Agenda of Development Assessment Panel - Wednesday, 10 June 2020

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 10/06/2020

Item: 05

Subject: DA2020 - 118.1 Dwelling and Secondary Dwelling - Lot 12 DP 285493, No 17 Birramal Drive, Dunbogan

Report Author: Building Surveyor, Ross Frazier

Applicant: K F Haynes

Owner: K F Haynes

Estimated Cost: $292,000

Parcel no: 31838

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2020 - 118.1 for a dwelling and secondary dwelling at Lot 12 DP 285493, No. 17 Birramal Drive, Dunbogan be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

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

Following exhibition of the application, 2 submissions were received. A copy of the submissions has been provided separately to the members of the Development Assessment Panel.

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 approximately 1439m².

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:

· Removal of several trees from the site in accordance with approved ecology report and construction of a new 2 storey, 2 bedroom dwelling with attached single storey, single bedroom secondary dwelling (Granny Flat).

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

Application Chronology

· 21 February 2020 - Application lodged.

· 9 March 2020 - Request for additional information - Arborist report/ecological report.

· 19 March 2020 - Council arborist site visit at owner request.

· 25 March 2020 - Request for information in response to submission concerns.

· 23 March 2020 - Receipt of ecology report.

· 24 March 2020 - Amended plans received to address off-street carparking.

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

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

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) Any Environmental Planning Instrument

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

There is no Koala Plan of Management on the site. Additionally, the site is less than 1ha in area. Some trees are indicated for removal and an ecology report has been prepared. The report has been referred to Councils Natural Resource team for assessment. Councils Natural resource team approved the report for the removal of the identified trees and has prepared conditions of consent as 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 located within a coastal environment area.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In accordance with Clause 15 the proposal is not likely to cause increased risk of coastal hazards on that land or other land.

The bulk, scale and size of the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding coastal and built environment. The site is part of an existing residential subdivision located on a dune style beachfront with natural bush surrounding. The land zoned for residential purposes.

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

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

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Clause 45 - Development in proximity to electricity infrastructure – The development is clear of infrastructure.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

Clause 20 - The site is in a prescribed zone and secondary dwellings are permissible with consent pursuant to the SEPP.

Clause 22(2) - The development would not result in there being a dwelling other than the primary dwelling and the secondary dwelling.

Clause 22(3) - The proposed secondary dwelling would not have a floor area exceeding 60m² and the combined floor area of the primary and secondary dwelling would not exceed the maximum permitted under the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 (see comments below under LEP).

Clause 22(4) - It is noted that consent cannot be refused on the grounds of site area or parking.

Clause 24 - It is noted that the consent authority must not consent to a development application that would result in any subdivision of a lot on which development for the purposes of a secondary dwelling has been carried out.

The requirements of this SEPP are therefore satisfied.

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 dwelling and attached secondary dwelling is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

· To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

· Clause 2.3(2) - The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives as it is a permissible landuse and consistent with the established residential locality.

· Clause 2.7 - No demolition proposed. New construction.

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is approx. 7.728m which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

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

· Clause 4.6 - Exceptions to development standards. Nil proposed.

· Clause 5.4 - Controls relating to B&Bs, home business, industrial retail, farm stay, kiosks, neighbourhood shops, secondary dwellings etc. Max floor of secondary dwelling 60m²_. The submitted plans indicate the secondary dwelling has a floor area of 59.6m². Appears to comply

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

· Clause 7.1 - The site is mapped as potentially containing class 5 acid sulfate soils. The proposed development includes a pole style dwelling however no excavation extending more than 2m below the natural surface level or within other ASS zones is proposed, therefore no adverse impacts are expected to occur in respect of acid sulphate soils found on site.

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

· Clause 7.5 - Koala Habitat - Applies to land that is shown as “Koala Habitat area” on the Koala Habitat Map. A search of council mapping indicates there is no current Koala Plan of Management applicable to the site.

· Clause 7.6 - Applies to land that is shown as Coastal Erosion Risk on the Coastal Erosion Map (Lake Cathie/Town Beach). In this regard the site is clear of the zone.

· Clause 7.9 - Development subject to acoustic controls. N/A

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

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

No draft instruments apply to the site.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

Note: The site is located within a private gated estate under a Community Association Plan - Timbarra Estate. This estate enjoys a private road network and private water and sewer utilities. The road setback provisions of the DCP are considered to be more relevant to a conventional torrens title subdivision with public road frontage. Notwithstanding this, an assessment has been provided noting the provisions of the DCP, the DCP objectives and the context of the estate.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013:

*DCP 2013: Dwellings, Dual occupancies, Dwelling houses, Multi dwelling houses & Ancillary development*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
3.2.2.1	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	Water tank is appropriately located	Yes
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	Due to the setback proposed for the dwelling and the design layout, there is no construction proposed within an articulation zone.	N/A
3.2.2.2	Front setback (Residential not R5 zone): · Min. 6.0m classified road · Min. 4.5m local road or within 20% of adjoining dwelling if on corner lot · Min. 3.0m secondary road · Min. 2.0m Laneway	1m setback from private road. Due to the existing and extensive slope of the site, the setback of the proposed dwelling has been maintained as close as practical to the front boundary	DCP Variation
3.2.2.3	Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade. Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided	Proposed main garage is forward of the main dwelling and setback 1m from the private road. As the dwelling is a pole style construction additional carparking is proposed beneath the dwelling at the side.	DCP Variation
	6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building	Width of garage door/s are compliant with the maximum width requirements	Yes
	Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width	Main driveway crossing width is proposed at 5.4m plus additional minor crossing to the side of the dwelling proposed. The subdivision is within a private gated estate and the roads are a private road. Council is not the consent authority for driveway crossovers in these circumstances.	DCP Variation
3.2.2.4	4m min. rear setback. Variation subject to site analysis and provision of private open space	The rear setback is 21m.	Yes
3.2.2.5	Side setbacks: · Ground floor = min. 0.9m · First floors & above = min. 3m setback or where it can be demonstrated that overshadowing not adverse = 0.9m min. · Building wall set in and out every 12m by 0.5m	The minimum side setback requirements are complied with. 7.6m to the north and 5.6m to the south.	Yes
3.2.2.6	35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade The lot is steeply sloping. Private open space is available within areas adjacent to the dwelling however direct connection is only available through the front entrance as there is no other entrance to the dwelling. Both dwellings enjoy access to a rear balcony. Although the floor areas of these balconies do not meet the dimensions required they do offer direct access from the dwelling and will enjoy the same benefits of such an area.	The primary dwelling contains 35m² open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m space. The secondary dwelling is provided a lesser but useable open space area. However, given the nature of the development, the occupants are likely to share the open space area. The dwelling and secondary dwelling have a total of 3 bedrooms only and therefore the use of the required open space areas will be minimal	Yes
3.2.2.10	Privacy: · Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed · Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m · Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m	No privacy screens are recommended. The development will not compromise privacy in the area due to a combination of lack of windows on side/rear boundaries, having high sill windows that face side/rear boundaries, limiting living areas that face adjoining living areas/open space, compliant separation and use of screening/fencing. Balconies greater than 3m to side boundaries. Recommend privacy screen to Southern end of deck on main dwelling. (Condition recommended)	Yes Yes

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline	No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Cut and fill <1.0m change 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Yes
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage	None proposed	N/A
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer	No retaining wall likely	Yes
	Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway	No retaining wall front fence combination proposed.	N/A
2.3.3.8	Removal of hollow bearing trees	Trees indicated on site plan to be removed. An ecological report has been prepared for the site. Council arborist has visited the site and found no indications of concern to prevent the removal of the trees.	Yes
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)	Trees indicated on site plan to be removed. An ecological report has been prepared for the site. Council arborist has visited the site and found no indications of concern to prevent the removal of the trees.	Yes
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads	No new access proposed to arterial or distributor road.	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Driveway crossing from private roads are not subject to Sec 138 approval	N/A
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. 1 space per single dwelling (behind building line). Parking for secondary dwelling optional.	1 or capacity for more than 1 parking space behind the building line has been provided for.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 7.11 contributions	Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Development is for a secondary dwelling only with standard driveway. No specific landscaping requirements recommended.	N/A
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Sealed driveways indicated	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 to be from private internal road and not subject to Sec 138 approval.	N/A
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Development is for a primary and attached secondary dwelling. Driveway stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.	Yes

The proposal seeks to vary the following Development Provisions.

3.2.2.2 (b) - the primary front setback should be 4.5m

Objective: Front setbacks should support an attractive streetscape.

3.2.2.3 (c) - A garage should be at least 5.5m from a front boundary where the dwelling has a setback of less than 4.5m.

(f) - Driveway crossovers are a maximum of 1/3^rd of the site frontage and no greater than 5m in width.

Objective: To minimise the impact of garages and driveways on the streetscape, on street parking and amenity.

To minimise the visual dominance of garages in the streetscape.

Discussion / Justification

The site is located within a private gated community estate. The road network and services / utilities are part of a private network. The site has been previously excavated and benched to establish a dwelling construction site, with the remainder of the lot having a steep grade.

Due to the grade of the site and to allow economical access and construction, it is required to locate the dwelling close to the front boundary.

Additionally, to provide access to the attached garage, the garage is to be located proud of the front wall of the dwelling.

The dwelling will be pole style construction which will allow space beneath the main floor of the dwelling. This will be utilised for additional off-street carparking / storage via a secondary sealed driveway to the side of the dwelling with another 2 spaces designated within this area and room for storage of vehicle accessories.

The DCP provides driveway width to be a maximum of 5m. it is proposed to increase the driveway width to 5.4m to allow for ease of access to the attached garage. Due to the relatively narrow streets, additional driveway width will assist with entering and exiting the garage. The road network is a private road and not subject to PMHC Sec 138 application.

3.2.2.6 (a) All dwellings should have a minimum area of private open space of 35m2 in one area, with

(b) a minimum dimension of 4m x 4m; and

(c) a maximum grade of 5% for minimum 4m x 4m of the total open space requirement; and

(d) direct accessibility from a ground floor living area.

Objective: To encourage useable private open space for dwellings to meet the occupant’s requirements for privacy, safety, access, outdoor activities and landscaping.

Discussion / Justification

The lot has an area of some 1438m² which will cater for the required open space for the dwelling and secondary dwelling. Due to the slope of the site the design of the dwellings provides for a single front door only. There is no rear access from the dwellings to the external area.

The dwelling and secondary dwelling are provided with attached balconies which will allow the occupants to access open space directly from the dwellings. Although these areas do not have the dimensions required by the DCP they will provide adequate amenity for the occupants. The designated drying areas are located adjacent to the dwellings on the site and will provide the occupants with the required open space dimensions. These external areas will be accessed from the front door of the dwellings by direct pathways.

Having regard for the development provisions and relevant objectives, it is considered that the site constraints require alternate design solutions outside the guidelines of the DCP and unique design considerations for development.

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

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

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

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

iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations

New South Wales Coastal Policy

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

this policy

Demolition of buildings AS 2601 - Clause 92

No demolition proposed.

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

· The proposal will not have any significant adverse impacts on existing adjoining properties and satisfactorily addresses the public domain.

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

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

· The proposal does not have significant adverse lighting impacts.

· There are no significant adverse privacy impacts.

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

Access, Traffic and Transport

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

Water Supply Connection

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

Sewer Connection

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

Stormwater

Service available – details required with S.68 application.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

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

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

Air and microclimate

The construction and/or operations of the proposed development will 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 require removal/clearing of native vegetation. An ecology report has been prepared and referred onto Council Natural Resource team for assessment. This assessment has confirmed that Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 is satisfied. Additionally, Council’s arborist staff have attended the site and there were no matters of concern raised which would prevent the trees indicated being removed.

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

The construction 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.

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

The Applicant has submitted a bushfire report prepared by a Certified Consultant.

An assessment of bushfire risk having regard to section 4.3.5 of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2006 including vegetation classification and slope concludes that a Bushfire Attack Level 29 shall be required.

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

Safety, security and crime prevention

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. Adequate provisions have been made for off-street carparking which will assist in reducing any impact from vehicles on the street frontage including impacting such services as garbage collection. No adverse impacts are 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 of bushfire/flooding have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

Two (2) written submissions were received following public exhibition of the application. A copy of the written submissions has been provided separately to members of the DAP.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response

Provision of adequate off-street carparking. It is considered that the off-street carparking provided will not cater for the proposed development and could hinder the movement of service vehicles within the development.	The proposed dwelling and attached secondary dwelling contains a maximum of 3 bedrooms. Councils DCP Table 2.5-1 requires 1 car parking space per dwelling thus requiring a total of 2 spaces for this development. The proposed development includes an attached double garage and additional carparking spaces at the side of the dwelling serviced by a dedicated sealed driveway. A total of 4 off-street spaces have been provided for the development. Additional space beneath the proposed dwelling will also be available for storage of trailers and the like. It is considered that adequate off-street car parking has been provided. Further it is noted that the By-laws of the community development provides inter alia that individual owners restrict parking boats/ trailers on the community parcel except on their own lot or other specifically designated place.
Bushfire assessment. It is considered that a BAL rating of BAL29 is not an acceptable finding.	A bushfire assessment (BAL certificate) has been prepared by a qualified BPAD accredited consultant. The BAL level has been indicated to be BAL 29. This is consistent with other assessments within the locality. Advice was sought from the consultant regarding the classification of the vegetation on the site and the consultant advised that in her opinion the classification is correct. In viewing Table A2.1 of Appendix 2 of the Planning for Bushfire Protection - 2006 document, there is little difference in the fuel loads from Tall Coastal Heath - 25 F(r)/F(t) t/ha and that of a Dry Sclerophyll Forest - 20/25 F(r)/F(t) t/ha. It is considered that a rating of BAL 29 is acceptable.
Reduced setback of the proposed dwelling not allowing off-street carparking.	The dwelling has been designed to cater for the existing batter of the land. To allow for economical construction and reduce the need for extensive clearing of the existing vegetation the dwelling has been located close to the front carriageway. To offset the in-front-of-garage parking normally achieved by a 5.5m standard setback the design incorporates additional parking at the side of the dwelling serviced by a sealed driveway. Timbarra Estate has no set building line requirements as it is a private estate. Generally the setback distance for each lot is individual to cater for the varying topography of the individual lots.

(e) The Public Interest

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

Development contributions will not be required under S64/S7.11 as the development is for a single dwelling and attached secondary dwelling. The secondary dwelling is under the minimum floor area requiring contributions and the lot is an existing lot.

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 to be 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. Attachment 1

Attachments

1 ⇩. DA2020 - 118.1 Recommended Conditions

2 ⇩. DA2020 - 118.1 Plans

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 10/06/2020

Item: 06

Subject: DA2020 - 120.1 Dwelling-house and Two(2) Lot Strata Subdivision at Lot 15 DP 1228922, Willow Dene Avenue Beechwood

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Steven Ford

Applicant: P R Auld

Owner: Holly May Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: $334,000

Parcel no: 67318

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2020 - 120.1 for a Dwelling-House and Two (2) Lot Strata Subdivision at Lot 15, DP 1228922, Willow Dene Avenue, Beechwood, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a dwelling-house and two (2) Lot Strata Subdivision at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Following exhibition of the application, one submission was received. A copy of the submission has been provided to the members of the DAP.

The proposal has been amended during the assessment of the application. Changes have been made to the driveway for the dwelling to enable vehicles to enter and leave the site in a forward direction.

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 1,117m².

The site is zoned RU5 - Village 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:

· Proposed dwelling on proposed Lot 2.

· One into two lot strata subdivision, both lots achieve the minimum lot size. Proposed Lots are 554m² and 562m².

· An indicative future dwelling envelope on proposed Lot 1.

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

Application Chronology

· 24 February 2020 - Application Received

· 5 March 2020 - Additional information received

· 16 March to 30 March 2020 - Public Notification

· 20 March 2020 - Revised plans and shadow diagrams received

· 24 April 2020 - RFS determination 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 5 - This SEPP applies to the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Government Area.

Clause 10 - The site is not identified on the Koala Development Application Map and the land has an area less than 1 hectare including adjoining land in the same ownership. The application has also demonstrated that no habitat will be removed or modified 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 / coastal environment area.

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

A BASIX certificate (number 959517S) 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.

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 RU5 Village.

· Clause 2.3(1) and the RU5 zone landuse table - The proposed dwelling and strata subdivision is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the RU5 zone are as follows:

o To provide for a range of land uses, services and facilities that are associated with a rural village

o To permit development that is appropriate in scale and type with the characteristics of a rural village

o To minimise conflict between land uses within the zone and land uses within adjoining zones

· 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 subdivision will allow for a variety of future housing types.

· Clause 4.1 - Whilst the proposal is a strata subdivision, the lot sizes within the proposed subdivision range from 554m² to 562m². All proposed lots comply with the minimum lot sizes identified in the Lot Size Map relating to the site.

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 8.35 m. There is no maximum standard height limit applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.52:1.0 for proposed lot 2. There is no maximum floor space ratio limit applying to the site.

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

No draft instruments apply to the site.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: 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	Water tank is appropriately located to the side of the dwelling	Yes
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. The future dwelling on proposed Lot 1 is capable of complying.	N/A
3.2.2.2	Front setback (Residential not R5 zone): · Min. 6.0m classified road · Min. 4.5m local road or within 20% of adjoining dwelling if on corner lot · Min. 3.0m secondary road · Min. 2.0m Laneway	Front building line setback requirements are complied with. Lot 1 - future dwelling is capable of complying Lot 2 - is characterised as a battle-axe lot.	Yes
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	Min. 1.22 to 8.27m rear setback for proposed Lot 2.	No*
3.2.2.5	Side setbacks: · Ground floor = min. 0.9m · First floors & above = min. 3m setback or where it can be demonstrated that overshadowing not adverse = 0.9m min. · Building wall set in and out every 12m by 0.5m	The minimum side setback requirements are complied with. Shadow diagrams have been provided demonstrating that the minimum side setback on 1.95m from the southern side boundary for the first floor will not adversely impact the solar access to future development on the adjoining land. The wall articulation softens the impact of the reduced side setbacks and satisfies the objectives of the development provision.	Yes
3.2.2.6	35m² min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade	Each occupancy contains sufficient 35m² area to utilise as open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m area. Lot 2 has approximately 180m² of useable area	Yes
3.2.2.10	Privacy: · Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed · Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m · Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m	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. A privacy screen is proposed along the side of the north-eastern first floor deck. No other 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. Adequate casual surveillance available.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Cut and fill <1.0m change 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Yes
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage	None proposed	N/A
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer	No retaining wall likely >1m	N/A
	Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway	No retaining wall front fence combination proposed.	N/A
2.3.3.8	Removal of hollow bearing trees	No trees proposed to be removed	N/A
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100m diameter trunk at 1m above ground level and 3m from external wall of existing dwelling)	No trees proposed to be removed	N/A
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads	No new access proposed to arterial or distributor road.	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Driveway crossing is minimal in width including maximising street parking. Lot 1 - capable of complying as it has approximately a 31m frontage to the road. Lot 2 - driveway is minimal in width and will be a battle-axe with a 3.6m crossover and a 5m wide access handle.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. Dwelling/dual occupancies 1 space per dwelling/occupancy (behind building line). Multi dwelling 1 space per 1 & 2 bedroom occupancies 1.5 spaces per 3+ bedroom occupancies 0.25 spaces per occupancy for visitor parking.	Lot 1 is capable of complying and Lot 2 has a proposed double garage. No visitor parking is required.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 7.11 contributions	Contributions apply - refer to ET calc and NOP.	Yes
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Suitable landscaping is capable of being proposed around driveway/parking locations.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Sealed driveway areas 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.	Yes

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to 3.2.2.4 - 4m minimum rear setback. The proposal is seeking approval for a minimum rear setback of 1.22m at the nearest point and varied to 8.27m (perpendicular to the eastern rear boundary).

The relevant objectives are:

· To allow adequate natural light and ventilation between dwellings/buildings and to private open space areas.

· To provide useable yard areas and open space.

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

· It is acknowledged that the site is situated on the corner of Willow Dene Avenue and Colwell Lane, but due to the shape of the lot, there is a rear boundary.

· The rear eastern boundary is at an irregular angle.

· The rear north-east rear corner of the dwelling has a setback of 1.22m and the south west rear corner is 8.27m to an open verandah, which softens the impact of the north-east corner variation.

· Shadow diagrams have demonstrated that there would be no adverse overshadowing due to the variation on the adjoining developments and/or future developments.

· Although the proposed private open space has not been positioned to achieve optimum solar access for the development, there is approximately 180m² of private open space within the rear and side yard.

· The adjoining lots to the north and south-east, are currently vacant and do not have any approved developments or have a residential development being considered by Council. The shadow diagrams indicate that the future development on the adjoining properties will not be impacted.

· The existing dwelling-house on No.736 Beechwood Road is positioned >12m from the subject proposed dwelling and is no parallel to the rear eastern boundary. The building line of the property adjoining the rear boundary is approximately 32m from the encroachment on a slight elevation. Providing the separation and there are no identifiable adverse impacts due the variation.

· The side setbacks comply and are greater than 3m on the southern side setback for a large proportion of the building footprint.

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

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

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

(v) 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 will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties or the public domain.

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

· There are no adverse impacts on existing view sharing.

· There are no 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.

· Proposed Lot 1 is of a sufficient size and design to satisfactorily accommodate for a future single dwelling.

Access, Traffic and Transport

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

Water Supply Connection

Each proposed dwelling/lot will need to be separately metered for water, meters may be either located at the road frontage or internally with a master meter at the boundary. All design & works shall be in accordance with Council’s adopted AUSPEC Specifications.

Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application. A standard condition has been recommended in this regard.

Sewer Connection

The proposed development shall drain all sewage to the existing sewer junction unless otherwise agreed by PMHC’s Water & Sewer Planning Manager. All design & works shall be in accordance with Council’s adopted AUSPEC Specifications.

Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application. A standard condition has been recommended in this regard.

Stormwater

Service available – details required with S.68 application. Drainage easement exists at the rear of the property. A standard condition has been recommended in this regard.

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, is part of a recent approved subdivision and considered to be disturbed land.

Other land resources

The site is within an established and developing village 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

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 Applicant has submitted a bushfire report prepared by a Certified Consultant.

Bushfire Safety Authority (BFSA) has been issued by the NSW Rural Fire Service subject only to a condition to manage a satisfactory Asset Protection Zone within the site. An appropriate condition is recommended to require compliance with the BFSA.

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

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 of bushfire risk have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

One written submission was received following public exhibition of the application. A copy of the written submission has been provided separately to members of the DAP.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Impact on solar access the proposed dwellings will have to adjoining properties.	Shadow diagrams have demonstrated that there are no adverse overshadowing impacts due to the side setback variation, as previously discussed, to the existing and future adjoining developments.
The over-bearing nature of the two storey high roofed dwellings proposed.	The proposed dwelling is 8.35m at the highest point. This achieves the objectives of clause 4.3 of the Port Macquarie Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, ensuring the proposed building is compatible with the height, bulk and scale of existing and future character of the locality. The building is considered to have good articulation noting its orientation and building materials, which softens any perceived bulk and scale. The adjoining lots to the north and south-east, are currently vacant and do not have any approved developments. The shadow diagrams indicate that the future development on the adjoining properties will not be impacted. There are no adverse bulk and scale issues identifiable to refuse this application.
Inconsistencies on the proposed Plans and Statement of Environmental Effects	Amended plans have been provided during the assessment to resolve the errors and provide additional plans to demonstrate how the proposal complies with the Port Macquarie Hastings Development Control Plan 2013.

(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.

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 Attachment 1 of this report.

Attachments

1 ⇩. DA2020 - 120.1 Recommended Conditions

2 ⇩. DA2020 - 120.1 Plans

3 ⇩. DA2020 - 120.1 Contributions Estimate

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 10/06/2020

Item: 07

Subject: DA2020 - 65.1 Staged Multi Dwelling Housing including Clause 4.6 Variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 and Community Title Subdivision at Lot 2 DP 1188545, Pacific Drive, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Benjamin Roberts

Applicant: Land Dynamics Australia

Owner: Transit Hill Estate Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: $6,270,000

Parcel no: 63335

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2020 - 65.1 for Staged Multi Dwelling Housing including a Clause 4.6 Variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Buildings) of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 and Community Title Subdivision at Lot 2, DP 1188545, Pacific Drive, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for staged multi dwelling housing including a clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.3 (height of buildings) of Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 and community title subdivision at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Following exhibition of the application, two (2) submissions were received. A copy of the submissions has been provided separately to the DAP members.

Amendments have been made to the proposal during assessment which primarily include Lot 5 dwelling and Lot 9 dwelling driveways.

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The subject land is described as Lot 2 DP 1188545, Livingstone Road, Port Macquarie. However, the site primarily fronts Pacific Drive and has an area of 7.688 hectares. The site is located on the southern aspect of what’s commonly known as ‘Transit Hill’ and slopes away significantly from north to south.

The site is vacant land (i.e. contains no dwelling or building structures). The north western portion of the site is heavily vegetated and the south eastern portion is partly cleared. These areas of the site are zoned E2 Environmental Conservation and R1 General Residential, respectively, in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 as shown in the following zoning plan:

The site is predominantly surrounded by residential dwelling houses to the south, east and north which are typically two storey in nature having regard to the slope.

The site adjoins Council road reservation (unconstructed) to the west and combination of Crown and Council owned land to the north containing a water supply reservoir and telecommunication infrastructure (i.e. towers).

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

Background and Development History

On 19 December 2018 a deferred commencement consent (via DA2017/1049) was granted by Council for a staged residential community title subdivision comprising 35 lots which included earthworks and vegetation removal. The deferred commencement conditions were satisfied and development consent issued on 3 September 2019.

Vegetation removal and earthworks have commenced on the site.

The approved subdivision layout and staging under DA2017/1049 is provided below:

The approved staging plan is provided as follows:

The approved concept landscaping plan is provided as follows:

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Construction of nineteen (19) dwellings

· Community Title subdivision and associated infrastructure

· Staging

The applicant has advised during the assessment of the application that all civil works under this application and DA2017/1049 are to be completed prior to the release of the linen plan/subdivision certificate for the community title subdivision across this section of the site.

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

Application Chronology

· 4 February 2020 - Application lodged.

· 12 February 2020 - Referral to NSW Rural Fire Service.

· 14 to 27 February 2020 - Public exhibition via neighbour notification.

· 21 February 2020 - Additional information request.

· 30 March 2020 - Additional information response with revised SOEE and plans.

· 14 April 2020 - Bushfire Safety Authority received from NSW Rural Fire Service.

· 4 May 2020 - Additional information request.

· 19 May 2020 - Additional information response with revised plans.

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 5 - This SEPP applies to the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Government Area.

Clause 10 - The site is identified on the Koala Development Application Map and the land has an area greater than 1 hectare including adjoining land in the same ownership.

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

With reference to clauses 6 and 7, the subject land is greater than 1 hectare (including any adjoining land under same ownership) and therefore the provisions of SEPP must be considered.

There is no Koala Plan of Management on the site and no tree removal proposed. Therefore, no further investigations are required.

It is noted that DA2017/1049 for the subdivision was supported by a Koala Habitat assessment which concluded that the site did not qualify as potential Koala habitat.

State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 62 – Sustainable Aquaculture

Given the nature and location of the proposed development there will be no adverse impacts on any existing aquaculture industries.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 – Advertising and Signage

The proposal does not incorporate any signage.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Consistent with clause 102 and taking into consideration the guideline titled “Development near rail corridors and busy roads – Interim Guideline 2008” the daily traffic volumes along Pacific Drive are not in the vicinity of 40,000 average daily vehicles, rather approximately 7,000 based on Council traffic data counts. Having regard to traffic volumes, approximate setback to kerb from Pacific Drive and the 1.8m high timber fence approved along the rear of the lots, the standard LAeq levels are expected to be met for residential accommodation and no adverse impacts are anticipated by road noise or vibration.

Pacific Drive is not a classified road and the proposal is not a traffic generating development identified in schedule 3 via clause 104 of this policy. Accordingly, the application was not referred to Roads and Maritime Services. Refer roads, transport and traffic heading later within this report for traffic impacts.

State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011

The proposed development does not have a capital investment value of more than $30 million and is therefore not recognised regional development under this policy.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

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

· Clause 2.2 - The site of the proposed development is zoned R1 General Residential. Multi dwelling housing is permissible with consent in the R1 zone.

· Clause 2.3(2) - 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 specifically:

o the proposal is a permissible landuse;

o the proposal will provide for housing needs of the community;

· Clause 2.6 - Consistent with clause 2.6, land to which the LEP applies may be subdivided with development consent.

· Clause 4.1 - Does not apply as the proposal is for community title subdivision.

· 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 8.5m identified on the height of buildings map. The maximum building height proposed (dwelling 15) is 9.2m, which represents a variation of 9%. Six (6) dwellings are proposed that would exceed the height limit and they are as follows:

- Dwelling 2 at 8.8m, representing a 3.5% variation

- Dwelling 3 at 8.9m representing a 4.7% variation

- Dwelling 4 at 8.9m, representing a 4.7% variation

- Dwelling 7 at 9.079m representing a 6.8% variation

- Dwelling 8 at 8.55m representing a 0.5% variation

- Dwelling 15 at 9.2m representing a 9% variation

The submitted plans identify the parts of the buildings that exceed the height limit. 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 0.39:1 (residential zoned land in eastern portion only). The maximum floor space ratio standard applicable to the site is 0.65:1 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.

· As illustrated on the plans the bulk of the dwellings exceeding the height limit sit within the building height standard. Specifically, its portions of the roof that protrude above the height plane.

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 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 a variation to the development standard on the following basis:

· The site contains some steep topography. The building designs respond to this constraint by stepping up the sites.

· The buildings have an appropriate built form and appearance envisaged for the locality and the objectives of both the building height standard and R1 zone are achieved.

· The portions of the roofs 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 building heights 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.

· The only dwellings with height variations fronting Pacific Drive are Lot 2, 3 and 4. The southern sections of these dwellings are under the building height limit and setback greater than the standard minimum 4.5m setback to Pacific Drive. The Lot 5 and 6 dwellings fronting Pacific Drive comply with the 8.5m height limit.

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 variations are primarily for small portions of roofing in response to the site topography. The majority of the buildings and their bulk sit beneath the 8.5m height limit. The two-storey design is consistent with that of dwellings in the immediate locality.

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

Comments: The visual impact of the buildings is minimal and considered satisfactory. There are no adverse view or solar access impacts.

Visual privacy is maintained by provision of landscape screen plantings along the eastern boundaries of dwellings 6 to 10.

(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 buildings that adequately respond to the site constraints and provide built forms 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.

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

Comments: In accordance Planning Circular PS20-002 issued by NSW Planning and Environment, dated 5 May 2020, Council can assume the Director’s concurrence for clause 4.6 variations to the height of buildings standard. The proposed variations contravene the numerical standard by less than 10% and therefore may be determined under delegation and does not need to be determined at an Ordinary meeting of Council.

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

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

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

(a) The supply of water

Comments: A preliminary services plan supports the application which includes provision of water connections to each lot and dwelling. Council’s water supply section are satisfied that adequate arrangements will be made for the supply of water expected to be generated from the development.

Specific consent conditions have been recommended requiring final water service sizing to be determined by a hydraulic consultant consistent with the requirements of Australian Standard 3500: Plumbing and Drainage with details to be provided as part of the subdivision works certificate application and section 68 application.

(b) The supply of electricity

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

Comments: A preliminary services plan supports the application which includes provision of sewer to each lot and dwelling. Council’s sewer supply section are satisfied that adequate capacity is available and arrangements will be made for connection and disposal of sewage expected to be generated from the development. The internal sewerage network shall be privately owned and outlined within a Community Management Statement. The development will be required to discharge all sewage to a single point of connection to Council’s sewerage system. Multiple connection points may be permitted subject to the approval of the Water and Sewer Planning Manager. Specifically consent conditions have been recommended requiring sewerage reticulation details to be provided as part of the subdivision works certificate application and section 68 application.

(d) Stormwater drainage or on-site conservation

Comments: A preliminary services plan supports the application which includes provision of stormwater connections to each lot and dwelling. Council’s development and stormwater engineers are satisfied that adequate arrangements will be made for stormwater collection and disposal.

(e) Suitable road access

Comments: Suitable road access is capable of being provided directly from Pacific Drive.

Satisfactory arrangements are available for the provision of essential services.

(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

The proposal is for community title subdivision and while the provisions of this plan are targeted at typical Torrens title subdivisions it is appropriate that consideration be given to the provisions to ensure the purpose and intent of the plan is achieved in the development.

*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	No ancillary development located forward of the building line.	Yes
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	Dwellings 5 and 6 have elements within the articulation zone to Pacific Drive closer than 3m.	No*
3.2.2.2	Front setback (Residential not R5 zone): • Min. 6.0m classified road • Min. 4.5m local road or within 20% of adjoining dwelling if on corner lot • Min. 3.0m secondary road • Min. 2.0m Laneway	Front building line setback to Pacific Drive less than 4.5m for dwellings 4, 5 and 6.	No*
3.2.2.3	Garage 5.5m min. and 1m behind front façade. Garage door recessed behind building line or eaves/overhangs provided	All garages and parking areas directly connect to the proposed internal private road. To the private road garage doors of dwellings 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 closer than 5.5m. The garages of dwellings 1, 2, 3 and 4 are not >1m behind the building line. Garage doors are recessed.	No* No* Yes
	6m max. width of garage door/s and 50% max. width of building	All garages and parking areas directly connect to the proposed internal private road. Width of garage doors are 6m or less. The width of the garage doors are 50% of less of the building width.	Yes Yes
	Driveway crossover 1/3 max. of site frontage and max. 5.0m width	All garages and parking areas directly connect to the proposed internal private road. 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 rear boundary is considered to be the northern boundary adjoining the properties along Orr Street. Greater than 4m is provided to the proposed dwellings. The internal rear setback to the community title boundary is less than 4m for dwellings 16, 17 and 20 to the proposed private fire trail and common property.	Yes No*
3.2.2.5	Side setbacks: • Ground floor = min. 0.9m • First floors & above = min. 3m setback or where it can be demonstrated that overshadowing not adverse = 0.9m min. • Building wall set in and out every 12m by 0.5m	The boundary adjoining the existing dwellings to the east is considered the eastern side boundary. Side setbacks to the eastern and western side boundary comply. The internal side setbacks of dwellings within the community title lots vary and some are proposed with a zero lot line. The wall articulation satisfies the objectives of the development provision.	Yes No* Yes
3.2.2.6	35m2 min. private open space area including a useable 4x4m min. area which has 5% max. grade	Each occupancy contains greater than 35m² open space. Some dwellings do not contain a directly accessible 4m x 4m dimensioned 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	No front fences proposed.	N/A
3.2.2.8	Front fences and walls to have complimentary materials to context No chain wire, solid timber, masonry or solid steel front fences	No front fences proposed.	N/A
3.2.2.10	Privacy: • Direct views between living areas of adjacent dwellings screened when within 9m radius of any part of window of adjacent dwelling and within 12m of private open space areas of adjacent dwellings. ie. 1.8m fence or privacy screening which has 25% max. openings and is permanently fixed • Privacy screen required if floor level > 1m height, window side/rear setback (other than bedroom) is less than 3m and sill height less than 1.5m • Privacy screens provided to balconies/verandahs etc which have <3m side/rear setback and floor level height >1m	The development will not compromise privacy in the area due to a combination of having high sill windows that face side boundaries, limiting living areas that face adjoining living areas/open space, compliant separation and use of screening/fencing.	Yes

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline	No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Cut and fill proposed >1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	No*
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage	None proposed	N/A
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer	Condition recommended to require engineering certification	Yes
	Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway	No combination proposed.	N/A
2.3.3.8	Removal of hollow bearing trees	No trees proposed to be removed.	N/A
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100m diameter trunk at 1m above ground level and 3m from external wall of existing dwelling)	No trees proposed to be removed.	N/A
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads	No new access proposed to arterial or distributor road.	N/A
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Driveway crossings are minimal in width including maximising street parking.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1. Multi dwelling 1.5 spaces per 3+ bedroom occupancies 0.25 spaces per occupancy for visitor parking.	The proposal would result in 19 dwellings comprising 3 or more bedrooms. Therefore, a total of 34 spaces is required. Each dwelling comprises a double garage with additional stacked parking available in each driveway for visitors i.e. 57 spaces proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Contributions apply - refer to ET calc and NOP.	Yes
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Suitable landscaping proposed around driveway/parking locations.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Sealed driveway areas 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.	Yes

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision 3.2.2.2 relating to dwelling incorporating an articulation zone to a street frontage of no less than 3m. Proposed dwellings 4, 5 and 6 incorporate elements within 3m.

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:

· Lot 5 is oddly shaped and the design and orientation of the proposed dwelling has responded to this lot shape. The setback to Pacific Drive boundary for dwelling 5 is variable with two sections being closest at 2.722m and 1.925m respectively.

· Lot 6 is angled and the setback to the Pacific Drive boundary for dwelling 6 is variable with two sections being closest at 2.018m and 1.526m which extends out to 2.503m.

· No boundary fencing is proposed under this application but it’s assumed that 1.8m fencing will follow as exempt development along the Pacific Drive frontage.

· Landscaping and screen plantings are approved under DA2017/1049 and it has been recommended via consent conditions that it be undertaken as part of this development to soften the streetscape appearance from Pacific Drive. A screen shot from the approved landscape concept plan is provided below for context:

· The distance to the edge of the Pacific Drive kerb is approximately 10m in this area which provides for appropriate visual buffer and accommodation of landscaping that will support an improved streetscape appearance from that which typical exists along this road frontage and immediately opposite the site.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to 3.2.2.2 relating to a minimum 4.5m setback to the primary road frontage. Pacific Drive is considered to be the primary road frontage. Dwellings 4, 5 and 6 propose a reduced setback being a minimum 4.102m, 1.925m and 1.526m respectively.

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:

· It is unique in that a conventional Torrens subdivision would typically identify this boundary as being the rear. Similar to existing lots along Pacific Drive a rear 1.8m boundary fence presents to the frontage. No boundary fencing is proposed under this application but it’s assumed that 1.8m fencing will follow as exempt development along the boundary of these lots and dwellings.

· Dwelling 5 has been designed to respond to the odd lot shape and the open space and living areas orientated north for better solar access which is considered to be a better outcome and is what a normal reduced rear setback encourages within this plan.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to 3.2.2.3 relating to garages being 1m behind the building line. The following variations have been identified:

· Dwellings 1, 2, 3, 4 garage is 600mm behind the building line.

· Dwelling 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 portions of garages closer than 5.5m.

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:

· Dwellings 1, 2, 3 and 4 still incorporate an entry porch feature forward of the garage and first floor extension over the garage which take away from any garage dominance.

· The portions of the garages within 5.5m for dwellings 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 is primarily a result of the lot shape angle at the frontage. The garage setbacks extend beyond 5.5m as the lot angle is followed. There will be sufficient length in the driveway to accommodate off-street parking.

· The internal road network is proposed as private under community title and the portions of the garages closer than 5.5m and those with the garage only 600mm behind the building line will not be visible from the public domain so will not impact upon its streetscape appearance.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to 3.2.2.4 relating to the rear boundary setback of 4m. Specifically the internal rear setback to the community title boundary is less than 4m for dwellings 16, 17 and 20 to the north.

The relevant objectives are:

· To allow adequate natural light and ventilation between dwellings/buildings and to private open space areas.

· To provide useable yard areas and open space.

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

· For dwelling 16 it is only a portion of building that is setback 1.56m from the internal community title boundary. The main alfresco area and open space area has been position in the north western part of the lot and is setback over 4m from that part of the lot boundary.

· The design of dwelling 16 and positioning of the private open space provides for usable yard space and adequate natural light and ventilation.

· Only a small portion of the wall to dwelling 17 is setback 3.781m. The setback extends out to 5.2m given the angle of the rear boundary. The minor encroachment still provides adequate light and ventilation to the private open space area and useable yard area.

· The rear setback of 2.923m for dwelling 20 still provides for adequate natural light and ventilation to the open space area given the north orientation. Useable yard area is limited noting the extent of cut and rock retaining proposed however it does provide the 4x4 area with usable yard area in the front setback of the dwelling.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to 3.2.2.5 relating to side boundary setbacks. Specifically, the internal side setbacks to the community title boundaries (assumed that subdivision will come first) is less than 900mm for ground floor and 3m for first floor for some dwellings. Specifically, the following variations are identified:

· Dwelling 2 zero lot line to eastern boundary. First floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 3 zero lot line to western boundary. First floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 4 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 6 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 7 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 8 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 9 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 10 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 11 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 12 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 13 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 14 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 15 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 16 ground floor 0.218m and first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 17 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 18 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 19 first floors within 3m.

· Dwelling 20 first floors within 3m.

The relevant objectives are:

· To reduce overbearing and perceptions of building bulk on adjoining properties and to maintain privacy.

· To provide for visual and acoustic privacy between dwellings.

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

· The proposal is for a community title arrangement with private internal road network and not typical of a standard Torrens title subdivision and layout that would otherwise provide separation between dwellings.

· The reduced setback is primarily a result of the topography of the site. Specifically, the split levels proposed which appear as two storey and above are a direct result of stepping up the sites.

· The bulk and scale impacts to adjoining properties outside of the development proposal is considered minimal.

· The design of the dwellings and location of primary open space areas accompanied with window treatments maintains sufficient visual and acoustic privacy between proposed dwellings and adjacent primary open space areas.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision 3.2.2.6 requiring a minimum dimensioned 4m x 4m area that is directly accessible from a ground floor living area. Specifically, the following has been identified:

· Dwelling 2 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 3.75m x 5.17m.

· Dwelling 3 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 3.52m x 5.17m.

· Dwelling 4 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 3.75m x 5.17m.

· Dwelling 5 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 3.6m x 3.2m.

· Dwelling 6 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 4.5m x 3.55m.

· Dwelling 7 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 4.5m x 3.55m.

· Dwelling 8 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 4.5m x 3.55m.

· Dwelling 9 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 6m x 3.55m.

· Dwelling 10 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 6m x 3.5m.

· Dwelling 15 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 3.92m x 5.56m.

· Dwelling 17 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 3.9m x 4.3m.

· Dwelling 18 ground floor alfresco is dimensioned 3.9m x 4.3m.

The relevant objectives are:

· To encourage useable private open space for dwellings to meet the occupant’s 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:

· In most instances the dimensioned area falls just short (being no more than 0.6m as the minimum) of the 4m length along one dimension but provides extra length >4m on the other dimension.

· In most cases additional useable areas are provided either in the form of balconies or additional areas joined to the direct accessible areas.

· The variation is considered minor and the dwellings will be provided with useable directly accessible open space.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to 2.3.3.1 which provides that development shall not exceed a maximum cut of 1m and fill of 1m outside the perimeter of the external walls of the building. The proposal incorporates cut and fill over 1m. Specifically the following has been identified:

· Fill over 1m to the rear of lots 2 to 4 and side of lot 6.

· Cut and fill over 1m to southern and northern boundaries of lot 7.

· Cut over 1m along the northern boundary of lot 8.

· Cut and fill over 1m to northern and southern boundaries of lot 9.

· Cut and fill over 1m to northern and southern boundaries of lot 10.

· Cut over 1m along the northern boundary of lot 11.

· Cut over 1m along the northern boundary of lot 12.

· Cut over 1m along the northern boundary of lot 13.

· Cut over 1m along the northern boundary of lot 14.

· Cut over 1m along the northern boundary of lot 15.

· Cut over 1m along the northern boundary of lot 16.

· Cut over 1m along the northern boundary of lot 17.

· Cut over 1m along the northern boundary of lot 18.

· Cut over 1m along the northern boundary of lot 19.

· Cut over 1m along the northern boundary of lot 20.

The relevant objectives are:

· Minimise the extent of site disturbance caused by excessive cut and fill to the site.

· Ensure there is no damage or instability to adjoining properties caused by excavation or filling.

· Ensure that there is no adverse alteration to the drainage of adjoining properties.

· Ensure the privacy of adjoining dwellings and private open space are protected.

· Ensure that adequate stormwater drainage is provided around the perimeter of buildings and that overflow paths are provided.

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

· The extent of cut and fill proposed is a direct result of the steep topography of the site.

· The cut and fill exceeding 1m is required to be engineer designed and certified. Suitable consent condition is recommended.

· Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed to ensure no adverse impacts to adjoining properties.

· The privacy between dwellings and adjoining open space areas is maintained.

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

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

Note: Subdivision provisions of the DCP are aimed at the creation of vacant lots (i.e. not lots within an integrated housing proposal such as this) and have therefore been excluded from the above assessment. Servicing requirements are discussed later in this report.

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

No planning agreement has been offered or entered into.

(iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations

New South Wales Coastal Policy

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

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

No Coastal Zone Management Plan applies to the subject site.

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

Context and setting

The site primarily fronts Pacific Drive and has an area of 7.688 hectares. The site is located on the southern aspect of what’s commonly known as ‘Transit Hill’ and slopes away significantly from north to south.

The site is vacant land (i.e. contains no dwelling or building structures). The north western portion of the site is heavily vegetated and the south eastern portion being the location of this proposal is cleared with earthworks undertaken for internal roads and infrastructure under DA2017/1049.

The site is predominantly surrounded by residential dwelling houses to the south, east and north which are typically two storey in nature having regard to the slope.

Having regard to existing development within the locality the proposal is considered to be consistent with the locality and adequately addresses planning controls for the area.

Roads

The site has road frontage to Pacific Drive.

Pacific Drive is a two-coat sealed public road under the care and control of Council. It has a 2m wide sealed shoulder for the frontage of the site. Pacific Drive is classified as an Urban Distributor.

This development has proposed an access to the site from Pacific Drive in the vicinity of the sag point along Pacific Drive. The development has proposed a channelised right turn into the development only. Review of the traffic impact statement would indicate that an auxiliary left turn is also required, given the downward grade of the approach and the sight distances from the crest of the road. The design of the intersection will be required to comply with AustRoads. Road widening shall be required to facilitate the additional lane widths to accommodate the turning lanes whilst maintaining the 2.0m sealed shoulders. All road works have been conditioned for AC finish to the surface.

Transport and Traffic

The application includes a Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by Streetwise Road Safety, which was updated on the 3 October 2019.

This application includes an additional 2 lots within Stage 1 (subject eastern section) of the site compared to that of the original DA being 2017/1049. The additional traffic associated with the development is unlikely to have any adverse impacts to the existing road network within the immediate locality.

Traffic Impact Assessment from Streetwise Road Safety suitably addresses this proposal and the previously required intersection upgrades are still relevant and sufficient.

Site Frontage and Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed though an individual driveway to internal private roads. The accessway shall be provided in concrete and compliant with Council’s heavy duty standard crossover. Access 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:

· Road widening to accommodate turning lanes and maintain the existing sealed shoulders.

· Concrete footpath paving (minimum 1.5m wide) along the full frontage and including a refuge to the existing network on Boonamin Road.

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards Pacific Drive. Council’s development engineer has reviewed the proposed development and preliminary stormwater management plan and is satisfied that adequate details and arrangements are proposed for effective stormwater management and drainage of the proposed development. A more detailed stormwater management plan is required prior to issue of any construction certificate. Refer to recommend conditions of consent.

Water Supply Connection

Each proposed dwelling will need to be separately metered for water, meters may be either located at the road frontage or internally with a master meter at the boundary. All design and works shall be in accordance with Council’s adopted AUSPEC Specifications. Final water service sizing will need to be determined by a hydraulic consultant to suit the development as well as addressing fire service coverage to AS 2419 and backflow protection.

Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application. Refer to recommended conditions of consent.

Sewer Connection

The proposed development shall drain all sewage to a new junction out of the existing sewer manhole on Pacific Drive road reserve unless otherwise agreed by Council’s Water and Sewer Planning Manager.

All design and works shall be in accordance with Council’s adopted AUSPEC Specifications. Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application. Refer to recommended conditions of consent.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services can be made available to the site.

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

Heritage

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

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

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

Air and microclimate

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

Flora and fauna

Waste

Satisfactory arrangements can be made for proposed storage and collection of waste and recyclables. A private waste collection service will be necessary and conditions have been recommended to reinforce this. No adverse impacts anticipated. Standard precautionary site management condition recommended.

Energy

No adverse impacts anticipated. BASIX certificates accompanied the application.

Noise and vibration

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

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone. The applicant has submitted a bushfire assessment report prepared by Building Code & Bushfire Hazard Solutions Pty Ltd, dated 22 January 2020. In accordance with Section 100B of the Rural Fires Act, 1997, the application proposes development for a Special Fire Protection Purpose.

The Commissioner has assessed the development and has issued a Bushfire Safety Authority consisting of General Terms of Approval which form part of the recommended conditions of consent.

Safety, security and crime prevention

Social impacts in the locality

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

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative Impacts

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

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

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

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

Two (2) written submissions were received following public exhibition of the application. Copies of the written submissions have been provided separately to members of the DAP.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
The addition of an extra lot and dwelling along the eastern boundary will further diminish views from the existing dwelling at 200 Pacific Drive.	The site has a residential zoning and the impact to any views into and across this site is considered negligible.
The screen plantings proposed to protect privacy will further disrupt views from the existing dwelling at 200 Pacific Drive.	Refer to above comments surrounding view impact. The addition of landscaped plantings will not only protect privacy but soften the visual outlet looking west.
With the increased traffic it would be a good time to install ‘concealed driveway’ signs on the north bound lead up to the Pacific Drive roundabout to make it safer for existing residents along Pacific Drive to enter the traffic flow.	This is not considered a relevant matter to this development application. The existing road network has the capacity to accommodate the increased traffic attributable to this development. Appropriate intersection treatments are required at the entry point to Pacific Drive.
The extent of the height variation sought is not clear. No height variation should be granted as it will impact on ongoing development and existing development. Especially those enjoying a southern aspect.	The height variations sought to proposed dwellings 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 and 15 are clearly illustrated on the revised plans received during assessment and attached to this report. Refer to assessment comments under clause 4.6 of LEP heading within this report.
The proposed BAL 29 construction standard and APZs are not considered enough due to expected fire behaviour. High density development close to forest with high undergrowth is dangerous.	The proposed BAL construction and APZs are considered appropriate, consistent with Planning for Bushfire Protection Guidelines and have been reviewed by the NSW RFS.
Object to high density development with various roof lines higher than normal. The roofs may not be wind tolerant and will add to low sunlight in winter promoting mould growth.	The proposed density and roof lines are considered appropriate and consistent with what could be expected in a residential zone on a slopping site. Refer to LEP comments.

(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.

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. 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 ⇩. DA2020 - 65.1 Recommended Conditions

2 ⇩. DA2020 - 65.1 Plans

3 ⇩. DA2020 - 65.1 Development Contributions Estimate

4 ⇩. DA2020 - 65.1 Bushfire Safety Authority conditions NSW RFS

5 ⇩. DA2020 - 65.1 DCP Compliance Table

6 ⇩. DA2020 - 65.1 SOEE

7 ⇩. DA2020 - 65.1 Bushfire Report

8 ⇩. DA2020 - 65.1 Traffic Assessment

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 10/06/2020

Item: 08

Subject: DA2019 - 552.1 Staged 136 Site Manufactured Home Estate at Lot 10 DP 1250178 No.11 Resort Rd, Kew

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Fiona Tierney

Applicant: ZW2 Pty Ltd

Owner: ZW2 Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: $6,358,000

Parcel no: 68549

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2019 - 552.1 for a Staged 136 Site Manufactured Housing Estate at Lot 10, DP 1250178, No. 11 Resort Road, Kew, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a Manufactured Housing Estate 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, two (2) submissions were received.

The proposal has been amended during the assessment of the application. The primary changes made to the proposal include a passing bay on Road No.2, refinements to the layout of the community building layout and carparking and deletion of reference to proposed Area 15 collector road along western boundary.

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 115.1Ha.

The site is zoned R1 General Residential, RU1 Primary Production, E2 Environmental Conservation and E3 Environmental Management in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

The subject site is located on the northern side of Ocean Drive, Kew; bordering onto

Lakewood.

The development area is located within the south western corner of the subject site, with frontage to Ocean Drive. The development area has previously been cleared under the Laurieton Residential Resort development consent and Vegetation & Habitat Management Plan.

Access to the site is currently provided via the existing construction access from Ocean Drive.

The subject site has a long low ridge running north south, with the foot of the spur ending approximately in the centre of the site. The development area occurs on a gentle and low north west facing slope.

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· 136 Manufactured Home sites staged.

- Stage 1 - Lots 1 to 118

- Stage 2 - Lots 119 to 136

· Site Office

· Multi-purpose room

· Community Centre

· Swimming Pool

· Bocce Green

· Signage

· Access Roads

· Servicing

· Landscaping

· Relocation of the existing right of carriageway

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

Application Chronology

· 9 August 2019 - Application lodged.

· 22 August 2019 to 20 September 2019 - Neighbour notification.

· 26 August 2019 - Additional information received intersection.

· 5 September 2019 - Request to vary existing Planning Agreement (VPA) from applicant.

· 23 September 2019 - Response from Natural Resource Access Regulator (NRAR) - No requirements for Activity Approval.

· 25 October 2019 - Request additional information - Stormwater.

· 21 November 2019 - Comments received Roads and Maritime Services.

· 22 November 2019 - Additional information request from Rural Fire Service.

· 25 November 2019 - Request to vary VPA not supported.

· 19 February 2020 - Additional information submitted by Applicant.

· 24 February 2020 - Additional information submitted by Applicant.

· 12 May 2020 - Determination received Rural Fire Service

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) Any Environmental Planning Instrument

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 21 - Caravan Parks

The proposal is not for a caravan park under this SEPP. The proposal is for a manufactured home estate with the following SEPP 36 being applicable to consider.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 36 - Manufactured Home Estates

The aims of this policy and comments are provided below:

a) to facilitate the establishment of manufactured home estates as a contemporary form of medium density residential development that provides an alternative to traditional housing arrangements, and

Comment(s): Manufactured Home Estates are considered a contemporary form of medium density housing. The proposed development will provide an alternative to traditional housing.

(b) to provide immediate development opportunities for manufactured home estates on the commencement of this Policy, and

Comments: This policy was gazetted and commenced on 16 July 1993.

(c) to encourage the provision of affordable housing in well designed estates, and

Comment(s): The proposal will provide a form of alternative residential housing in a specifically designed estate. Adequate provision has been made for on-site facilities, services and open space above minimum standards of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005.

(d) to ensure that manufactured home estates are situated only in suitable locations and not on land having important resources or having landscape, scenic or ecological qualities that should be preserved, and

Comment(s): Assessment of the proposal having regard to landscape, scenic and in particular ecological qualities have concluded the site suitable for the proposed development.

(e) to ensure that manufactured home estates are adequately serviced and have access to essential community facilities and services; and

Comment(s): The proposed development will be capable of being serviced by adequate infrastructure including reticulated water and sewer facilities. The proposal will provide a number of community facilities within the estate and access to social and health services is readily available from the site.

(f) to protect the environment surrounding manufactured home estates, and

Comment(s): Measures have been incorporated into the design of the estate to provide adequate protection to the environment within and surrounding the proposed estate. Additional measures have been incorporated into the design in response to comments from statutory authorities.

(g) to provide measures which will facilitate security of tenure for residents of manufactured home estates.

Comment(s): Tenure is largely secured through the large upfront capital required to establish supporting infrastructure. Conditions of consent have been recommended to require community and recreational facilities to be provided up front and before occupation of any sites particularly noting the Staging of the proposal. Tenancy agreements are the other means for tenure security for future residents.

The proposed development is considered consistent with the aims of this policy.

Clause 6 - Where development for the purposes of a manufactured home estate may be carried out

Clause 6 of this policy provides where development for the purposes of a manufactured home estate maybe carried out.

The proposed development is permissible with the consent of Council pursuant to clause 6. In particular, the subject clause allows a manufactured home estate on land where a ‘caravan park’ is permissible. The R1 residential zoning of the subject land permits ‘caravan parks’ with development consent. In addition, the proposed development is not subject to any of the excluded areas contained in Schedule 2 of the SEPP.

Clause 7 - Development consent required for manufactured home estates

Clause 7(1) provides that development for the purposes of a manufactured home estate permitted to be carried out by this Policy may be carried out only with the development consent of the Council.

Comment(s): Noted. This Development Application is seeking development consent.

Clause 7(2) provides that a Council must not consent to any such development unless it imposes, as a condition of the consent, a requirement that an approval to operate a manufactured home estate on the land on which the development is to be carried out must be obtained under Part 1 of Chapter 7 of the Local Government Act 1993.

Comment(s): Noted. A suitable condition is recommended in this regard.

Clause 7(3) provides that nothing in this Policy requires a separate development consent to authorise the placing of each manufactured home within a manufactured home estate.

Comment(s): Noted. The installation or construction of a dwellings on individual manufactured home sites will not require separate development consent.

Clause 8 - Subdivision of manufactured home estates

(1) Land on which development for the purposes of a manufactured home estate may be lawfully carried out (whether or not because of a development consent granted pursuant to this Policy) may be subdivided:

(a) under section 289K of the Local Government Act 1919 for lease purposes, or

(b) under the Community Land Development Act 1989,

only with the development consent of the council.

(2) A Council must not grant a development consent for such a subdivision if any of the lots intended to be created by the proposed subdivision would contravene a requirement of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates) Transitional Regulation 1993.

(3) Any prohibition or restriction on the subdivision of land imposed by any other environmental planning instrument (whether made before or after this Policy) does not apply to such a subdivision.

(4) This Policy does not allow the subdivision of land within a Crown reserve.

Comment(s): No subdivision of the MHE for lease or community title purposes is proposed with the subject development application.

Clause 9 - Matters to be considered by Councils

Clause 9(1) provides that Council may grant development consent for the purposes of a manufactured home estate only if it satisfied:

(a) That each of the sites on which a manufactured home is or will be installed within the manufactured home is or will be installed within the manufactured home estate is or will be adequately provided with reticulated water, a reticulated sewerage system, drainage and electricity, and

Comment(s): Each of the proposed sites within the proposed estate are capable of being serviced by reticulated water, reticulated sewer, drainage and electricity services. Appropriate conditions are recommended in this regard.

(b) that the manufactured home estate is or will be provided with adequate transport services, and

Comments(s): The road network provided to and within the estate is considered appropriate for the proposed development. Existing transport services are available to the site.

(c) that sufficient community facilities and services, whether situated within or outside the estate, are or will be available and reasonably accessible to the residents of the manufactured home estate, and

Comment(s): A range of community facilities are proposed within the estate, which will be directly available and accessible to the residents within the estate. The community facilities proposed include a clubhouse, swimming pool, multi-purpose room and bocce green. Existing services and transport are available to the site.

(d) that the development will not have an adverse effect on any:

· conservation area

· heritage item

· waterway or land having special landscape, scenic or ecological qualities, which is identified in an environmental planning instrument applicable to the land concerned.

Comment(s): The proposed development will not have any identifiable adverse impacts on any of the above.

Clause 9(2) provides that Council may grant development consent for the purposes of a manufactured home estate only after it has considered the following:

(a) the cumulative impact of the proposed development and other manufactured home estates in the locality,

Comments: An assessment of the proposed development, supporting documentation and legislative provisions suggests that there will be no adverse cumulative impact on the locality or other manufactured home estates in the area to warrant recommending refusing consent to the DA. The MHE is run in conjunction with the existing MHE on the site.

(b) any relevant guidelines issued by the Director,

Comment(s): No relevant guidelines identified.

10.

(c) the provisions of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates) Transitional Regulation 1993.

11.

Comment(s): The above Regulation has since been repealed. The Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005 is the current Regulation applicable. A detailed checklist of compliance with the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005 is provided below:

Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005.

It is noted the Development Application was accompanied by a section 82(1) objection under the Local Government Act 1993. Specifically seeking an exemption to clause 41 of this regulation which requires manufactured homes to be constructed and assembled onsite.

The relevant parts of the regulation are addressed below in the following table:

CLAUSE	REQUIREMENT (in summary)	COMMENT/COMPLIANCE
Division 1 Application of Part
Clause 1-4	No specific requirements only information on the legislation in terms of operation, definitions etc	Noted
5 Application of Part	This part applies to both the operation of the manufactured home estate and the installation of the home itself.	Noted
Division 2 Approvals and exemptions
6 Factors for consideration before approval is granted	(1) Council must be satisfied that the estate will be designed in accordance with Division 3; and (2) Council must have regard to the Floodplain Development Manual.	(1) The proposed development has been designed in accordance with Division 3, refer to comments in Division 3; (2) Consultation has been undertaken with Council’s Flooding Engineer as part of the site is mapped as flood prone land. The works are proposed well clear of the flood areas and no specific conditions are proposed.
7 Matters to be specified in approval	Any approval must specify the number, size and location of the dwelling sites.	For consideration with the application for approval to operate.
8 Conditions of approval	The approval must be conditioned to ensure the design, construction, maintenance and operation of the estate is in accordance with Division 3.	For consideration with the application for approval to operate
9 Conditional exemption	(1) Council approval is not required for: (a) the installation of a home within the estate, so long as it is designed, constructed and installed in accordance with Division 4 and is only occupied after certificate of completion is issued; or (b) the associated structure is designed, constructed and installed in accordance with Division 4. (2) This exemption applies only of the installation is carried out by the operator of the estate. (3) This exemption does not apply to the installation of a home on flood liable land. (4) This exemption does not apply for homes or associated structures of more than one storey.	For consideration with the application for approval to operate
10 Installation on flood liable land	(1) Council must have regard to the Floodplain Development Manual. (2) The home must be designed, constructed and installed in accordance with Division 4.	(1) As detailed above part of the site is mapped as flood prone land. However, the works are proposed to the southern part of the site and well clear of any flood prone land. (2) Noted.
11 Installation of manufactured home or associated structure of more than one storey	Council assessment must have regard to the amenity of the adjoining occupiers.	For consideration with the application for approval to operate. The plans provided indicate the dwellings will be of single storey construction.
Division 3 Manufactured home estates
12 Minimum size of estate	Estate must have an area of not less than 1 hectare.	Complies - area is greater than 1Ha.
13 Community amenities	(1) 10% of total area of estate must be reserved for recreation or other communal activities. (2) If lesser proportion, Council must have regard to the type and range of amenities proposed.	Approximately 12.6% of the site (as amended) during assessment is available for recreational or communal activities which is in excess of the 10% minimum standard.
14 Size of dwelling sites	A dwelling site must have an area of at least 130m².	Complies – All proposed site have areas exceeding 130m². Minimum site area is 221m2 to 348m².
15 Site identification	(1) Dwelling site to be numbered with clearly identified boundaries. (2) Site identification must be conspicuous.	Complies – Each of the dwelling sites will be clearly numbered.
16 Dwelling sites to have road frontage	A dwelling site must have vehicular access to a road.	Complies – all proposed dwelling sites have frontage to a road
17 Setbacks of community buildings	(1) Not to be located closer than 10m to boundary of estate and dwelling sites. (2) Any lesser distance to satisfy Council that building has been properly screened, fenced, enclosed or otherwise treated. (3) Must not in any case be closer than 2m to any boundary.	The community facility buildings are to be setback greater than 10m from boundaries of the site.
18 Setbacks of dwelling sites from road frontages	(1) No closer than 10m to a public road or 3m to any other boundary unless approved. (2) Any lesser distance to satisfy Council that the dwelling site has been properly screened, fenced, enclosed or otherwise treated.	All dwelling sites are located greater than 10m from a public road and 3m from any other property boundary. To be confirmed prior to approval to operate.
19 Use of buffer zones	Buffer zones can be used for: (a) community amenities, access roads, car parking, footpaths or landscaping, or (b) or any similar purpose.	Complies.
20 Entrance and exit roads	(1) Entrance to or exit from estate must be 8m wide. (2) Divided roads to have at least 5m on either side. (3) Tapers between entrance and access roads to be in the approval.	Complies as amended during assessment. The entrance and exit roads meet the requirements.
21 Width of roads	(1) Road reserve to be: (a) 8.5m for major access road, and (b) 6m for minor access road. (2) Sealed portion of access road must be: (a) 6m for major roads, and (b) 4m for minor roads. (3) Passing bays required for minor access roads exceeding 80m in length (4) Passing bays at intervals of 100m. (5) Sealed portion of access road with a passing bay to be: (a) 8.5m for major road, and (b) 6m for minor roads.	The widths of all proposed internal roads are capable of compliance with the requirements. Passing bays incorporated into amendments during assessment process.
22 Speed restrictions as part of road design	(a) 30 km/hr for major access roads, and (b) 15 km/hr for minor access roads.	To be sign-posted accordingly and suitable condition recommended.
23 Visitor parking	(1)(a) 8 spaces for an estate with 35 sites. (b) 12 spaces for 35 to 70 sites. (c) 16 spaces for 70 to 105 sites. (d) 20 spaces for 105, plus 1/7 sites over 140. (2)(a) Minimum dimensions of 5.4m x 2.5m, and (b) 6.1m x 2.5m. (3) Visitor spaces to be clearly identified.	For the 136 sites proposed a total of 20 visitor car parking spaces are required and provided. All spaces satisfy the minimum dimension requirements.
24 Visitor parking for people with disabilities	(1) 1 space for people with a disability. (2) If more than 100 sites - 1 / 100 sites of fraction of 100 sites. (3) In accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1:2004. (4) Visitor and disabled spaces to be clearly marked. (5) Visitor spaces to be counted under clause 23.	For the 136 sites proposed a total of 2 disabled visitor spaces are required and provided.
25 Road surfaces	Must have all-weather sealed surface, allow for adequate drainage and eliminate excessive grades.	All proposed roads to and within the development will have all asphalt sealed surface and will allow for adequate drainage.
26 Lighting	Roads to be lit between sunset and sunrise.	All roads proposed to be lit via fixed street lighting.
27 Water supply	(1)(a) Estate must be connected to mains water, or (b) provided with an alternative. (2)(a) Dwelling site must be connected to the estate water supply, and (b) separately metered. (3)(a) water supply to comply with the Plumbing and Drainage Code of Practice, and (b) Requirements of relevant statutory bodies. (4) Water for domestic requirements to comply with 'Australian Drinking Water Guidelines.	Complies – Estate is to be connected to mains water. Each dwelling site is to be connected to the estate water supply and to be separately metered.
28 Sewerage	(1)(a) Estate must be connected to main sewer, or (b) alternative approved system. (2) Dwelling site to be connected to estate system. (3)(a) System to comply with the Plumbing and Drainage Code of Practice, and (b) Requirements of relevant statutory bodies.	Complies. Estate to be connected to reticulated main sewer. A new sewer main is required outside of the development site. Each dwelling site will be required to be connected to the estate system.
29 Drainage	(1) Estate to comply with specified and approved stormwater drainage system. (2)(a) dwelling site to be connected with estate system, or (b) or provided with on-site drainage system. (3)(a) System to comply with the Plumbing and Drainage Code of Practice, and (b) Requirements of relevant statutory bodies.	Conceptual stormwater management plan has been submitted and will be conditioned to comply. Dwelling sites will be required to be directly connected to the stormwater drainage system.
30 Electricity supply	(1) Dwelling site to be supplied with electricity and a separate meter. (2) Installation in accordance with AS/NZS 3000:2000. (3) Electricity charge to comply with standard for locality.	Electricity supply is capable of being supplied to each dwelling site. Recommended condition applied requiring letter from respective electricity authority confirming satisfactory arrangement have been made.
31 Telephone lines	Must be available to each dwelling site.	Each dwelling site will capable of having a telephone service available.
32 Common trenches	Common trench may be used.	Noted.
33 Garbage removal	Arrangements to be specified and must be in a clean and sanitary condition.	All proposed dwelling sites will be provided with a garbage collection service via a private waste contractor.
34 Fire hydrants	(1) Dwelling site and community building to be no more than 90m from fire hydrant. (2)(a) hydrant to be a double-headed pillar-type hydrant, and (b) maintained to standard specified.	Fire hydrants are proposed to meet the requirements.
35 Buildings	(1) A building must not be erected in an estate unless the approval allows. (2) Buildings allowed within an estate include: (a) community building, (b) Brick or masonry separating walls or external facades to homes. (3) Brick or masonry external façade permitted only if: (a) the dwelling site is within a 'neighbourhood lot', and (b) the owner of the lot is also the proprietor.	Complies. No buildings, other than community/recreational buildings are proposed as part of this proposal.
36 Use of manufactured home estates	(1)(a) estate must not be used for any other commercial purpose, or (b) manufacture, construction or reconstruction of a moveable dwelling. (2) Manufactured home may be used for exhibition purposes. (3) Renovation and maintenance permitted on homes.	Noted.
37 Community map	Map to be provided to Council.	Noted. A community map will be provided to Council and will be a condition of any approval to operate the MHE under a separate section 68 permit.
38 Access to approval and community map	Approval, community map and this Regulation must be available for inspection.	Noted. Will be condition as part of the approval to operate the MHE under a separate section 68 permit.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2019

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is located within an area containing coastal wetlands, coastal wetland proximity, coastal use area and coastal environment area. The development area, however is only identified as containing a small portion of coastal wetlands proximity.

The application has been referred under the Water Management Act to the NSW Natural Resource Access Regulator. No requirement was specified under the Act for a Controlled Activity Approval.

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

Having regard to clause 11 of the SEPP, the proposed development will not result in:

· identifiable significant adverse impacts on the biophysical, hydrological or ecological integrity of the adjacent coastal wetland to the development site; and

· any identifiable significant reduction to the quantity and quality of surface and ground water flows to and from the adjacent coastal wetland.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In accordance with Clause 15 the proposal is not likely to cause increased risk of coastal hazards on the land or other 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 No. 44 - Koala Habitat Protection

With reference to clauses 6 and 7, the subject land is greater than 1 hectare (including any adjoining land under same ownership) and therefore the provisions of SEPP must be considered.

There is no Koala Plan of Management on the site. No vegetation is proposed to be removed 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, the development site not being in close 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 proposal incorporates a large feature two sided billboard signage and flag signage at the entry to the proposed estate. The proposal satisfies the applicable requirements of this policy. The assessment table provided below provides consideration of the proposal in accordance with schedule 1 of the policy.

Applicable clauses for consideration	Comments	Satisfactory
Clause 8(a) Consistent with objectives of the policy as set out in Clause 3(1)(a).	The signage is consistent with the objectives of this policy.	Yes
Schedule 1(1) Character of the area.	The entrance and flag signage to be incorporated will not be out of character with the area.	Yes
Schedule 1(2) Special areas.	The entrance signage will not adversely impact on any identifiable special areas.	Yes
Schedule 1(3) Views and vistas.	The entrance signage will not adversely impact on any views or visas.	Yes
Schedule 1(4) Streetscape, setting or landscape.	The entrance works and signage will not adversely detract from the streetscape.	Yes
Schedule 1(5) Site and building.	This signage is compatible with the size and scale of the estate to which it is to be located.	Yes
Schedule 1(6) Associated devices and logos with advertisements and advertising structures.	None proposed.	N/A
Schedule 1(7) Illumination.	No internal illumination of the entrance signage is proposed. Timed external upwards illumination proposed.	Yes
Schedule 1(7) Safety.	The signage will not adversely impact on public safety matters.	Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004

The Applicant has submitted that the development is not age restricted although targeted to over 55. No provisions of this SEPP require specific consideration in this regard.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

With reference to clause 101, the site has frontage to the Ocean Drive which is a classified road. The consent authority must not grant consent to development on such land unless it is satisfied that:

(a) where practicable and safe, vehicular access to the land is provided by a road other than the classified road, and

12.

(b) the safety, efficiency and ongoing operation of the classified road will not be adversely affected by the development as a result of—

(i) the design of the vehicular access to the land, or

(ii) the emission of smoke or dust from the development, or

(iii) the nature, volume or frequency of vehicles using the classified road to gain access to the land, and

(c) the development is of a type that is not sensitive to traffic noise or vehicle emissions, or is appropriately located and designed, or includes measures, to ameliorate potential traffic noise or vehicle emissions within the site of the development arising from the adjacent classified road.

The proposal has been referred to NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) during the assessment of the application. The advice received from the RMS has been considered later in this report.

Road noise/acoustic impacts are considered later in this report.

State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011

The proposed development does not have a capital investment value of more than $20 million and is not considered Regional Development (as per legislation in force at the time of lodgement of the DA). No provisions of this SEPP require specific consideration in this regard.

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, RU1 Primary Production, E2 - Environmental Conservation and E3 - Environmental Management. The works are located wholly within the R1 zone.

13.

14. In accordance the SEPP36 for a Manufactured Home Estate to be permissible a ‘caravan park’ under this LEP is to be permissible. In this regard, in accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R1 landuse table, the proposed development for a ‘caravan park’ is a permissible landuse with consent in the R1 zone.

15.

16. The proposed recreation and communal facilities are based upon the submitted details and locations best characterised as being ancillary and subordinate to the primary landuse and therefore permissible. The SEPP 36 requires communal facilities also which implies permissibility also for such ancillary uses.

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.

The objectives of the RU1 zone are as follows:

o To encourage sustainable primary industry production by maintaining and enhancing the natural resource base.

o To encourage diversity in primary industry enterprises and systems appropriate for the area.

o To minimise the fragmentation and alienation of resource lands.

o To minimise conflict between land uses within this zone and land uses within adjoining zones.

The objectives of the E2 zone are as follows:

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

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

o To protect coastal wetlands and littoral rainforests.

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

17. The objectives of the E3 zone are follows:

o To protect, manage and restore areas with special ecological, scientific, cultural or aesthetic values.

o To provide for a limited range of development that does not have an adverse effect on those values.

· 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 an alternative type of residential housing with a range of opportunities for varied housing types; and

o The works are located wholly within the R1 zone.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the component of proposal with permanent community amenity buildings does not exceed and complies with the maximum 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

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

· Clause 7.3 - Part of the site is land within a mapped “flood planning area” (Land subject to flood discharge of 1:100 annual recurrence interval flood event (plus the applicable climate change allowance and relevant freeboard) In this regard the following comments are provided which incorporate consideration of the objectives of Clause 7.3 and 7.4, Council’s Flood Policy 2015, the NSW Government’s Flood Prone Lands Policy and the NSW Government’s Floodplain Development Manual (2005):

o The proposal is compatible with the flood hazard of the land taking into account projected changes as a result of climate change;

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

o The proposal incorporates measures to minimise & manage the flood risk to life and property associated with the use of land;

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

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

· Clause 7.9 Acoustic controls - An acoustic assessment has been submitted due to the impact of noise from traffic on Ocean Drive. The assessment has found that some living and bedroom windows will require an upgrade to glazing and ventilation. Conditions of consent have been applied to require compliance with the recommendations of the report.

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

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

No draft instruments apply to the site

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: General Provisions*
	Requirements	Proposed	Complies
2.2.2.1	Signage to be building or business identification. Be contained to within the property. Not project above building facades. Potential for light spill from illumination to be subject to curfew.	Entrance signage on front wall identifying the estate proposed. Curfew proposed.	Yes
2.3.3.3	Significant land reforming proposals shall not change surface levels by more than 5m.	Landform change is less than 5m change proposed. Maximum cut of 4m and maximum fill of 2m which tapers down to natural ground level to Ocean Drive.	Yes
2.3.3.1	Cut and fill 1.0m max. 1m outside the perimeter of the external building walls	Earthworks are proposed and capable of being managed. Suitable site management conditions recommended.	Yes
2.3.3.2	1m max. height retaining walls along road frontage	No retaining walls along road frontage proposed.	N/A
	Any retaining wall >1.0 in height to be certified by structure engineer	Engineering certification capable.	Yes - capable
	Combination of retaining wall and front fence height max 1.8m, max length 6.0m or 30% of frontage, fence component 25% transparent, and splay at corners and adjacent to driveway	No combination of retaining and front fence proposed.	N/A
2.3.3.8	Removal of hollow bearing trees	No hollow bearing trees are proposed to be removed.	Yes
2.6.3.1	Tree removal (3m or higher with 100m diameter trunk at 1m above ground level and 3m from external wall of existing dwelling)	No tree removal is proposed	Yes
2.4.3	Bushfire risk, Acid sulphate soils, Flooding, Contamination, Airspace protection, Noise and Stormwater	Refer to main body of report.	Yes
2.5.3.2	New accesses not permitted from arterial or distributor roads	Access proposed via proposed public road connection to Ocean Drive.	Yes
2.5.3.2	Driveway crossing/s minimal in number and width including maximising street parking	Single entry and exit point proposed via public road.	Yes
2.5.3.3	Parking in accordance with Table 2.5.1.	Adequate off-street parking is proposed consistent with the requirement of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005.	Yes
2.5.3.11	Section 94 contributions	Refer to main body of report.	Yes
2.5.3.12 and 2.5.3.13	Landscaping of parking areas	Suitable landscaping proposed.	Yes
2.5.3.14	Sealed driveway surfaces unless justified	Internal roads to be sealed.	Yes
2.5.3.15 and 2.5.3.16	Driveway grades first 6m or ‘parking area’ shall be 5% grade with transitions of 2m length	Internal roads can comply with requirements of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005.	Yes
2.5.3.17	Parking areas to be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Parking areas will be adequately drained.	Yes
2.5.3.17	Vehicle washing facilities – grassed area etc. available.	Suitable areas available for car washing.	Yes
2.7.2.1	Social impact assessment shall be submitted in accordance with Council’s Social Impact Assessment Policy	A Social Impact Assessment has been submitted with the DA that is considered later in this report.	Yes
2.7.2.2	Design addresses generic principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design guideline	Adequate casual surveillance will be available for all community amenities within the development.	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

An existing planning agreement exists for the site more broadly from the first stage of Laurieton Residential Resort. The Planning Agreement was between Port Macquarie-Hastings Council and ZW2 Pty Ltd (Trading as Laurieton Residential Resort) dated 22 February 2017. Amongst other things, the existing Planning Agreement allowed for the manufactured homes associated with DA2009 - 302 (approval for a manufactured home estate) to be charged at an aged unit rate and set requirements around ensuring a similar usage.

A request to vary the existing Planning Agreement was received from the applicant in relation to DA2019 - 552. The request was to seek an extended agreement across this development site to formalise how the contributions were calculated for the manufactured homes associated with DA2019 - 552. In particular, the applicant was seeking to have the manufactured homes assessed at the same aged unit rate for contribution purposes.

Council staff have considered the offer and do not support amending the existing Planning Agreement to also include the manufactured home estate proposed under DA2019 - 552. In assessing the most relevant contribution rate applicable to DA2019 - 552, it is considered that the caravan park rates in the Development Contributions Assessment Policy (DCAP) are the most appropriate (Note: Caravan Park rates shift to the Flats, Units, Town Houses etc rate under the DCAP where the sites are to be used as permanent self-contained). This was the approach traditionally used with the exception of some manufactured housing estates utilising Planning Agreements.

It was also acknowledged that the DCAP has an aged unit rate for development approved under SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability). The DCAP further advises that the aged unit rate can be used where “the applicant demonstrates to Council’s satisfaction that the development will be occupied by older persons as defined in the SEPP and the maximum occupancy for any unit is 2 persons”. However, it has not been satisfied that the future dwellings in the manufactured housing estate will be used as such and that ensuring compliance with such a requirement would prove difficult to enforce and un-reasonable from a compliance perspective given the nature of the development for which consent has been applied for.

In order to obtain reduced contributions as an aged unit, it was suggested that consideration be given to amending the development application (DA2019 - 552) from a manufactured home estate to seniors housing with subsequent consideration of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.

(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 will be unlikely to have any adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties or the public domain.

· The proposal is considered to adequately address the planning controls for the area. The site is zoned for residential purposes and is adjoining an existing MHE.

· The proposal will not have any identifiable adverse impacts on existing view sharing or significant vistas.

· The proposal will be unlikely to result in any significant adverse lighting impacts.

· There are no identifiable adverse privacy impacts.

· There are no identifiable adverse overshadowing impacts. The proposal (including future manufactured homes and dwellings) will be unlikely to prevent adjoining properties from receiving 3 hours of sunlight to private open space and primary living areas on 21 June.

Roads

The site has road frontage to Ocean Drive, Kew.

Adjacent to the site, Ocean Drive is a sealed public road under the care and control of RMS. Ocean Drive is a RMS Classified road with a 7m road width within a 20m road reserve. There is no kerb and gutter along the frontage of Ocean Drive, however there is a table drain along the northern (adjacent) side. There is a 2.5m wide cycle path along the southern (opposite) side of Ocean Drive. There are also overhead power poles present on both sides of the road.

Traffic and Transport

The site is currently approved for residential use. This development proposes to generate 286 daily trips. The addition in traffic associated with the development is likely to have an impact on the existing local road network and will require an upgrade of the Ocean Drive frontage.

The application includes a Traffic Impact Assessment from Intersect Traffic. Findings of the study determined:

· There is sufficient spare capacity within the local road network to cater for the proposed development, however, dedicated turning lanes will be required to safely manage traffic entering and exiting the development.

· Subject to the vehicular access off Ocean Drive being constructed to a CHR(s)/AUL(s) standard the site access and internal road network would comply with the requirements of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings, 2005 and Austroads).

· Sufficient room exists on the site to provide the required visitor car parking (at least 20 visitor car parks, two of which will be accessible spaces).

· The report states that no additional external pedestrian or cycle paths will be required as part of this development. However, it is a PMHC requirement that a footpath be provided along the frontage for developments such as these. The relocation of sections of the existing cycle path will also be required due to the associated road widening of Ocean Drive.

· Internal pedestrian and cycle facilities will need to be provided to the consent authority requirements though it is considered sharing of the internal road ways by pedestrian and cyclists would be satisfactory for the type and scale of the development.

Key issues or recommendations to be addressed by conditions.

As such, the following is to be incorporated in the conditions of consent.

Construction of a new, unsignalised intersection on Ocean Drive at the entrance to the estate, within the first stage of the development, in accordance with AUSTROADS and Council’s AUS-SPEC standards, at no cost to Council, and the following items:

a) Design details shall be approved by Council as part of a Roads Act (s138) application prior to construction.

b) A detailed Geotech report shall be provided to Council as part of the Roads Act application and shall detail the pavement design for the Ocean Drive intersection, as well as any reconstruction works along this length of road that are required as a result of the new road design.

c) Any Regulatory signs and devices proposed on public roads will require the endorsement of the Local Traffic Committee prior to Council’s approval.

d) Any proposed changes to speed zoning should be referred to Roads & Maritime Services (RMS) for consideration prior to the issue of any Roads Act approval.

e) Any road reserve widening to accommodate the intersection is to be dedicated at no cost to Council.

f) All new roads including private roads within the Manufactured Home Estate shall be lit between sunset and sunrise. For any public roads deemed to require street lighting, the lighting classification shall be nominated by Council prior to any Construction Certificate, using Essential Energy’s prescribed form. Details of lighting installation shall be shown on the Construction Certificate plans for each relevant stage.

g) The intersection shall include suitable stormwater drainage infrastructure designed to meet the requirements of AUSPEC D5.

h) The provision of additional civil works within Ocean Drive at no cost to Council necessary to ensure satisfactory transitions to existing work as a result of work conditioned for the development. Design plans are to be approved by Council prior to issue of the Subdivision Construction Certificate.

Roads and Maritime Services (RMS)

Consistent with RMS requirements, the proposal was referred to the RMS. RMS’ review of the proposal determined:

Roads and Maritime has reviewed the referred information and provides the following comments to assist the consent authority in making a determination:

1. Ocean Drive is a classified regional road (MR600) and as such, concurrence form Roads and Maritime is required under section 138 of the Roads Act for access onto that road. The applicant should be advised of that requirement.

Comments: The applicant has been advised of this requirement and conditions of consent will be applied.

2. No details have been provided of the size or location of the signage. It is noted that he application classified the sign as ‘business identified signage’ meaning it is not caught by referral to Roads and Maritime for concurrence. Therefore, Council should be satisfied that the signage meets the requirements of SEPP 64 and the Transport Corridor and Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines.

Comments: Details in relation to the size and location of signage were provided within the Landscape Plans. A SEPP 64 Assessment was provided with the application and Council is satisfied that this meets the requirements of SEPP 64 and the Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines.

3. Site Regrade Plan Sheet 1 (in Appendix A) shows a proposed Collector Road along the western boundary of the property for access to a future adjoining urban release area. No other plans show this future road, and nor is there any mention of connecting this development onto that road.

Comments: The applicant acknowledged that this collector road was an error and the plans were updated to remove this reference.

4. It appears that the road named Resort Road on maps may traverse/ sever the site. This should be clarified as it has potential to impact the design and access arrangements for the Home Park.

Comments: The applicant confirmed via NSW Six Map and a Certificate of Title and Deposited Plan that Resort Road does not traverse/sever the site. The access through the site is not a public road, but is a ‘Right of Carriageway 20 wide’, and is proposed to be relocated as part of the proposed development.

5. The Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) concluded on page 16 that a CHR(s) and an AUL(s) were required for the new access. This is likely to require shifting the eastbound carriageway and widening for AUL(s) on the northern side. However, no Strategic Design for the proposed road works has been provided. Such design will be required before any approval under section 138 can be considered.

Comments: The applicant acknowledged that a CHR(s) and AUL(s) will be required and a draft intersection plan was provided. A detailed strategic design for the proposed road works will be provided following development consent being issued, and prior to approval under Section 138. This design will be forwarded to RMS for concurrence prior to issue of that approval.

6. It is understood that the existing temporary access track over the site will be closed, and will not provide secondary access onto Ocean Drive. This should be clarified, and the timing of that closure reflected in any approval granted. The proposed development incorporates the continuation of the existing secondary access road from the existing MHE in the northern portion of the site (Laurieton Residential Resort). The existing secondary access road will be realigned to connect with the internal access road infrastructure of the proposed MHE, with the existing connection to Ocean Drive in the southern corner of the site to be maintained. A gate (no lock) will be provided at the southern end of the existing access road where it enters the proposed MHE with an RFS keyed gate/bollard provided at the southern end of the internal road which discharges to Ocean Drive.

7. Consideration should be given to connectivity for public transport facilities and active transport modes such as walking and cycling. In this regard, we note that there is a shared path and bus stop located on the southern side of Ocean Drive. Any road works on Ocean Drive should consider incorporating an appropriate facility to assist in crossing the road.

Comments: It is noted that the nearest bus stops are located opposite the site at the Mountain View Road intersection for westbound buses and 100m west of the site for eastbound buses. These are considered within easy walking distance from the development location. In order to facilitate safe and convenient pedestrian access to the facilities located on the southern side of Ocean Drive, the applicant has proposed to incorporate a pedestrian refuge within the median (painted chevron area). However, given the traffic volumes on Ocean Drive and the likely age demographic of the MHE residents, it is recommended that a formalised pedestrian refuge will be required and a DA condition has been included to reflect this.

Pedestrians

This development is proposing effectively 136 new residential sites for development. A footpath is a Council requirement to be provided along the frontage for developments such as these to provide linkages to existing infrastructure. Internal pedestrian and cycle facilities would need to be provided to the consent authority requirements though it is considered sharing of the internal road ways by pedestrian and cyclists would be satisfactory for the type and scale of the development.

It is noted that the nearest bus stops are located opposite the site at the Mountain View Road intersection for westbound buses and 100m west of the site for eastbound buses. These are considered within easy walking distance from the development location. In order to facilitate safe and convenient pedestrian access to the facilities located on the southern side of Ocean Drive, the applicant has proposed to incorporate a pedestrian refuge within the median (painted chevron area). However, given the traffic volumes on Ocean Drive and the likely age demographic of the MHE residents, it is recommended that a formalised pedestrian refuge will be required and a DA condition has been included to reflect this.

Parking and Manoeuvring

Resident parking will be able to be provided on each MHE site. In addition, a total of 20 visitor parking spaces (including 2 disabled spaces) have been provided on-site. Parking on site can comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and conditions have been imposed to reflect these requirements.

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site has an existing 150/32mm combined metered water service. The proposed development can be serviced for water supply from the existing 150/32mm combined meter. 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 in accordance with AS3500.

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is connected to Sewer via junction to the existing sewer line that traverses the development site. The proposed development must discharge all sewage to a new manhole. A gravity sewer connection from the new manhole shall be provided to the western property boundary at no cost to Council.

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

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards the north-west corner (rear of the site) and is currently unserviced via the public piped drainage system.

A stormwater management plan has been submitted in support of the development application and demonstrates conceptually that the development can achieve Council’s AUSPEC requirements with regard to water quality and detention. In this regard, a stormwater basin is proposed to be located to the north west of the development. The report demonstrates that the basin and associated treatment train achieves compliance with Councils water quality targets via the provision of a GPT, grassed swales and bio-retention. MUSIC modelling output summaries have been submitted to demonstrate compliance in this regard.

Amendments were made during the course of the assessment to ensure the MUSIC model replicated the stormwater design.

Additionally, a summary of the modelling undertaken utilising the RAFTS software demonstrates that the basin has capacity to detain stormwater discharge to the extent that post development flows are less than pre development rates. To achieve this, the basin provides a volume of 3616m3.

The plan indicates that no stormwater will be discharged to the Ocean Drive frontage of 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 Construction Certificate.

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

· Detailed modelling and calculations to demonstrate that the designed system meets the above objectives,

· Design specifications for the detention and water quality facilities;

· Maintenance plans/specifications for the detention and water quality facilities; and

· Design specifications for the outlet form the stormwater basin to demonstrate that flows are being discharged onto the surface of the land in a manner that matches pre development discharge.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Evidence of satisfactory arrangements with the relevant utility authorities for provision to each proposed lot and the MHE will be required prior to final Section 68 permit to operate the MHE being issued.

Heritage

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

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

Air and microclimate

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will not require additional removal/clearing of vegetation. The site is the subject of the original Laurieton Residential Resort development and Vegetation Management Plan (Keystone Ecological 2016).

Clearing of the land, offsets and management were evaluated as part of the application and is subject to ongoing management strategies. This included nest boxes, glider poles, weed management and regeneration of vegetation communities. The applicant is to ensure the recommendations of the VMP are implemented and maintained.

The proposal is located within the highly modified area required to be low fuel for RFS purposes and is not within the area required to be revegetated. Council’s ecologist has assessed the ecological report, inspected the site and has no additional requirements.

Waste

With regards to the ongoing operational management of waste; an Operational

Management Plan will be prepared with the appointed private waste contractor, ensuring each moveable dwelling will have access to an appropriate garbage collection service onsite.

Each moveable dwelling will have access to suitable garbage and recycling bin facilities, allowing for waste to be sorted prior to collection. No adverse impacts anticipated. An appropriate condition is recommended in this regard.

A Waste Management Plan has been submitted which is considered acceptable.

Standard precautionary site management condition recommended.

Energy

The proposal includes measures to address energy efficiency in the design of the on-site communal facilities and will be required to comply with the requirements of Section J of the Building Code of Australia. No adverse impacts anticipated.

Noise and vibration

The operation of the dwellings and community facilities are proposed by the Applicant to not be restricted by hours of operation, but rather by standard noise criteria under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

No other adverse impacts are anticipated.

A standard condition recommended to restrict construction to standard construction hours.

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

In accordance with Section 100B - Rural Fires Act 1997, whilst not technically integrated development the application proposes an MHE that could lawfully be used for residential purposes.

The Applicant has submitted a bushfire report prepared by a Consultant. The report has carried out an assessment under Section 100B requirements.

The Commissioner has assessed the development and has issued a Bushfire Safety Authority subject to conditions. A copy of the Authority is attached to this report.

Safety, security and crime prevention

A Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) Report has been prepared for the proposed development.

The increase in housing density will improve natural surveillance within the locality.

Social impacts in the locality

A Social Impact Assessment prepared by Aigis Group - Mark Sargent Enterprises has been submitted with the DA as required by Council’s Development Control Plan 2013 and Social Impact Assessment Policy.

The below is a list of the key recommendations from the Social Impact Assessment, which the Applicant has justified that have been incorporated into the site plan or are addressed in the accompanying expert reports:

1. The landscape buffer is to be maintained to enhance acoustic privacy and reduce visual impacts.

2. A Traffic Engineering Assessment is to be provided with the Development Application.

3. Provision of community facilities and landscaping.

Subject to the above being complied with, the proposal has been assessed as being unlikely to result in adverse social impacts which would warrant refusing the DA.

Residents of the MHE will have access to Laurieton based medical facilities via the local bus transport.

Issues relating to impact on character have been addressed above earlier in this report.

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative Impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

The proposal will adequately fit into the locality and the site attributes are conducive to the proposed development to not warrant recommending refusing consent to the application.

Site constraints of bushfire risk and potential road noise have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

Two (2) written submissions were received following public exhibition of the application. Copies of the written submissions have been provided separately to members of the DAP.

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
The area is well known for Black Cockatoos and requests Casuarina Species be planted. Also request Eucalypt Species and wildlife infrastructure.	As discussed earlier in this report, the site is part of a broader scale Vegetation Management Plan that includes this site and has ongoing works for regeneration of vegetation communities that has been assessed under the original Laurieton Residential Resort. Further revegetation is not considered appropriate and would have broader implications for bushfire hazard management over the entire site. The application has been assessed by Council’s ecologist who has advised that the requirements of the VMP have been fulfilled and the planting schedule proposed within the MHE is acceptable. An amended landscaping plan has also been submitted during the assessment of the application.
Traffic impact and safety concerns including road widening at entry/exit, turning bays on Mountainview Road and lower speed limit.	The application (including traffic report) has been referred to the Roads and Maritime Services who have made recommendations in relation to access. The applicant has modified the plans and provided additional entry details that are acceptable to the RMS and conditions of consent applied. See specific additional information above in relation to traffic and RMS assessment. Lowering the speed limit is considered unnecessary.
Noise Impact to proposed dwellings	Ocean Drive is a major collector road for access to Laurieton. Whilst future development is subject to acoustic controls for dwellings to be constructed, there is currently no ability to impose an upgrade to existing dwellings or planned road works/noise mounds in this section of road.
Noise and Dust Impact during construction	Standard condition of consent is to be imposed.
Pedestrian access-footpath required	Additional requirements have been imposed via conditions for extension of footpaths and for pedestrian refuges.
Maintenance of existing shrubs along Ocean Drive	Additional monitoring will be conducted under the terms of the Vegetation Management Plan

(e) The Public Interest

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

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

18.

· 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 - 552.1 Recommended Conditions

2 ⇩. DA2019 - 552.1 Plans

3 ⇩. DA2019 - 552.1 Contributions Estimate

4 ⇩. DA2019 - 552.1 Responce to RFI

5 ⇩. DA2019 - 552.1 SOEE

6 ⇩. DA2019 - 552.1 Stormwater Report

7 ⇩. DA2019 - 552.1 Traffic Impact Assessment

8 ⇩. DA2019 - 552.1 Vegetation & Habitat Management Plan

date of meeting:		Wednesday 10 June 2020
location:		Via Skype
time:		2:00pm

Member	26/02/20	11/03/20	25/03/20	08/04/20	06/05/20	27/05/20
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.