150m³ of soil at a depth of 1,200mm and area of 10m x 10m or equivalent. · Medium trees 8-12m high, up to 8m crown spread at maturity = need 35m³ of soil at a depth of 1,000mm and area of 6m x 6m or equivalent. · Small trees 6-8m high, up to 4m crown spread at maturity = need 9m³ of soil at a depth of 800mm and area of 3.5m x 3.5m or equivalent. · Shrubs need soil depth of 500-600mm · Ground cover needs soil depth of 300-450mm · Turf needs soil depth of 200mm	Planting over structures proposed and capable of being provided. Suitable landscaping provided.	Yes
4P - 2 Plant growth is optimised with appropriate selection and maintenance	Plants are suited to site conditions, considerations include: · drought and wind tolerance · seasonal changes in solar access · modified substrate depths for a diverse range of plants · plant longevity A landscape maintenance plan is prepared. Irrigation and drainage systems respond to: · changing site conditions · soil profile and the planting regime · whether rainwater, stormwater or recycled grey water is used	Landscaping plans have included adequate plant selection for the proposal.	Yes
4P - 3 Planting on structures contributes to the quality and amenity of communal and public open spaces	Building design incorporates opportunities for planting on structures. Design solutions may include: · green walls with specialised lighting for indoor green walls · wall design that incorporates planting · green roofs, particularly where roofs are visible from the public domain · planter boxes Note: structures designed to accommodate green walls should be integrated into the building facade and consider the ability of the facade to change over time	Design contains adequate plantings within the site such areas above sub floor around the communal area and poll to form the first floor level landscaping.	Yes
4Q Universal design
4Q - 1 Universal design features are included in apartment design to promote flexible housing for all community members	Developments achieve a benchmark of 20% of the total apartments incorporating the Liveable Housing Guideline's silver level universal design features	The open plan design provides for various levels of mobility and accessibility.	Yes
4Q - 2 A variety of apartments with adaptable designs are provided	Adaptable housing should be provided in accordance with the relevant council policy Design solutions for adaptable apartments include: · convenient access to communal and public areas · high level of solar access · minimal structural change and residential amenity loss when adapted · larger car parking spaces for accessibility · parking titled separately from apartments or shared car parking arrangements	Building design allows adaptability.	Yes
4Q - 3 Apartment layouts are flexible and accommodate a range of lifestyle needs	Apartment design incorporates flexible design solutions which may include: · rooms with multiple functions · dual master bedroom apartments with separate bathrooms · larger apartments with various living space options · open plan ‘loft’ style apartments with only a fixed kitchen, laundry and bathroom	Apartment design allows for flexible room usage and living space.	Yes
4R Adaptive reuse
4R - 1 New additions to existing buildings are contemporary and complementary and enhance an area's identity and sense of place	Design solutions may include: · new elements to align with the existing building · additions that complement the existing character, siting, scale, proportion, pattern, form and detailing · use of contemporary and complementary materials, finishes, textures and colours Additions to heritage items should be clearly identifiable from the original building. New additions allow for the interpretation and future evolution of the building.	No additions proposed.	N/A
4R - 2 Adapted buildings provide residential amenity while not precluding future adaptive reuse	Design features should be incorporated sensitively into adapted buildings to make up for any physical limitations, to ensure residential amenity is achieved. Design solutions may include: · generously sized voids in deeper buildings · alternative apartment types when orientation is poor · using additions to expand the existing building envelope Some proposals that adapt existing buildings may not be able to achieve all of the design criteria in this Apartment Design Guide. Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, alternatives could be considered in the following areas: · where there are existing higher ceilings, depths of habitable rooms could increase subject to demonstrating access to natural ventilation, cross ventilation (when applicable) and solar and daylight access (see also sections 4A Solar and daylight access and 4B Natural ventilation) · alternatives to providing deep soil where less than the minimum requirement is currently available on the site · building and visual separation – subject to demonstrating alternative design approaches to achieving privacy · common circulation · car parking · alternative approaches to private open space and balconies	Not an adapted building.	N/A
4S Mixed use
4S - 1 Mixed use developments are provided in appropriate locations and provide active street frontages that encourage pedestrian movement	Mixed use development should be concentrated around public transport and centres. Mixed use developments positively contribute to the public domain. Design solutions may include: · development addresses the street · active frontages are provided · diverse activities and uses · avoiding blank walls at the ground level · live/work apartments on the ground floor level, rather than commercial	Not a mixed use development.	N/A
4S - 2 Residential levels of the building are integrated within the development, and safety and amenity is maximised for residents	Residential circulation areas should be clearly defined. Design solutions may include: · residential entries are separated from commercial entries and directly accessible from the street · commercial service areas are separated from residential components · residential car parking and communal facilities are separated or secured · security at entries and safe pedestrian routes are provided · concealment opportunities are avoided Landscaped communal open space should be provided at podium or roof levels.	Development contains limited concealment/entrapment areas and provides suitable surveillance to ensure safety to occupants.	Yes
4T Awnings and signage
4T - 1 Awnings are well located and complement and integrate with the building design	Awnings should be located along streets with high pedestrian activity and active frontages. A number of the following design solutions are used: · continuous awnings are maintained and provided in areas with an existing pattern · height, depth, material and form complements the existing street character · protection from the sun and rain is provided · awnings are wrapped around the secondary frontages of corner sites · awnings are retractable in areas without an established pattern Awnings should be located over building entries for building address and public domain amenity. Awnings relate to residential windows, balconies, street tree planting, power poles and street infrastructure. Gutters and down pipes should be integrated and concealed. Lighting under awnings should be provided for pedestrian safety.	The development does not front a high pedestrian street or provide an active/commercial frontage. No awnings are proposed. Front fences and gates will delineate entrance.	Yes
4T - 2 Signage responds to the context and desired streetscape character	Signage should be integrated into the building design and respond to the scale, proportion and detailing of the development. Legible and discrete way finding should be provided for larger developments. Signage is limited to being on and below awnings and a single facade sign on the primary street frontage.	No Signage is proposed.	N/A
4U Energy efficiency
4U - 1 Development incorporates passive environmental design	Adequate natural light is provided to habitable rooms (see 4A Solar and daylight access). Well located, screened outdoor areas should be provided for clothes drying	Location of balconies and open space on the northern elevation ensures quality solar access. The large private open space to apartments (balconies) ensures ample screened outdoor area for clothes drying.	Yes
4U - 2 Development incorporates passive solar design to optimise heat storage in winter and reduce heat transfer in summer	A number of the following design solutions are used: · the use of smart glass or other technologies on north and west elevations · thermal mass in the floors and walls of north facing rooms is maximised · polished concrete floors, tiles or timber rather than carpet · insulated roofs, walls and floors and seals on window and door openings · overhangs and shading devices such as awnings, blinds and screens Provision of consolidated heating and cooling infrastructure should be located in a centralised location (e.g. the basement)	Provisions provided in the design or can be retrospectively applied. Design satisfies BASIX requirements.	Yes
4U - 3 Adequate natural ventilation minimises the need for mechanical ventilation	A number of the following design solutions are used: · rooms with similar usage are grouped together · natural cross ventilation for apartments is optimised · natural ventilation is provided to all habitable rooms and as many non-habitable rooms, common areas and circulation spaces as possible	All the units are provided with satisfactory amount of openings and allowances for ventilation.	Yes
4V Water management and conservation
4V - 1 Potable water use is minimised	Water efficient fittings, appliances and wastewater reuse should be incorporated. Apartments should be individually metered. Rainwater should be collected, stored and reused on site. Drought tolerant, low water use plants should be used within landscaped areas	BASIX certificate provided. Landscaping can be managed/replanted to suit.	Yes
4V - 3 Flood management systems are integrated into site design	Detention tanks should be located under paved areas, driveways or in basement car parks. On large sites parks or open spaces are designed to provide temporary on site detention basins.	Onsite and underground stormwater detention proposed Large area of gardens and planting will maximise the use of all collected water.	Yes
4W Waste management
4W - 1 Waste storage facilities are designed to minimise impacts on the streetscape, building entry and amenity of residents	Adequately sized storage areas for rubbish bins should be located discreetly away from the front of the development or in the basement car park. Waste and recycling storage areas should be well ventilated. Circulation design allows bins to be easily manoeuvred between storage and collection points. Temporary storage should be provided for large bulk items such as mattresses. A waste management plan should be prepared	Suitable sized ground floor waste storage are proposed. The area is screened from the Drew Close frontage. Natural ventilation proposed of the area.	Yes
4W - 2 Domestic waste is minimised by providing safe and convenient source separation and recycling	All dwellings should have a waste and recycling cupboard or temporary storage area of sufficient size to hold two days worth of waste and recycling. Communal waste and recycling rooms are in convenient and accessible locations related to each vertical core. For mixed use developments, residential waste and recycling storage areas and access should be separate and secure from other uses. Alternative waste disposal methods such as composting should be provided	Bin storage areas available within dwellings.	Yes
4X Building maintenance
4X - 1 Building design detail provides protection from weathering	A number of the following design solutions are used: · roof overhangs to protect walls · hoods over windows and doors to protect openings · detailing horizontal edges with drip lines to avoid staining of surfaces · methods to eliminate or reduce planter box leaching · appropriate design and material selection for hostile locations	Design contains suitable weather protection measures.	Yes
4X - 2 Systems and access enable ease of maintenance	Window design enables cleaning from the inside of the building. Building maintenance systems should be incorporated and integrated into the design of the building form, roof and façade. Design solutions do not require external scaffolding for maintenance access. Manually operated systems such as blinds, sunshades and curtains are used in preference to mechanical systems. Centralised maintenance, services and storage should be provided for communal open space areas within the building.	Windows could be accessed via balconies/extension poles. Access to roof available for servicing and maintenance. Adequate storage and maintenance areas available.	Yes
4X - 3 Material selection reduces ongoing maintenance costs	A number of the following design solutions are used: · sensors to control artificial lighting in common circulation and spaces · natural materials that weather well and improve with time such as face brickwork · easily cleaned surfaces that are graffiti resistant · robust and durable materials and finishes are used in locations which receive heavy wear and tear, such as common circulation areas and lift interiors	Generally robust and modern materials and finishes selected. Majority of the building can be accessed for maintenance from time to time.	Yes

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

A BASIX certificate (1035024M_02) has been submitted demonstrating that the proposal will comply with the requirements of the SEPP. It is recommended that a condition be imposed to ensure that the commitments are incorporated into the development and certified at Occupation Certificate stage.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is located within a coastal environment area and coastal use area. The site is also partly mapped as coastal wetland and within the proximity area for coastal wetlands. A screen shot of the coastal wetland mapping is provided below for context:

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

In accordance with clause 10, the proposal is declared to be designated development. The application was accompanied by an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which is consistent with the issued Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs). A copy of the issued SEARs and EIS are provided as attachments to this report.

It is evident that the site is highly disturbed and does not physically contain coastal wetland or any vegetation that represents a coastal wetland vegetation community.

In accordance with clause 11, the proposal will not significantly impact on:

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

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

In accordance with clause 15, the proposed development is not likely to cause increased risk of coastal hazards on that land or other land.

In accordance with clause 16, there is no certified coastal management program that applies to the land.

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

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

The development does not trigger any of the traffic generating development thresholds of Clause 104. Referral to the NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) is not required.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

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

· Clause 2.2 - The subject site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential.

· Clause 2.3(1) and the R3 zone land use table - residential flat buildings are a permissible land use in the R1 zone.

· The following land use in the LEP is relevant to determine and characterise the proposed use:

· residential flat building means a building containing 3 or more dwellings, but does not include an attached dwelling or multi dwelling housing.

· The objectives of the R3 zone are as follows:

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

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

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 proposal will provide for additional housing needs of the community.

o The proposal will provide for an appropriate form of higher residential density to which the medium density residential zone, building height standard and floor space ratio standard is trying to achieve.

o The proposal will provide for a further housing type in the form of a residential flat building. This will complement the current mixture of two storey dwellings and other residential flat buildings in the immediate area and R3 zone.

o The proposal will not inhibit other land uses that may provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

· Clause 4.3 - This clause establishes the maximum “height of a building” (or building height) that a building may be built to on any parcel of land. The term “building height (or height of building)” is defined in the LEP to mean “the vertical distance between ground level (existing) and the highest point of the building, including plant and lift overruns, but excluding communication devices, antennae, satellite dishes, masts, flagpoles, chimneys, flues and the like”. The term “ground level (existing)” is also defined in the LEP to mean “the existing level of a site at any point”.

The subject site has a maximum building height of 14.5m identified on the height of buildings map. The maximum building height proposed is 17.4m, which represents a variation of 20%. The submitted plans identify the parts of the building that exceed the height limit. An extract of the plans showing the height variation is shown below:

The applicant has submitted a clause 4.6 variation supporting the application, which is addressed under the following clause 4.6 section of this report.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the proposal is 1.15:1. The maximum floor space ratio standard applicable to the site is 1.5:1 and the proposal complies.

· Clause 4.6 - This clause establishes a degree of flexibility for certain development standards in certain circumstances which have demonstrated that a better planning outcome will occur from that flexibility.

In this regard the proposal seeks a variation to the maximum building height standard. The maximum building height proposed is 17.4m and this is to the top of the lift overrun. Inclusion of the lift overrun in the height of a building is consistent with the definition provided for in clause 4.3. As illustrated on the plans the lift-overrun structure itself extends independently above the main roofline. This component, which is the highest part of the building represents a 20% departure from the building height standard.

As illustrated on the height plane plans the majority of the building does sit within the building height standard. Specifically, the bulk of the building sits between 12m to 13.5m in height. Although some other parts of the main building’s roofline (excluding the lift overrun) also extend above the height standard. The notable section being the southern portion of the sixth floor, which extends to 15.7m on its northern façade. This component represents an 8% departure from the building height standard.

Assistance on the approach to variation of this standard is also taken from NSW Land and Environment Court and NSW Court of Appeal decisions in:

1. Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) NSW LEC 827 (Wehbe);

2. Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council (2015) NSWLEC 1009; and

3. Al Maha Pty Ltd v Huajun Investments Pty Ltd (2018) NSWCA 245

Having regard to specific requirements of clause 4.6(3) and 4.6(4) the following assessment comments are provided:

(3) Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered a written request from the applicant that seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard by demonstrating:

(a) that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, and

(b) that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

Comments: The applicant has submitted a written request in writing seeking justification for contravention of the building height standard for the following reasons (as summarised):

· The steep slope (topography) in the southern portion of the site represents a significant site constraint in providing strict compliance with the standard.

· The proposal is consistent with the height of buildings objectives and zone objectives notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard. Compliance with the development standard in unnecessary in the circumstances of this case notwithstanding the numerical variation.

(4) Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless:

(a) the consent authority is satisfied that:

(i) the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by subclause (3)

In Wehbe ‘five methods’ have been developed to test whether a compliance with the standard is unreasonable or unnecessary:

1. The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding the non-compliance with the numerical standard and therefore compliance is unnecessary.

2. The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is not relevant to the development and therefore compliance is unnecessary.

3. The underlying object or purpose of the standard would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required and therefore compliance is unreasonable.

4. The development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s own actions in granting a consent to proposals departing from the standard and hence compliance is unreasonable and unnecessary.

5. The zoning of the particular land is unreasonable or inappropriate so that a development standard appropriate for that zoning is also unreasonable and unnecessary as it applies to the land.

The proposal relies upon the first test and it is considered that the applicant’s written request has satisfactorily demonstrated that the proposed development will achieve the objectives of the height of building development standard despite numerical non-compliance.

There are considered to be sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard on the following basis:

· The site contains some steep topography in the southern portion. The building design responds to this constraint by stepping up the site.

· The building has an appropriate built form and appearance envisaged for the locality and the objectives of both the building height standard and R3 zone are achieved.

· The portions of the roof and lift overrun that exceed the height limit are a small part of the roof and generally located where the building steps to accommodate the fall of the land.

· The additional height is located centrally to the site and would not result in any adverse amenity impacts to neighbouring properties.

· The height variation does not result in the development achieving any additional floor area compared with a compliant proposal.

On the basis of the above, it is considered that the Applicant’s clause 4.6 variation has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by clause 4.6(3).

(ii) the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out,

The consistency of the proposal with the zone objectives has been discussed above under clause 2.3. Consideration of the proposal’s consistency with the objectives of the building height standard (clause 4.3) is provided as follows:

(a) to ensure that buildings are compatible with the height, bulk and scale of the existing and desired future character of the locality,

Comments: The variation is primarily for the lift overrun and small sections of the roof line in response to the site topography. The majority of the building sits wholly beneath the 14.5m height limit and the design has been stepped in response to the topographical constraint.

There are a number of similar sized residential flat buildings in the locality to the east of the site. It is noted that the intention of the zoning and density controls is to create a higher density residential environment. The density proposed is commensurate with the site’s proximity to the Settlement city precinct, and would not create a bulk or character inconsistent with that envisaged by the applicable zoning or density controls.

The sections of the building above the height standard do not result in a significant difference in how the building will be read, nor do they produce any significant adverse impacts.

The proposed height, bulk and scale of the development is considered compatible with the existing and desired future character of the locality.

(b) to minimise visual impact, disruption of views, loss of privacy and loss of solar access to existing development,

Comments: Due to the stepping of the building in response to the topography the building will present as five storey when view from Drew Close. The visual impact of the building is minimal and considered satisfactory.

View impacts and solar access are considered later in this report under. Specifically, it is noted that any view impacts to the property at number 9 Hastings Avenue would not be a result of the building height variation. The proposed variation is unlikely to create any adverse view loss or overshadowing.

Visual privacy is maintained by minimising windows along the southern elevation and incorporation of northern orientated living areas to units.

(c) to minimise the adverse impact of development on heritage conservation areas and heritage items,

Comments: The site does not contain or adjoin and heritage conservation areas or heritage items. No adverse impacts would result.

(d) to nominate heights that will provide a transition in built form and land use intensity within the area covered by this Plan.

Comments: The proposal will provide for a building that adequately responds to the site constraints and provides for a built form and land use intensity envisaged for the area.

The development is consistent with the building height and zone objectives of the LEP 2011 and is unlikely to have any implications on State related issues or the broader public interest.

(b) the concurrence of the Secretary has been obtained.

Comments: In accordance Planning Circular PS18-003 issued by NSW Planning and Environment, dated 21 February 2018, Council can assume the Director’s concurrence for clause 4.6 variations to the height of buildings standard. In addition, the variation contravenes the numerical standard by more than 10% and needs to be determined at an Ordinary meeting of Council.

Having regard to the above consideration and comments it is recommended that the building height variation be supported.

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

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

No draft instruments apply.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: Residential Flat Development, Tourist and Visitor Accommodation and Mixed Use Development*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3.3.2.2	Satisfactory site analysis plan submitted.	Relevant information shown on submitted documentation.	Yes
3.3.2.3	Statement addressing site attributes and constraints submitted.	Relevant information shown on submitted documentation and plans.	Yes
3.3.2.4	Streetscape and front setback: · Within 20% of the average setback of the adjoining buildings. · 3m setback to all frontages if no adjoining development. · 2m setback to secondary frontages. · Max. 9m setback for tourist development to allow for swimming pool.	Front setback to Drew Close varies from 4.982m to 8.68m. This is consistent with the setback of existing buildings fronting Drew Close that are setback about 6m from the boundary.	Yes
3.3.2.5	Balconies and building extrusions can encroach up to 600mm into setback.	Balconies to not encroach into the minimum 3m setback.	N/A
	Buildings generally aligned to street boundary.	The block is oddly shaped and the building aligns to the street boundary.	Yes
	Primary openings aligned to street boundary or rear of site.	The buildings and openings are orientated north towards the street frontage.	Yes
3.3.2.6	Side setbacks comply with Figure 3.3-1: · Min. Side setback 1.5m for 75% of building depth. · Windows on side walls min. 3m from side boundary. · 3m minimum where adjacent to existing strata titled building.	Eastern side varies from 3.368m to 7.728m. Western side varies from 13.027m to 13.747m.	Yes Yes
	Side walls adjacent to existing strata-titled buildings should be articulated and modulated to respond to the existing buildings.	Does not adjoin existing strata titled building.	N/A
	Min. 6m rear setback (including sub basements)	The rear southern boundary setback vary from 1.509m, 3.29m to 12.345m.	No but having regard to the lot shape, site constraints, building design the portions of the building within the 6m setback are considered acceptable.
3.3.2.7	A party wall development may be required if site amalgamation is not possible and higher density development is envisaged by these controls.	Not required.	N/A
3.3.2.8	Party wall development can occur only with the agreement and consent of the adjoining property owner. Exposed party walls should be finished in a quality comparable to front facade finishes.	Not required.	N/A
3.3.2.9	Corner sites consolidated with adjacent land where possible.	Not a corner site.	N/A
3.3.2.9	Where consolidation not possible a minimum setback of 6m should extend to secondary street (see Fig 3.3-2 and 3.3-3).	Consolidation not proposed or required.	N/A
3.3.2.10	Where sites adjacent to open space are to be developed the edge of the open space should be defined with a public road and buildings address the open space.	The site ds not adjoin public open space areas.	N/A
3.3.2.11	Deep soil zones: · Extend the width of the site and have minimum depth of 6m. · Are contiguous across sites and within sites (see Fig 3.3-4).	variable 3m – 12.3m wide deep soil zone is available across the rear of the subject site whilst additional deep soils zones are located across the eastern and northern aspects of the proposed development.	Yes
3.3.2.12	Deep soil zones accommodate existing advanced trees, and allow for advanced tree planting.	No existing trees within the site. Appropriate landscaping treatment is proposed.	Yes
3.3.2.13	Deep soil zones integrated with stormwater management measures.	Capable of integration.	Yes
3.3.2.14	Sunlight to the principal area of ground-level private open space of adjacent properties should not be reduced to less than 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on June 22.	The impact of the proposed building on solar access is considered for the adjoining sites to the east and south. The shadow diagrams indicates that the proposed development will allow for a minimum 3 hours.	Yes
	Where existing overshadowing by buildings and fences is greater than this, sunlight should not be reduced by more than 20%.	The proposal does not add to any existing overshadowing impacts form other buildings to adjoining dwellings.	Yes
	Buildings should not reduce the sunlight available to the windows of living areas that face north in existing adjacent dwellings to less than the above specification.	The north facing windows of existing dwellings will not be impacted in terms of access to sunlight form the proposed development. Refer to shadow diagrams.	Yes
3.3.2.15	Internal clothes drying space provided (not mechanical).	Sufficient area provided for clothes drying.	Yes
	Ceiling fans provided in preference to air conditioning.	Can be installed retrospectively.	Yes
	Solar hot water systems (or equivalent technology) provided.	Energy efficiency requirements covered by BASIX.	Yes
	Photovoltaic arrays installed where practical.	Solar panels proposed on roof.	Yes
3.3.2.16	Landscape plan provided including: · 35% soft landscaping with minimum width of 3m. · Existing vegetation and proposed treatment. · Details of hard landscaping. · Location of communal recreational facilities. · Species not to obscure doors, paths, etc. · Street trees in accordance with Council’s list.	Landscaping plan provided. The landscaping is designed to be in scale with the building, improve the privacy of the residential flats, relate to the buildings form, add to the amenity of the balconies by screening excessive sun and generally softening the building. The amount of landscaping is below 35% but is generous in width <3m and especially in the south-western portion.	No. Less than 35% of the site is proposed to be landscaped. This is mainly due to the rock shelf located in the south-western portion of the site. The landscaping proposed is considered to beacceptable.
3.3.2.17	Existing vegetation to be retained and nutrient-rich water prevented from entering native gardens.	There is very limited existing vegetation on the site due to the topography.	Proposed landscaping will improve
3.3.2.18	Landscape plan to demonstrate how trees and vegetation contribute to energy efficiency and prevent winter shading on neighbouring properties.	Landscaping plan indicates select species and plantings locations to achieve shade outcomes.	Landscaping proposed is acceptable.
3.3.2.19	Street trees in accordance with Council’s list.	No street trees are proposed and there is limited opportunity along the Drew Close frontage to provide successful street tree plantings.	No but considered acceptable.
3.3.2.20	All dwellings at ground floor level have minimum 35m² of private open space, including one area 4m x 4m at maximum grade of 5% and directly accessible from living area.	No units proposed on the ground floor.	N/A
3.3.2.20	Separate private open space for any resident manager or permanent occupant of a tourist facility.	No permanent resident onsite manager proposed.	N/A
3.3.2.21	Where open space is of irregular shape, areas having a width less than 2m are excluded from calculated area.	Noted.	N/A
3.3.2.21	Dwellings not at ground level have balconies with minimum area 8m² and minimum dimension 2m.	All dwellings provided with balconies in excess of 8m2 with a minimum 2m dimension.	Yes
3.3.2.22	Fencing or landscaping defines public/communal and private open space.	Fencing, gates and mail box structure help define public and private spaces.	Yes
3.3.2.23	Solid fences should be: · Max. 1.2m high, · Setback 1m, · Suitably landscaped, · Provide 3m x 3m splay.	1.8m high fencing proposed. See below.	N/A
3.3.2.23	Where front fences higher than 1.2m: · Max. 1.8m high, · Landscaped recesses for 50% of frontage, or length of fence not more than 6m or 50% of street frontage. · Min. 25% transparent, · 3m x 3m splay for corner sites. · 900mm x 900mm splay at vehicle driveways.	Appropriate 1.8m open style picket security fencing and entry gates proposed along street frontage.	Yes
3.3.2.24	Fencing materials consistent with or complimentary to existing fencing in the street.	Proposed fencing and materials considered appropriate. Limited existing fencing along the street.	Yes
3.3.2.25	Fences constructed of chain wire, solid timber or masonry and solid street not permitted, even if consistent with existing fencing in the locality.	None proposed.	N/A
3.3.2.26	Building to be designed so that: · Busy, noisy areas face the street. · Quiet areas face the side or rear of the lot. · Bedrooms have line of site separation of at least 3m from parking areas, streets and shared driveways.	The parking is located on the ground and first floors. The units are located above to limit noise impact. Wherever possible like rooms in adjoining apartments have been located together thereby reducing the potential for reduced acoustic privacy.	Yes
3.3.2.26	Openings of adjacent dwellings separated by at least 6m.	>6m separation proposed.	Yes
3.3.2.27	Building designed so noise transmission between apartments is minimised.	Like rooms in adjoining apartments have been located together thereby reducing the potential for noise transmission.	Yes
3.3.2.27	Uses are to be coupled internally and between apartments i.e. noisy internal and noisy external spaces should be placed together. (See Figure 3.3-6).	See above.	Yes
3.3.2.28	Development complies with AS/NZS2107:2000 Acoustic – Recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors for residential development.	The residential units have been designed to comply with the noise transmission requirements of the National Construction Code.	Yes
3.3.2.29	Impact of noise from key public places to be considered.	No adverse impacts are identifiable to public open space areas.	Yes
3.3.2.30	Direct views between living room windows to be screened where: · Ground floor windows are within 9m of windows in an adjoining dwelling. · Other floors are within a 12m radius. · Living room windows are within 12m radius of the principal area of private open space of other dwellings.	Combination of screens, fencing and separation will ensure privacy is retained both to and from the development. Living rooms are positioned to facilitate views north and provide solar access and to avoid overlooking of other private open spaces.	Yes
	Direct views may be screened with either a 1.8m high fence or wall, or screening that has maximum 25% openings.	Refer to above comment. Adequate screening has been proposed to ensure privacy.	Yes
	Windows in habitable rooms screened if >1m above ground level and wall set back <3m.	No habitable rooms above ground level are setback within 3m.	Yes
	Balconies, decks, etc screened if <3m from boundary and floor area >3m² and floor level >1m above ground level.	No habitable rooms above ground level are setback within 3m.	Yes
3.3.2.31	Developments to be designed in accordance with AS 1428.	Development capable of complying. Details will be required at Construction Certificate stage.	Yes
3.3.2.32	Barrier free access to at least 20% of dwellings provided.	The proposal is capable of applying.	Yes
3.3.2.33	Developments located close to open space, recreation, entertainment and employment.	Site located close to Stuart Park and facilities to the west. Close to settlement city precinct to the north.	Yes
3.3.2.33	Where LEP permits FSR > 1:1, FSR not less than 1:1 should be achieved.	LEP permits 1.5:1. Proposed FSR 1.15:1.	Yes
3.3.2.34	Variety of types - studio, 1, 2, 3 and 3+ bedroom apartments	Development provides a mix of 2 and 3 bedroom apartments.	Yes
	Studio and 1 bedroom apartments not > 20% of total number of apartments.	No studio or 1 bedroom apartments.	N/A
	Mix of 1 and 3 bedroom apartments at ground level.	No units proposed on ground level.	N/A
3.3.2.35	Council’s Affordable Housing Strategy to be considered for residential flat buildings.	While targeted at providing a medium density outcome the internal layout of the units allows for some flexibility of use. This has been achieved through the careful placement of the different living spaces in a logical hierarchy.	Yes
3.3.2.36	Lift over-runs and plant integrated within roof structures.	The lift overrun extends above the main roof form. However, it is central to the building and will be barely visible from the public domain given the site topography.	Yes
	Outdoor recreation areas on roof tops to be landscaped and incorporate shade structures and wind screens.	No recreational roof top areas proposed.	N/A
	Outdoor roof areas oriented to the street.	No recreational roof top areas proposed.	N/A
	Roof design to generate interesting skyline.	The stepped design creates an interesting façade and roof treatment.	Yes
3.3.2.37	Facade composition should: · Have balance of horizontal and vertical elements. · Respond to environmental and energy needs. · Incorporate wind mitigation. · Reflect uses within the buildings. · Include combination of building elements.	Development provides mixture of articulation and materials to create an interesting façade with regard to the environment. The design has met the desirable criteria for building elements of the Apartment Design Guide.	Yes
3.3.2.38	Building elements, materials and colours consistent or complimentary to those existing in the street.	Proposed colours and materials considered satisfactory and suitable for the desired character.	Yes
3.3.2.39	Entrances clearly identifiable from street level.	Entry off Drew close is clearly defined.	Yes
	Entries provide clear transition between public street and shared private circulation spaces/apartments.	The entry alongside the mailboxes, fencing and gate define the public/private interface.	Yes
	Entries provide clear line of sight between one circulation space and the next.	Entry is clear.	Yes
	Entries avoid ambiguous and publicly accessible small spaces in entry areas.	Entry is clear.	Yes
	Entries sheltered and well lit.	Entry to the building is clear and capable of being well lit.	Yes
	Entries and circulation spaces sized for movement of furniture.	The design allows for movement of furniture throughout.	Yes
	Corridors minimum 2.5m wide and 3.0m high.	Internal corridors are of sufficient width.	Yes
	Corridor lengths minimised and avoid tight corners.	Corridor lengths minimised and tight corners avoided.	Yes
	Longer corridors articulated by: · Changing direction and width. · Utilising series of foyers. · Incorporating windows.	Refer above.	Yes
3.3.2.40	Minimum 1 balcony per apartment.	At least 1 balcony per apartment has been provided.	Yes
	Main balcony accessible from living area.	Balconies accessible from living areas.	Yes
	Balconies take advantage of favourable climatic conditions.	Each unit has north facing balcony providing solar access.	Yes
	Balconies and balustrades balance privacy and views.	Mixture of glass and screened balconies proposed.	Yes
3.3.2.41	Balconies include sunscreens, pergolas, shutters and operable walls.	Majority of balconies include sheltered components, sliding doors to create an indoor/outdoor living area and privacy screens.	Yes
	Balconies recessed to create shadowing to facade.	Majority of balconies are recessed or contain shade structures to create shadow elements over the façade.	Yes
	Solid balustrades discouraged.	All balconies have a glass balustrade components. A mix of solid and glass balustrades to allow for privacy.	Yes
	Air conditioning units not visible from the street.	AC units not visible form the street. Likely to be roof top plant.	Yes
3.3.2.42	Secure open air clothes drying facilities that are: · easily accessible, · screened from public domain and communal spaces, · located with high degree of solar access.	Sufficient area available on apartment balconies for clothes drying.	Yes
3.3.2.43	Mailboxes integrated into building design and sighted to ensure accessibility and security.	Mailbox area will be incorporated into the front entrance and street frontage.	Yes
3.3.2.44	Public and private space clearly defined.	Private and public space appropriately defined.	Yes
	Entrances: · oriented to public street, · provide direct and well lit access between car parks, lift lobbies and unit entrances, · optimise security by grouping clusters (max. 8) around a common lobby	The entrance is orientated to Drew Close. Entrances are clearly defined. The entry and parking areas are capable of being well lit.	Yes
	Surveillance facilitated by: · views over public space from living areas, · casual views of common internal areas, · provision of windows and balconies, · separate entries to ground level apartments.	Casual surveillance of communal open space and available from apartments.	Yes
	Concealment avoided by: · preventing dark or blind alcoves, · providing lighting in all common areas, · providing graded car parking illumination (greater at entrances).	Building design limits concealment opportunities. All communal and car parking areas are capable of being lit.	Yes
	Access to all parts of the building to be controlled.	Access to the building and throughout can be controlled via various electrical security systems and keys.	Yes
3.3.2.45	Accessible storage provided for tenants in basement car park or garages.	Storage areas provided in parking areas adjoining car spaces which will be suitably allocated to each unit.	Yes
3.3.2.45	One bike stowage space per dwelling provided.	Objectives have been satisfied with bicycle storage area available within each unit and in the parking areas.	Yes
3.3.2.46	For developments of < 6 dwellings individual waste management permitted. Designated area to be provided for storage of bins: · not visible from street, · easily accessible, · not adjoining private or communal space, windows or clothes drying areas, · on hard stand area, · close to street and a tap for washing, · maintained free of pests.	See below. More than 6 dwellings proposed.	N/A
	Communal bulk waste required where: · > 6 dwellings, or · Number of bins wouldn’t fit in street frontage, or · Topography would make street collection difficult.	Communal bin storage area identified alongside visitor parking at the site entrance. This will be collected via a private waste collection arrangement.	Yes
	Communal bulk waste facilities integrated into development and located at ground or sub-basement level. · Not visible from street, · Easily accessible, · Can be serviced by collection vehicles, · Not adjoining private or communal space, windows or clothes drying areas, · Has water and drainage facilities for cleaning, · Maintained free of pests.	Bin storage area identified alongside visitor parking at the site entrance. Adequately screened from the street with a combination of fencing and landscaping treatments.	Yes
	Evidence provided that site can be serviced by waste collection service.	Condition recommended requiring private waste collection service for the development.	Yes
3.3.2.47	Common trenching of utility services where possible.	Capable of being undertaken.	Yes
	Above ground utility infrastructure integrated with building design.	Area exists onsite to incorporate infrastructure within garden beds or the building design.	Yes
	Site and individual units numbered.	Street numbering will satisfy this provision.	Yes
	Common aerials and satellite dishes provided.	None proposed.	N/A

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline: · Casual surveillance and sightlines · Land use mix and activity generators · Definition of use and ownership · Lighting · Way finding · Predictable routes and entrapment locations	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.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Cut >1m, but generally contained within external walls of the building footprint.	Yes
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontages	No retaining walls proposed along street frontage.	N/A
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structural engineer	Suitable condition applied.	Yes
	Combination of retaining wall and front fence height	No combination of retaining wall and front fence proposed.	N/A
2.3.3.8 onwards	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 100mm diameter trunk and 3m outside dwelling footprint	No trees to be removed. The site is void of any significant vegetation.	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. Existing accesses rationalised or removed where practical	Development does not front an arterial or distributor road. Vehicle access limited to one crossover from Drew Close.	Yes
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	One crossover proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Off-street parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1: · 1 per 1 or 2 bed unit, 1.5 per 3-4 bed unit + 1 visitor per 4 units.	15 Apartments: - 3 x 2 bed units - 12 x 3 bed units 25 spaces are required. Total of 29 spaces are proposed. It is noted that a further 5 stacked spaces are proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.5	On-street parking permitted subject to justification	No on-street parking proposed.	N/A
2.5.3.7	Visitor parking to be easily accessible	Four visitor spaces are located alongside the vehicular entry driveway at ground level.	Yes
	Stacked parking permitted for medium density where visitor parking and 5.5m length achieved	Noted	N/A
	Parking in accordance with AS 2890.1	The parking layout was amended during assessment to reflect compliance with the standard.	Yes
2.5.3.9	Bicycle and motorcycle parking considered and designed generally in accordance with the principles of AS2890.3	Space exists in the parking areas to accommodate bicycle and motor cycle parking.	Yes
2.5.3.10	Parking concessions possible for conservation of heritage items	Not proposed.	N/A
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Refer to main body of report.	Yes
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Landscaping of visitor parking area considered acceptable. Ground floor and first floor parking will be underneath the building.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Driveway will be sealed. Conditions applied.	Yes
2.5.3.15	Driveway grades for first 6m of ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade (Note AS/NZS 2890.1 permits steeper grades)	The site is relatively flat at the entry point from Drew Close. Driveway grades can comply.	Yes
2.5.3.16	Transitional grades min. 2m length	Compliance possible.	Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Stormwater from hardstand and visitor parking area capable of being managed.	Yes
	Vehicle washing facilities – grassed area etc available.	Area exists at ground level for car washing.	Yes
	No direct discharge to K&G or swale drain	Adequate stormwater arrangements proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.18	Car parking areas drained to swales, bio retention, rain gardens and infiltration areas	Adequate stormwater arrangements proposed.	Yes

DCP 2013 - Part 4.2 Area Based Provisions (Westport Neighbourhood)
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
4.2.4.1	New streets, laneways, park edges and pedestrian linkages as per figure 4.2-3	None are identified in this location and none are proposed.	N/A
4.2.4.2	Minimum lot frontage of 24m at the boundary for residential flat development.	The lot is odd shape and it only has 20m of frontage to Drew Close. It opens up beyond the boundary and the building has been designed to reflect the shape of the lot.	No but considered acceptable. The proposal is consistent with bulk and scale envisaged for the area.
	Sites with multiple frontages may provide a reduced frontage to 18m.	The site does not have multiple frontages.	N/A
	Where a minimum street frontage cannot be achieved, the development potential is reduced.	Noted.	Noted.
4.2.4.3	Buildings do not exceed the maximum height controls under the LEP.	Proposal incorporates a building height variation. Refer to comments under clause 4.3 and 4.6 of the LEP heading within this report.	No but considered acceptable
	Setbacks and building alignments are to be consistent with those shown in Figure 4.2-4.	No controls applicable to this site.	N/A
4.2.4.4	Setbacks and building alignments are to be consistent with those shown in Figure 4.2-5 and Figure 4.2-6.	No setbacks are identified for the site.	N/A
	Where no setback is shown, buildings are to be setback 3 metres from the street.	The building is setback over 3m from the street.	Yes
4.2.4.5	Buildings are setback: - 3 metres from side boundaries, and - 6 metres from the rear boundary.	Eastern side varies from 3.368m to 7.728m. Western side varies from 13.027m to 13.747m. The rear southern boundary setback vary from 1.509m, 3.29m to 12.345m.	Yes No but having regard to the lot shape, site constraints, building design the portions of the building within the 6m setback are considered acceptable.
	Party wall development is not appropriate in the precinct.	No party wall development proposed.	N/A
4.2.4.7	Side and rear walls are to be articulated to achieve privacy separation with balconies and windows of adjacent buildings. Between 5 and 8 storeys/up to 25 metres - 9 metres for habitable rooms and balconies, 4.5 metres for non-habitable rooms.	Adequate articulation is incorporate into the building design overall.	Yes
4.2.4.8	Communal open space is to be at least 25 per cent of the site area.	The communal open space on the ground floor exceeds 25% of the site area.	Acceptable as the design meets the objectives of this clause.
	Where it is demonstrated that 25 per cent is not achievable due to site size constraints, provide a minimum 5 square metres per dwelling unit as consolidated communal open space.	Meets above.	N/A
	A minimum 2 hours sunlight is provided to the principle portion of communal open space between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter.	More than 2 hours provided to communal open space areas.	Yes
4.2.4.9	Deep soil of 15% of the site to be provided with minimum 6m dimension.	The competing and overriding provisions of the ADG requires 7% of site area to be deep soil zones with a minimum width of 3m. A deep soil zone area of approximately 120m² complies with a minimum 3m dimension and equal to 7% of the site area. Additional plantings are also proposed along the eastern portion of the site. It should be noted that there are no existing trees within the site.	Yes
4.2.4.10	Any fences or retaining walls over 1.2 metres above the boundary level should be 50 per cent transparent above the 1.2 metre datum.	Appropriate 1.8m open style picket security fencing and entry gates proposed along street frontage.	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 considered to be consistent with other residential development in the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area.

There are no significant adverse privacy impacts.

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

View sharing

During public exhibition a concern was expressed surrounding view loss by the residents of 9 Hastings Avenue.

The notion of view sharing is invoked when a property enjoys existing views and a proposed development would share that view by taking some of it away for its own enjoyment. (Taking it all away cannot be called view sharing, although it may, in some circumstances, be quite reasonable.)

Using the principles of NSW Land and Environment Court caselaw - Tenacity Consulting v Waringah 2004 NSW LEC 140, the following comments are provided in regards to the view impacts using the 4 step process to establish whether the view sharing is acceptable.

Step 1

Assessment of views to be affected. Water views are valued more highly than land views. Iconic views (e.g. of the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge or North Head) are valued more highly than views without icons. Whole views are valued more highly than partial views, e.g. a water view in which the interface between land and water is visible is more valuable than one in which it is obscured.

Comments: The residence at 9 Hastings Avenue enjoys elevated views of the settlement city precinct, Hastings River and hinterland. These views are wide ranging and are enjoyed toward the north, northeast, northwest and west. The view to the northwest across the development site is to the hinterland. The hinterland view includes treetops on the foreground and mountains in the background. A hinterland view is also enjoyed to the west behind the site. There are no iconic views enjoyed from the dwelling impacted. The view to the north and north east to the Hastings River and its interface with the land is considered to be a valuable view.

A screenshot looking north down Hastings Avenue from google street view provides some context of the view:

Step 2

Consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example, the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries. In addition, whether the view is enjoyed from a standing or sitting position may also be relevant. Sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views. The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic.

Comments: The views are enjoyed from elevated north facing living and outdoor areas across a side boundary. The views are enjoyed from both standing and sitting positions from various parts of both residences.

Step 3

Assess the extent of the impact. This should be done for the whole of the property, not just for the view that is affected. The impact on views from living areas is more significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued because people spend so much time in them). The impact may be assessed quantitatively, but in many cases this can be meaningless. For example, it is unhelpful to say that the view loss is 20% if it includes one of the sails of the Opera House. It is usually more useful to assess the view loss qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating.

Comments: The extent of the impact upon the views enjoyed from 9 Hastings Avenue is considered to be minor for the following reasons:

· The most valuable views to Settlement City and Hastings River land interface are not impacted.

· The hinterland view to the west behind the site is not impacted.

· The hinterland view to the northwest across the site is only a small portion of the wide-ranging views enjoyed from the property.

Step 4

Assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of non-compliance with one or more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours. If the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.

Comments: While a building height variation is sought it is primarily for the lift overrun and small portions of the roof which are central to the building. The majority of the building falls within the prescribed 14.5m building height. It is important to note that the southernmost part of the proposed building is sitting under the 14.5m building height control and it is this part of the building that is impacting on views across the site. Hence, a fully compliant building height will result in the same view impact.

Roads

The site has road frontage to Drew Close, being a sealed public road under the care and control of Council. Drew Close is a Local road with a formation width of approximately 7m within a 20m road reserve. The eastern extents of Drew close have SA upright kerb and gutter, whilst the frontage and the western extents of Drew Close are not formalised and only consist of gravel shoulders.

Traffic and Transport

The site is zoned for medium density residential use and the proposed development is consistent with this zoning. Assuming approximately 7 vehicle trips per day per unit, this would generate an additional 105 vehicle trips per day in the area. This additional 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 site is proposed though one access driveway to onto Drew Close. All accesses shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards, and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

Due to the type and size of development, additional works are required to include which have been included in the relevant conditions of consent:

· A suitable end of road treatment for a public road to allow vehicles to turn around in accordance with AUSPEC. This may be a cul-de-sac head, however noting the limitations with the road reserve width alternative designs with signposted no stopping /parking may be more appropriate.

· Kerb and gutter along the western extents of Drew Close.

· Concrete footpath paving from the development site down Drew Close to connect to the existing footpath along Warlters Street.

Suitable conditions of consent have been recommended.

Parking and Manoeuvring

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

Water Supply

Council records indicate that the development site is not currently metered for water.

Each individual unit shall be individually metered with the meters either located at an easily accessible location unless the water supply to the whole site is metered with a single larger meter with private meters at each unit. There is also the option for utilising remotely read electronic meters. Details are to be provided on the hydraulic plans.

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.

Council’s existing 100mm asbestos cement water main which enters the site on the eastern side of Drew Close shall be removed, with the new termination point of the main being the existing duckfoot hydrant on the property frontage of 3 Drew Close.

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

Sewer Supply

Council records indicate that the development site is not currently connected to sewer. The proposed development shall drain all sewage to a new or existing sewer manhole approved by the Water & Sewer Planning Manager. The hydraulic designer is to confer with Council sewer section prior to submitting sewer design plans.

The hydraulic designer is to confer with Council sewer section prior to submitting sewer design plans.

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

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards the Drew Close frontage and is currently (un)serviced via a formal piped connection, with the nearest point of connection being a downstream stormwater kerb inlet located approximately 40m to the north of the site in Warlters St.

The legal point of discharge for the proposed development is defined as a direct connection to Council’s downstream stormwater pit referred to above, which will necessitate the extension of the piped drainage system to the site frontage.

The site is traversed by two existing easements for drainage, located along the eastern and western site boundaries respectively. Neither of these existing easements are currently piped.

Stormwater from the proposed development is planned to be disposed via an extension of the piped drainage system in Warlters Street to the frontage of the site, which is consistent with the above requirements. Furthermore, the stormwater drainage plan submitted incorporates OSD facilities which have been conceptually designed to achieve compliance with the requirements of Council’s AUSPEC specifications. The application has demonstrated that OSD facilities can be readily incorporated into the development.

However, the stormwater plans submitted only include the piping of one of the existing easements for drainage that traverse the site. IN this regard, Council pre-lodgement advice to the applicant was to construct suitably sized stormwater infrastructure within both of the existing easements for drainage traversing the site in conjunction with the proposed development. This advice was on the basis that the proposed development, including retaining walls, hard surfaces and other structures would make it extremely difficult for a future adjoining and upstream landowner to construct such infrastructure following the development of the site. A specific condition of consent is proposed to require that the detailed plans submitted with the s68 application prior to the issue of a CC include the piping of both easements for drainage traversing the site.

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

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

No heritage items are known to exist on the site. Standard condition recommended advising of process should unexpected relics be uncovered during earthworks.

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 not have any significant 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 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

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

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone. The application was supported by a bushfire risk assessment report which makes a number recommendations including bushfire attack level (BAL) construction standards. During assessment the vegetation classification and management regime of adjoining land was queried and having regard to the nature of the development a referral undertaken to NSW Rural Fire Service to confirm expected BAL construction standards.

The NSW Rural Fire Service provided advice and confirmed expected BAL construction standard a number of recommended conditions which form part of the recommend consent conditions.

Safety, security and crime prevention

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area. 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 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. 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 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 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 was received following public exhibition of the application. Copies of the written submission have been provided separately to members of the DAP.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Increased traffic to the area will lead to increased congestion especially opposite a school.	Refer to comment under transport and traffic heading of this report.
The buildings height is out of character with the buildings around it. Existing residential buildings are significantly lower in comparison.	Refer to comments under clauses 4.3 and 4.6 of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011.
The height of the building will impact on views to the north enjoyed from 9 Hastings Avenue.	Refer to view sharing assessment comments within the report.
The height of the building will result in significant shadowing of adjoining properties.	The shadow diagrams supporting the application indicate the extent of overshadowing impact from the proposed development. The impacts are well within adopted standards for minimum solar access.
The proposal would reduce the resale value and development potential of 9 Hastings Avenue.	The impact to property value is not a relevant consideration under planning legislation.
A review of the height and scale of the building is requested with a view in providing a smaller scale development.	The proposed height and scale of the proposal is considered to be appropriate for the site having regard to the adopted planning controls.

(e) The Public Interest

The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls as justified 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 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.

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 ⇩. DA2019 - 676.1 Recommended Conditions

2 ⇩. DA2019 - 676.1 Attachment 2 - Plans

3 ⇩. DA2019 - 676.1 Attachment 3 - Contributions Quote

4 ⇩. DA2019 - 676.1 Clause 4.6 Building Height Variation

5 ⇩. DA2019 - 676.1 SEPP 65 Design Verification Statement

6 ⇩. DA2019 - 676.1 Apartment Design Guide Assessment

7 ⇩. DA2019 - 676.1 Bushfire Assessment Report

8 ⇩. DA2019 - 676.1 Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARS)

9 ⇩. DA2019 - 676.1 SEARs.

10 ⇩. DA2019 - 676.1 Stormwater Plan

11 ⇩. DA2019 - 676.1 NSW RFS Bushfire comment and suggested conditions

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 08/04/2020

Item: 06

Subject: DA2019 - 867.1- Multi Dwelling Housing and Strata Title Subdivision at Lot 110 DP788310, No.18 Montague Street, Port Macquarie

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

Applicant: Johnson Family Homes

Owner: SJ & K Johnson

Estimated Cost: $650,000

Parcel no: 13885

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2019 - 867 for a multi dwelling housing and strata title subdivision at Lot 110, DP 788310, No. 18 Montague Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a multi dwelling housing and strata title subdivision proposal 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.

The proposal has been amended during the assessment of the application with the following changes made:

· Unit 3 courtyard 5% maximum design grade clarified on plans;

· Driveway long sections provided;

· Privacy screen added to Unit 3 upper deck.

This report recommends that the development application be approved subject to the attached conditions (Attachment 1).

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 783m2.

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:

· Construction of three (3) x attached dwellings on a vacant lot (multi dwelling-housing); and

· Strata title subdivision.

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

Application Chronology

· 25 November 2019 - DA lodged.

· 18 December 2019 to 10 January 2020 - Neighbour notification of proposal.

· 24 January 2020 - Additional information requested from Applicant - driveway grades, private open space and privacy impacts associated with Unit 3 and submission for consideration.

· 25 March 2020 - Amended plans and additional information received.

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 (Koala Habitat Protection) 2019

Clause 15 - A development application made, but not finally determined, before the commencement of this Policy in relation to land to which this Policy applies must be determined as if this Policy had not commenced. The application was made and not finally determined prior to the commencement of this policy. The application is therefore required to be assessed under the relevant provisions of State Environmental Policy No 44 - Koala Habitat Protection. See assessment comments below.

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 (Coastal Management) 2018

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

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

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

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Clause 100 and 101 of the SEPP refers to certain development on a classified road. In this case, there is no work proposed on the classified road.

The development does not trigger any of the traffic generating development thresholds of Clause 104. Referral to the NSW Roads and Maritime Services is not required.

Based on the above, the proposed development addresses relevant clauses in the SEPP and will not result in adverse conflicts in terms of traffic or noise.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

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

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

· Clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table - The proposed development for a multi dwelling-housing 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; and

o The proposal will contribute to the variety of suitable housing types and densities in the locality.

· Clause 4.1 - The minimum subdivision lot size standard does not apply to the proposed strata title subdivision.

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the building above ground level is 8.3m, which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.649:1.0, which complies with the maximum 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

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

(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

*DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
3.2.2.1	Ancillary development: • 4.8m max. height • Single storey • 60m² max. area • 100m² for lots >900m2 • 24 degree max. roof pitch • Not located in front setback	The rainwater tanks are located within the courtyard areas for Units 1 & 2, and in the rear yard of Unit 3.	Yes/No* Unit 1 and 2 water tank only
3.2.2.2	Articulation zone: • Min. 3m front setback • An entry feature or portico • A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah • A window box treatment • A bay window or similar feature • An awning or other feature over a window • A sun shading feature	No elements within the articulation zone front setback to Kestrel Close and Montague Street.	N/A
3.2.2.2	Front setback: • Primary road front setback min. 4.5m to Montague Street: north-east or within 20% of adjoining dwelling if on corner lot • Secondary road front setback min. 3.0m to Montague Street: north and north-west and Kestrel Close Note: A corner lot means a lot that has 2 contiguous boundaries with a road or roads (other than a lane) that intersect at an angle of 135 degrees or less (whether or not the lot has any other boundaries with a road).	Primary front setback min. 4.05m to 6.0m setback to Montague Street: north-east. Secondary road front setback min. 3.096m to Montague Street: north. Secondary road front setback min. 2.82m to Montague Street: north-west. Secondary road front setback min. 3.0m to Kestrel Close.	Yes/No*
3.2.2.3	Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade. Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided	Garage door setback requirements are complied with.	Yes
	6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building	Width of garage door requirements are complied with.	Yes
	Driveway crossover 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 lot.	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	Ground floor = 1.05m minimum (Unit 3). First floor = 1.05m minimum (Unit 3 balcony). This is acceptable and will not result in any adverse overshadowing or privacy impacts to neighbouring properties. All elevations have compliant articulation.	Yes
3.2.2.6	35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area, which has 5% max. grade	All Units exceed the minimum requirement of 35m2 of private open space areas. However, it is noted that units 1 and 2 do not contain 35m2 in a single area.	Yes/No*
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	The proposed front courtyard fence design is considered to meet the fencing objectives of DCP 2013. No adverse impacts will occur.	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	No 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. No additional privacy screens are recommended.	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 or identified. Adequate casual surveillance available.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls associated with the front courtyards of units 1 and 2. Retaining wall 1.4m associated with and cut for vehicle turning areas and fill for private open space courtyard for Unit 3 is less than 1m change either side of wall.	Yes
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage	1.2m high retaining wall along north-west frontage to Montague Street for part length of boundary.	No*
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer	Condition recommended to require engineering certification of existing retaining walls to retained for new construction.	Yes
	Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway	The front courtyard walls and combined fence are not erected up to the front boundary however there is a small section of combined retaining wall and fencing fronting Montague Street: north-west which, in combination exceed the 1.8m standard fence height.	No*
2.3.3.8	Removal of hollow bearing trees	No trees proposed to be removed	N/A
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100m diameter trunk at 1m above ground level and 3m from external wall of existing dwelling)	No trees proposed to be removed	N/A
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads	No new accesses permitted from arterial or distributor roads.	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Driveway crossings minimal in number and width including maximising street parking opportunities.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. Multi dwelling 1 space per 1 & 2 bedroom occupancies 1.5 spaces per 3+ bedroom occupancies 0.25 spaces per occupancy for visitor parking.	Proposal involves 3 x 3/4 bedroom dwellings. The minimum parking requirements are therefore 3 x 1.5 spaces + 3 x 0.25 visitor spaces = 5 spaces for dwellings + 1 visitor space required. Each of the 3 dwellings have a double garage = 6 parking spaces. Unit 3 has a visitor parking area available within the driveway. Units 1 and 2 do not have a nominated separate visitor parking space.	Yes/No*
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Contributions apply.	Yes
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Suitable concept landscaping proposed around driveway/parking locations.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Sealed driveway areas internally within the site proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16	Driveway grades first 6m or ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade with transitions of 2m length	Driveway grades capable of satisfying Council standard driveway crossover requirements. Condition recommended for section 138 Roads Act permit.	Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction. Refer to concept stormwater management plan submitted attached to this report and assessment comments later in report.	Yes

*Variations:

Rainwater tanks in front setback

The proposal seeks to vary the standard Development Provision relating to recommended location of water tanks. Specifically, the following areas of the proposal are unable to meet the standard:

· The water tanks for Unit 1 and 2 are located in the front courtyards/front setbacks. Unit 3 complies with its’ water tank located to the rear of Unit 3.

The relevant objectives are:

· To facilitate and sustain certain development as ancillary development.

Note: Ancillary development is development that is ancillary or subordinate to the core purpose of the development being carried out

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

· The site is a corner lot with multiple street frontages.

· The alignments of the two (2) tanks for units 1 and 2 are perpendicular to the street frontage.

· The tanks are located in the front courtyards behind 1.8m high fences and will largely be not visible from the street.

Front setback

The proposal seeks to vary the standard Development Provision relating to recommended primary and secondary front setbacks. Specifically, the following areas of the proposal are unable to meet the standard:

· A small length of the corner of Unit 1 is within the standard primary front setback of min. 4.5m to Montague Street: north-east. The encroachment is 0.45m.

· A small length of Unit 1 is within the standard secondary road front setback of min. 3.0m to Montague Street: north-west.

· The sections of building in question are highlighted as shown below:

The relevant objectives are:

· Front setbacks should support an attractive streetscape.

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

· The site is a corner lot with multiple secondary street frontages.

· The variation to the secondary frontage to Montague Street: north-west is very minor and relates to the curved property boundary, which does not follow the road pavement alignment.

· The variation to the primary frontage to Montague Street: north-east is very minor and the secondary frontage to the north to Montague Street is compliant at this point is 3.573m, which is 0.573m greater than the secondary frontage minimum standard.

· The majority of the primary street frontage is significantly greater than the minimum 4.5m.

· The proposal will result in an attractive streetscape.

Units 1 and 2 Private Open Space

The proposal seeks to vary the standard Development Provision relating to recommended 35m² private open space for Unit 1 and 2 to be in one area.

The relevant objectives are:

· To encourage useable private open space for dwellings to meet the occupants requirements for privacy, safety, access, outdoor activities and landscaping.

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

· The total private outdoor living area for Unit 1 is 58.9m², and for Unit 2 the area is 62.7m2, however the largest single area is 25m² and 26.6m² respectively.

· Units 1 and 2 have their largest private open space areas located within the front, north facing courtyards. These courtyards both have direct linkage to indoor living areas. The front courtyards could be extended to the property boundary and may then achieve the total area; however, a better streetscape is achieved by keeping the fences set in.

· Units 1 and 2 both have large alfresco areas at the rear of the property. These alfresco areas are also large areas, but less than the 35m², being 25m² and 24.8m² respectively. These alfresco areas will provide an alternate outdoor living area, and these areas have good separation to the dwelling on the adjoining property, as well as the adjoining unit. Having more than one outdoor living area allows the future residents to choose between shade or sun areas depending on the time of day / season.

· Units 1 and 2 provide useable space for the future residents, and satisfy the relevant objectives of the DCP.

Section of Unit 1 front courtyard wall and combined fence height

The proposal seeks to vary the standard Development Provision relating to recommended 1.8m height restriction for front retaining wall heights with front fence combined. The area of non-compliance is associated with a section of fence and wall for Unit 1 courtyard fronting Montague Street: north-west.

The relevant objectives are:

· To ensure retaining walls are functional, safe and positively contribute to the development

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

· The variation is minor with the retaining wall under part of the front fence being 0.7m. Moving further east along the Montague Street the fence becomes compliant.

· The courtyard walls and front fencing are set back from the front property boundaries and landscaping is proposed.

· Having regard to the topography of the site, this is considered an acceptable solution to ensuring privacy and separation / security for the private living areas of the future residents.

Off-street visitor parking for Units 1 and 2

The relevant objectives are:

· Provision of sufficient parking spaces for different landuses.

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

· Each of the three (3) units have a double garage thus providing six (6) off street parking spaces. This is above the minimum calculated minimum 5 (rounded up from 4.5) parking space requirement.

· Unit 3 has a setback for the garage, which provides for visitor parking in front of the garages.

· Unit 1 and 2 from a parking provision perspective can be considered as a dual occupancy with only two (2) dwellings sharing one driveway and not requiring specific assigned visitor parking. 4 parking spaces are provided for Units 1 and 2.

· Being a corner site, the site has a large street frontage that provides for l on street parking opportunities.

(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

N/A

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

• For a new development to be visually compatible with its context, it should contain, or at least respond to, the essential elements that make up the character of the surrounding environment. The most important contributor to character identified for the subject locality is the relationship of built form to surrounding space created by building height, setbacks, landscaping. There are a number of detached dwellings in the locality with a 1 to 2 storey scale, varied side setback, varied setbacks to Koala Street and limited landscaping for each dwelling particularly fronting Koala Street. The roof style of nearby dwellings are primarily hipped and gable roof styles of construction.

• There are examples of multiple dwellings and differing architectural styles in the surrounding area are presented below. Points c. and d. are back-to-back developments:

· a) 23 Ashdown Drive

· b) 40 + 40a Ashdown Drive

· c) 21a + 21b Montague St

· d) 5a + 5b The Pinnacle

• The proposal will result in a change in character with a different architectural form including skillion style roof forms within the immediate locality however, this is considered to be an acceptable physical and visual impact change given the proposal satisfactorily addresses the planning controls applying to the site. The proposal generally complies with the minimum setback requirements (minor variations only), is within the maximum building height limit and the maximum floor space ratio.

• There are no adverse impacts on existing view sharing particularly given the compliance with the building height control applying to the site.

• There are no identifiable adverse privacy impacts to adjoining and adjacent properties. A privacy screen has been added to Unit 3 upper level deck.

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

Roads

The site is located in the south quadrant of the intersection with Montague Street, Ashdown Street and Kestrel Close. Adjacent to the site, all streets are local sealed public road under the care and control of Council with SA kerb and gutter.

Montague Street has a 9m road formation within a 20m Road Reserve; Ashdown Drive is a 7m road formation within a 19m Road Reserve; and Kestrel Close is a local road with a 11m road formation within a 20.115m Road Reserve.

Traffic and Transport

The site is currently approved for a single residential dwelling use permitted to generate seven (7) daily trips. This development proposes three (3) units expected to generate up to 21 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 site is proposed though two (2) individual driveway, one (1) driveway on Montague Street, which is shared, with Units 1 and 2 and one on Kestrel Close that serves Unit 3. Access shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards, and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

Parking and Manoeuvring

A total of six (6) parking spaces have been provided on-site within garages with additional parking provided available within the driveway for unit 3. Parking and driveway widths on site are capable of complying with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

Due to the type of development, car park circulation is required to enable vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward manner for Units 1 and 2. Site plans show adequate area is available and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site has a sealed water service from the 100 PVC water main on the same side of Kestrel Close. A separate metered water service is required for each unit. Engineering plans are to be provided to the Water Supply Section.

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

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is connected to Sewer via junction to the existing sewer main in the eastern corner of the lot. This can be adopted for the development. Engineering plans are to be provided to the Sewer Section.

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

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards the south-western corner of the site fronting the Montague Street frontage.

The Applicant has submitted a concept Stormwater Management Plan prepared by David R Johnson (refer to Attachment 2) which includes details to addressed likely proposed arrangements for conveyance of drainage to a private piped network and underground detention tank. The overflow from the detention tank is then proposed to connect to the kerb with an outlet to Montague Street, which is the legal point of discharge for the proposed

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.

The submitted engineering concept plan is considered satisfactory in regards to capability of management of stormwater subject to appropriate consent conditions as recommended.

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 not have any significant 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 BASIX.

Noise and vibration

Bushfire

The site is not 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. 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 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.

(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 separately to members of the DAP.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Objection to any breaches of planning instruments.	The variations proposed to Development Control Plan 2013 only have merit to support when having regard to the performance based objectives that support the development provisions. Specific variations are addressed earlier in this report and are considered to be appropriately justified.
The size and construction style of the 3 storey multi dwellings will be visually dominating and inconsistent with the nature of surrounding dwellings.	The building meets the objectives of R1 General Residential zone under the Port Macquarie-Hastings local Environmental Plan 2011. The buildings have a well designed street presentation using a variation of building materials and finishes. The proposal is sufficiently compatible with the character of the existing surrounding locality having regard to the proposal’s compliance with the objectives of the planning controls applying to the site. Council’s primary planning controls are the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 and Development Control Plan 2013. The proposal is not considered to be at odds with the planning requirements of these planning controls, which permit this form of residential development.
The proposal is significantly outside of the building lines of the surrounding properties. The designation of Montague Street as a secondary road (in addition to the breach of the setback requirements as identified in the application) will result in the building extending well beyond the building line of the existing properties and will create an unsightly streetscape.	The proposal complies with the desired streetscape front setback controls of Development Control Plan 2013 with the exception of two minor variations. The site is a corner lot with multiple street frontages.
The proposed 3 level design building will create privacy issues to 15 Montague Street.	Having regard to the privacy standards in the DCP as considered earlier in this report the proposal will not result in adverse privacy impacts to adjoining properties. 15 Montague Street is on the opposite side of Montague Street and the dwelling and its associated pool on this property is greater than 25 metres from the site. The privacy standards of Development Control Plan 2013 focus on a 12m radius for privacy impacts.
The proposal may cause visual obstructions for traffic on the intersection of Montague Street and Ashdown Drive which can get busy particularly at school drop off and pick up times.	It is noted that the site has an existing splayed property frontage along Montague Street and Kestrel Close street frontages. The courtyard fencing on the corner of Montague Street and Kestrel Close is setback 0.9 metres from the front boundary. The proposed building including fencing will not result in any obstruction of key sightlines for the directions of travelling public along Montague Street and Kestrel Close.
A less dense housing alternative would be suited to the site.	The proposal is not considered to be an overdevelopment of the site based upon the assessment provided earlier in this report.

(e) The Public Interest

The proposed development satisfies relevant planning controls (as justified) 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.

· 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 ⇩. DA2019 - 867.1 Recommended Conditions

2 ⇩. DA2019 - 867.1 Plans.

3 ⇩. DA2019 - 867.1 Contributions Estimate

Member	11/12/19	22/01/20	12/02/20	26/02/20	11/03/20	25/03/20
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) - Development Assessment Planner	P	P	P	P	P	P

22/01/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
12/02/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
26/02/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
11/03/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
25/03/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
8/04/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
6/05/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
27/05/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
10/06/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
24/06/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
8/07/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
22/07/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
12/08/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
26/08/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
9/09/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
30/09/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
14/10/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
28/10/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
11/11/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
25/11/2020	Function Room	2:00pm
16/12/2020	Function Room	2:00pm

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.