Agenda of Development Assessment Panel - Thursday, 21 January 2021

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 21/01/2021

Item: 05

Subject: DA2020 - 701.1 Part Change of Use from Educational Establishment to Multi Dwelling Housing including Tourist and Visitor Accommodation, 11 Mission Terrace Lakewood, Lot 2 DP 771931

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Steven Ford

Applicant: Blueprint Planning Consultants

Owner: CrossView Australia Ltd

Estimated Cost: $0

Parcel no: 16822

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2020 - 701 for a part Change of Use from Educational Establishment to Multi Dwelling Housing including Tourist and Visitor Accommodation at Lot 2, DP 771931, No. 11 Mission Terrace, Lakewood, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a Part Change of Use from Educational Establishment to Multi Dwelling Housing including Tourist and Visitor Accommodation 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.

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 56 Hectares.

Prior to lodgement of this development application, the subject property was rezoned from RU1 Primary Production to R1 General Residential and E3 Environmental Management, amending the minimum lot size, building height and floor space ratio provisions applying to part of Lot 2 DP 771931, Mission Terrace, Lakewood. (PP2016 - 11.1)

The site is now zoned R1 General Residential and E3 Environmental Management 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 photographs:

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· The existing educational establishment with onsite accommodation was originally approved by DA1999/752 and remains an active consent. This is to be partly retained, namely the educational buildings, in conjunction with the residential accommodation.

· Propose change of use of all dwellings to multi dwelling housing. To allow flexibility to rent out any or all dwellings to persons not associated with the educational establishment.

· Allow tourist and visitor accommodation of dwellings numbered 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 18 and 3 studios.

· All educational establishment buildings to remain as previously approved by DA1999/752.

· No Building works are proposed other than bushfire mitigation upgrades.

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

Application Chronology

· 27 August 2020 - Application Received

· 9 September to 22 September 2020 - Notification of Proposal

· 21 September 2020 - Submission received

· 24 September 2020 - Additional information received

· 28 October 2020 - Additional information request from Rural Fire Service

· 6 November 2020 - Additional information received

· 4 December 2020 - Additional Information Request from Rural Fire Service

· 17 December 2020 - General Terms of Approval received from Rural Fire Service

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

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

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) Any Environmental Planning Instrument

State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2020

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

Clause 7 - The property is over 1ha in size and consideration of the site as potential koala habitat is required under Clause 8.

Clause 8 - As per Circular B35, Clause 1.5, it is the intent of the Policy that investigations for potential and core koala habitat be limited to those areas in which it is proposed to disturb habitat. In this case, the application has demonstrated that no habitat will be removed or disturbed in relation to the change of use of the existing development to multi dwelling housing. Therefore, the site is not considered to be potential habitat and further consideration of the SEPP is not required.

Clause 9 - The Applicant has submitted an assessment by JB Enviro, which satisfactorily demonstrates the site is not core koala habitat. As the site is not considered to be core habitat, further consideration of the SEPP is not required.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is located within a coastal environment area.

Clause 7 - This SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.

Clause 14 - 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.

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 remains compatible with the surrounding coastal and built environment. The site for the proposal is predominately cleared and located within an area zoned for residential purposes.

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 and E3 Environmental Management.

· Clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table - The proposed development for a Change of use from Educational Establishment to Multi Dwelling Housing including part Tourist and visitor accommodation is a permissible landuse with consent. (note the footprint of the existing development is within the R1 zoned land only).

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 E3 zone are as follows:

o To protect, manage and restore areas with special ecological, scientific, cultural or aesthetic values. To provide for a variety of housing types and densities.

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 no identifiable adverse impact to the adjoining environmental management land in terms of special ecology, cultural or aesthetic values.

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

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

No draft instruments apply to the site.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

The relevant general provisions of the plan considered in the following table:

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B2: Environmental Management*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3	a) Development must comply with Council’s Developments, Public Place & Events - Waste Minimisation and Management Policy.	The existing storage and collection of waste satisfies this clause and is to remain as private collection. Standard condition recommended for construction waste management.	Yes
Cut and Fill Regrading
4	a) Development shall not exceed a maximum cut of 1.0m and fill of 1.0m measured vertically above the ground level (existing) at a distance of 1.0m outside the perimeter of the external walls of the building (This does not apply to buildings where such cut and fill is fully retained within or by the external walls of the building).	The proposal involves no additional earthworks beyond what has been approved under consent to DA 1999/752.	N/A

DCP 2013: Part B - General Provision - B3: Hazards Management

Bushfire Hazard Management

a) APZs are to be located outside of environmental protection zones and wholly provided within private land. Note perimeter roads provided as part of a residential subdivision are classified as being part of the subdivision and not a separate permissible land use within environment protection zones.

The existing APZ is wholly contained within the R1 zoned area. As stated in the Bushfire Assessment Report, by Midcoast Building and Environmental, amended August 2020, the proposed multi dwelling housing development is capable of complying.

Yes

*DCP 2013: Part B- General Provisions- B4: Transport, Traffic Management, Access and Car Parking*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Road Hierarchy
Parking Provision
24	a) Off-street Parking is provided in accordance with Table 3: - 1 parking space per each dwelling for dwelling-house.	A parking study has been submitted to support the existing development onsite parking adequately addresses the DCP 2013 requirements. All the dwellings (total of 30 separate occupancies) include a single carport and most provide for a stacked parking space in the driveway from the internal access road to the garage. Total of 30 residential car spaces + opportunities for stacked car parking within driveways for visitors. In addition, there is visitor parking provided near the office building for 24 angled parking spaces, and a further 12 angled parking spaces near the meeting/classroom building. Resulting in adequate parking for the existing administration and educational buildings to partly continue operation/use. Providing the above comments, location, the private road/driveways widths being 6.2m wide, existing developments, there is no identifiable impact to on street car parking along Mission Terrace. In general the development meets the objectives of this clause.	Yes
Parking Layout
28	c) Parking spaces shall generally be behind the building line but may be located between the building line and the street when: − it is stacked parking in the driveway; or − it can be demonstrated that improvements to the open space provided will result; and − the spaces are screened (densely landscaped or similar) from the street by a landscaping with a minimum width of 3.0m for the entire length of the parking area.	No Changes proposed - see Parking and Manoeuvring later in this report	N/A
28	d) Parking design and layout is provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1 - Parking facilities - Off-street car parking.	No Changes proposed - see Parking and Manoeuvring later in this report	N/A
34	a) All parking and manoeuvring spaces must be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	No changes proposed	N/A
34	b) Council will not permit the discharge of stormwater directly into kerbing and guttering or table drains for any development other than that of a minor nature.	No Changes proposed	N/A

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B5: Social Impact Assessment and Crime Prevention*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Crime Prevention
43	a) The development addresses the generic principles of crime prevention: − Casual surveillance and sightlines; − Land use mix and activity generators; − Definition of use and ownership; − Basic exterior building design; − Lighting; − Way-finding; and − Predictable routes and entrapment locations; − as described in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.	No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available. Note, buildings are existing onsite.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Part C - Development Specific Provisions - C1: Low Density Residential Development*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Front Setbacks
44	a) Dwellings may incorporate an articulation zone to a street frontage at no less than 3m from property boundary. The following building elements are permitted within the articulation zone: − 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. b) These building elements should not extend above the eave gutter line, other than a pitched roof to an entry feature or portico that has the same pitch as the roof on the dwelling house.	N/A - the development is at the end of Mission Terrace and considered to be inward facing to internal roads/driveways.	N/A
44	c) The primary road front setback shall be: Classified road = any frontage 6.0m Primary frontage = 4.5m Secondary frontage = 3.0m Ancillary Lane = 2.0m Large lot residential and rural zones = 10.0m	N/A - No proposed changes	N/A
45	a) A garage, carport or car parking space should: − be at least 1m behind the building line, where the dwelling(s) has a setback from a front boundary of 4.5m or more, or − be at least 5.5m from a front boundary, where the dwelling(s) has a setback of less than 4.5m.	N/A - no proposed changes.	N/A
	b) The total width of the garage/carport openings should not be more than 6m and not more than 50 per cent of the width of the building.	N/A - no proposed changes to existing carports.	N/A
	c) Driveway crossovers are no greater than 5.0m in width.	N/A - no proposed changes	N/A
	d) Where a dual occupancy or attached dwelling is proposed on a corner lot a garage and driveway is provided on each road frontage.	N/A - not considered a corner lot	N/A
Side and Rear Setbacks
46	a) A minimum rear boundary setback of 4m is to be provided to dwellings (including verandahs, patios and decks).	All buildings are setback not less than 10m from the nearest property boundary. There are no impacts on adjoining properties from overshadowing.	Yes
47	a) Ground floors (being <1m above existing ground level) should be setback a minimum of 900mm from side boundaries.	All dwellings are single storey, although the floor may be elevated due to the fall of the site. No dwelling encroaches 900mm from any boundary.
Private Open Space
48.	a) All dwellings should have a minimum area of private open space of 35m2, which includes a principal private open space area with: − a minimum dimension of 4m x 4m, and − a maximum grade of 5% for minimum 4m x 4m of the total open space requirement, and − direct accessibility from a ground floor living area and orientated to maximise use.	Each dwelling is provided with a fenced yard which provides private open space. The private open spaces varies from 70m² to 150m², however, due to the natural slope of the site exceeds the 5% maximum specified by the DCP, it is considered that this is compensated by the large size of the yards providing more than the minimum private open space and the provision of decks on each of the dwellings, opening from the living room. The objectives of this clause have been satisfied.	Yes
	b) Private open space may include clothes drying areas and garbage storage.	Appropriate area provided for each dwelling.	Yes
Public Domain and Fencing
49	a) Front fences built forward of the building line for the primary road frontage should be detailed on the development application plans.	N/A - no front fence proposed	N/A
Bulk and Scale
51	a) Direct views between indoor living rooms and principal private open space of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots, including possible dwellings on future lots, should be obscured or screened where: − Ground and first floor (and above) indoor living room windows are within a 9m radius. − Direct views between principal private open space areas where within a 12m radius. − Direct views between indoor living rooms of dwellings into the principal area of private open space of other dwellings within a 12m radius.	No adverse privacy impacts are identified to neighbouring properties. It is also noted due to the natural fall of the site, and the orientation of the internal floor areas towards the north, and with garages on the southern side, good visual privacy is achieved between each of the dwellings.	Yes
	b) A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah should have a privacy screen where there are direct views of: − Indoor living room windows of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots within 9m radius; or − Principal areas of private open space of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots within a 12m radius.	As discussed above, adequate separation is provided between adjoining dwellings to provide privacy.	Yes
	c) Privacy protection is not required for: − Any Indoor living room windows with a sill height of greater than 1.5m above the finished floor level of that room or where fixed non-openable translucent glass is installed to the same height.	No additional screening or increase sill height will be required.	Yes
	d) Direct views described above may be reduced or obscured by one of the following measures (details to be submitted with the development application): − 1.8m high fence or wall between ground-floor level windows or between a dwelling and principal private open space − Screening of minimum 1.7m height, that has 25% openings (max), with no individual opening more than 30mm wide, is permanently fixed and is made of durable materials. − A window, the whole of which has translucent glass and is not able to be opened.	There are no privacy concerns between adjoining properties externally or internally. No additional screening or increase sill height will be required.	Yes
Ancillary Development
56	a) For ancillary development in R1 General Residential, R2 Low Density Residential, R3 Medium Density Residential, R4 High Density Residential, R5 Large Lot Residential and RU5 Village zones: − The height of an outbuilding or the alterations and additions to an existing outbuilding on a lot should not be more than 4.8m above ground level (existing). − The building should be single storey construction with a maximum roof pitch of 24 degrees. − The maximum area of the building should be 60m2 for lots less than 900m² and maximum of 100m² for larger lots. − Ancillary development that is a garage, or an outbuilding, or a rainwater tank should not be located in front of the main building line with the exception of swimming pools.	N/A - No changes to existing and proposed Educational building as approved under DA1999/752	N/A

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

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

(iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations

Fire Safety and other considerations - Clause 93

The change of building use sought by a development application is satisfied that the building complies (or will, when completed, comply) with such of the Category 1 fire safety provisions as are applicable to the building’s proposed use. It is considered that buildings are capable of complying to that required by the BCA appropriate to all of the proposed uses, both the existing dwellings and Tourist and Visitor Accommodation buildings, on completion.

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended.

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

Context and Setting

· The site has a general north west street frontage orientation to Mission Terrace.

· Adjoining the site to the north is bushland zoned RU1 and further north is Ocean Drive.

· Adjoining the site to the east is E3 environmental Management land and further East is residential subdivisions (West Haven).

· Adjoining the site to the south is E3 Environmental Management land and National Park land.

· Adjoining the site to the west is a residential subdivision.

· The proposal will not have any significant 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 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. Adequate building separation and tenancy is proposed/existing.

· 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 between the hours of 9am and 3pm.

Roads

The site is at the end of Mission Terrace is characterised as a cul-de-sac. Mission Terrace is a sealed public road under the care control of Council and connects to a private sealed road/driveway to each dwelling.

Traffic and Transport

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

Site Frontage and Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed though an individual existing crossover with direct frontage to Mission Terrace, being a Council-owned public road. Access complies with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards at the time of construction.

Parking and Manoeuvring

A total of 30 parking spaces have been provided on-site within carports, with up to 24 additional parking provided existing educational buildings and additional parking available within the internal roads/driveways. Parking and driveway widths on site comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890).

The Application has provided supporting documentation regarding parking and manoeuvring from Midcoast Consulting Engineers. The application has satisfactorily demonstrated that the proposed development can provide adequate parking and access for compliance with DCP 2013 and AS2890. Existing private road carriageway widths are minimum 6.2m which complies with public road standard for Shareway or Access Place (Auspec D1, Table D1.5), suitable for servicing up to 30 dwellings.

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site has an existing 100mm metered service to the 100mm diameter PVC water main on the same side of Mission Terrace.

Each proposed dwelling will need to be separately metered, meters may be either located at the road frontage or internally with a master meter at the boundary.

A hydraulic strategy and detailed plans are required from a hydraulic consultant for the whole of the development on the site. Water service sizing is then to be determined by the hydraulic consultant to suit the proposed development, as well as addressing fire service requirements to AS 2419 and backflow protection requirements.

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 have previously been submitted and approved with a S.68 application.

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is connected to Sewer via junction to the existing sewer manhole outside the property frontage of the development lot. The site may discharge all sewage to this point.

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

Appropriate consent conditions are recommended.

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards North-East corner of the lot and is currently serviced via an existing onsite detention. Detailed plans have previously been submitted and approved with a S.68 application.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

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

Other Land Resources

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

Water Cycle

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

Soils

The proposed development will not have any significant adverse impacts on soils in terms of quality, erosion, stability and/or productivity.

Air and Microclimate

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

Flora and Fauna

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

Waste

Satisfactory private waste collection arrangements are to be retained. No adverse impacts anticipated. A consent condition is recommended in this regard.

Energy

No adverse impacts anticipated. No change to buildings.

Noise and Vibration

The noise and amenity operations of the proposed development will not result in any significant adverse impacts on the existing air quality or result in any pollution.

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

The Applicant has submitted a bushfire report prepared by Midcoast Building and Environmental, August 2020.

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 ranges from 12.5, 19 and 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 to require upgrade of the buildings prior to Occupation Certificate.

In accordance with Section 100B - Rural Fires Act 1997 - the application proposes development that is integrated development. As a result, the applicant has submitted a bushfire report prepared by a Certified Consultant. The report was forwarded to the NSW Rural Fire Service who have since issued a Bushfire Safety Authority, which will be incorporated into the consent.

Safety, Security and Crime Prevention

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 housing density will retain 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 Impacts in the Locality

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

Site Design and Internal Design

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

Construction

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

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

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

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
The submission notes that it does not entirely object. However, reserves the right to object because of some of the issues raised and consideration of adopting the proposed enhancements as mitigation measures.	The submission was forwarded to the Applicant for consideration. Issues raised have been noted.
Bushfire attack mitigation	The submitted bushfire report sets out all the required works to comply with Planning for Bushfire Protection 2019. There is no requirement to undertake any works outside the property boundaries. In accordance with Section 100B - Rural Fires Act 1997, the report was forwarded to the NSW Rural Fire Service who have since issued concurrence as the Bushfire Safety Authority, which will be incorporated into the consent.
Pedestrian access to Ocean Drive and Queens Lake. Consideration is requested to enter into an amicable agreement for pedestrian access for compensation or maintenance costs.	The proposed application does not indicate a pedestrian route to Ocean Drive over the adjoining private land. The use of the existing fire trail through 304 Ocean Drive is not proposed to change. There is no planning justification requiring such an arrangement. If the owner of the adjoining land wishes to negotiate such an arrangement, this could be addressed as a civil matter, and not be imposed on the development consent. The Development has access to Ocean Drive and Queens Lake via Mission Terrace. Therefore, there no further comment is required at this time.
Stormwater discharge	There are always alternative solutions to stormwater solutions, however the development does not propose any new works and so any existing stormwater flow has been approved by council in previous consents. The existing stormwater infrastructure appears consistent with the most recent Section 68 approval for the site, reference 680.2018.00005067.001 and the original Engineering Works approved by DA1999/752 for the Educational Establishment. This application relates to the change of use of the approved residential accommodation to allow long term accommodation. This will have no impact to the existing storm water flow.

(e) The Public Interest

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

Ecologically Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle

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

The four principles of ecologically sustainable development are:

· the precautionary principle,

· intergenerational equity,

· conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity,

· improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms.

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

Climate change

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

· Development contributions will not be required under S64/S7.11 for the following reasons:

· The development does not propose the creation of any additional dwellings

· The existing dwellings and proposed dwellings have been approved by DA1999/752, as modified, and levied appropriate S64/S7.11 developer charges that applied at the time of approval and payable prior to the release of the Construction Certificate for each dwelling.

· The 3x Existing Studios were approved by DA2005/301 and note that contributions were satisfied with a site credit.

· Contributions have been levied as dwellings, as required at the time, and not as tourist and visitor accommodation.

· No subdivision is proposed (note, future development involving subdivision might generate additional S64/7.11 charges to be levied).

· The dwelling yet to be constructed but approved under DA1999/752 will be levied S64/7.11 charges prior to the Construction Certificate as per the consent conditions.

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 and appropriate, conditions have been recommended to manage the impacts attributed to these issues.

The site is considered suitable for the proposed development and the proposal adequately addresses relevant planning controls. The development is not considered to be contrary to the public's interest and will not result a significant adverse social, environmental or economic impact. It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to the recommended conditions of consent provided in the attachment section of this report (Attachment 1).

Attachments

1 ⇩. DA2020 - 701.1 Recommended DA Conditions

2 ⇩. 2020 - 701.1 Plans and Supporting Reports

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 21/01/2021

Item: 06

Subject: DA2020 - 917.1 Ancillary Building Carport at Lot 44 DP 1078055, No 12 St Vincents Way, Bonny Hills

Report Author: Building Surveyor, Ross Frazier

Applicant: C A Xerri

Owner: C A & L G Xerri

Estimated Cost: $5,000

Parcel no: 46750

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2020 - 917.1 for ancillary building - carport at Lot 44 DP 1078055, No. 12 St Vincents Way, Bonny Hills be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a detached open carport 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.

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 674.1m²^.

The site is zoned R 1 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:

· Proposed open carport detached from existing dwelling and located to the side of the existing dwelling.

· Carport posts to be located approx. 625mm from side boundary in lieu of 900mm as per DCP.

· Height to ridge - 3550mm indicated

· Height to eaves - 2650mm indicated.

Refer to Attachment 2 for plans of the proposed development.

Application Chronology

· 23/10/2020 Application lodged

· 25/11/2020 Notification of application completed. One (1) submission received

· 27/11/2020 Site inspection undertaken. Discussed side setback requirements with owner/applicant. Applicant indicated that he may be able to comply with DCP requirements

· 30/11/2020. Emailed objector to advise that posts setback would comply with DCP

· 30/11/2020. Received e-mail confirmation submission would be withdrawn if DCP requirements are met.

· 30/11/2020. Emailed applicant to confirm submission withdrawn provided DCP requirements are met. Requested amended site plan to indicate post location in accordance with DCP

· 7/12/2020. Received email from applicant they now wish to contest the submission.

· 10/12/2020. Advised objector that the application will be forwarded to DAP as the applicant has declined to relocate carport.

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) 2020

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

Clauses 7 and 8 - The site is not subject to a Koala Plan of Management and is less than 1 hectare in size. No tree removal is proposed.

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 is not required for the development.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Clause 45 - Development in proximity to electricity infrastructure - appears clear of infrastructure.

Clause 102 refers to noise and vibration impacts from a classified road on non-road development. The clause does not apply.

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

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

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local 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 ancillary structure to a dwelling is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

o To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

· Clause 2.3(2) - The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives as it is a permissible landuse and consistent with the established residential locality. The proposal contributes to the range of housing options in the locality.

· Clause 2.7 - No demolition proposed.

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 3.5m which complies with the standard height limit applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the site is unaltered as the proposal is for an open carport.

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

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

· Clause 7.1 - The site is not mapped as potentially containing acid sulfate soils.

· 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).

(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: Part B - General Provisions - B2: Environmental Management*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3	a) Development must comply with Council’s Developments, Public Place & Events - Waste Minimisation and Management Policy.	Standard condition recommended for construction waste management.	Yes
Cut and Fill Regrading
4	a) Development shall not exceed a maximum cut of 1.0m and fill of 1.0m measured vertically above the ground level (existing) at a distance of 1.0m outside the perimeter of the external walls of the building (This does not apply to buildings where such cut and fill is fully retained within or by the external walls of the building).	Proposed open carport. Generally Level Site.	Yes
5	a) A certified practicing structural engineer must certify any retaining wall greater than 1.0m.	No retaining walls proposed.	N/A
5	b) Where a combination of a fence and a wall is proposed to be greater than 1.2m high: - be a maximum combined height of 1.8m above existing property boundary level; - be constructed up to the front boundary for a maximum length of 6.0m or 30% of the street frontage, whichever is less; − the fence component has openings which make it not less than 25% transparent; and − provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and - provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances.		N/A

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provision - B3: Hazards Management*
Bushfire Hazard Management
18	a) APZs are to be located outside of environmental protection zones and wholly provided within private land. Note perimeter roads provided as part of a residential subdivision are classified as being part of the subdivision and not a separate permissible land use within environment protection zones.	Not bushfire prone land	N/A
Flooding
19	a) Development must comply with Council’s Floodplain Management Plan and Flood Policies.	Not flood prone land	N/A

*DCP 2013: Part B- General Provisions- B4: Transport, Traffic Management, Access and Car Parking*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Road Hierarchy
Parking Provision
24	a) Off-street Parking is provided in accordance with Table 3: - 1 parking space per each dwelling for dwelling-house.	No alteration to existing residential off-street carparking for dwelling.	N/A
Parking Layout
28	c) Parking spaces shall generally be behind the building line but may be located between the building line and the street when: − it is stacked parking in the driveway; or − it can be demonstrated that improvements to the open space provided will result; and − the spaces are screened (densely landscaped or similar) from the street by a landscaping with a minimum width of 3.0m for the entire length of the parking area.	No alteration to existing residential off-street carparking	N/A
28	d) Parking design and layout is provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1 - Parking facilities - Off-street car parking.	No alteration to existing residential off-street carparking
34	a) All parking and manoeuvring spaces must be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	No alteration to existing residential off-street carparking	N/A
34	b) Council will not permit the discharge of stormwater directly into kerbing and guttering or table drains for any development other than that of a minor nature.	Roof drainage connect to existing.	Yes - acceptable

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B5: Social Impact Assessment and Crime Prevention*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Crime Prevention
43	a) The development addresses the generic principles of crime prevention: − Casual surveillance and sightlines; − Land use mix and activity generators; − Definition of use and ownership; − Basic exterior building design; − Lighting; − Way-finding; and − Predictable routes and entrapment locations; − as described in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.	No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Part C - Development Specific Provisions - C1: Low Density Residential Development*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Front Setbacks
44	a) Dwellings may incorporate an articulation zone to a street frontage at no less than 3m from property boundary. The following building elements are permitted within the articulation zone: − 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. b) These building elements should not extend above the eave gutter line, other than a pitched roof to an entry feature or portico that has the same pitch as the roof on the dwelling house.	No articulation proposed	N/A
44	c) The primary road front setback shall be: Classified road = any frontage 6.0m Primary frontage = 4.5m Secondary frontage = 3.0m Ancillary Lane = 2.0m Large lot residential and rural zones = 10.0m	5.5m front setback to carport.	Yes
45	a) A garage, carport or car parking space should: − be at least 1m behind the building line, where the dwelling(s) has a setback from a front boundary of 4.5m or more, or − be at least 5.5m from a front boundary, where the dwelling(s) has a setback of less than 4.5m.	Support posts of carport located 1m behind the building line. The dwelling has an existing front fence and gates which will assist in screening the carport area.	Yes
	b) The total width of the garage/carport openings should not be more than 6m and not more than 50 per cent of the width of the building.	Separate structure to main dwelling	N/A
	c) Driveway crossovers are no greater than 5.0m in width.	No new crossover proposed.	N/A
	d) Where a dual occupancy or attached dwelling is proposed on a corner lot a garage and driveway is provided on each road frontage.		N/A
Side and Rear Setbacks
46	a) A minimum rear boundary setback of 4m is to be provided to dwellings (including verandahs, patios and decks).	No change to existing setback on main dwelling. Carport does not protrude past existing dwelling rear setback	Yes
	b) A minimum rear boundary setback of 900mm applies to sheds and swimming pools subject to achieving minimum required private open space area.		N/A
	c) Council may consider varying rear setback requirements where it is demonstrated that the private open space could achieve better solar access between the building and the side setback. In that instance, one side setback should be a minimum 4m in width (for an equivalent length of rear boundary, behind building line) and the rear setback may be reduced to 900mm.		N/A
47	a) Ground floors (being <1m above existing ground level) should be setback a minimum of 900mm from side boundaries.	Support posts for carport proposed to be located approx. 625mm from the side boundary. The plans indicate the gutter location to be 500mm from side boundary. The gutter width is calculated to be 125mm in width from measurements indicated on plans.	No*DCP variation request.
	b) First floors and above (including single storey with floor level >1m) should be setback a minimum of 3m from the side boundary, or reduced down to 900mm where it can be demonstrated that the adjoining property’s primary living rooms and principal private open space areas are not adversely overshadowed for more than 3hrs between 9am - 3pm on 21 June.		N/A
	c) First floors and above should have building walls that step in and out at least every 12m by a minimum of 500mm articulation. Where first floors and above are setback >3m, wall articulation is not required.		N/A
Private Open Space
48.	a) All dwellings should have a minimum area of private open space of 35m2, which includes a principal private open space area with: − a minimum dimension of 4m x 4m, and − a maximum grade of 5% for minimum 4m x 4m of the total open space requirement, and − direct accessibility from a ground floor living area and orientated to maximise use.	Private open space maintained	Yes
	b) Private open space may include clothes drying areas and garbage storage.		N/A
Public Domain and Fencing
49	a) Front fences built forward of the building line for the primary road frontage should be detailed on the development application plans.	Existing front fence and gates to remain	N/A
	b) Solid Front fences up to 1.2m high should be: − Setback 1.0m from the front boundary, and − Suitably landscaped to reduce visual impact, and − Provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites.
	b) Front fences proposed to be more than 1.2m high should be a maximum of 1.8m in height, above existing front property boundary level, and either: − Include landscaped recesses having minimum dimensions of 1.8m long x 900mm deep which occupy no less than 50% of the total length of the fence, or − be erected up to the front boundary for a maximum length of 6.0m or 50% of the street frontage,		N/A
	c) have openings which make it not less than 25% transparent (no individual opening more than 30mm wide);		N/A
	d) provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and		N/A
	e) provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances.		N/A
50	a) For tennis courts or other similar areas, chain wire fences should be black or dark green plastic coated mesh.		N/A
50	b) Solid fences enclosing these facilities should not be permitted over 1.8m.
Bulk and Scale
51	a) Direct views between indoor living rooms and principal private open space of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots, including possible dwellings on future lots, should be obscured or screened where: − Ground and first floor (and above) indoor living room windows are within a 9m radius. − Direct views between principal private open space areas where within a 12m radius. − Direct views between indoor living rooms of dwellings into the principal area of private open space of other dwellings within a 12m radius.		N/A
	b) A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah should have a privacy screen where there are direct views of: − Indoor living room windows of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots within 9m radius; or − Principal areas of private open space of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots within a 12m radius.		N/A
	c) Privacy protection is not required for: − Any Indoor living room windows with a sill height of greater than 1.5m above the finished floor level of that room or where fixed non-openable translucent glass is installed to the same height.		N/A
	d) Direct views described above may be reduced or obscured by one of the following measures (details to be submitted with the development application): − 1.8m high fence or wall between ground-floor level windows or between a dwelling and principal private open space − Screening of minimum 1.7m height, that has 25% openings (max), with no individual opening more than 30mm wide, is permanently fixed and is made of durable materials. − A window, the whole of which has translucent glass and is not able to be opened.		N/A
Roof Terraces
52	a) Direct views between roof terraces and indoor living room windows or principal areas of private open space of adjacent dwellings should be screened where: − Ground and first floor (and above) indoor living room windows are within a 9m radius of the trafficable area of the roof terrace; Direct views between roof terraces principal areas of private open space within a 12m radius of the trafficable are of the roof terrace.		N/A
	b) Screening should only be considered where: − the height of the screen does not exceed the maximum building height; and − the screening contributes to the building form, and − the screening is integrated into the design of the roof; and − is constructed and designed with materials complementary to the building.		N/A
	c) Lighting installations on roof terraces should be: - contained within the roof terrace area and located at a low level, and - appropriately shaded and fixed in a non-adjustable manner so that light is projected downwards onto the floor surface of the terrace. − designed in compliance with Australian Standards AS4282 - Control of obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.		N/A
Ancillary Development
56	a) For ancillary development in R1 General Residential, R2 Low Density Residential, R3 Medium Density Residential, R4 High Density Residential, R5 Large Lot Residential and RU5 Village zones: − The height of an outbuilding or the alterations and additions to an existing outbuilding on a lot should not be more than 4.8m above ground level (existing). − The building should be single storey construction with a maximum roof pitch of 24 degrees. − The maximum area of the building should be 60m2 for lots less than 900m² and maximum of 100m² for larger lots. − Ancillary development that is a garage, or an outbuilding, or a rainwater tank should not be located in front of the main building line with the exception of swimming pools.	Proposed detached carport Height of carport indicated to be 3.55m Single storey Roof pitch < 24⁰. Single carport < 60m². Support posts located behind building line	Yes Yes Yes Yes

The applicant seeks approval to vary Development Provision 46 relating to side setback. Application is sought to locate the support posts of the carport approx. 625mm from the side boundary.

Objectives:

• To ensure no adverse overshadowing or privacy impacts to neighbouring properties.

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

• To provide useable yard areas and open space.

It is considered that the provisions of the DCP should be upheld in this instance to maintain the objectives. In this regard, a consent condition is recommended to require the carport to be setback a minimum 0.9m with the plans for construction certificate to address compliance with the DCP.

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

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

(iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations

Demolition of buildings AS 2601 - Clause 92

No demolition 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

Context and Setting

· 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.

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 – No proposed alteration to existing service.

Sewer Connection

The proposed works are clear (>600mm) of the existing sewer junction and main traversing the site.

Service available - No proposed alteration to existing service

Stormwater

Service available - Stormwater disposed to existing system.

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

Flora and Fauna

Waste

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

Energy

The proposal is not required to address BASIX commitments.

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 not identified as being bushfire prone.

Safety, Security and Crime Prevention

Social Impacts in the Locality

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

Economic Impacts in the Locality

The proposal is not considered to have any significant adverse economic impacts on the locality. A likely positive impact is that the development will maintain employment in the construction industry, which will lead to flow impacts such as expenditure in the area.

Site Design and Internal Design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative Impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

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

(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 submission and comments are provided as follows:

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Adverse effect on natural light to an existing bedroom window	Proposed carport will be located on the Northern side of the existing dwelling. Any construction close to the side boundary will impact on the natural light to existing windows. Minimum setbacks are to be maintained.
Visual appearance	An existing courtyard style fence located on the front boundary and will assist to screen the carport from the street. The front setback is compliant with the DCP controls.
Overcrowding	Maintaining the DCP requirements for the side setback will assist in reducing the aspect of overcrowding

(e) The Public Interest

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

Ecologically Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle

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

The four principles of ecologically sustainable development are:

· the precautionary principle,

· intergenerational equity,

· conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity,

· improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms.

Climate Change

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

Development contributions will not be required under S64/S7.11.

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.

Attachments

1 ⇩. 2020 - 917.1 Recommended DA Conditions

2 ⇩. 2020 - 917.1 Plans

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 21/01/2021

Item: 07

Subject: DA2020 - 962.1 Dwelling-house at Lot 510 DP 1261705, No. 130 Crestwood Drive, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Fiona Tierney

Applicant: Adenbrook Homes

Owner: D Tabone

Estimated Cost: $450,000

Parcel no: 68465

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2020 - 962 for a dwelling-house at Lot 510, DP 1261705, No. 130 Crestwood Drive, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

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

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

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 602.3m².

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

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Construction of a new two storey dwelling

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

Application Chronology

· 5 November 2020 - Application lodged.

· 12 to 25 November 2020 - Public exhibition via neighbour notification.

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) Any Environmental Planning Instrument (EPI)

State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2020

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

Clause 8 - The site is not under a Koala Plan of Management and the land has an area less than 1 hectare including adjoining land in the same ownership. The SEPP does not prevent the granting of consent on the land being less than 1 hectare in area. The application has 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 (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 - referral to Essential Energy required for any of the following:

(a) the penetration of ground within 2m of an underground electricity power line or an electricity distribution pole or within 10m of any part of an electricity tower,

(b) development carried out:

(i) within or immediately adjacent to an easement for electricity purposes (whether or not the electricity infrastructure exists), or

(ii) immediately adjacent to an electricity substation, or

(iii) within 5m of an exposed overhead electricity power line,

(i) within 30m of a structure supporting an overhead electricity transmission line, measured horizontally from the top of the pool to the bottom of the structure at ground level, or

(ii) within 5m of an overhead electricity power line, measured vertically upwards from the top of the pool

No infrastructure noted in proximity.

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 is a permissible landuse with consent.

· 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.

1. The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives as it is a permissible landuse and consistent with the established residential locality. The proposal contributes to the range of housing options in the locality.

· Clause 4.3 - The proposed maximum overall height of the building above ground level is 7.428m and complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.25:1 and complies with the maximum 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

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

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

No draft instruments apply.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: Part C - Development Specific Provisions - C1: Low Density Residential Development*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Front Setbacks
44	a) Dwellings may incorporate an articulation zone to a street frontage at no less than 3m from property boundary. The following building elements are permitted within the articulation zone.	No building elements proposed within the articulation zone.	N/A
44	c) The primary road front setback shall be: Primary frontage = 4.5m	Site is located on a battleaxe allotment.	N/A
45	a) A garage, carport or car parking space should: - be at least 1m behind the building line, where the dwelling(s) has a setback from a front boundary of 4.5m or more, or - be at least 5.5m from a front boundary, where the dwelling(s) has a setback of less than 4.5m.	Battleaxe allotment	N/A
	b) The total width of the garage/carport openings should not be more than 6m and not more than 50 per cent of the width of the building.	Width of garage door is compliant with the maximum width requirements	Yes
	c) Driveway crossovers are no greater than 5.0m in width.	No change to existing driveway battle-axe access.	N/A
	d) Where a dual occupancy or attached dwelling is proposed on a corner lot a garage and driveway is provided on each road frontage.	No dual occupancy proposed or a corner lot.	N/A
Side and Rear Setbacks
46	a) A minimum rear boundary setback of 4m is to be provided to dwellings (including verandahs, patios and decks).	The rear setback varies from 3m to 6.578m.	No*
	b) A minimum rear boundary setback of 900mm applies to sheds and swimming pools subject to achieving minimum required private open space area.	No ancillary development proposed in rear yard.	N/A
	c) Council may consider varying rear setback requirements where it is demonstrated that the private open space could achieve better solar access between the building and the side setback. In that instance, one side setback should be a minimum 4m in width (for an equivalent length of rear boundary, behind building line) and the rear setback may be reduced to 900mm.	Proposal provides increased setbacks to all other elevations and provides good solar access. Meets the average requirements and intent of this clause.	Yes
47	a) Ground floors (being <1m above existing ground level) should be setback a minimum of 900mm from side boundaries.	North side setback min. 2.5m setback. South side setback min. 3.0m setback. West side setback >3m setback.	Yes
	b) First floors and above (including single storey with floor level >1m) should be setback a minimum of 3m from the side boundary, or reduced down to 900mm where it can be demonstrated that the adjoining property’s primary living rooms and principal private open space areas are not adversely overshadowed for more than 3hrs between 9am - 3pm on 21 June.	First floor north side setback is varying with 2.673m minimum to wall. The remaining setbacks are 3m or more. No adverse overshadowing impacts to neighbouring properties identified.	Yes
	c) First floors and above should have building walls that step in and out at least every 12m by a minimum of 500mm articulation. Where first floors and above are setback >3m, wall articulation is not required.	First floor is set back over 3m.	Yes
Private Open Space
48.	a) All dwellings should have a minimum area of private open space of 35m2, which includes a principal private open space area with: - a minimum dimension of 4m x 4m, and - a maximum grade of 5% for minimum 4m x 4m of the total open space requirement, and - direct accessibility from a ground floor living area and orientated to maximise use.	The dwelling contains 35m² open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m space.	Yes
	b) Private open space may include clothes drying areas and garbage storage.	Noted. Clothes drying area nominated.	Yes
Public Domain and Fencing
49	a) Front fences built forward of the building line for the primary road frontage should be detailed on the development application plans.	No front fence proposed.	N/A
	b) Solid Front fences up to 1.2m high should be: - Setback 1.0m from the front boundary, and - Suitably landscaped to reduce visual impact, and - Provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites.		N/A
	b) Front fences proposed to be more than 1.2m high should be a maximum of 1.8m in height, above existing front property boundary level, and either: - Include landscaped recesses having minimum dimensions of 1.8m long x 900mm deep which occupy no less than 50% of the total length of the fence, or - be erected up to the front boundary for a maximum length of 6.0m or 50% of the street frontage.		N/A
	c) have openings which make it not less than 25% transparent (no individual opening more than 30mm wide);		N/A
	d) provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and	Not a corner site.	N/A
	e) provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances.	No site line issues identified for driveway entrance.	Yes
Bulk and Scale
51	a) Direct views between indoor living rooms and principal private open space of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots, including possible dwellings on future lots, should be obscured or screened where: - Ground and first floor (and above) indoor living room windows are within a 9m radius. - Direct views between principal private open space areas where within a 12m radius. - Direct views between indoor living rooms of dwellings into the principal area of private open space of other dwellings within a 12m radius.	Window placements have been carefully considered and where appropriate highlight windows nominated. i.e. north facing windows on the first floor are bedroom windows and one is a highlight window. No direct views between living rooms and principal private open space areas of adjoining properties within 9m and 12m radius.	Yes
	b) A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah should have a privacy screen where there are direct views of: - Indoor living room windows of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots within 9m radius; or - Principal areas of private open space of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots within a 12m radius.	No upper level deck proposed	Yes
	c) Privacy protection is not required for: - Any Indoor living room windows with a sill height of greater than 1.5m above the finished floor level of that room or where fixed non-openable translucent glass is installed to the same height.	Noted refer to above comments.	Yes
	d) Direct views described above may be reduced or obscured by one of the following measures (details to be submitted with the development application): - 1.8m high fence or wall between ground-floor level windows or between a dwelling and principal private open space - Screening of minimum 1.7m height, that has 25% openings (max), with no individual opening more than 30mm wide, is permanently fixed and is made of durable materials. - A window, the whole of which has translucent glass and is not able to be opened.	Screening and other privacy treatment measures are proposed where necessary.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B2: Environmental Management*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3	a) Development must comply with Council’s Developments, Public Place & Events - Waste Minimisation and Management Policy.	Satisfactory arrangements can be put in place for storage and collection of waste. Standard condition recommended for construction waste management.	Yes
Cut and Fill Regrading
4	a) Development shall not exceed a maximum cut of 1.0m and fill of 1.0m measured vertically above the ground level (existing) at a distance of 1.0m outside the perimeter of the external walls of the building (This does not apply to buildings where such cut and fill is fully retained within or by the external walls of the building).	Cut and fill >1m is proposed outside the perimeter of the external building walls. Approx. 1.3m cut to east for a limited length and battered up to fence line.	No*
5	a) A certified practicing structural engineer must certify any retaining wall greater than 1.0m.	Noted. Suitable condition recommended for retaining wall beside dwelling on south side.	Yes
5	b) Where a combination of a fence and a wall is proposed to be greater than 1.2m high: - be a maximum combined height of 1.8m above existing property boundary level; - be constructed up to the front boundary for a maximum length of 6.0m or 30% of the street frontage, whichever is less; − the fence component has openings which make it not less than 25% transparent; and − provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and - provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances.	No retaining wall and front fence combination is proposed. Refer to front fencing comments surrounding masonry wall.	N/A

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provision - B3: Hazards Management*
Bushfire Hazard Management
18	a) APZs are to be located outside of environmental protection zones and wholly provided within private land. Note perimeter roads provided as part of a residential subdivision are classified as being part of the subdivision and not a separate permissible land use within environment protection zones.	APZ within property.	Yes
Flooding
19	a) Development must comply with Council’s Floodplain Management Plan and Flood Policies.	Not flood prone land.	N/A

*DCP 2013: Part B- General Provisions- B4: Transport, Traffic Management, Access and Car Parking*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Road Hierarchy
Parking Provision
24	a) Off-street Parking is provided in accordance with Table 3: - 1 parking space per each dwelling for dwelling-house.	Capacity for more than 1 parking space behind the building line has been provided for.		Yes
Parking Layout
28	c) Parking spaces shall generally be behind the building line but may be located between the building line and the street when: − it is stacked parking in the driveway; or − it can be demonstrated that improvements to the open space provided will result; and − the spaces are screened (densely landscaped or similar) from the street by a landscaping with a minimum width of 3.0m for the entire length of the parking area.	Proposed behind the building line.		Yes
	d) Parking design and layout is provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1 - Parking facilities - Off-street car parking.	Parking design and layout appropriate.		Yes
34	a) All parking and manoeuvring spaces must be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.		Yes
	b) Council will not permit the discharge of stormwater directly into kerbing and guttering or table drains for any development other than that of a minor nature.	Single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.		Yes

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B5: Social Impact Assessment and Crime Prevention*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Crime Prevention
43	a) The development addresses the generic principles of crime prevention: - Casual surveillance and sightlines; - Land use mix and activity generators; - Definition of use and ownership; - Basic exterior building design; - Lighting; - Way-finding; and - Predictable routes and entrapment locations; - as described in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.	No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.	Yes

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision 46 relating to a minimum rear setback requirement of 4m. The rear setback proposed varies from 3m to 6.578m.

The relevant objectives are:

· To ensure no adverse overshadowing or privacy impacts to neighbouring properties.

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

· To provide useable yard areas and open space

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

· The variation is minor and largely compliant. The minor variation is due to the angle in the allotment boundary.

· No adverse overshadowing or privacy impacts will result.

· Adequate natural light and ventilation between dwellings and to private open space areas will be achieved.

· Useable yard and open space areas are provided.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision 4 which provides that development shall not exceed a maximum cut of 1.0m and fill of 1.0m measured

vertically above the ground level (existing) at a distance of 1.0m outside the perimeter of the external walls of the building (This does not apply to buildings where such cut and fill is fully retained within or by the external walls of the building). The proposal incorporates cut over 1m outside the external walls of the building primarily in the front portion of the site. A battered cut is proposed up to 1.3m in height in the rear portion of the site.

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.

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

· The extent of cut and retaining proposed s due to the drop in grade along the depth of the site.

· Stormwater is capable of being managed.

· Privacy of adjoining dwellings is not compromised as a result of the cut.

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 of any 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

No matters prescribed by the regulations apply.

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

Context and Setting

The proposed development 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.

Privacy

The design has had regard to positioning of the primary living and outdoor areas at ground level and cut into the site. Where appropriate privacy protection measures are proposed in the form of either privacy screening or highlight windows. Bedroom windows are located on upper levels. There are no significant adverse privacy impacts identified that would warrant refusal of the application.

Access, Traffic and Transport

The proposal will not have any significant adverse impacts in terms access, transport and traffic.

Water Supply Connection

Water supply service is existing to the lot. Details of connection and associated plumbing will be provided with section 68 application under the Local Government Act. Appropriate condition recommended.

Sewer Connection

Sewer service is existing to the lot. Details of connection and associated plumbing will be provided with section 68 application under the Local Government Act. Appropriate condition recommended.

Stormwater

There is a stormwater pit and piped network in Watonga Street. The proposal is capable of connection to this network. Details of stormwater drainage and connection will be required with S.68 application. Appropriate standard condition recommended.

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

Air and Microclimate

Flora and Fauna

Construction of the proposed development will not require any removal/clearing of any significant native vegetation. The proposal does not trigger the biodiversity offsets scheme and 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. An assessment of bushfire risk having regard to Planning for Bushfire Protection including vegetation classification and slope concludes that a Bushfire Attack Level 12.5 shall be required.

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

Safety, Security and Crime Prevention

Social Impacts in the Locality

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

Economic Impact in the Locality

Site Design and Internal Design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative Impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

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

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

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

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Privacy - Bedroom windows of proposed dwelling will sit 900mm below top of the boundary fence	Master bedroom window is a highlight window with a sill height of 1.8m the remaining 2 bedroom windows are set at 1.2m and located 3 to 6m from the rear boundary. Bedroom windows under the DCP are not subject to the same privacy limitations and setbacks as primary living areas. Given the sill heights casual overlooking is generally not an issue in normal use of a bedroom.

(e) The Public Interest

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

Ecologically Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle

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

The four principles of ecologically sustainable development are:

· the precautionary principle,

· intergenerational equity,

· conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity,

· improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms.

Climate change

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

Development contributions will not be required under S64/S7.11 as the development is located on an approved lot and development is for a single dwelling.

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 ⇩. 2020 - 962.1 Recommended DA Conditions

2 ⇩. 2020 - 962.1 Plans

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 21/01/2021

Item: 08

Subject: DA2020 - 430.1 Additional Dwelling to create Dual Occupancy with Torrens Title Subdivision, Lot 6 DP258215, 5 Kiah Place Bonny Hills, 11028

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Steven Ford

Applicant: Karen Burke Registered Architect

Owner: S B Hollis & K N Burke

Estimated Cost: $330,000

Parcel no: 11028

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2020 - 430.1 for Additional Dwelling to create Dual Occupancy with Torrens Title Subdivision at Lot 6, DP 258215, No. 5 Kiah Place, Bonny Hills, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for Additional Dwelling to create Dual Occupancy with Torrens Title Subdivision at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

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

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

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 924m²and there is an existing single dwelling located on the land.

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:

· Additional dwelling to create dual occupancy

· Subdivision into 2 torrens title lots.

· Staging of the proposal.

· Removal of six (6) mature native trees

Refer to Attachment 2 for the plans and supporting reports of the proposed development.

Application Chronology

· 09 June 2020 - Application lodged.

· 16 June 2020 to 29 June 2020 - Neighbour notification.

· 20 July 2020 - Amended plans received.

· 28 July 2020 - Additional amended plans received.

· 06 August 2020 - Hollow bearing tree assessment received

· 20 August 2020 - Additional information requested

· 11 December 2020 - Ecological Impact Assessment received

· 11 January 2020 - Amended plans received

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) Any Environmental Planning Instrument (EPI)

State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2020

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

Clause 8 - The site is less than 1 hectare including adjoining land in the same ownership. The SEPP does not prevent the granting of consent on the land being less than 1 hectare in area.

The Applicant has also submitted an Ecological Impact Assessment to support the application for development of the site and the proposal has been assessed by Council’s Arborist and Ecologist. The Five Part test undertaken and an assessment of tree health also provided has been confirmed to be satisfactory and that the recommendations for tree removal were justified. Recommended mitigation measures have been appropriately applied to the recommended conditions.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

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

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is located within a coastal use area.

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 funneling 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 located within an area zoned for residential purposes.

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

A BASIX certificate (number 1104815S) 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 R1 General Residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table, the proposed development for an additional Dwelling to create Dual Occupancy with Torrens Title Subdivision is a permissible land uses with consent.

The objectives of the R1 zone are as follows:

o To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

· Clause 2.3(2) - The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives having regard to the fact that the proposal would contribute to the range of housing types and densities to meet the housing needs of the community.

· Clause 4.1A - The minimum lot sizes do not apply to the proposal as it is characterised as a dual occupancy with subdivision development (integrated housing). The proposal is 1 into 2 lot Torrens title subdivision, the existing dwelling is located on proposed lot 1 with a total area of 441.3m2 and proposed lot 2 has a total area of 483.1m2 with a proposed single dwelling.

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the building above ground level (existing) is 5.69 m which complies with the standard height limit of 8.5 m applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.36:1.0 which complies with the maximum 0.65:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

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

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

(ii) Any proposed instrument that is or has been placed on exhibition

No draft instruments apply to the site.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan (DCP) in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013:

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B2: Environmental Management*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3	a) Development must comply with Council’s Developments, Public Place & Events - Waste Minimisation and Management Policy.	Satisfactory arrangements can be put in place for storage and collection of waste. Standard condition recommended for construction waste management.	Yes
Cut and Fill Regrading
4	a) Development shall not exceed a maximum cut of 1.0m and fill of 1.0m measured vertically above the ground level (existing) at a distance of 1.0m outside the perimeter of the external walls of the building (This does not apply to buildings where such cut and fill is fully retained within or by the external walls of the building).	No cut or fill greater than 1m is proposed outside of the building footprint.	Yes
5	a) A certified practicing structural engineer must certify any retaining wall greater than 1.0m.	N/A	N/A
5	b) Where a combination of a fence and a wall is proposed to be greater than 1.2m high: - be a maximum combined height of 1.8m above existing property boundary level; - be constructed up to the front boundary for a maximum length of 6.0m or 30% of the street frontage, whichever is less; − the fence component has openings which make it not less than 25% transparent; and − provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and - provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances.	N/A - no front fences proposed	N/A

DCP 2013: Part B - General Provision - B3: Hazards Management

Bushfire Hazard Management

Capable of complying - see bush fire comments later in this report

Yes

*DCP 2013: Part B- General Provisions- B4: Transport, Traffic Management, Access and Car Parking*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies

Parking Provision
24	a) Off-street Parking is provided in accordance with Table 3. 1 parking space per each dwelling for dwelling-houses/dual occupancies/semi-detached dwellings.	Both proposed lots are capable of accommodating off street car parking areas. The existing dwelling has a hardstand area in front of the building line which is to be removed. The existing dwelling is proposed to provide a primary hardstand space minimum 6m from the front boundary and between the western boundary and the building. The proposed new dwelling will have a double carport behind the front building line of the existing dwelling but forward of the proposed dwelling. Total of 3 parking spaces has been provided. Objectives of this clause have been satisfied.		Yes
Parking Layout
28	c) Parking spaces shall generally be behind the building line but may be located between the building line and the street when: − it is stacked parking in the driveway; or − it can be demonstrated that improvements to the open space provided will result; and − the spaces are screened (densely landscaped or similar) from the street by a landscaping with a minimum width of 3.0m for the entire length of the parking area.	Residential parking only. The development proposes to have a new primary parking space 6m from the front boundary but partially in front of the building line by 3m. Plan number DA-2B demonstrates the proposed location in relationship to the existing dwelling. Due to a large existing front setback, and natural slope the car park position was difficult to be located any further from the street. The proposed location has provided separation from the street, allowed for screening with front landscaping and the property being at the end of a cul-de-sac. The objective of this clause have been satisfied and considered to minimise conflict to the street amenity.		No - for the front dwelling 5A* - see comments beside.
	d) Parking design and layout is provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1 - Parking facilities - Off-street car parking.	The development is capable of complying.		Yes

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B5: Social Impact Assessment and Crime Prevention*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Crime Prevention
43	a) The development addresses the generic principles of crime prevention: − Casual surveillance and sightlines; − Land use mix and activity generators; − Definition of use and ownership; − Basic exterior building design; − Lighting; − Way-finding; and − Predictable routes and entrapment locations; − as described in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.	No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Part C - Development Specific Provisions - C1: Low Density Residential Development*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Front Setbacks
44	a) Dwellings may incorporate an articulation zone to a street frontage at no less than 3m from property boundary. The following building elements are permitted within the articulation zone: − 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. b) These building elements should not extend above the eave gutter line, other than a pitched roof to an entry feature or portico that has the same pitch as the roof on the dwelling house.	No building elements are proposed within the articulation zone. The proposed car park has been amended during the assessment and is not within the articulation zone.	N/A
44	c) The primary road front setback shall be: Classified road = any frontage 6.0m Primary frontage = 4.5m Secondary frontage = 3.0m Ancillary Lane = 2.0m Large lot residential and rural zones = 10.0m	Front setbacks. Dwelling (Existing) 5A - 8.2m Proposed Dwelling 5B - 15.5m	Yes
45	a) A garage, carport or car parking space should: − be at least 1m behind the building line, where the dwelling(s) has a setback from a front boundary of 4.5m or more, or − be at least 5.5m from a front boundary, where the dwelling(s) has a setback of less than 4.5m.	Proposed Dwelling 5B, proposes a car port 6m behind the front building line of the existing house but forward of the proposed dwelling. The carport is setback 15.5m from the street frontage and the shape of the proposed lot can be characterised similarly to a battleaxe. The existing dwelling, due to the irregular shape and narrowness of the site has a car space partially forward of the existing building line, see a variation to the development provisions of this clause, see justification below.	Yes and No* Acceptable, see justification below.
	b) The total width of the garage/carport openings should not be more than 6m and not more than 50 per cent of the width of the building.	Proposed carport is 4.9m wide, and 38% of the total width of the dwelling (13.1m).	Yes
	c) Driveway crossovers are no greater than 5.0m in width.	Lot 5B - existing driveway crossover, 3m wide Lot 5A - proposed width 3m wide	Yes
	d) Where a dual occupancy or attached dwelling is proposed on a corner lot a garage and driveway is provided on each road frontage.	N/A - not considered a corner lot.	N/A
Side and Rear Setbacks
46	a) A minimum rear boundary setback of 4m is to be provided to dwellings (including verandahs, patios and decks).	Dwelling 5A - Rear building line is unchanged, 5.28m. Dwelling 5B - minimum rear setback is 4m	Yes
	b) A minimum rear boundary setback of 900mm applies to sheds and swimming pools subject to achieving minimum required private open space area.	None proposed	N/A
	c) Council may consider varying rear setback requirements where it is demonstrated that the private open space could achieve better solar access between the building and the side setback. In that instance, one side setback should be a minimum 4m in width (for an equivalent length of rear boundary, behind building line) and the rear setback may be reduced to 900mm.	No variation proposed	N/A
47	a) Ground floors (being <1m above existing ground level) should be setback a minimum of 900mm from side boundaries.	North East side setback, minimum 970mm. Western boundary side setback unchanged. Proposed internal boundary, minimum setback of 1m.	Yes
	b) First floors and above (including single storey with floor level >1m) should be setback a minimum of 3m from the side boundary, or reduced down to 900mm where it can be demonstrated that the adjoining property’s primary living rooms and principal private open space areas are not adversely overshadowed for more than 3hrs between 9am - 3pm on 21 June.	Proposed first floor side setback of 970mm. The Applicant has provided satisfactory shadow diagrams to demonstrating no overshading impacts caused by the variation, and privacy screening to provide privacy concerns raised from proposed Bed 1 eastern facing windows to the adjoining private open space.	Yes
	c) First floors and above should have building walls that step in and out at least every 12m by a minimum of 500mm articulation. Where first floors and above are setback >3m, wall articulation is not required.	The proposed dwelling is considered well-articulated. No building walls are longer that 7m in length for a single span.	Yes
Private Open Space
48.	a) All dwellings should have a minimum area of private open space of 35m², which includes a principal private open space area with: − a minimum dimension of 4m x 4m, and − a maximum grade of 5% for minimum 4m x 4m of the total open space requirement, and − direct accessibility from a ground floor living area and orientated to maximise use.	The proposal is well accounted for in regards to private open space and site constraints. Due to natural slope, the grade of 5% is not achievable at ground level. Both dwellings have a balcony accessible and usable from primary living areas approximately 20m² and rear yards of over 150m². Providing the site constraints, the objectives of this clause has been satisfied.	No, but minor variation considered acceptable.
	b) Private open space may include clothes drying areas and garbage storage.	The development is capable of having adequate drying and storage facilities.	Yes
Public Domain and Fencing
49	a) Front fences built forward of the building line for the primary road frontage should be detailed on the development application plans.	No front fence proposed	N/A
	b) Solid Front fences up to 1.2m high should be: − Setback 1.0m from the front boundary, and − Suitably landscaped to reduce visual impact, and − Provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites.	N/A	N/A
	b) Front fences proposed to be more than 1.2m high should be a maximum of 1.8m in height, above existing front property boundary level, and either: − Include landscaped recesses having minimum dimensions of 1.8m long x 900mm deep which occupy no less than 50% of the total length of the fence, or − be erected up to the front boundary for a maximum length of 6.0m or 50% of the street frontage,	N/A	N/A
	c) have openings which make it not less than 25% transparent (no individual opening more than 30mm wide);	N/A	N/A
	d) provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and	N/A	N/A
	e) provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances.	N/A	N/A

Bulk and Scale
51	a) Direct views between indoor living rooms and principal private open space of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots, including possible dwellings on future lots, should be obscured or screened where: − Ground and first floor (and above) indoor living room windows are within a 9m radius. − Direct views between principal private open space areas where within a 12m radius. − Direct views between indoor living rooms of dwellings into the principal area of private open space of other dwellings within a 12m radius.	Adequate separation has been provided between the proposed dwelling and the adjoining dwellings. Elevated homes constructed on sloping blocks generally overlook adjacent properties. As a mitigation measure the eastern facing windows have been amended to include direction privacy screening. This softens privacy concerns that have been raised in the submissions and provides adequate screening to adjoining private open space. There is considered to be more than adequate separation of between 9m and 12m to adjoining principle private open space. However, as a mitigation measure, screening plants have been proposed to be planted along the rear boundary.	Yes
	b) A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah should have a privacy screen where there are direct views of: − Indoor living room windows of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots within 9m radius; or − Principal areas of private open space of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots within a 12m radius.	There is considered to be more than adequate separation of between 9m and 12m to adjoining principle private open space. However, as an additional mitigation measure, screening plants have been proposed to be planted along the rear boundary. The objectives of this clause are considered to be satisfied.
	c) Privacy protection is not required for: − Any Indoor living room windows with a sill height of greater than 1.5m above the finished floor level of that room or where fixed non-openable translucent glass is installed to the same height.	Eastern facing windows with sill heights lower than 1.5m have been provided with privacy screening to protect privacy were necessary. This design elements will soften any adverse impacts.	Yes
	d) Direct views described above may be reduced or obscured by one of the following measures (details to be submitted with the development application): − 1.8m high fence or wall between ground-floor level windows or between a dwelling and principal private open space − Screening of minimum 1.7m height, that has 25% openings (max), with no individual opening more than 30mm wide, is permanently fixed and is made of durable materials. − A window, the whole of which has translucent glass and is not able to be opened.	Directional privacy screening has been provided to eastern facing windows. The southern facing windows and balcony are considered to have adequate separation and no additional fixed screening is necessary to the balcony.	Yes
Ancillary Development
56	a) For ancillary development in R1 General Residential, R2 Low Density Residential, R3 Medium Density Residential, R4 High Density Residential, R5 Large Lot Residential and RU5 Village zones: − The height of an outbuilding or the alterations and additions to an existing outbuilding on a lot should not be more than 4.8m above ground level (existing). − The building should be single storey construction with a maximum roof pitch of 24 degrees. − The maximum area of the building should be 60m2 for lots less than 900m² and maximum of 100m² for larger lots. − Ancillary development that is a garage, or an outbuilding, or a rainwater tank should not be located in front of the main building line with the exception of swimming pools.	Water tank for proposed new dwelling appropriately located.	Yes

*DCP 2013: PART C - Development Specific Provisions - C5: Subdivision*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Site Analysis
139	a) A site analysis is required for all development and should illustrate: - microclimate including the movement of the sun and prevailing winds; - lot dimensions; - north point; - existing contours and levels to AHD; - flood affected areas; - overland flow patterns, drainage and services; - any contaminated soils or filled areas, or areas of unstable land; - easements and/or connections for drainage and utility services; - identification of any existing trees and other significant vegetation; - any existing buildings and other structures, including their setback distances; - heritage and archaeological features; - fences, boundaries and easements; - existing and proposed road network, including connectivity and access for all adjoining land parcels; - pedestrian and vehicle access; - views to and from the site; - overshadowing by neighbouring structures; and - any other notable features or characteristics of the site.	Satisfactory site analysis plan details submitted.	Yes
Urban Structure and Lot Layout
140	a) Any residential allotments created by Torrens title subdivision should satisfy the following standards: - A minimum width of 15 metres when measured at a distance of 5.5 metres from the front property boundary; - A minimum width of 7 metres measured when side boundaries are extended to the kerb line; A minimum depth of 25 metres; - For lots where the average slope of the development site is equal to, or exceeds 16%, indicative road and driveway grades are required demonstrating satisfactory access.	Lot 1 - 9.15m at front boundary and side boundary of 31.5m Lot 2 - 3.83m at front boundary and side boundary of 55m but could be is characterised as a battleaxe lot. Due to the irregular shape of the subject site, the applicant has demonstrated that a dwelling can fit within the site and address the objectives of this clause.	Yes No, but minor variation considered acceptable as integrated development.
141	a) Battleaxe allotments are discouraged in greenfield development.	Infill development, not considered a greenfield development.	N/A
141	b) Council may consider permitting Torrens Title battleaxe allotments for “infill” development where it is demonstrated that: - A Torrens Title lot, that is not a battleaxe lot, cannot be achieved; and - the number of crossovers do not reduce the amenity of the street or on street parking; and - - - the impact of noise, dust and headlights on the land owners adjoining the driveway is addressed by the construction of an acoustic fence for the full length of the driveway; and - - - addresses privacy between the rear lot and the rear open space of the front lot by the provision of adequate screening, larger lot size and setbacks; and - extends utilities to the end of the axe handle; and - There is sufficient space for garbage collection on the frontage.	Proposed layout is considered satisfactory and consistent with the objectives of this clause. The access handles for both Lots 2 are capable of being provided with sealed driveway to the proposed carport. Adequate privacy will be achieved with the installation of a 1.8m height fence along the full length of the proposed boundaries. The site is capable of being serviced by public utilies and sufficient space for garbage collection at the frontage.	Yes
142	a) The subdivision of land with slopes exceeding 25% is generally discouraged.	Land slope is less than 25%	Yes
143	a) Wherever possible orientate streets to maximise the number of east, west and south facing lots and to minimise the number of narrow north facing lots.	Orientation of lots is acceptable providing the existing dwellings northern aspect will be relatively unchanged. And proposed Lot 2 will have a south eastern aspect	Yes
	b) Residential street blocks should preferably be orientated north-south with dimensions generally limited to 60 - 80 metres by 120 - 150 metres.	Noted. The proposed dwelling on lot 2 achieves an acceptable BASIX rating.	Acceptable
	c) Lot size and shape are to reflect orientation to ensure future dwelling construction has optimal opportunity for passive solar design.	Noted. The proposed dwelling on lot 2 achieves an acceptable BASIX rating.	Acceptable
144	a) The site analysis, including the lot orientation, layout, and natural topography should inform and aid the design of the street pattern.	N/A	N/A
144	b) The street plan should provide: - Street network, including those existing (adjacent or opposite); - Cycleways and pathway network - Indicative gradients and cross-sections of roads, cycle ways and pathways, particularly those with steep slopes that may present access and mobility constraints. Provide notional road batters for steep areas - General intersection traffic dampening, related landscape features and constriction points; - Notional drainage pattern and works where affected by road works - Car parking - Consideration of existing and proposed street trees - Existing and proposed fire trails - Street and Service Plans should need to show how the proposal should integrate with the existing system.	N/A	N/A
145	a) Subdivision applications close to urban centres should achieve a high-medium population yield (>35 dwellings per hectare).	N/A - minimal infill subdivision	N/A
145	b) Subdivisions along arterial roads and serviced by public transport should achieve a high-medium population yield (>35 dwellings per hectare).	N/A	N/A
Infrastructure - Integrated Water Cycle Management
150	a) An application for subdivision should include a WSUD prepared by a certified practicing engineer and in accordance with Council’s adopted design specification documents.	2 Lot subdivision only capable of complying - Concept stormwater management plan submitted is satisfactory. Appropriate consent conditions recommended.	Yes
Infrastructure - Stormwater Management
151	- a) An application for subdivision should be accompanied by a Stormwater Management Strategy prepared by a certified practicing engineer and in accordance with Council’s adopted AUS-SPEC design specification documents.	2 Lot subdivision only capable of complying - Concept stormwater management plan submitted is satisfactory. Appropriate consent conditions recommended.	Yes
	- b) The Designer should adopt the ‘major/minor’ approach to urban drainage systems as outlined in the current version of Australian Rainfall and Runoff utilising local parameters and factors where necessary and as defined in AUS-SPEC.	2 Lot subdivision only capable of complying - Concept stormwater management plan submitted is satisfactory. Appropriate consent conditions recommended.	Yes
	- c) The ‘Minor’ system generally refers to a pipeline network with sufficient capacity to contain nuisance and low flows from nominated storm events. These pipelines prevent stormwater damage to properties and also limit the frequency and quantity of surface water to a level that is acceptable to the community.	2 Lot subdivision only capable of complying - Concept stormwater management plan submitted is satisfactory. Appropriate consent conditions recommended.	Yes
	- d) A ‘Major’ drainage system caters for the runoff from rarer storms of higher intensity than for which the minor drainage system has been designed. refers to overland flow paths that are to be designed to convey the major storm flows when the capacity of the minor system is exceeded. The ‘Major’ drainage system generally refers to a system of safe is designed to handle flows resulting from rare storm events up to and including a 100-year ARI. These flows should follow a designated overland flow paths that are to be designed to convey the major storm flows when the capacity of the minor system is exceeded. The major drainage system is designed to handle flows resulting from rare storm events up to and including a 1% AEP event.	2 Lot subdivision only capable of complying - Concept stormwater management plan submitted is satisfactory. Appropriate consent conditions recommended.	Yes
	- e) The design AEP storm events are defined in AUS-SPEC D5	Proposal capable of compliance with AUS-SPEC. Appropriate conditions recommended.	Yes
	- f) Freeboard to buildings, structures, property boundaries above major stormwater flows shall be provided in accordance with the council’s current flood policy.	Proposal capable of compliance with AUS-SPEC. Appropriate conditions recommended.	Yes
152	a) All Council owned stormwater infrastructure is designed in accordance with the Council’s AUS-SPEC Design Specification Documents.	Proposal capable of compliance with AUS-SPEC. Appropriate conditions recommended.	Yes
Infrastructure - Water Supply
153	- a) A reticulated water supply should be required for all subdivisions except rural zoned areas greater than 40 hectares or where deemed financial unviable by the Water and Sewer Planning Manager or equivalent.	Reticulated water supply proposed. Appropriate standard conditions are recommended.	Yes
	- b) For all applicable subdivisions, provision is to be made to provide a separate metered water connection to Council’s main for each lot. All work will need to comply with the requirements of Council’s adopted AUS-SPEC Design and Construction Guidelines and Policies. Details to be provided on a hydraulic plan submitted to Council.	Provision can be made to provide a separate metered water connection to Council’s main for each lot. All work will need to comply with the requirements of Council’s adopted AUS-SPEC Design and Construction Guidelines and Policies. Appropriate standard conditions are recommended.	Yes
	- c) A water supply strategy should be required where there are more than 20 lots and may be required for sub-divisions of less than 20 lots as directed by the Water and Sewer Planning Manager or equivalent. The water supply strategy is to detail any subdivision staging and the corresponding water supply work (including augmentation) necessary to support each stage. The strategy is to incorporate the latest changes in water supply design requirements as well as being modelled on software compatible with that used by Council.	N/A	N/A
	- d) All water supply systems should be designed to meet Council’s design specification documents for infrastructure external to the property.	All water supply systems can be designed to meet Council’s design specification documents for infrastructure external to the property. Appropriate standard conditions are recommended.	Yes
	- f) Proponents are required to extend and meet full cost of water reticulation.	Subdivision works at proponent’s cost.	Yes
Infrastructure - Sewerage
155	- a) A sewer system is required for all subdivisions with proposed lots smaller than 5000m 2, where Onsite Sewage Management requirements cannot by demonstrated to Council or where deemed financial viable by the Water and Sewer Planning Manager or equivalent.	Concept sewer management plan submitted is satisfactory. Appropriate consent conditions recommended.	Yes
	- b) For all applicable subdivisions, provision is to be made to provide a separate sewer junction and connection to Council’s main for each lot. All work will need to comply with the requirements of Council’s adopted AUS-SPEC Design and Construction Guidelines and Policies. Details to be provided on an Engineering plan submitted to Council.	Concept sewer management plan submitted is satisfactory. Appropriate consent conditions recommended.	Yes
	- c) A sewerage strategy should be provided for an application for subdivision of 20 or more lots and may be required for subdivisions of less than 20 lots as directed by the Water and Sewer Planning Manager or equivalent. The sewer strategy is to detail any subdivision staging and include the proposed method of servicing necessary to support each stage. The strategy is to incorporate the latest changes in sewer design requirements as well as being modelled on software compatible with that used by Council.	N/A	N/A
	- d) All sewer systems to be designed to meet the NSW Code of Practice Plumbing & Drainage and Australian Standard AS3500 and related standards for infrastructure within property boundaries.	Sewer systems can be designed to meet the NSW Code of Practice Plumbing & Drainage and Australian Standard AS3500 and related standards for infrastructure within property boundaries.	Yes
	- e) All sewer systems to be designed to meet Council’s AUS-SPEC specification documents for infrastructure external to the property.	All required sewer systems can be designed to meet Council’s AUS-SPEC specification documents for infrastructure external to the property.	Yes
	- f) Sewerage systems should be planned to provide for anticipated future requirements over a period of at least twenty (20) years.	All required sewer systems can be designed to meet Council’s AUS-SPEC specification documents for infrastructure external to the property.	Yes
	- g) Proponents should be required to extend and meet full cost of sewerage systems.	Subdivision works at proponent’s cost.	Yes
Soil Management
156	- a) An erosion and sediment control plan should be provided for a development application to subdivide land in accordance with Council’s adopted AUS-SPEC design specification documents	Minimal subdivision construction works proposed -Appropriate conditions recommended to address erosion and sediment control requirements in accordance with AUS-SPEC.	Yes
156	- b) An erosion and sediment control plan should be provided for a development application to subdivide land in accordance with Council’s adopted AUS-SPEC design specification documents.	Appropriate conditions recommended to address erosion and sediment control requirements in accordance with AUS-SPEC.	Yes
Service Infrastructure and Information Technology
161	- a) All service infrastructure should be underground unless otherwise approved by Council.	All service infrastructure will be underground.	Yes
	- b) All service infrastructure should be installed in a common trench.	All service infrastructure can be installed in a common trench.	Yes
	- c) Conduits for the main technology network system should be provided in all streets.	Conduits for the main technology network system can be provided in street.	Yes
	- d) Conduits are to be installed in accordance with the National Broadband Network Company Limited’s ‘Guidelines for Fibre to the Premises Underground Deployment’.	Conduits can be installed in accordance with the National Broadband Network Company Limited’s ‘Guidelines for Fibre to the Premises Underground Deployment’.	Yes
	- e) Access pits are to be installed at appropriate intervals along all streets.	Access pits for information technology if required can be installed at appropriate intervals along all streets.	Yes

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision relating to clause 45 - car parking spaces forward of the building line.

The relevant objectives are:

· 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.

· To provide safe and functional vehicular access.

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

· The development does not intend or propose alterations and additions to the existing dwelling.

· If the dwelling only had the minimum front setback of 4.5m, the car space would be more than the minimum behind the front building line and is setback greater than the minimum 5.5m required.

· Access to the existing dwelling’s garage is impacted by the proposed subdivision.

· The site constraints of slope and narrowness of the site must be considered, as the car park space has been placed in the most practical position before impacting the existing dwelling or neighbouring property.

· The hardstand space is accessed from the head of a Cul-de-sac that has existing on street car parking and manoeuvring issues, by providing additional off street car parking this will soften existing impacts to the street amenity.

· The hard stand space will be partially screened from traffic entering Kiah Place from Panorama Drive by fencing and vegetation.

· Other dwellings within Kiah Place have hard stand parking within the front setback.

· A hardstand space in this location of is not anticipated to adversely impact the existing amenity, eases on street car parking demand, allows for manoeuvring at the head of the cul-de-sac.

· The site plan provides a total of 3 off street car spaces, which is consistent with the off-street car parking in accordance with the DCP.

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

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

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

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

(iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations

N/A

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

Context and setting

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

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

• There are no 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.

Roads

The site has road frontage Kiah Place, which is a sealed road under the care and control of Council. Kiah Place is a Cul-de-sac, with a 16m wide road reserve, and an 8m carriageway width.

Traffic and Transport

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

Site Frontage and Access

Vehicle access to the proposed new dwelling/lot site is proposed via the existing driveway, which is proposed to be within an easement for access for access to the road frontage.

Primary access for the existing dwelling is proposed to be via the existing gravel crossover, which will be augmented to enable parking for 2 vehicles with direct street frontage. It has been conditioned that a section 138 consent for these works must be obtained prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

Parking and Manoeuvring

A total of 3 parking spaces have been provided on-site within Carports with additional parking provided available within the driveway. Parking and driveway widths 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 is currently serviced by a 100mm potable water main. Each Torrens Title lot requires a separate metered water connection to Council’s water main. Water meters shall be located on the respective future lots. All design & works shall be in accordance with Council’s adopted AUSPEC Specifications.

A new metered water service will be required for each allotment as part of the Torrens Title Subdivision.

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.

An appropriate consent condition is recommended.

Sewer Connection

Each Torrens Title lot requires a separate line to Council’s sewer main. A sewer main extension shall be required from the existing manhole located to the rear of the lot, in the neighbouring property. The sewer main extension shall require owners consent from the adjoining property. All design & works shall be in accordance with Council’s adopted AUSPEC Specifications.

A separate sewer connection to Councils main is required for each Torrens Title lot.

A manhole will also be required at the high end of the line as it will be more than 40m long.

As the development will exceed 2ET discharge, sewer connection is to be made from a manhole.

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

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

An appropriate consent condition is recommended.

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards the rear and is currently serviced via an existing interallotment drainage system, being the legal point of discharge for the subject site.

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

An appropriate consent condition is recommended.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site. Evidence of satisfactory arrangements with the relevant utility authorities for provision to each proposed lot will be required prior to Subdivision Certificate approval.

An appropriate consent condition is recommended.

Heritage

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

Other Land Resources

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

Water Cycle

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

Soils

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 dwelling will require the removal of six (6) mature native trees and otherwise planted landscaping. Two of these trees are located within the proposed building footprint and the remaining four are located either within 10m of the proposed structure or require removal due to poor health and safety close to both existing and proposed structures.

The Applicant has submitted an ecological assessment prepared by TreeHouse Ecology. The ecological survey has been undertaken in accordance with relevant legislation including the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and the commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

With considerations to the Biodiversity Offsets Scheme (BOS):

· The study area is not located on lands mapped as Biodiversity Values Land.

· The proposed clearing of less than 0.06 ha of native vegetation is less than the area clearing threshold of 0.25 ha.

· The test of significance (5 Part Test) concludes a not-significant impact on state listed biodiversity.

As assessment of the latest amended plans and key matters within the TreeHouse Ecology report has identified the following:

· The site contains 5 Scribbly Gums plus 1 Red Bloodwood.

· A landscaping plan should be submitted to compensate for the biomass of removed foraging foliage and seasonal floristics available to local fauna. This will not compensate for the removal of potential habitat provided specifically by the large mature trees, however it will otherwise aim to provide a more positive ecological outcome for fauna species considered.

Having regard to the above, an assessment of the proposal, including review by a Council Ecologist, has concluded that the proposal will be unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts on biodiversity or threatened species of flora and fauna.

Appropriate conditions are recommended to require the mitigation measures to be implemented.

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 Australian Bushfire Consulting Services.

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

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

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

Safety, Security and Crime Prevention

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 Impacts 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 and slope have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

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

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

Submission Issue/Summary	Planning Comment/Response
Privacy concerns	The proposed dwelling complies with rear and side setback provisions as outlined in the DCP 2013. As a mitigation measure the Applicant has provided detailed landscaping plans to include screening plans along the rear boundary for sightlines over the southern rear boundary. For the eastern facing windows, fixed privacy screens are proposed to protect the privacy of the adjoining private open space. These screens are directional screens designed to provide privacy to the northern property but still enjoy and eastern aspect over adjoining bushland.
Solar Access	The Applicant has provided shadow diagrams. The diagrams demonstrate that the proposed development does not adversely impact the primary living areas of adjoining properties. Shadow diagrams have been attached to this report. It was also noted that the existing vegetation causes significant overshadowing from the mature trees, which will be improved once removed.
Torrens title subdivision of this site unsuitable and out of character with surrounding area.	The land and adjoining area is zoned R1 General Residential. The proposal is a permissible landuse in the R1 general residential zone. The Applicant has satisfied the requirements of the Port Macquarie Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, with regards to permissibility, Floor Space Ratio, Height of Building and minimum lot size. With regards to character of the streetscape, the existing dwelling is retained and driveway crossings are existing. Section 4.15(3A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 provides that: If a development control plan contains provisions that relate to the development that is the subject of a development application, the consent authority— (a) if those provisions set standards with respect to an aspect of the development and the development application complies with those standards—is not to require more onerous standards with respect to that aspect of the development Based on the merits of the proposed development, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development and the proposal adequately complies with relevant planning controls.
Bush Fire Impacts	The Applicant has submitted a bushfire report prepared by Australian Bushfire Consulting Services. The report concludes that a Bushfire Attack Level 29 (eastern elevation only) and BAL 19 shall be required. In accordance with Section 100B - Rural Fires Act 1997 the Application and bushfire report was referred to the NSW Rural Fire Service for comment. Who have since issued concurrence as the Bushfire Safety Authority, which will be incorporated into the consent. Subsequently, the removal of the subject trees will improve the bushfire risk of to the adjoining properties.

(e) The Public Interest

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

Ecologically Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle

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

The four principles of ecologically sustainable development are:

· the precautionary principle,

· intergenerational equity,

· conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity,

· improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms.

Climate Change

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

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

· 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.

Attachments

1 ⇩. DA2020 - 430.1 Recommended DA Conditions

2 ⇩. DA2020 - 430.1 Plans

3 ⇩. DA2020 - 430.1 Contributions Estimate

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 21/01/2021

Item: 09

Subject: DA2020 - 713.1 Dwelling and Swimming Pool at Lot 33 DP 31187, No. 58 Watonga Street, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Benjamin Roberts

Applicant: Craig Teasdell Architect

Owner: Reiter Nominees Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: $1,750,000

Parcel no: 24859

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2020 - 713.1 for a dwelling and swimming pool at Lot 33, DP 31187, No. 58 Watonga Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

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

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

The application was considered by the Development Assessment Panel on 25 November 2020 and was deferred with the following resolution:

‘That DA 2020 - 713.1 for a dwelling and swimming pool at Lot 33, DP 31187, No. 58 Watonga Street, Port Macquarie, be deferred to enable the applicant an opportunity to amend plans so as to lower the building height and lessen the impact on views of the Lighthouse from adjoining properties.’

In response to the resolution, the applicant submitted revised plans on 7 December 2020. The revised plans result in a height reduction of 400mm in the north-eastern corner of the proposed dwelling.

The revised plans were provided to previous submitters on 8 December 2020 and further comments requested up until 6 January 2012. Three (3) additional responses were received in response to the amended plans.

The assessment of the application has been updated and concludes that 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.

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 is vacant and has an area of 569.1m². The site falls toward Watonga Street in two distinct sections. The first 7 metres within the boundary is quite significant at approximately 30 degrees. Beyond this point, the slope is approximately 10 degrees extending to the rear boundary.

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

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Construction of a new dwelling house and swimming pool

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

Application Chronology

· 1 September 2020 - Application lodged.

· 9 to 22 September 2020 - Public exhibition via neighbour notification.

· 23 September 2020 - Additional information request.

· 1 October 2020 - Additional information response.

· 7 October 2020 - Views inspected from at 1A Bourne Street.

· 9 October 2020 - Views inspected from 1B Bourne Street.

· 12 October 2020 - Views inspected from 2/3 Bourne Street.

· 16 October 2020 - Views inspected with applicant at 2/3 Bourne Street.

· 16 October 2020 - Views inspected from 56 Watonga Street.

· 16 October 2020 - Additional information request to applicant.

· 26 October 2020 - Additional information response and revised plans (change to roof window structure).

· 25 November 2020 - Deferred at Development Assessment Panel meeting.

· 7 December 2020 - Revised plans lodged.

· 8 December 2020 to 6 January 2021 - Comments sought from submitters on 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 not under a Koala Plan of Management and the land has an area less than 1 hectare including adjoining land in the same ownership. The SEPP does not prevent the granting of consent on the land being less than 1 hectare in area. The application has 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 located within a coastal use and 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 funneling 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 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 predominately cleared and located within an area zoned for residential purposes.

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

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Clause 45 - Development in proximity to electricity infrastructure - referral to Essential Energy required for any of the following:

(a) the penetration of ground within 2m of an underground electricity power line or an electricity distribution pole or within 10m of any part of an electricity tower,

(b) development carried out:

(i) within or immediately adjacent to an easement for electricity purposes (whether or not the electricity infrastructure exists), or

(ii) immediately adjacent to an electricity substation, or

(iii) within 5m of an exposed overhead electricity power line,

(i) within 30m of a structure supporting an overhead electricity transmission line, measured horizontally from the top of the pool to the bottom of the structure at ground level, or

(ii) within 5m of an overhead electricity power line, measured vertically upwards from the top of the pool

Site inspection revealed exposed overhead power lines running along the western edge of Watonga Street. The ground floor terrace is setback some 5.8m from the front boundary and be well over 5m from the overhead lines. No referral to Essential Energy triggered.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011

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

· Clause 2.2 - The subject site is zoned R1 General Residential. In accordance with clause 2.3(1) and the R1 zone landuse table, the dwelling and ancillary swimming pool are a permissible landuse with consent.

· 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.

2. The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives as it is a permissible landuse and consistent with the established residential locality. The proposal contributes to the range of housing options in the locality.

· Clause 4.3 - The proposed maximum overall height of the building above ground level is 8.45m and complies with the standard height limit of 8.5m applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the proposal is 0.72:1 and complies with the maximum 1:1 floor space ratio applying to the site.

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

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

No draft instruments apply.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: Part C - Development Specific Provisions - C1: Low Density Residential Development*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Front Setbacks
44	a) Dwellings may incorporate an articulation zone to a street frontage at no less than 3m from property boundary. The following building elements are permitted within the articulation zone.	No building elements proposed within the articulation zone.	N/A
44	c) The primary road front setback shall be: Primary frontage = 4.5m	Front building line setback to Watonga Street varies but closest point is 5.8m.	Yes
45	a) A garage, carport or car parking space should: - be at least 1m behind the building line, where the dwelling(s) has a setback from a front boundary of 4.5m or more, or - be at least 5.5m from a front boundary, where the dwelling(s) has a setback of less than 4.5m.	The garage is less than 1m behind the building. The garage setback varies but is setback greater than 5.5m. Garage door is recessed.	No* Yes
	b) The total width of the garage/carport openings should not be more than 6m and not more than 50 per cent of the width of the building.	Width of garage door is compliant with the maximum width requirements	Yes
	c) Driveway crossovers are no greater than 5.0m in width.	Driveway crossing width is compliant with the maximum width requirements	Yes
	d) Where a dual occupancy or attached dwelling is proposed on a corner lot a garage and driveway is provided on each road frontage.	No dual occupancy proposed or a corner lot.	N/A
Side and Rear Setbacks
46	a) A minimum rear boundary setback of 4m is to be provided to dwellings (including verandahs, patios and decks).	The rear setback varies from 3m to 5.48m.	No*
	b) A minimum rear boundary setback of 900mm applies to sheds and swimming pools subject to achieving minimum required private open space area.	No ancillary development proposed in rear yard.	N/A
	c) Council may consider varying rear setback requirements where it is demonstrated that the private open space could achieve better solar access between the building and the side setback. In that instance, one side setback should be a minimum 4m in width (for an equivalent length of rear boundary, behind building line) and the rear setback may be reduced to 900mm.	N/A	N/A
47	a) Ground floors (being <1m above existing ground level) should be setback a minimum of 900mm from side boundaries.	Ground floor north side setback is varying with 1.215m minimum. Ground floor south side 3m setback.	Yes
	b) First floors and above (including single storey with floor level >1m) should be setback a minimum of 3m from the side boundary, or reduced down to 900mm where it can be demonstrated that the adjoining property’s primary living rooms and principal private open space areas are not adversely overshadowed for more than 3hrs between 9am - 3pm on 21 June.	First floor north side setback is varying with 1.2m minimum. First floor south side is varying with 2.49m minimum. The section of wall setback 2.49m is for a length of 4.5m. The reminder of the southern side setback is 3m or more.	Yes. Refer to overshadowing assessment and analysis section of this report.
	c) First floors and above should have building walls that step in and out at least every 12m by a minimum of 500mm articulation. Where first floors and above are setback >3m, wall articulation is not required.	Section of south facing wall to sitting, dining and living rooms is approximately 13m in length. Is setback 3.05m.	Yes
Private Open Space
48.	a) All dwellings should have a minimum area of private open space of 35m2, which includes a principal private open space area with: - a minimum dimension of 4m x 4m, and - a maximum grade of 5% for minimum 4m x 4m of the total open space requirement, and - direct accessibility from a ground floor living area and orientated to maximise use.	The dwelling contains 35m² open space in one area including a useable 4m x 4m space.	Yes
	b) Private open space may include clothes drying areas and garbage storage.	Noted.	Yes
Public Domain and Fencing
49	a) Front fences built forward of the building line for the primary road frontage should be detailed on the development application plans.	Front masonry wall detailed on plans.	Yes
	b) Solid Front fences up to 1.2m high should be: - Setback 1.0m from the front boundary, and - Suitably landscaped to reduce visual impact, and - Provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites.	2m high masonry wall proposed.	N/A
	b) Front fences proposed to be more than 1.2m high should be a maximum of 1.8m in height, above existing front property boundary level, and either: - Include landscaped recesses having minimum dimensions of 1.8m long x 900mm deep which occupy no less than 50% of the total length of the fence, or - be erected up to the front boundary for a maximum length of 6.0m or 50% of the street frontage.	2m high masonry wall proposed setback 3.1m from front boundary.	No*
	c) have openings which make it not less than 25% transparent (no individual opening more than 30mm wide);	No openings proposed.	No*
	d) provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and	Not a corner site.	N/A
	e) provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances.	No site line issues identified for driveway entrance.	Yes
Bulk and Scale
51	a) Direct views between indoor living rooms and principal private open space of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots, including possible dwellings on future lots, should be obscured or screened where: - Ground and first floor (and above) indoor living room windows are within a 9m radius. - Direct views between principal private open space areas where within a 12m radius. - Direct views between indoor living rooms of dwellings into the principal area of private open space of other dwellings within a 12m radius.	Windows placements have been carefully considered and where appropriate highlight windows nominated. i.e. north facing windows on the first floor are highlight windows. Elevated north facing ground floor windows at the front of the block serve a bedroom and ensuite only. South facing windows on the first floor serving the living, dining, sitting rooms are setback 3.05m. No screening of these windows is proposed. However due to the elevation and eastern view aspect no direct views are identified to the primary living and open spaces located on the first floor and front aspect front of 60 Watonga Street. No windows are proposed in the first floor west facing wall of the study. No windows are proposed on the ground floor western elevation of the gym. Elevated south facing windows on the ground floor are to bedrooms and ensuites only. The ground floor terrace and sitting room are setback 3.05m and 5.9m respectively. The lap pool and its fencing is setback 1m from the southern side boundary. The restricted width along the southern and eastern edges of the pool limit any ability for pedestrian use of the poolside. A 6m length of obscured glazed pool fencing is proposed at ground level along the southern boundary to protect privacy to the adjoining front balcony of 60 Watonga Street from these areas.	Yes
	b) A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or verandah should have a privacy screen where there are direct views of: - Indoor living room windows of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots within 9m radius; or - Principal areas of private open space of adjacent dwellings, including proposed dwellings approved on adjoining lots within a 12m radius.	The first floor front balcony is setback 1.9m from the northern boundary. The northern elevation of the balcony is provided with a hard wall treatment. An opening in this wall 1.5m from floor level is proposed above the BBQ area. However, given the elevation difference, view angle out the opening and fixed BBQ bench against the opening there is no direct view available into any adjoining primary living or open space areas of 56 Watonga Street. The first floor front balcony is setback 5.985m from the southern boundary. It is provided with a solid lower portion balustrade to maintain privacy to the adjoining front balcony of 60 Watonga Street. A rear balcony off the master bedroom on the first floor is setback 3.05m to the southern boundary. This balcony is also setback a minimum of 4.2m that extends to 5.48m from the rear boundary. The western elevation of this balcony is provided with privacy louvres to maintain privacy between adjoining residences in Bourne Street. There is no direct view to the primary living and outdoor areas of 60 Watonga Street from this balcony and no screening is proposed along its southern elevation.	Yes
	c) Privacy protection is not required for: - Any Indoor living room windows with a sill height of greater than 1.5m above the finished floor level of that room or where fixed non-openable translucent glass is installed to the same height.	Noted refer to above comments.	Yes
	d) Direct views described above may be reduced or obscured by one of the following measures (details to be submitted with the development application): - 1.8m high fence or wall between ground-floor level windows or between a dwelling and principal private open space - Screening of minimum 1.7m height, that has 25% openings (max), with no individual opening more than 30mm wide, is permanently fixed and is made of durable materials. - A window, the whole of which has translucent glass and is not able to be opened.	Screening and other privacy treatment measures are proposed where necessary.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B2: Environmental Management*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3	a) Development must comply with Council’s Developments, Public Place & Events - Waste Minimisation and Management Policy.	Satisfactory arrangements can be put in place for storage and collection of waste. Standard condition recommended for construction waste management.	Yes
Cut and Fill Regrading
4	a) Development shall not exceed a maximum cut of 1.0m and fill of 1.0m measured vertically above the ground level (existing) at a distance of 1.0m outside the perimeter of the external walls of the building (This does not apply to buildings where such cut and fill is fully retained within or by the external walls of the building).	Cut and fill >1m is proposed outside the perimeter of the external building walls.	No*
5	a) A certified practicing structural engineer must certify any retaining wall greater than 1.0m.	Noted. Suitable condition recommended.	Yes
5	b) Where a combination of a fence and a wall is proposed to be greater than 1.2m high: - be a maximum combined height of 1.8m above existing property boundary level; - be constructed up to the front boundary for a maximum length of 6.0m or 30% of the street frontage, whichever is less; − the fence component has openings which make it not less than 25% transparent; and − provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and - provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances.	No retaining wall and front fence combination is proposed. Refer to front fencing comments surrounding masonry wall.	N/A

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provision - B3: Hazards Management*
Bushfire Hazard Management
18	a) APZs are to be located outside of environmental protection zones and wholly provided within private land. Note perimeter roads provided as part of a residential subdivision are classified as being part of the subdivision and not a separate permissible land use within environment protection zones.	APZ within property.	Yes
Flooding
19	a) Development must comply with Council’s Floodplain Management Plan and Flood Policies.	Not flood prone land.	N/A

*DCP 2013: Part B- General Provisions- B4: Transport, Traffic Management, Access and Car Parking*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Road Hierarchy
Parking Provision
24	a) Off-street Parking is provided in accordance with Table 3: - 1 parking space per each dwelling for dwelling-house.	Capacity for more than 1 parking space behind the building line has been provided for.		Yes
Parking Layout
28	c) Parking spaces shall generally be behind the building line but may be located between the building line and the street when: − it is stacked parking in the driveway; or − it can be demonstrated that improvements to the open space provided will result; and − the spaces are screened (densely landscaped or similar) from the street by a landscaping with a minimum width of 3.0m for the entire length of the parking area.	Proposed behind the building line.		Yes
	d) Parking design and layout is provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1 - Parking facilities - Off-street car parking.	Parking design and layout appropriate.		Yes
34	a) All parking and manoeuvring spaces must be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.		Yes
	b) Council will not permit the discharge of stormwater directly into kerbing and guttering or table drains for any development other than that of a minor nature.	Single dwelling only with 1 domestic driveway. Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed as part of plumbing construction.		Yes

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B5: Social Impact Assessment and Crime Prevention*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Crime Prevention
43	a) The development addresses the generic principles of crime prevention: - Casual surveillance and sightlines; - Land use mix and activity generators; - Definition of use and ownership; - Basic exterior building design; - Lighting; - Way-finding; and - Predictable routes and entrapment locations; - as described in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.	No concealment or entrapment areas proposed. Adequate casual surveillance available.	Yes

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision 45 relating to the garage being at least 1m behind the building. The garage is proposed at an angle to the front boundary. Its distance behind the building line varies from approximately 300mm in the southern part of the garage door to over 1m toward the northern extent.

The relevant objectives are:

· 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.

· To provide safe and functional vehicular access.

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

· The variation is minor and largely compliant. The minor variation is due to the angle provided in the building design and garage door.

· The angle in the garage door combined with the feature window and balustrade façade treatments to the east facing wall of the garage and above the garage door minimise any dominance upon the streetscape.

· The landscaping and retaining wall treatments will be the dominant features of the immediate streetscape. These features will complement the streetscape and will almost eliminate any view of the garage from street level.

· A safe and functional vehicular access is still achieved.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision 46 relating to a minimum rear setback requirement of 4m. The rear setback proposed varies from 3m to 5.48m.

The relevant objectives are:

· To ensure no adverse overshadowing or privacy impacts to neighbouring properties.

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

· To provide useable yard areas and open space

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

· The variation is minor and largely compliant. The minor variation is due to the angle in the allotment boundary.

· No adverse overshadowing or privacy impacts will result. Appropriate privacy screening and landscape plantings are proposed.

· Adequate natural light and ventilation between dwellings and to private open space areas will be achieved.

· Useable yard and open space areas are provided.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision 49 which provides that front fencing more than 1.2m in height be a maximum of 1.8m in height and either:

- Include landscaped recesses having minimum dimensions of 1.8m long x 900mm deep which occupy no less than 50% of the total length of the fence, or

- Be erected up to the front boundary for a maximum length of 6.0m or 50% of the street frontage.

- Have openings which make it not less than 25% transparent (no individual opening more than 30mm wide)

The proposal incorporates a 2m high masonry wall setback 3.1m from the front boundary.

The relevant objectives are:

· To define the edge between public and private land and to provide privacy and security.

· To ensure the adequate sight lines are provided for vehicles leaving the site.

· To ensure front fencing does not impact on the public domain.

· To encourage surveillance of the street and other public places.

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

· The masonry wall helps to define the interface between public and private land and provides for privacy and security to the dwelling.

· The wall is setback 3.1m from the boundary and adequate sight lines are provided from the driveway.

· A garden bed is provided immediately in front of the wall to provide for plantings that will soften its appearance and not impact upon the public domain.

· The elevated nature of the site and dwelling provides for sufficient casual surveillance of the street and public domain.

The proposal seeks to vary Development Provision 4 which provides that development shall not exceed a maximum cut of 1.0m and fill of 1.0m measured

vertically above the ground level (existing) at a distance of 1.0m outside the perimeter of the external walls of the building (This does not apply to buildings where such cut and fill is fully retained within or by the external walls of the building). The proposal incorporates cut and fill over 1m outside the external walls of the building primarily in the front portion of the site. Retaining is also proposed up to 1.1m in height in the rear portion of the site.

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.

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

· The extent of cut and retaining proposed s due to the steep drop in grade along the front of the site.

· Stormwater is capable of being managed.

· Privacy of adjoining dwellings is not compromised as a result of the cut and fill.

· Potential damage or instability to adjoining properties can be appropriately managed. It is a prescribed condition of any development consent.

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

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

(iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations

No matters prescribed by the regulations apply.

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

Context and Setting

The proposed development 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.

View Sharing

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

The judgement in Tenacity Consulting v Waringah 2004 NSW LEC 140 is an established ‘planning principle’ which provides an assessment methodology as to what constitutes view sharing and what constitutes reasonable view sharing. To that end, Commissioner Roseth SC developed a four step assessment process to assess the impacts of views. The four steps are as follows:

Step 1

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

Step 2

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

Step 3

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

Step 4

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

Analysis of view impacts at four residences was undertaken to establish whether the view sharing is acceptable. The four residences being 56 Watonga Street, 1A Bourne Street, 1B Bourne Street and 2/3 Bourne Street. For the purposes of this assessment, the following was undertaken:

· Establishment of height poles by proponent to indicate proposed maximum building height.

· Certification of the height poles by a registered surveyor.

· Site inspections, observations and photographs from all four residences.

Note the photos and height poles depicted in the photos below are based on the original plans and do not reflect the further building height reduction of 400mm in the north-eastern corner.

See aerial photo below showing location of adjoining residences for context:

56 Watonga Street

This site contains an existing two-storey dwelling that fronts Watonga Street. The site immediately adjoins the development site to the north.

Step 1 - The dwelling enjoys extensive panoramic ocean and land interface views extending to the northeast, east and southeast. The elevated nature of the site provides uninterrupted highly valuable headland, lighthouse and ocean views.

Step 2 - The orientation of the block and dwelling results in the views primarily being enjoyed across the front boundary. These views are from the secondary storey living room and balcony. There is also an ocean and land interface view enjoyed from the living room window across the side boundary to the southeast. Views are enjoyed from both standing and sitting positions.

Step 3 - Sitting and standing views of the ocean, headland and lighthouse across the front boundary from the living room and balcony will not be impacted by the proposal. The standing and sitting view across the side boundary to the south of the ocean and land interface from the living room window and to some extent the southern aspect of the front balcony will be impacted. However, a view corridor will still exist from the southern aspect of the front balcony and living room window past the front of the new dwelling. The view loss can be described as minor.

Site photos are provided below showing the location of the front balcony and south facing living room window and southerly view enjoyed:

Southern aspect of front balcony and living room window.

View from south facing living room window.

View from south facing aspect of front balcony.

Step 4 - The amended proposal is compliant with the applicable building height and floor space controls. While there are minor variations to the rear and south side setback standards of the development control plan these variations do not impact on the extent of view loss from this property. The proposed front setback exceeds the 4.5m minimum which aids in the retention of some view corridor across the southern side boundary.

1A Bourne Street

This site contains a two-storey dwelling that fronts Bourne Street. The site partly adjoins the development site to the west.

Step 1 - At ground level the dwelling enjoys ocean and land interface views across the development site. See site photo below for context:

View from rear ground floor patio looking east across the development site.

The elevated nature of the first floor provides uninterrupted highly valuable headland, lighthouse and ocean views to the north, east and south. The view is across the development site and above the roofline of existing dwellings. Refer to site photo below context:

View from first floor balcony off master bedroom.

Step 2 - The orientation of the block and dwelling results in the views primarily being enjoyed across the rear boundary. The primary views are from the secondary storey balcony off the master bedroom and the ground balcony off the living area. Views are enjoyed from both standing and sitting positions. There is also views enjoyed from first floor north east facing windows to a study and lounge area. See photo below for context:

North and east facing first floor windows of study and lounge area.

Step 3 - Sitting and standing views of the ocean and land interface across the development site at ground level will be lost almost completely. A small view corridor will be retained along the northern boundary between the new dwelling and No 56 Watonga Street. The standing and sitting views from the first floor balcony northeast of the headland, lighthouse and ocean interface are not impacted as they are enjoyed across the roofline of No 56 Watonga Street. The same applies to the first floor north and east facing windows to the study and lounge area. The sitting and standing view of the ocean and its land interface immediately east across the development site will be lost from the first floor balcony. Sitting and standing views of the ocean and land interface north and south will be retained either side of the new dwelling from the first floor balcony. The view loss can be described as moderate.

1B Bourne

This site contains a two-storey dwelling that fronts Bourne Street. The site partly adjoins the development site to the west.

Step 1 - At ground level the dwelling enjoys ocean, headland and land interface views east across the development site. Standing in the southern corner of the rear yard the lighthouse is visible alongside the roofline of No 36 Watonga Street. See site photos below for context:

View from rear ground floor patio looking east across the development site.

View from southern corner of ground floor rear yard looking north. Lighthouse adjoining roofline of No 36 Watonga Street.

View from first floor balcony off master bedroom.

Step 3 - Sitting and standing views of the ocean and land interface across the development site at ground level will be lost almost completely. A small view corridor will be retained along the southern boundary between the new dwelling and No 54 Watonga Street. The standing and sitting views from the first floor balcony northeast of the headland, lighthouse and ocean interface are not impacted as they are enjoyed across the roofline of No 56 Watonga Street and will remain over the roofline of the proposed dwelling. The sitting and standing view of the ocean and its land interface immediately east across the development site will be lost from the first floor balcony. Sitting and standing views of the ocean and land interface north and south will be retained either side of the new dwelling from the first floor balcony. The view loss can be described as moderate.

Step 4 - The amended proposal is compliant with the applicable building height and floor space controls. While there are minor variations to the rear and south side setback standards of the development control plan, these variations do not significantly impact on the extent of view loss from this property. Notably the section of south facing wall setback 2.49m (as opposed to 3m) for a length of 4.6m.

2/3 Bourne Street

This site contains a first floor unit that fronts Bourne Street. The site does not share a boundary with the development site.

Step 1 - The first floor unit enjoys ocean, headland, lighthouse and land interface views northeast across the development site. Panoramic ocean and land interface views are also enjoyed east and south. See site photos below for context:

View from first floor balcony looking northeast.

View from first floor balcony looking southeast.

Step 2 - The orientation of the block and unit results in the views primarily being enjoyed across the side and rear boundary. The primary views are from the first floor balcony and living area. Views are enjoyed from both standing and sitting positions. The lighthouse and headland view is considered to be enjoyed across a side boundary.

Step 3 - Sitting views of the headland and lighthouse from the living room window and balcony will be lost. See photos below for context:

View from living room window in siting position.

View from balcony in siting position.

Standing views of the headland and ocean interface would be lost from both the living room window and balcony. A standing view of the lighthouse would be retained immediately above the proposed roofline from both the living room window and balcony. See photos below for context:

Standing view of lighthouse and headland from living room window.

Standing view of lighthouse and headland from balcony.

The standing and sitting panoramic ocean and land interface views from the living room and balcony east and south across the rear boundary will not be impacted. See photos below for context:

View east across rear boundary from balcony.

View southeast from balcony.

Views of the lighthouse are considered to be iconic in the context of the area. The lighthouse view loss from a sitting position in conjunction with the headland and ocean interface view impact from both a sitting and standing position can be described as severe.

In response to view impact concerns, post exhibition, the applicant lodged revised plans. The revised plans replaced the raised clerestory window with a low pitched skylight window arrangement on the roof top. The changes do soften the appearance of an element that would have somewhat “stuck out” from the proposed roofline when viewed from the residences in Bourne Street.

In terms of whether a more skilful design could provide the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours, the applicant advised that numerous design options were explored and offered the following comments:

· More traditional roof pitches - but these proved too high;

· Stepped floor levels - but these did not provide the accessibility via a lift required by the landowner;

· Burying’ the primary habitable rooms deeper into the hill - however this was detrimental to the amenity afforded to the landowner and resulted in substantial retaining walls outside of the dwelling (and is poor design and completely undesirable in any case.);

· Reducing side setbacks and shifting the building mass towards Watonga Street – but this has a greater view impact to the southern edge of the proposed design;

· If floor areas were reduced then the building height would be unaffected as the main building volume would shift towards Watonga street – this is a redundant point however as the floor area is a result of the required functional design brief (5 bedroom property, gym, two sitting rooms, lift access etc);

· Please note - higher ceiling heights were originally proposed and shown to the neighbours prior the development application. Ceiling heights were reduced in an effort to maintain maximum height limits and improve the view sharing aspect to the proposal.

Following deferral of the application on 25 November 2020 the applicant submitted revised plans. The revised plans reduce the building height by 400mm in the north-eastern corner, which do lessen the impact on views of the Lighthouse from 2/3 Bourne Street. This north-eastern portion of the building now sits approximately 1.2m below the 8.5m maximum height control.

Having regard to compliance with the adopted maximum building height and floor space ratio controls it is considered that the amended development proposal is a realistic response to the site conditions and view impacts not unreasonable in this instance. While there is a minor variation to the rear setback standard of the development control plan this variation does not impact on the extent of view loss from the adjoining properties.

The proposal will not have any significant adverse view sharing impact that would warrant refusal of the application.

Overshadowing

The application was supported by a set of shadow diagrams. The most impacted property being No 60 Watonga Street immediately adjoining to the south.

This dwelling has a couple of outdoor areas at the rear. The ground level outdoor area from the house is heavily excavated into the site, bordered by a significant retaining wall and currently covered by an awning structure. There is an upper rear yard area accessed via a pedestrian bridge from the upper level of the house. This is considered to be the secondary open space area of the dwelling. The shadow diagrams demonstrate that this yard area is not adversely overshadowed for more than 3 hours between 9am and 3pm on 22 June (winter solstice).

The primary living and outdoor balcony area of the house is located on the first floor with an eastern aspect taking advantage of the views. There are two north-facing windows on the dwelling. One located on the upper level which serves the master bedroom and one on the lower level, which appears to serve a bedroom or sitting room. Access to within the dwelling could not be obtained to confirm the lower room. Having regard to the elevated nature and east facing aspect of the primary living and outdoor balcony area there will be no adverse overshadowing impacts.

The proposal does not have significant adverse overshadowing impacts.

Privacy

The design has had regard to positioning of the primary living and outdoor areas in relation to that of adjoining primary living and outdoor areas. Where appropriate privacy protection measures are proposed in the form of either privacy screening or highlight windows. There are no significant adverse privacy impacts identified that would warrant refusal of the application.

Bulk and Scale

In response to the steep topography and commanding views in the area surrounding development is characterised by large two storey and to some extent three storey homes. While the proposed building height does extend slightly above those of the immediately adjoining dwellings, it does present of a similar bulk and scale. The design of the roof is lower at the rear, which aids in reducing the visual bulk of the dwelling when viewed from existing Bourne Street residents.

The building design also provides for various building elements and materials, which soften the visual impact and dominance of various parts and levels of the dwelling, pool edge and basement garage.

Having regard to the topography, compliance with the adopted planning controls, front and southern setback at ground and first floor, reduction in building width heading back into the block and response to the irregular lot shape the bulk and scale of the proposal is appropriate for the site.

Access, Traffic and Transport

The proposal will not have any significant adverse impacts in terms access, transport and traffic.

Water Supply Connection

Sewer Connection

Sewer service is existing to the lot. Details of connection and associated plumbing will be provided with section 68 application under the Local Government Act. Appropriate condition recommended.

Stormwater

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

Air and Microclimate

Flora and Fauna

Waste

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

Energy

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

Noise and Vibration

Bushfire

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 Impacts in the Locality

Site Design and Internal Design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative Impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

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

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

Four (4) written submissions were received following public exhibition of the original application and plans. Three (3) additional responses were received in response to the amended plans following notification to previous submitters. Copies of all 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
Concerns over impacts to dwelling and its foundations at 56 Watonga Street given the extent of excavation proposed. No engineering details provided.	It is a prescribed condition of any development consent that possible damage from any excavation extending below the base of the footings of an adjoining building be protected and supported. Engineering details will form part of the Construction Certificate plans.
Potential impact of construction traffic on recent road and infrastructure work in Watonga Street. Objection to relocation of power pole.	Any damage to Council infrastructure will be managed by Council. No relocation of power pole is proposed or noted on the plans.
View sharing impacts.	Refer to view sharing assessment and analysis within this report.
Overshadowing impacts.	Refer to overshadowing impact assessment section of this report.
Privacy impacts.	Refer to DCP assessment table and privacy heading of this report.
The open cut out in the front balcony above the barbeque area will impact on enjoyment of balcony at No 56 Watonga Street in the form of barbeque smoke.	The first floor balcony is open to the east and south. No adverse smoke or odour impacts are likely to result from the cut out in the northern wall of this balcony.
The proposed front door lines up with a bedroom window at No 56 Watonga Street. Privacy and noise impacts.	Aluminium louvres are proposed alongside the boundary fence to maintain privacy to the entry. The use of this entry will be infrequent and not create any significant adverse noise or privacy impact.
No consultation or prior plans discussed with No 56 Watonga Street.	Noted.
The proposal is not consistent with the height of building objectives of the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011.	Refer to comments under Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 heading of this report. The proposal complies with the maximum building height limit.
Advice from planning organisation suggests view loss could be minimised by reduction in garage height and removal of mezzanine within.	Noted. The application as lodged is subject to this assessment. Refer to comments under view sharing analysis indicating various design options that were investigated.
The height of the dwelling is excessive and leads to the impact upon views and outlook form Bourne Street residents.	Refer to view sharing and bulk and scale sections of this report. The proposal complies with the maximum building height limit.
The proximity of the lap pool to the boundary will result in noise, music, litter impacts.	Appropriate separation between adjoining primary living and outdoor areas is achieved. Privacy measures are proposed where appropriate. The swimming pool will be used by the residents and no adverse noise or litter impacts are identified.
The bulk and amenity impacts to Bourne Street residences from the rear facing wall.	The section of building facing the rear boundary is approximately 5.2m in width. The ground floor component contains no windows to the gym room. The first floor contains a 2.6m unarticulated wall section to the study room and 2.6m wide section of vertical louvres to the western elevation of the rear balcony. Having regard to the elevated nature of the Bourne Street properties and articulation proposed there are no adverse bulk and amenity impacts that would warrant refusal of the application.
The clerestory roof window could be redesigned similar to a skylight and be incorporated into the roof so as to minimise amenity and view impact.	Changes were made to the design and orientation of the rooftop window. Refer to view sharing assessment and analysis within this report.
The solar panels could be placed closer to the southern side of the roof and further minimise view impact.	Noted. The application as lodged is subject to this assessment.
The size of the dwelling lends itself to be used for the purposes of tourist and or visitor letting.	The proposal is for a residential use only. Recommended consent condition to reinforce this.

(e) The Public Interest

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

Ecologically Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle

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

The four principles of ecologically sustainable development are:

· the precautionary principle,

· intergenerational equity,

· conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity,

· improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms.

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

Climate change

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

Development contributions will not be required under S64/S7.11 as the proposal is for a new residential dwelling on an approved residential 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.

Attachments

1 ⇩. DA2020 - 713.1 Recommended DA Conditions

2 ⇩. DA2020 - 713.1 Covering letter to revised plans

3 ⇩. DA2020 - 713.1 Revised Plans

AGENDA Development Assessment Panel 21/01/2021

Item: 10

Subject: DA2020 - 606.1 Demolition of Caravan Park and Construction of Service Station, Food and Drink Premises and Car Park at Lot 702 DP 1151916, No 128 Hastings River Drive, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Chris Gardiner

Applicant: RCI Group

Owner: Stevens Holdings Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: $3,200,000

Parcel no: 61267

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2020 - 606.1 for demolition of a caravan park and construction of a service station, food and drink premises and car park at Lot 702, DP 1151916, No. 128 Hastings River Drive, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for demolition of a caravan park and construction of a service station, food and drink premises and car park at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Following exhibition of the application, eight (8) submissions were received.

The proposal has been amended through the assessment process, including increase to the height of the acoustic fence to the southern boundary, reduction in operational hours for the food and drink premises, changes to illuminated signage, and access and circulation within the site.

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 1.062 hectares.

The site is zoned B5 Business Development in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Demolition of existing caravan park, including roads, swimming pool and community buildings;

· Construction of a service station including convenience shop, underground fuel tanks, and fuelling canopy;

· Construction of a food and drink premises with drive through facility;

· Construction of associated car parking, landscaping and frontage works.

The development is proposed to be staged to allow for each of the components to be completed individually in any order.

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

Application Chronology

· 31 July 2020 - Application lodged.

· 11 August 2020 to 24 August 2020 - Neighbour notification.

· 21 October 2020 - Additional information requested from Applicant.

· 4 November 2020 - Comments on application received from Transport for NSW.

· 24 November 2020 - Additional information and amended plans submitted by Applicant.

· 16 December 2020 - Amended Waste Management Plan submitted.

· 17 December 2020 - Amended food and drink premises fit out plans submitted.

· 6 January 2021 - Amended plans and noise impact assessment submitted.

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) Any Environmental Planning Instrument

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 21 - Caravan Parks

The proposal involves demolition of an existing caravan park. The SEPP does not contain any relevant provisions regarding the closure/demolition of a caravan park. The retained caravan park (Melaleuca Lifestyle Village) on adjoining Lot 32 DP 855159 has a separate approval to operate and does not rely upon any of the roads or communal facilities on the subject site (other than the section of road within the right of carriageway, which is proposed to be retained).

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 33 - Hazardous and Offensive Development

The subject SEPP was introduced to clarify the definitions for hazardous and offensive industries and to apply guidelines for the assessment of industries that have the potential to create hazards or an offence. In this case, the development has the potential to be hazardous (risk of fire/explosion) and offensive (odours) given the fuel storage component and the provisions of the SEPP apply.

The proposal incorporates a total of approximately 115 kilolitres of flammable liquid and 65 kilolitres of combustible liquid stored in underground tanks. The application includes a SEPP 33 Risk Screening Report prepared by Hazkem Dangerous Goods Consulting. The report addresses the Department of Planning’s Hazardous and Offensive Development Application Guidelines - Applying SEPP 33 and considered the screening tests to determine whether a preliminary hazard analysis is required.

The proposal includes the following breakdown of fuel types and classifications:

The total storage volume is 180,000 litres, but for the purpose of the screening test the guideline allows the volume to be divided by a factor of 5, due to all tanks being underground. This gives a total volume of 36,000 for the purpose of the screening test. Figure 9 in the guideline provides the minimum separation distances required for a proposal to not be considered hazardous. The proposal has been plotted on the figure below:

The only residential use adjoining the site is located to the south, with other adjoining development being commercial. The proposal satisfies the minimum setback requirements and therefore doesn’t require a preliminary hazard analysis.

The proposal is also below the transport screening threshold of up to 45 movements per week or 750 movements per year. The application indicates that the site will receive approximately 3 deliveries per week (156 deliveries per year), which is well below the threshold.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2020

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

Clause 7 - The site has an area greater than 1 hectare and Part 2 of the SEPP applies.

Clause 8 - The ecological assessment prepared by Narla Environmental confirms that the land does contain any Schedule 2 food trees and the site therefore does not meet the definition of potential koala habitat. No further consideration of the SEPP is 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. The land has previously been used as a caravan park, which is not identified as a potentially contaminating use in the contaminated land planning guidelines.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 - Advertising and Signage

The proposed development includes proposed signage in the form of two 6m high pylon signs in the Hastings River Drive frontage and various business identification signs on the fuel canopy, service station building and food and drink premises.

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

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

Applicable clauses for consideration	Comments	Satisfactory
Clause 8(a) Consistent with objectives of the policy as set out in Clause 3(1)(a).	The proposed signage is consistent with the objectives of the Policy.	Yes
Schedule 1(1) Character of the area.	The area has a generally commercial character along Hastings River Drive and the proposed signs are considered to be compatible with the existing and desired future character of the area.	Yes
Schedule 1(2) Special areas.	The site is not located in a special area.	N/A
Schedule 1(3) Views and vistas.	The proposed signs would not affect any significant views or vistas.	Yes
Schedule 1(4) Streetscape, setting or landscape.	The scale of the signage is appropriate to the setting and would not detract from the streetscape. The pylon signs are below the top of the service station buildings and consistent with the DCP height controls for pylon signs in the precinct.	Yes
Schedule 1(5) Site and building.	The scale of the signs are in proportion to the proposed buildings.	Yes
Schedule 1(6) Associated devices and logos with advertisements and advertising structures.	N/A	N/A
Schedule 1(7) Illumination.	The proposal includes illuminated signage. Given that the service station is intended to operate 24 hours, the signage is not proposed to be subject to a curfew. It will be necessary for the illuminated signs to comply with AS4282, and a condition has been recommended in this regard. The DCP recommends that illuminated signage near residential uses be fitted with a time switch to dim by 50% after 11.00pm and a condition is also recommended confirming this requirement. Illuminated signage associated with the food and drink premises should be switched off outside the operational hours of the business.	Yes
Schedule 1(7) Safety.	The signs are not considered to adversely affect traffic, cyclist, or pedestrian safety.	Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

The site is located within a coastal use area, coastal environment area and proximity area to coastal wetlands.

Clause 7 - This SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.

Clause 11(1)(a) - The proposal is not expected to significantly impact the biophysical, hydrological or ecological integrity of the adjacent coastal wetland. The site is an existing developed caravan park and is separated from the coastal wetland by the adjoining Melaleuca Village. The proposal includes stormwater quality controls in accordance with Council’s AUSPEC specifications.

Clause 11(1)(b) - The quality and quantity of surface water entering the adjacent coastal wetland will be controlled in accordance with Council’s AUSPEC specifications. The Applicant has submitted a Water Cycle Management Plan, which demonstrates conceptually that on-site detention and water quality controls are achievable. In relation to potential impacts on groundwater entering the coastal wetland, the proposed underground fuel storage tanks are located outside the proximity area and have been designed with leak, detection and groundwater monitoring in accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations (Underground Petroleum Storage Systems) Regulation 2014.

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; or

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.

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.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Clause 45 - The development is not in proximity to electricity infrastructure and referral to Essential Energy was not required.

Clause 101 - The site has frontage to a classified road (Hastings River Drive). The property also has frontage to Mumford Street and Hughes Place. Access to the proposed development is proposed via a left-in left-out divided driveway from Hastings River Drive. This is consistent with the existing access arrangement for the caravan park. In this instance access via Hughes Place or Mumford Street is not considered desirable due to traffic impacts on the classified road at their intersections.

The design of the access to the land and the likely traffic impacts on the classified road have been addressed in the submitted Traffic Impact Assessment are discussed later in this report.

The development will not result in any emissions of smoke or dust once operational.

A standard condition has been recommended in relation to dust management during the construction phase.

The development is not of a nature that would be sensitive to road traffic noise.

Clause 104 - The proposal is traffic-generating development identified in Schedule 3 of the SEPP. The proposal has been referred to Transport for NSW (TfNSW) in accordance with this clause. The comments received from TfNSW are discussed later in this report.

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 B5 Business Development.

· Clause 2.3(1) and the B5 zone landuse table - The proposed development for a service station, food and drink premises and car park is permissible with consent.

The objectives of the B5 zone are as follows:

o To enable a mix of business and warehouse uses, and specialised retail premises that require a large floor area, in locations that are close to, and that support the viability of, centres.

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

o To ensure that new developments make a positive contribution to the public domain and streetscape.

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

o The development contributes to the mix of business uses in the area.

o Land use conflict with nearby uses is capable of being appropriately managed.

o The development will make an acceptable contribution to the streetscape.

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

· Clause 4.3 - The maximum overall height of the buildings above ground level (existing) is 8.0m, which complies with the height limit of 11.5m applying to the site.

· Clause 4.4 - No maximum floor space ratio applies to the site.

· Clause 5.10 - 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 3 acid sulfate soils. The proposed development includes underground fuel storage tanks, which will involve excavation of more than 1m below ground level. An Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan prepared by Douglas Partners Pty Ltd has been submitted with the application. The Plan recommends pre-construction confirmation of site specific acid sulfate soil conditions. Excavated acid sulfate soils are to be stored in a bunded area to contain leachate and neutralised using Grade 1 agricultural lime. The Acid Sulfate Soil Management Plan is considered satisfactory and a condition is recommended requiring the Plan to be implemented during construction.

· Clause 7.3 - 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, 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;

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

o The service station convenience shop, fuel canopy, and food and drink premises are proposed to be constructed to FPL2 (1:100 flood level, plus applicable climate change allowance)

(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

The relevant provisions of the DCP are considered in the following table:

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B1: Advertising and Signage*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
1	a) Signs primarily identifying products or services are not acceptable, even where relating to products or services available on that site.	All proposed signage is business identification with the exception of the fuel pricing information, which is legally required to be displayed.	Yes
	b) Signage is not permitted outside property boundaries except where mounted upon buildings and clear of pedestrians and road traffic. No signage is permitted upon light or power poles or upon the nature strip (the area between the property boundary and constructed roadway). Limited directional signage and “A” frame signage may separately be approved by Council under the Roads Act 1993 or section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993.	All proposed signs are contained within the site boundaries.	Yes
	c) An on-building 'chalkboard' sign, for the purpose of describing services or goods for sale which vary on a regular basis generally should not be any larger than 1.5m2, and should contain a sign written heading indicating the premises to which it refers.	N/A	N/A
	d) On-premise signs should not project above or to the side of building facades	Signs are contained within the walls of the buildings.	Yes
2	a) Where there is potential for light spill from signage in a non-residential zone adjoining or adjacent to residential development, illuminated signage is to be fitted with a time switch to dim by 50% or turn off the light by 11pm each night, depending on the nature of the development.	Condition recommended requiring illuminated signage to be dimmed by 50% or turned off by 11pm each night.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B2: Environmental Management*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
3	a) Development must comply with Council’s Developments, Public Place & Events - Waste Minimisation and Management Policy.	The Applicant has submitted a Waste Management Plan addressing Council’s Policy.	Yes
Cut and Fill Regrading
4	a) Development shall not exceed a maximum cut of 1.0m and fill of 1.0m measured vertically above the ground level (existing) at a distance of 1.0m outside the perimeter of the external walls of the building (This does not apply to buildings where such cut and fill is fully retained within or by the external walls of the building).	The proposal includes substantial earthworks across the site, the majority of which is located outside the perimeter walls of the proposed buildings. The proposal includes cut of less than 0.5m, and filling of up to 1.8m. The extent of filling is necessary in this instance to achieve the required minimum floor/ground levels in accordance with Council’s Flood Policy. The required levels cannot be achieved within the DCP provisions. Relevant objectives of the provision including, site stability, privacy impacts, and stormwater management have been considered in the assessment and the proposal is consistent with these objectives.	No, but acceptable
5	a) A certified practicing structural engineer must certify any retaining wall greater than 1.0m.	Condition recommended requiring engineering certification.	Yes
5	b) Where a combination of a fence and a wall is proposed to be greater than 1.2m high: - be a maximum combined height of 1.8m above existing property boundary level; - be constructed up to the front boundary for a maximum length of 6.0m or 30% of the street frontage, whichever is less; − the fence component has openings which make it not less than 25% transparent; and − provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and - provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances.	No front fence and retaining wall combination proposed.	N/A
Tree Management – Private Land
11	c) Where a tree listed in Table 1 is approved for removal it must be compensated with 2 x koala habitat trees. Significant large-scale development will require an advanced size koala food tree or habitat tree (primary Koala browse species) that meets AS2303:2015 Tree Stock for Landscape Use. The compensation tree is to be planted in a suitable location as determined by the Director of Development and Environment or their delegate.	The ecology report identifies 4 broad leaf paperbarks to be removed, which are listed as other browse species in the DCP. Offset plantings are capable of being provided within the site landscaping or on the vacant part of the site adjacent to Mumford Street. A condition is recommended requiring offset plantings at a ratio of 2:1 in the same species, or 1:1 with primary koala food trees.	Yes
Tree Management - Hollow Bearing Trees
13	a) All hollow bearing trees within the development area are to be accurately located by survey and assessed by an appropriately qualified ecologist in accordance with Council’s Hollow-bearing tree assessment (HBT) protocol	No hollow bearing trees identified for removal.	N/A

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provision - B3: Hazards Management*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Airspace Protection
15	a) Development shall not result in land use or activities that attract flying vertebrates such as birds and bats within proximity of flight paths associated with airport operations.	The proposed use is not expected to attract flying vertebrates.	Yes
16	a) Development shall not result in emission of airborne particulate or produce a gaseous plume with a velocity exceeding 4.3m per second that penetrates operational airspace. Refer Manual of Standards Part 139 – Aerodromes, Civil Aviation Safety Authority.	No emissions of this nature proposed.	Yes
Flooding
19	a) Development must comply with Council’s Floodplain Management Plan and Flood Policies.	See comments earlier under Clause 7.3 of LEP regarding flooding.

*DCP 2013: Part B- General Provisions- B4: Transport, Traffic Management, Access and Car Parking*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Road Hierarchy
23	a) New direct accesses from a development to arterial and distributor roads is not permitted. Routes should differ in alignment and design standard according to the volume and type of traffic they are intended to carry, the desirable traffic speed, and other factors.	Site has existing entry and exit to classified road.		N/A
	b) Existing direct accesses from a development to arterial and distributor roads are rationalised or removed where practical.	The existing site access is already left-in, left-out to Hastings River Drive, which is considered to be the most practical means of access. Access from Mumford Street is not desirable without improvements to the intersection of Hastings River Drive and Mumford Street.		Yes
	c) Vehicle driveway crossings are minimal in number and width (while being adequate for the nature of the development), and positioned: − to avoid driveways near intersections and road bends, and − to minimise streetscapes dominated by driveways and garage doors, and − to maximise on-street parking.	A single entry and exit driveway are proposed with adequate width to accommodate heavy vehicles.		Yes
Parking Provision
24	a) Off-street Parking is provided in accordance with Table 3. Take away food and drink premises - On-site seating and drive-through: 1 space per 2 seats, plus queuing area for minimum of 8 cars from the pickup point. Service station: 3 spaces per work bay + 1 per employee + 2 customer (minimum) + any Restaurant/Take Away Food requirements	The service station is noted to have no work bays and 2 employees, which requires a minimum of 4 parking spaces. The convenience store component of the service station has a floor area of approximately 98m² and is considered to generate a parking demand at the retail premises rate (1 space per 30m²). This equates to an additional 3.27 (rounded to 4) spaces. The total parking demand for the service station component is 8 spaces. The takeaway food and drink premises is proposed to have 42 indoor seats (21 spaces) and provided queuing for 8 vehicles in the drive through. The total parking required for the development is therefore 29 spaces, plus queuing for 8 vehicles at the drive through. The proposal provides 148 spaces, which meets this requirement with 119 parking spaces surplus.		Yes
	b) Where a proposed development does not fall within any of the listed definitions, the provision of on-site parking shall be supported by a parking demand study.	N/A		N/A
	c) Where a proposed development falls within more than one category Council will require the total parking provision for each category.	Noted. Parking assessment has considered all relevant land uses.		Yes
25	a) A development proposal to alter, enlarge, convert or redevelop an existing building, whether or not demolition is involved, shall provide the total number of parking spaces calculated from the schedule for the proposed use, subject to a credit for any existing deficiency, including any contributions previously accepted in lieu of parking provision.	No parking credits applicable.		N/A
26	a) On street parking, for the purposes of car parking calculations will not be included unless it can be demonstrated that: − there is adequate on street space to accommodate peak and acute parking demands of the area; − parking can be provided without compromising road safety or garbage collection accessibility; − parking can be provided without jeopardising road function; and − that streetscape improvement works, such as landscaped bays and street trees are provided to contribute to the streetscape.	N/A		N/A
	b) On street parking is provided in accordance with AS2890.5.	N/A		N/A
Parking Layout
28	a) Visitor and customer parking shall be located so that it is easily accessible from the street.	Parking easily accessible.		Yes
	b) Internal signage (including pavement markings) should assist customers and visitors to find parking and circulate efficiently and safely through a car park.	General directional pavement markings included on architectural plans.		Yes
	c) Parking spaces shall generally be behind the building line but may be located between the building line and the street when: − it is stacked parking in the driveway; or − it can be demonstrated that improvements to the open space provided will result; and − the spaces are screened (densely landscaped or similar) from the street by a landscaping with a minimum width of 3.0m for the entire length of the parking area.	Parking in the north-west corner of the site located forward of the building line with landscaping approximately 1.5m wide. This is consistent with the adjoining car parking for the Aldi store to the west. Landscaping in this location has been established in the 1.5m wide strip and successfully screens the open parking area from Hastings River Drive. It is considered that a similar landscape treatment for the subject site could achieve a similar result.		No, but acceptable
	d) Parking design and layout is provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1 - Parking facilities - Off-street car parking and AS 2890.6 - Off-street parking for individuals with a disability and AS/NZS 2890.2 - Parking facilities - Off-street commercial vehicle facilities.	Parking layout capable of complying. Conditions recommended requiring certification of design prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate and certification of the completed car park prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.		Yes
	e) Stack or tandem parking spaces will not be included in assessment of parking provision except where: − the spaces are surplus to that required; − in motor showrooms; − for home business; − for exhibition homes; − in car repair stations; − staff parking spaces are separately identified and delineated; − it is visitor parking associated with a dual occupancy multi dwelling and/or terrace housing, directly in front of the garage with a minimum depth of 5.5m.	None proposed.		Yes
29	a) Parking is provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1 - Parking facilities - Off-street car parking, AS/NZS 2890.2 - Parking facilities - Off-street commercial vehicle facilities, AS 1428 - Design for access and mobility and AS 2890.6 - Off-street parking for individuals with a disability.	Parking layout capable of complying. Conditions recommended requiring certification of design prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate and certification of the completed car park prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.		Yes
30	a) Bicycle and motorcycle parking shall be considered for all developments.	The proposed uses of the land for a service station and food and drink premises are not expected to generate a significant demand for customer bicycle parking. A bicycle rack is identified on the plans adjacent to the food and drink premises to cater for the small volume of staff and customer parking anticipated. Motorcycle parking can be accommodated within the vehicle parking area, and there is significant surplus spaces for this use.		Yes
	b) Bicycle parking areas shall be designed generally in accordance with the principles of AS2890.3 - Parking facilities - Bicycle parking facilities.	Bicycle rack adjacent to the food and drink is capable of complying with standard.		Yes
	c) Motorcycle parking areas shall be 1.2m (wide) x 2.5m (long).	N/A		N/A
Landscaping of Parking Areas
33	a) Landscaping areas shall be provided in the form of large tree planting, understorey plantings, mulch areas, mounding, lawns and the like	The landscape plan includes understorey plantings as well as 36 medium mature trees including: - 5 Tuckeroo - 4 Riberry - 7 Watergum - 20 Foxtail Palm		Yes
	b) Landscaping areas shall be used throughout the car park and on the perimeters of the property where it addresses the public domain.	The landscape plan includes landscaping within the parking areas and along the site frontage to the public domain.		Yes
	c) Garden beds shall be a minimum of 3m in width between car parking areas and street boundaries.	Parking in the north-west corner of the site located forward of the building line with landscaping approximately 1.5m wide. The suitability of this area is discussed above under 28(c).		No, but acceptable
34	a) All plantings on public lands are to be selected from Council’s Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List from the relevant vegetation community adjacent to the Development.	Proposal will include replacement of the existing street tree in Hastings River Drive.		Yes
	b) Trees are to be grown and installed in accordance with AS 2303:2015 Tree Stock for Landscape Use and Council’s AUS-SPEC design specifications.	Noted. Replacement street tree will need to meet these specifications.		Yes
	Surface Finishes
35	a) All parking and manoeuvring areas shall be constructed with a coarse base of sufficient depth to suit the amount of traffic generated by the development, as determined by Council. It shall be sealed with either bitumen, asphaltic concrete, concrete or interlocking pavers. Preliminary details of construction materials for access and car parking areas shall be submitted with the development application. Detailed plans shall be prepared for the construction certificate by a practising qualified Civil Engineer.	Concrete surface proposed.		Yes
	b) In special cases (e.g. where traffic volumes are very low) Council may consider the use of consolidated unsealed gravel pavement for car parks. However, this should not be assumed and will need to be justified by the applicant at the Development Application stage.	N/A		N/A
	Drainage
36	a) All parking and manoeuvring spaces must be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Water Cycle Management Plan submitted with application addressing these matters.		Yes
	b) Council will not permit the discharge of stormwater directly into kerbing and guttering or table drains for any development other than that of a minor nature.
37	a) Car parking areas should be drained to swales, bio retention, rain gardens and infiltration areas.
	Loading Bays
38	a) Off street commercial vehicle facilities are provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.2 - Parking facilities - Off-street commercial vehicle facilities.	Separate loading facilities proposed for the service station and food and drink premises.		Yes
	b) Loading bays should be provided in accordance with the following requirements; - Minimum dimensions to be 3.5m wide x 6m long. (This may increase according to the size and type of vehicle). - Vertical clearance shall be a minimum of 5m. - Adequate provision shall be made on-site for the loading, unloading and manoeuvring of delivery vehicles in an area separate from any customer car parking area. - A limited number of ‘employee only’ car parking spaces may be combined with loading facilities. - Loading areas shall be designed to accommodate appropriate turning paths for the maximum design vehicle using the site. - Vehicles are to be capable of manoeuvring in and out of docks without causing conflict with other street or on-site traffic. - Vehicles are to stand wholly within the site during such operations.	Service station bay 8m x 3.5m. Food and drink premises loading bay 8m x 3.58m. Neither loading bay is roofed and both loading bays can accommodate the swept path of the design vehicle.		Yes
	c) Industrial development shall provide adequate heavy vehicle access to building entries, or alternatively, external bays located appropriately for goods distribution.	N/A		N/A
	d) For external bays, one bay is required for 500m² of floor space or 1000m² of site area.	Two loading bays provided.		Yes
	e) Commercial development having a floor space less than 500m² need not provide a loading bay.	N/A		N/A
	f) Other commercial development shall provide one loading bay for the first 1,000m² floor space and one additional bay for each additional 2,000m².	N/A		N/A
	g) If parcel pickup facilities are provided on-site they shall be located so as to avoid conflict with general traffic flow within parking areas. Parcel pickup lanes shall be separate from through traffic lanes in major shopping developments.	N/A		N/A
39	a) The location and design of loading bays should integrate into the overall design of the building and car parking areas.	Loading bay locations acceptable.		Yes
	b) Where visible from the public domain, loading bays are located behind the building.	Service station loading bay behind the building line and food and drink premises loading bay substantially setback from site frontage.		Yes
	c) Where loading bays are located close to a sensitive land use, adequate visual and acoustic screening is provided.	Food and drink premises loading bay located approximately 20m from the boundary of the adjoining Melaleuca Village. The loading bay is screened from the sensitive land use by the screened plant area on the eastern side of the building and also the proposed acoustic fencing on the property boundary.		Yes
Traffic Generating Development
41	a) Traffic Generating Development as defined under SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007 is referred to Roads and Maritime Services. (Refer to Clause 104 and Schedule 3 of the SEPP).	Proposal is traffic generating development and has been referred to Transport for NSW.		Yes

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B5: Social Impact Assessment and Crime Prevention*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Social Impact Assessment
42	a) A social impact assessment shall be submitted in accordance with the Council’s Social Impact Assessment Policy.	Social Impact Assessment has been submitted and is considered later in this report.
Crime Prevention
43	a) The development addresses the generic principles of crime prevention: - Casual surveillance and sightlines; - Land use mix and activity generators; - Definition of use and ownership; - Basic exterior building design; - Lighting; - Way-finding; and - Predictable routes and entrapment locations; - as described in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles.	The service station component is proposed to be open 24 hours and will provide casual surveillance of the site. The building surrounds and car parking areas are proposed to be illuminated, which will also assist with casual surveillance and remove concealment opportunities. There is no access control to the overall site and parking area, but appropriate access control will be provided to buildings, particularly during late night trading at the service station. The site layout and proposed landscaping will define the public and private areas of the site.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Part C - Development Specific Provisions - C3: Business and Commercial Development*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
97	Setbacks a) A zero metre setback to ground floor is preferred for B1 Neighbourhood Centre, B2 Local Centre, B3 Commercial Centre and B4 Mixed Use zone developments.	Not applicable to B5 zone.	N/A
97	b) Any front setback for other commercial zones to be considered on merit, having regard to existing streetscape.	The proposed setback of 7.5m to the service station building and fuelling canopy is considered satisfactory for the nature of the use. There is no established character to the existing building setbacks in the locality.	Yes
99	Roof Form a) Variations in roof form including the use of skillions, gables and hips are to be provided in the development.	Roof form satisfactory having regard to other buildings in the locality.	Yes
	b) Variations in roof materials shall be used.
	c) Parapets and flat roofs should be avoided.
	d) In an established street, roof form and materials shall be consistent or complementary to those developments in that street.	Roof form and materials consistent with other development in the locality.	Yes
	e) Lift over-runs and service plant shall be concealed within roof structures.	N/A	N/A
	f) All roof plant must be represented on plans and elevations.	Screened plant areas identified on the plans to the side of each of the proposed buildings. No roof plant proposed.	Yes
	g) Outdoor recreation areas on flat roofs shall be landscaped and incorporate shade structures and wind screens to encourage use.	N/A	N/A
	h) Roof design shall generate an interesting skyline and be visually interesting when viewed from adjoining developments.	No multi-storey buildings in the locality that would have views across the rooftops.	No, but acceptable
100	a) Colours, construction materials and finishes should respond in a positive manner to the existing built form, character and architectural qualities of the street	Materials and finishes satisfactory in the site context.	Yes
101	a) Shopfront widths are to be between 15 and 20 m.	Maximum 20m shopfront width.	Yes
	b) Widths up to a maximum of 30 may be considered where the building achieves superior built design and streetscape outcomes.	N/A	N/A
	c) The maximum length of any similar façade treatment is 22m.	Neither façade is longer than 22m.	Yes
	d) Side and rear facades are to be treated with equivalent materials and finishes to the front façade.	Side and rear facades treated in similar quality materials.	Yes
	e) Building facades should be designed to reflect the orientation of the site incorporating environmental control devices, e.g. sun shades, ventilation vents, overhangs, building recesses, eaves, as an integrated design feature of the building.	Features integrated into building design.	Yes
	f) An articulation zone of between 1.8-4.0m is provided for the front façade of all floors containing residential and tourist uses.	N/A	N/A
102	a) Any security grilles shall be provided inside the building, behind glazing and designed to ensure transparency to the interior.	None shown on plans.	N/A
103	a) Infill development or alterations should respect the form, scale and massing of existing traditional buildings.	N/A	N/A
103	b) Where traditional frontages and facades set the architectural theme for parts of a Centre, infill buildings or alterations respect and reflect the architectural qualities and traditional materials of those buildings, but do not necessarily imitate historical architectural styles.	N/A	N/A
104	Active Frontages a) Ground floor levels should not be used for residential purposes in zones B1 Neighbourhood Centre, B2 Local Centre, B3 Commercial core and B4 Mixed use.	Land is in B5 zone.	N/A
111	Landscaping A landscape plan shall be submitted with the development application and include: − Existing vegetation; and − Existing vegetation proposed to be removed; and − Proposed general planting and landscape treatment; and − Design details of hard landscaping elements and major earth cuts, fills and any mounding; and − Street trees; and − Existing and proposed street furniture including proposed signage.	Landscape plan submitted showing satisfactory detail of plantings.	Yes
111	b) Vegetation is provided on top of podium levels, on tops of car parks, and on balconies and verandas fronting the street below podium level.	N/A	N/A
112	a) All street plantings are to be selected from Council's Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List from the relevant vegetation community adjacent to the Development.	Condition recommended regarding replacement street tree plantings.	Yes
113	a) Large trees and spreading ground covers are provided in all landscape areas within the site.	Proposed on landscape plan.	Yes
	b) Large screening shrubs of an appropriate density and size to complement the scale and bulk of the subject building are provided in areas where screening is a priority.	Appropriate screening shrubs proposed in the area forward of the parking area on the western side of the service station building.	Yes
	c) Where car parking cannot be provided under or behind the building and Council has agreed to permit some or all of the parking in the front setback, a landscaped strip with a minimum width of 3.0m is provided along the entire frontage/s of the site.	1.5m wide landscaped strip proposed between the parking area and Hastings River Drive. This is generally consistent with the width of the landscaping for the adjoining Aldi car park and can accommodate effective screen plantings.	No, but acceptable.
114	a) At grade car parking incorporate water sensitive urban design principles to drain pavement areas.	See comments under Stormwater section of this report.
115	a) Fencing for security or privacy shall not be erected between the building line and the front boundary of a site.	None proposed.	Yes
116	a) Where fences are erected, landscaping of an appropriate height and scale shall be provided to screen the fence and achieve an attractive appearance to the development when viewed from the street or other public place.	N/A	N/A
117	a) Street furniture, including seats, bollards, grates, grills, screens and fences, bicycle racks, flag poles, banners, litter bins, telephone booths and drinking fountains are coordinated with other elements of the streetscape.	None proposed.	N/A
118	a) Any ramps are to be integrated into the overall building and landscape design.	No ramps proposed.	N/A
120	Vehicular Access Location and Design a) No direct vehicular access to at grade or basement car parking from the active street frontage should be permitted in B1 Neighbourhood Centre, B2 Local Centre, B3 Commercial Core and B4 Mixed Use zones.	Land is in B5 zone.	N/A
	b) The number of vehicular crossovers shall be kept to a minimum and appropriate sight lines provided to ensure safe integration of pedestrian and vehicular movement.	Single entry and single exit driveway proposed, which is consistent with the existing access arrangement for the site.	Yes
	c) Any car park ramps are located largely within the building footprint.	N/A	N/A
	d) Underground car parks must be designed to enable all vehicles to access and egress in a forward direction.	N/A	N/A
	e) Vehicular entrances to underground car parks are to be; − Located on minor streets; − Have a maximum crossover of 6.0m; − Shall be signed and lit appropriately; − Shall be designed so that exiting vehicles have clear sight of pedestrians and cyclists.	N/A	N/A
	f) At-grade / surface car parking areas adjacent to streets shall be generally avoided or at least adequately softened by appropriate landscaping.	Landscaping proposed between car park and street.	Yes
	g) All stairs and elevators in the parking structure are clearly visible.	N/A	N/A
123	Pedestrian Entries & Access a) Pedestrian and vehicle movement areas are separated to minimise conflict.	Separate pedestrian access proposed from Hastings River Drive.	Yes
123	b) Changes in pavement material, levels, lining or tactile treatments are used to distinguish changes between vehicle and pedestrian access ways.	Submitted plans show line marking to define pedestrian paths through the parking area.	Yes
124	a) Pedestrian and vehicle movement areas are separated to minimise conflict.	Pedestrian and vehicle areas separated between Hastings River Drive and the service station building. Within the site dedicated pedestrian areas are provided between parking bays, but crossing of traffic aisles is still required.	Yes
	b) Changes in pavement material, levels, lining or tactile treatments are used to distinguish changes between vehicle and pedestrian access ways	Submitted plans show line marking to define pedestrian paths through the parking area.	Yes
	c) Parking areas are adequately illuminated (naturally and/or artificially) during the time period the centre is open.	Lighting proposed, but no details shown on the plans. The Statement of Environmental Effects notes that a detailed lighting design will be prepared as part of the Construction Certificate documentation.	Yes
127	Commercial Development Adjoining Residential Land Uses a) The development is designed so that all vehicle movement areas and servicing areas are located away from adjoining residential areas.	Food and drink premises loading area located on north-east corner of the building, away from the residential use to the south. Service station loading area located on the southern side of the building, but separated by approximately 50m from the southern boundary.	Yes
	b) Where this cannot be achieved visual and acoustic treatment of the interface is required.	Acoustic fence proposed along boundary of adjoining residential use in accordance with the recommendation in the Noise Impact Assessment.	Yes
	c) The building elevation adjoining the residential area must be; − Articulated, with changes in setback at intervals no greater than 10m; − Use a variety of materials and treatments; − Be setback a minimum of half the height of the wall or a minimum of 3.0metres whichever is greater.	Southern elevation of Food and drink premises includes appropriate articulation and building materials. Minimum setback from the boundary is approximately 11.5m for a building having a maximum height of 7.0m.	Yes
	d) Waste areas are located and managed to minimise pests, noise and odour.	Waste storage located in screened service yards.	Yes
132	Public Art - Additional Requirements for Land Zoned for Business and Tourism a) Development proposed on land zoned Business or Tourist on sites over 5,000sqm, or where the total project capital costs exceed $5M, is to provide a Public Art Strategy for consideration as part of a Development Application.	Cost of works is less than $5 million.	N/A
	b) The Strategy is to make provision for quality artwork(s) within the development in publicly accessible location(s) and take into account the links and connections between the development and the area’s natural and cultural heritage.	N/A	N/A
	c) The public art is to be 1% of the total cost of the development to provide works of art for appreciation from the public domain.	N/A	N/A

*DCP 2013: Part D - Locality Specific Provisions - D3 Port Macquarie West: D3.3 Hastings River Drive*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
229	a) Subdivision design shall incorporate access roads generally in the location shown on Figure 76. New building development shall be located to avoid the proposed access roads and be designed to provide access to them, in preference to Hastings River Drive.	N/A	N/A
230	a) All development (including minor works and change of use development) on land fronting Hastings River Drive shall contribute to the improvement of the streetscape of Hastings River Drive, and are required to incorporate landscaping works.	Proposal includes removal of existing fencing and caravan park buildings, and landscaping has been incorporated into the frontage of the proposed development.	Yes
	b) Where development involves subdivision, new buildings or major additions, and the development site has a frontage greater than 40m, landscaped blisters shall be provided generally in accordance with Figure 76 and Figure 77 and to the satisfaction of Council’s engineers and Parks and Recreation Manager.	The proposal includes removal of existing landscaped blisters adjacent to the proposed exit driveway and for the deceleration lane in the frontage of adjoining land to the east at No. 124 Hastings River Drive. The concept plans submitted for the frontage works in Hastings River Drive do not include any replacement landscaped blisters, and there is not considered to be a suitable safe location in the site frontage for these to be provided. However, there is considered to be sufficient area for two new trees to be provided in the central median of Hastings River Drive, and a condition has been recommended requiring detailed design with the Section 138 application.	Yes
	c) Land required for road widening is to be dedicated to Council as a condition of consent.	No road widening required in site frontage.	N/A
	d) Development is to be designed to be operational for both pre and post road widening.	Road widening has already been carried out in the site frontage, and the proposal will be operational for the existing widened road.	Yes
	e) Flush wall signs and pole or pylon signs are preferred signs in the precinct. Pylon or pole signs are subject to the following: − maximum height of 6m; − one pylon (or pole) sign per property. Multiple signs may be attached to the one pole. − Where a property has more than 50m frontage to Hastings River additional pylons may be allowed, provided that there is a minimum separation of 40m between pylons; − the sign shall not overhang the boundary	The majority of proposed signs are flush wall signs or pole/pylon signs. Some awning fascia signs are proposed on the fuel canopy, which are also considered acceptable in the context and are consistent with the signage at the nearby Caltex service station at No. 92 Hastings River Drive. The site has a frontage greater than 50m and two pylons are permitted. The proposed pylon signs are each 6m high and separated by 40m.	Yes
	f) For motor showrooms, the application shall demonstrate that consideration has been given to the impact of all signs and advertising techniques utilised on the site (including flags, bunting etc), in respect to visual amenity and reduction of visual clutter, integration of landscaping works, car display and signage.	N/A	N/A
	g) Where multiple car franchises are to operate from the one site, one corporate pole sign per franchise may be allowed, provided the position, height and size of each sign is integrated so that the overall impact is controlled, eg grouping of poles, with differing heights, and different setbacks and stepping of signs. In addition, there should be careful integration with landscaping works and car display. No other pole signs will be allowed on site. If a dealer name identification sign is required, this should appear on the building, or as part of a franchise corporate sign. Directional signs eg visitor parking, customer service, parts etc, should be either attached to a corporate franchise “pylon” style sign, or a small entry way wall sign.	N/A	N/A

Based on the above assessment, the variations detailed above 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 of a significance that would justify refusal of the application.

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

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

(iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations

Demolition of buildings AS 2601 - Clause 92

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

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

Context and Setting

The site has a general northerly street frontage orientation to Hastings River Drive. The site also has a narrow frontage to Mumford Street for the part of the site shown as ‘Vacant Land’ on the plans, and frontage via a battle-axe handle to Hughes Place to the west.

Adjoining the site to the north is Hastings River Drive. On the northern side of Hastings River Drive are a car dealership and bowling alley.

Adjoining the site to the east is bulky goods premises and vehicle repair station, and some self-storage units.

Adjoining the site to the south is the remaining part of the caravan park (known as Melaleuca Lifestyle Village) and the Heritage Christian School.

Adjoining the site to the west is an Aldi supermarket.

The proposal has had regard for the context and particularly potential amenity impacts on the adjoining caravan park to the south.

Lighting

The Statement of Environmental Effects notes that the proposal will include low impact illuminated signage and lighting to the car park and vehicle fuelling area given the intended 24-hour operation. No details of the lighting have been submitted with the application and it has been stated that a detailed design will be prepared as part of the Construction Certificate documentation.

A condition is recommended requiring the design and installation of all exterior lighting to be certified by an appropriately qualified person to comply with AS4282 - Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.

Overshadowing

The proposal is not expected to result in any adverse overshadowing impacts to the adjoining caravan park. The acoustic fence and retaining wall will have a combined height of up to approximately 4m in places. The nearest caravan park sites are setback from the fence by 5m.

Roads

The site’s primary road frontage is onto Hastings River Drive. Adjacent to the site, Hastings River Drive is a sealed public road under the care and control of Council. It is a TfNSW Classified distributor road with a 33m wide road reserve. There is a 10m wide road carriageway in the western (outbound) direction, consisting of two through-traffic lanes, an on-road bike lane and a left-hand slip lane providing access to the site. In the eastern (inbound) direction, the road carriageway consists of two through-traffic lanes, an on-road bike lane and a 2.5m wide parallel parking bay.

Within Hastings River Drive, there is a 2.5m wide centre median, consisting of trees, a garden bed and streetlights. Immediately adjacent is a tree pit and a concrete pedestrian refuge, accommodating foot traffic across Hastings Rive Drive. There is a bus bay in the road reserve, adjacent to the north-west corner of the site. In the site frontage, there is SA profile kerb & gutter, an established garden and an existing 1.2m wide footpath.

The site also has road frontage to Hughes Place in the west, via a 5m wide, bitumen-sealed right of carriageway on the access handle and the adjoining land to the south. However, there is no driveway connection from the end of the access handle to the public road. Hughes Place is a 9m wide, sealed Local Street within a 22m wide road reserve. There is SA profile kerb & gutter and an existing 1.2m wide footpath in the street.

The site also has access to Mumford Street to the south, via a bitumen-sealed 5.5m wide private roadway (with boom gate). Mumford Street is a 7.5 wide, sealed Local Street within a 20m wide road reserve. The site’s private access road comes off the north-west edge of the turning circle, which consists of a vegetated centre median and SA profile kerb & gutter.

Traffic and Transport

The site is currently approved for use as a caravan park, with 11 long-term sites and 39 short-term sites. Given the proposed change in use of the site, the application includes a Traffic Impact Assessment from Intersect Traffic dated July 2020. Findings of the study determined:

· The local and state road network is currently operating within its two-way mid-block technical capacity therefore has spare capacity to cater for development in the area.

· The proposed development could generate up to 162 vtph to and from the site during peak periods of which 82 vtph will be passing trade.

· The local and state road network will not reach its two-way mid-block technical capacity resulting from this development and it is reasonable to conclude the development will not adversely impact on the state and local road network subject to satisfactory intersection performance.

· Sidra Intersection modelling of the adjoining Hastings River Drive / Hughes Place roundabout has shown the roundabout will continue to operate satisfactorily post development during both the AM and PM peak periods through to 2030 and beyond. No loss of LoS, with average delays and queue lengths well within the acceptable intersection criteria set by TfNSW. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the proposal will not adversely impact on the operation of intersections within the local and state road network.

· The proposed development will not adversely impact on the Hastings River Drive / Wood Street intersection and the Hastings River Drive / Mumford Street intersection.

· The proposed access arrangements for the development are satisfactory and compliant with Australian Standard AS 2890.1 – 2004 Parking facilities – Part 1: Off-street car parking and the Port Macquarie Hastings DCP (2013).

· The relocation of the Hastings River Drive entry driveway will require the removal of some roadside furniture and loss of 2 – 3 on-street car parks with the lengthening of the No Stopping zone along the adjoining business frontage to allow the existing parking lane on Hastings River Drive to be utilised as a left turn deceleration lane into the site. Whilst this will have a negative impact on the supply of on-street car parking in the area it was noted during site observations and from an historical aerial photograph survey of the site (Near Map) that the on-street car parking demand in this area is not excessive and on-street car parking in Hastings River Drive should not be encouraged due to the function of the road and the traffic volumes on the road.

· Suitable queuing areas exist from the bowsers to the site accesses such that the risk of vehicles queuing back onto the road network is minimal.

· The proposed development provides sufficient and suitable car parking to meet the requirements of the Port Macquarie Hastings DCP (2013) and Australian Standard AS2890.1-2004 “Parking Facilities Part 1 – Off street car parking”.

· The drive through service lane within the food and drink premises also has queuing space for 9 vehicles behind the service point before the queue would begin to impact on the operation of the on-site car parking. This is compliant with the Port Macquarie Hastings DCP (2013) requirements for drive through service lanes (minimum 8 spaces).

· The servicing facilities provided within the site are satisfactory and allow convenient servicing of the site with forward entry and exit from the site for the fuel tankers and service vehicles. This has been demonstrated with the provision of swept turning paths on the plans.

· No additional public transport facilities will be needed resulting from the development as little demand for such services will be generated by the development and suitable public transport services and infrastructure already exists within the vicinity of the site.

· Whilst this type of development may generate a small amount of pedestrian and cycleway traffic, it would not be sufficient to require additional infrastructure.

The findings of the traffic assessment have been assessed by Council staff and are considered to be reasonable

Transport for NSW (TfNSW) Referral

The proposal was referred to TfNSW in accordance with Clause 104 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. Comments were received on 4 November 2020, which recommended consideration of the following items:

· TfNSW recommends that the impact of turning traffic on the safe and efficient operations of the Hastings River Drive should be assessed in accordance with the Austroads Guide to Traffic Management Part 6 and Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 4A to identify the appropriate type of left-turn treatment that will be required for the accesses.

· Any proposed roadworks on Hastings River Drive will require a S138 Application to be submitted to Council and referred to TfNSW for Concurrence. This should include a 2D strategic design for consideration.

· The development proposes two connections to the Aldi Supermarket and the vacant lot. The additional uses proposed as well as the existing, have the potential to increase traffic generation through the site and at the Hasting River Drive accesses. The potential additional traffic generation should be taken into account.

· Traffic from the site and the proposed subdivision will have to use the service stations forecourt area to exit the site. This area will be used by pedestrians to access the shop. A separate exiting arrangement for traffic should be provided to maintain a safe environment for pedestrians.

· The swept paths of the largest design vehicle entering and leaving and movements through the development for each development should be considered.

· The Fuel Plans indicate that the fuel tanker cannot turn from the nearside lane and the prime mover will block the exit while unloading. An alternative arrangement needs to be considered to ensure safety and efficiency for all users of the site.

· No details were provided of the Pylon Sign. Please confirm if SEPP 64 will be triggered.

· Consideration needs to be given to how the Mobile Home Parks pedestrians will safely connect to the existing bus stop.

· Any new or changes to the regulatory controls should be referred to Council’s Traffic Committee for a recommendation.

The Applicant has provided a response to these issues and it is considered that they have been satisfactorily resolved through additional information and amendments to the design of the development.

Site Frontage and Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed though separate left-in (entry) and left-out (exit) driveways onto Hastings River Drive. There will also be an alternative access provided via the existing right of carriageway over the Aldi driveway onto Hughes Place. All accesses shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards, and conditions have been recommended to reflect these requirements.

Hastings River Drive is a Transport for NSW (TfNSW) classified road and will require concurrence from the TfNSW prior to works on this road. Details shall be provided as part of a Roads Act (Section 138) application to Council.

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

· The reinstatement of SA profile kerb & gutter across any redundant driveways.

· The planting of two additional street trees within the centre median of Hastings River Drive, to compensate for the removal of the two existing tree pits.

Appropriate consent conditions have been recommended.

Parking and Manoeuvring

A total of 148 parking spaces (including 2 disabled spaces) have been provided on-site. This includes 10 dedicated on-site car parking spaces for the service station convenience store (including 1 accessible space and a loading / servicing area). The food and drink outlet will be serviced via a drive-thru lane with a queuing capacity of 9 cars behind the service window and 40 on-site car parking spaces including 2 waiting bays for the drive through service lane as well as an accessible parking space. A loading / service bay for the food and drink premises is provided beside the building clear of any car parking provided for the business. The remaining parking spaced will be shared between the two businesses. Parking and driveway widths on site can comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and conditions have been recommended to reflect these requirements.

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

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development has a 40mm and a 20mm metered water service. Final water service sizing will need to be determined by a hydraulic consultant to suit the domestic and commercial components of the development, as well as fire service and backflow protection requirements in accordance with AS3500.

Existing water services no longer required are to be disconnected at the main and a request for this is to accompany the application for water meter hire.

Any water main fittings (hydrants, stop valves etc.) shall be moved clear of driveways if required, at no cost to Council.

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

Appropriate consent conditions have been recommended.

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is traversed by a 150mm PVC sewer line. Any other abandoned sewer junctions are to be capped off at Council’s sewer main. Due to the scale of the development all sewage must discharge directly to a new or existing sewer manhole.

Footings and/or concrete slabs adjacent to sewer lines are to be designed so that no loads are imposed on the infrastructure.

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

Appropriate consent conditions have been recommended.

Stormwater

The submitted application includes a Water Cycle Management Plan prepared by Eclipse Consulting Engineers. The plan has been reviewed by Council’s Senior Stormwater Engineer and considered to be satisfactory subject to the recommended conditions.

The development includes water quality control facilities that have been sized to achieve the water quality targets of AUSPEC D7. A maintenance plan will be required at Section 68 stage to address the ongoing maintenance of these facilities.

The proposed drainage system included on-site detention (OSD) facilities that have been sized to restrict stormwater discharge to pre development rates for all storm events up to and including the 10% AEP event. This differs to Council’s usual requirements which would stipulate detention of flows up to the 1% AEP event, however has been justified in this instance on the basis that the downstream receiving waters are flood prone and will be inundated in events larger than the design - hence there is no downstream benefit to detaining those larger storm events.

Potential exists for discharge from the service station to impact on receiving waters. A SPEL Puraceptor and Stomscak pre-treatment devices/system is proposed to treat surface water/runoff wastewater from the under canopy high risk area, prior to discharge to the stormwater system. Conditions have been recommended in relation to the design and maintenance of this system. Stormwater from the lower risk areas is to be diverted around/away from the high-risk under canopy area.

Appropriate consent conditions have been recommended.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

No known items of Aboriginal or European heritage significance exist on, or adjacent to, the property. The site is considered to be disturbed land due to the previous development of the caravan park.

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

Other Land Resources

The site is within 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. The application includes a satisfactory Water Cycle Management Plan

Soils

Air and Microclimate

Flora and Fauna

The application includes an ecological assessment prepared by Narla Environmental Pty Ltd. The proposed development includes clearing of approximately 391m²of native vegetation (Broad-leaved Paperbark Swamp Woodland) and 3,157m² of urban native/exotic vegetation. The Biodiversity Offset Scheme doesn’t apply for the following reasons:

· The land isn’t identified on the Biodiversity Values Map;

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

· The application of test of significance (5 Part Test) demonstrates that the development will not have a significant impact on biodiversity values.

Offset planting requirements in accordance with the DCP have been recommended in the conditions

Waste

The Applicant has submitted a Waste Management Plan (WMP) for the development. The WMP generally complies with the provisions of Council’s Developments, Public Place & Events Waste Minimisation and Management Policy and make appropriate provision for waste storage, private waste collection, and manoeuvring for garbage collection vehicles. Some minor changes to the operational provisions of the plan are recommended to incorporate the following:

· Public place bins are to include side-by-side general waste (red) and recyclables (yellow) bins;

· The food and drink premises is to provide 2 x 240L food organics and garden organics (green) bins.

A condition has been recommended requiring these changes to the WMP.

Standard precautionary site management condition also recommended for the construction phase of the project.

Energy

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

Noise and Vibration

A Noise Impact Assessment prepared by Reverb Acoustics has been submitted with the application. The assessment considers potential noise impacts from a range of activities associated with the proposed development, including:

· Cars entering, exiting, using the car park, and using the drive through lane;

· Trucks entering, existing, manoeuvring to loading areas, and making deliveries;

· Customers and staff in the drive through facility;

· Fuel tankers entering, exiting, and delivering fuel at the fill point;

· Air conditioning, refrigeration, and exhaust plant; and

· Service station air compressor.

The assessment determined that with no mitigation measures, noise levels would exceed the relevant criteria by up to 9dB(A) at the nearest residential boundary and noise was also predicted to exceed sleep arousal criterion.

The consultant has made a series of recommendations for noise mitigation measures required to achieve the appropriate noise criteria as follows:

4.1 The service station and take-away restaurant may trade over the full 24-hour period.

4.2 Fuel tanker deliveries are to be restricted to 5am-12am.

4.3 General store deliveries are to be restricted to 5am-12am.

4.4 Acoustic fences 2400-2700mm above FGL must be erected along the south site boundary. See Figure 2 for fence heights and locations. A gap of 50-75mm is permitted at ground level to aid in drainage. An acoustic fence is one which is impervious from the ground to the recommended height, and is typically constructed from lapped and capped timber, Hebel Powerpanel or similar. No significant gaps should remain in the fence to allow the passage of sound below the recommended height. Other construction options are available if desired, providing the fence or wall is impervious and of equivalent or greater surface mass than the above construction options.

4.5 Preference should be given to installing a RFP Retail Forecourt Inflator with inbuilt compressor, in preference to a separate compressor. If a separate compressor is preferred it must be located in the service yard.

4.6 Perimeter walls to the Service Yards must be impervious from the ground to a height of 1800mm above FGL. Construction may consist of Colorbond or similar. A gap of 50-75mm may be left at ground level to aid in drainage, cleaning, etc.

4.7 Exhaust plant that produces a sound pressure level (SPL) in excess of 65dB(A) at a distance of 1 metre must have acoustic barriers constructed at the fan discharge. The barriers must fully enclose at least three sides towards any residence. In our experience, a more efficient and structurally secure barrier is one that encloses all four sides. The barrier must extend at least 600mm above and below the fan centre and/or the highest point of the discharge outlet. The barrier must be no closer than 500mm and no further than 1200mm from the edges of the exhaust. Barrier construction should consist of Acoustisorb panels (available through Modular Walls). Note that variations to barrier construction or alternate materials are not permitted without approval from the acoustical consultant. Barrier construction is based solely on acoustic issues. Visual, wind load issues must be considered and designed by appropriately qualified engineers.

4.8 All refrigeration must be located at ground level in enclosed service yards.

4.9 No acoustic treatment is required for air conditioning/refrigeration or exhaust plant (not located in service yards) that satisfies the following noise emission limits:

	*Lw, dB(A)*	*SPL at 1m dB(A)*
*Exhaust plant*	71	65
*Air con Plant (behind parapet)*	86	80

4.10 The contractor responsible for supplying and installing mechanical plant must provide evidence that installed plant meets this noise emission limit, or that noise control included with the plant is effective in reducing the sound level to the specified limit. Once the plant layout has been finalised, details should be forwarded to the acoustic consultant for approval.

4.11 It is strongly recommended that waste collection be restricted to weekdays 7.00am to 6.00pm.

4.12 Construction Certificate documentation must be forwarded to Reverb Acoustics to ensure all recommendations within this report have been incorporated into the design of the site.

4.13 For both staff and customers, some form of education campaign is suggested to ensure satisfactory noise levels at nearby residences. For staff, the education can be part of in-service training, while for visitor’s reminders may be included in promotional material and reinforced with erection of appropriate signage.

Conditions are recommended requiring implementation and certification of the noise mitigation measures recommended in the report.

The height of the acoustic fence has been further increased by the Applicant during the assessment process and is now proposed to be 3.3m high above FGL for the section noted as 2.4m high in Figure 2 above.

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

The Applicant has submitted a bushfire report prepared by a BPAD Certified Consultant. The assessment concludes that the proposed development will comply with the aims and objectives of Planning for Bush Fire Protection subject to the following recommendations:

· The proposed building works shall comply with the NCC (National Construction Code).

· The entire site shall be managed as an inner protection area (IPA) as outlined in Appendix 4 of Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019.

· An Emergency Management Plan shall be prepared in accordance with AS3745-2010 with specific consideration for bushfire.

Conditions are recommended confirming these requirements.

Safety, Security and Crime Prevention

The service station component is proposed to be open 24 hours and will provide casual surveillance of the site. The building surrounds and car parking areas are proposed to be illuminated, which will also assist with casual surveillance and remove concealment opportunities. There is no access control to the overall site and parking area, but appropriate access control will be provided to buildings, particularly during late night trading at the service station. The site layout and proposed landscaping will define the public and private areas of the site.

Social Impacts in the Locality

The application includes a Social Impact Assessment Prepared by BB Professional Services. The assessment identifies potential positive social impacts through the creation of employment (40-50 jobs during construction and up to 30 ongoing jobs). The new car park will have a positive social impact by filling a shortage of off-street parking in the locality for existing businesses. If the displaced manufactured homes were able to be relocated to serve as some form of affordable housing at another location, this would also be a positive social impact.

There is also potential for some negative social impacts on:

· evicted home-owners in the Melaleuca Caravan Park

· evicted renters in the Melaleuca Caravan Park

· neighbouring residents in the Melaleuca Lifestyle Village

· and to a small extent, on the availability of affordable housing in Port Macquarie.

To mitigate the likely negative impacts of the proposed development, the Social Impact Assessment makes the following recommendations:

· That residents of Melaleuca Caravan Park be kept informed;

· That renters be given longer than usual notice before eviction and financial assistance towards relocation costs in two cases where tenants will be most negatively impacted;

· If acceptable sites for relocation of owner-occupied homes can be found at another park in Port Macquarie or another location acceptable to the owners, that relocation expenses be paid, including any fee for securing the new site;

· If no acceptable relocation sites can be found, that home-owners be paid an agreed amount for their homes, so they can use the money received to purchase a new home in another residential park in Port Macquarie when one becomes available;

· That residents of Melaleuca Lifestyle Village be kept informed;

· That Council conducts the intended 6 months’ inspection to ensure that Aldi complies with the noise reduction measures specified as conditions of consent to extended operating hours given in January 2020;

· That the sound-proofing treatment of the perimeter fence behind Aldi, required by Council but not complied with at the time of writing, be extended along the perimeter fence behind the proposed development (car park and fast food restaurant);

· That the tall shrub planting at the Hughes Place end of the perimeter fence also be extended along the entire perimeter fence to reduce fumes;

· That the current storm water run-off problem be rectified with improved drainage;

· That a dilapidation assessment be conducted on houses in the Melaleuca Residential Park for those residents who wish to participate;

· That the developer explores, with Council, the NSW Department of Family and Community Services and community housing providers in Port Macquarie, ways in which the displaced rental homes could be repurposed as social housing elsewhere.

The Applicant has noted in the Statement of Environmental Effects that they intend to implement the recommendations of the Social Impact Assessment. It is recommended that the Social Impact Assessment be included in the approved documents for the development to ensure that the commitments are incorporated into any consent.

The recommendations regarding management of eviction/relocation of existing residents and renters, as well as informing existing residents of progress, are a matter for the property owners and it is not considered that they can be linked to the building certification process. It is noted that the same impacts could occur if the caravan park were to close outside the development application process. A condition has been recommended requiring all existing site agreements to be resolved prior to demolition of construction work commencing.

The other recommendations that relate specifically to the proposed development on the land have been addressed through the assessment and recommended conditions.

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 create employment in the construction industry (40-50 jobs during construction), which will lead to flow impacts such as expenditure in the area. The operational development is also expected to create ongoing employment opportunities for up to 30 people.

Underground Petroleum Storage System (UPSS)

The UPSS must comply with the various NSW requirements including the Protection of the Environment Operations Act, the UPSS Regulation, EPA requirements and relevant Australian Standards. Conditions have been recommended to ensure that the system complies with these requirements.

Site Design and Internal Design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative Impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

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

Site constraints of flooding, bushfire, and acid sulfate soils have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

Eight (8) written submissions 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

Is another service station needed when there are already 8 service stations within approximately 5km, 4 of which operate 24 hours?	Supply and demand for a particular land use is not a matter for consideration by the consent authority.
Viability of the proposal and potential impacts on existing service stations in Port Macquarie. If other service stations are forced to close it will result in abandoned properties with underground fuel storage, resulting in potential pollution issues.	Viability and competition impacts are not matters for consideration by the consent authority. The Protection of the Environment Operations (Underground Petroleum Storage Systems) Regulation 2019 contains provisions for the ongoing monitoring and remediation of properties containing underground fuel storage systems. These provisions would apply to service stations that are no longer operational. It is not expected that any closure of existing service stations would result in pollution issues.
Air quality impacts on adjoining caravan park, including vapours from fuel bowsers and filling point, vehicle emissions, and odour from fast food outlets.	The fuel system and service station has capability for vapour recovery (ie VR1 & VR2). Vapour recovery is not required by the EPA in regional NSW and is not mandatory in the Port Macquarie-Hastings LGA. However, VR1 has been recommended to be installed in the fuel system in the proposed conditions. Potential exists for cooking odours to be generated from the takeaway food and drink premises and a condition has been recommended regarding the management offensive odours. Vehicle emissions are managed through manufacturing standards and are not a matter for consideration in individual development proposals.
Noise impacts on adjoining caravan park from vehicles, deliveries, waste collection, operation of fuel pumping equipment, air compressor, refrigeration and air conditioning plant, conversations at the drive through facility.	A Noise Impact Assessment has been submitted and the likely noise impacts and mitigation measures are discussed earlier in this report.
Increase in traffic noise impacts on Melaleuca Lifestyle Village from Hastings River Drive due to the removal of existing caravan park buildings, which currently provide some noise protection.	A part 3.3m and part 2.7m acoustic fence is proposed to be constructed along the northern edge of the caravan park. The fence is expected to provide better traffic noise reduction from Hastings River Drive than the existing buildings as it is of a similar height and does not have any gaps.
Proximity of the proposed service station to residential uses may result in health impacts, particularly on the elderly vulnerable residents of the Melaleuca Lifestyle Village and children attending the nearby Heritage Christian School. Some international studies have recommended a minimum separation distance of 50m, 100m, or 150m. The proposal shows the nearest fuel bowser being approximately 47.5m from the closest residence. There are also international studies showing links between proximity to petrol stations and childhood leukaemia or cancer.	There have been no public health standards adopted in NSW for the separation between residential uses and service stations. Safe separation distances have been considered in terms of potential hazards associated with fuel storage in accordance with the requirements of SEPP 33 - Hazardous and Offensive Development.
If the development is approved the recommendations in the Social Impact Assessment need to be implemented.	The recommend conditions of consent are consistent with the SIA recommendations.
The survey accompanying the Social Impact Assessment did not include any detail of the actual proposal, which limited the ability of nearby residents to make informed comments.	Noted.
The developer has made no attempt to consult with residents of the Melaleuca Lifestyle Village prior to, or since the lodgement of the application. This is contrary to the recommendations of the Social Impact Assessment to keep residents informed.	Noted.
Impacts of construction activities. It is recommended that the developer have a liaison person responsible for informing residents of the Melaleuca Lifestyle Village of key events, including: · Notice of commencement of work on the site; · Any work which would cause severe ground vibration; · Internal road blockages; · Pile driving equipment; · Heavy excavation work; · Excessive noise related events; · Excessive dust and debris events.	A condition has been recommended requiring this to be implemented as part of the construction site management.
Manufactured homes in the adjoining caravan park are highly susceptible to vibration impacts. The construction activities should adopt best management practice. A dilapidation report for existing homes should be carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Social Impact Assessment.	Conditions have been recommended requiring the developer to prepare a dilapidation report prior to commencing works and following completion of the development.
Inaccuracies in previous background noise logging for developments at the adjoining Aldi site.	Noted. The submission also notes that the location of the noise logger for the current proposal is considered to be more appropriate.
Noise recommendations must not require residents to close windows and doors to achieve required noise levels.	The mitigation measures proposed in the Noise Impact Assessment do not require residents to close windows and doors to achieve required internal noise levels.
Removal of the existing caravan park buildings and replacement with a 2400mm high acoustic fence will expose residents to increased noise levels from the Aldi loading dock.	The proposal has been amended to provide a 3.3m high acoustic fence extending from the existing fence at the Aldi loading dock. Advice from the acoustic consultant has been submitted, confirming that the proposal would not result in an increase in noise from this source.
Question the effectiveness of the proposed additional 300mm fence height adjacent to the takeaway premises.	The acoustic consultant has modelled the expected noise impacts in accordance with EPA guidelines and has recommended that the fence height is appropriate to achieve the required noise reduction.
The proposal will replace an existing 3300mm acoustic fence adjacent to the Aldi loading dock with a 2400mm high acoustic fence along the road edge. This will reduce the level of noise protection from the Aldi loading dock.	The proposal has been amended during the assessment process to increase the fence height in this location to 3.3m.
The full length of the perimeter fence should be provided with an additional acoustic treatment, similar to Council’s requirements for the Aldi section of the fence under DA2019 - 673.1, as recommended in the Social Impact Assessment.	The noise impact assessment has not determined that this level of acoustic treatment to the full length of the fence is necessary to achieve satisfactory noise levels in the adjoining caravan park. The conditions of DA2019 - 673.1 only require this treatment for the south-western boundary of the Aldi site prior to any deliveries occurring between 10pm and midnight. It is understood that the Aldi site is yet to act on DA2019 - 673.1 and deliveries to the site are being carried out in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment (COVID-19 Development – Construction Work Days) Order 2020.
The perimeter fence should be increased in height to a minimum of 3.3m above finished ground level for its full length and have an acoustic treatment/lining to a minimum of Rw28.	The fence height has been increased in height to 3.3m for part of its length. The noise impact assessment has not determined that it is necessary to provide the additional acoustic treatment/lining to achieve appropriate noise levels in the adjoining caravan park.
The hours of operation for the service station should be reduced to 5am to midnight, 7 days a week. This is consistent with the developer’s other service station approved under DA2019 - 285.1 at the corner of Ocean Drive and Ackroyd Street.	The noise impact assessment has demonstrated that the proposed service station is capable of operating 24 hours without adverse noise impacts on adjoining residents.
Request that the hours of operation for the take away food and drink premises be reduced to: - 7am to 10pm Sunday to Thursday, and - 7am to 11pm Friday and Saturday.	The Applicant has amended the proposal to reduce the hours of operation for the food and drink premises to: - 7am to 10pm Sunday to Thursday, and - 7am to midnight Friday and Saturday.
Request that deliveries be restricted to between 7am and midnight, consistent with the adjoining Aldi store.	The noise impact assessment recommends that deliveries be restricted to between 5am and midnight.
The proposed illuminated signage on the southern elevation of the take away building will project above the proposed perimeter fence and cause lighting and visual impacts on the adjoining caravan park residents.	The proposal has been amended to remove illuminated signage from the southern elevation of the food and drink premises.
Request that the air pump beeper be silenced or turned off after 8pm each night.	A condition has been recommended the air pump beeper to be silenced after 8pm each night.
Request that illuminated signs be fitted with a time switch to dim by 50% or turn off by 9pm each night.	The DCP requires illuminated signage to dim by 50% or switch off after 11pm and a condition has been recommended accordingly. A condition has also been recommended requiring the illuminated signage for the takeaway food and drink premises to be switched off outside the approved hours of operation. This would require the signage illumination to be switched off from 10pm Sunday to Thursday.
Request that the developer provide a follow up noise assessment after all buildings and the fence are completed.	A condition has been recommended requiring the noise mitigation measures recommended in the noise impact assessment to be completed and certified prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.
The submitted plans incorrectly label some of the building elevations.	Amended plans have been submitted with the correct orientation labelled on the elevations.
Request for ongoing monitoring of noise and air quality impacts.	Ongoing monitoring of noise and air quality impacts is typically only required for development subject to an Environment Protection Licence (EPL) issued by the EPA. The proposed development does not require an EPL and ongoing monitoring is not considered necessary. If any operational noise impacts occur, Council’s regulatory staff could address the issue in accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.
Concerns regarding negotiations with the developer over relocation/compensation for existing impacted residents.	The Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013 provides the relevant process for termination of site agreements and this is not a matter for consideration by the consent authority in the assessment of the development application. A condition is recommended requiring any existing site agreements to be terminated prior to works commencing.
Any increase in traffic on Mumford Street will reduce safety for children at Heritage Christian School.	The application does not propose any access from Mumford Street for the service station and food and drink premises. The existing Mumford Street access to the Melaleuca Lifestyle Village will be retained, but would not result in any increase in traffic generation.
Due to congestion on Hughes Place delivery vehicles are likely to use Mumford Street for access.	All delivery vehicles are to access the site from Hastings River Drive and a condition has been recommended confirming this requirement.
The traffic assessment has not considered impacts on Mumford Street or its intersection with Hastings River Drive, which is already unsafe.	The application does not propose any access from Mumford Street for the service station and take away food and drink premises and therefore will not affect the volume of traffic turning onto Hastings River Drive at the Mumford Street intersection.
The end of Mumford Street is used by school buses to turn around. Any additional access points in this location will have safety and congestion impacts.	No additional access points are proposed in this location.
The proposal will increase pedestrian traffic past the Heritage Christian School.	The application does not propose any pedestrian access to Mumford Street.
The take away food and drink premises will encourage students leaving the Heritage Christian School to cross the road in unsafe locations.	There is no pedestrian access to the food and drink premises proposed from Mumford Street.
Having a licenced premises so close to a school is of concern and will result in intoxicated patrons walking through the school grounds.	The application does not indicate that either the service station or food and drink premises would be licenced.
Construction noise impacts on school.	Standard conditions have been recommended in relation to construction hours and noise.
Concerns that fuel storage could contaminate surface water during extreme flooding.	The service station canopy area has been designed to be above 1:100 flood level (including climate change allowance). Modern fuel storage systems are designed to be water tight, and compliance with current Australian Standards will ensure that surface water is not able to enter the fuel storage system during flood events more extreme than the 1:100 event.
The submitted plans don’t clearly indicate how/if the development will connect to Mumford Street.	Clarification has been provided, confirming that there will be no connection to Mumford Street for this development.
Request that no vehicle or pedestrian access to Mumford Street be permitted during construction or operation of the development.	No access to Mumford Street is proposed for this development. A condition has been recommended confirming that access is not permitted in this location.
Allegations that Council has historically failed to enforce the requirements for the caravan park.	Noted, but not relevant to the assessment of the current application.
The proposed fencing to the eastern side of the caravan park should extend to the Mumford Street frontage, and the fence at the rear of the take away food and drink premises should extend to the eastern property boundary.	The fencing proposed in the application is to the extent necessary to provide noise mitigation for the proposed uses. The vacant portion of the site adjacent to Mumford Street could potentially be further developed in the future and appropriate fencing could be considered as part of any such proposal.
The parking area contains more spaces than will be required for the customers of the service station and take away food and drink premises. It is likely that these spaces will be used by customers of the adjoining Aldi store.	As noted in the parking assessment earlier in this report, the proposal provides 119 parking spaces more than the minimum required under the DCP. Even if the parking is considered to be an independent land use (rather than being ancillary to the service station or food and drink premises), car parks are permitted with consent in the B5 zone. The design of the car park appears to provide for physical access to the adjoining Aldi site, but it would be possible for the property owner/s to deny access for Aldi customers if they did not wish to allow shared use. The proposal does not include any rights of carriageway or parking easements in favour of the Aldi site.
Request for copies of studies relating to noise, air quality impacts, and impacts on koalas.	The relevant studies submitted with the application were made publicly available on Council’s online Application Tracker.
There are links between the proximity of fast food restaurants to schools and adolescent obesity.	There have been no public health standards adopted in NSW for the separation distance between take away food and drink premises and schools.
Access to Hughes Place via the Aldi site does not appear practical due to the narrow width of the access road adjacent to the loading dock, one way direction of travel (entry only), and use of the area by service vehicles.	It is agreed that access to Hughes Place on the southern side of the Aldi building would not be possible with the current access arrangements. However, it is possible that vehicles could exit the development site and circulate via the northern side of the building to Hughes Place. As noted in the traffic impact assessment, this is not expected to be a common trip as it provides less convenient access to Hastings River Drive. It is only anticipated that the Hughes Place exit would be used by customers shopping at Aldi after visiting the service station or food and drink premises.
The retained section of fence shown on the DA plans is not in the same location as the fence exists on site. The existing fence is located on the boundary of the Aldi lot and setback from the caravan park road approximately 1.8m. The fence shown on the DA plans is located on the northern edge of the caravan park road.	The plans have been amended to show the correct location of the retained section of fence adjacent to Aldi.
The lack of fence for the full length of the western boundary of the caravan park will result in a complete loss of privacy and security. Vehicles will also be able to access the vacant lot from the rear of the take away building.	The noise modelling indicated that acoustic fencing is only required for part of the western boundary with the caravan park to achieve satisfactory noise levels. An appropriate fencing treatment for the remainder of the western edge would need to be negotiated between the property owners. It is not considered that there is sufficient nexus to require the developer to construct the fence given that there are no development impacts created on the vacant part of the site. Pedestrians are able to access to caravan park via the access to Mumford Street and the proposal would not create any additional security risks that do not already exist. To prevent vehicles accessing the vacant part of the site, a condition has been recommended requiring a temporary barrier to be installed between the eastern end of the acoustic fence and the eastern property boundary. The barrier is to be maintained until any future development of the vacant part of the site. A barrier in this location would also likely discourage pedestrian access between Mumford Street and the proposed development.
Discrepancies between noise data in the submitted noise impact assessment and a similar noise impact assessment prepared by the same company for DA2019 - 285.1.	An amended noise impact assessment has been submitted, which corrects these discrepancies. The result of the amended modelling found that the overall noise level at the receiver increased by 0.3dB(A)
Request that waste collection hours be restricted to 7am to 6pm, as strongly recommended in the noise impact assessment.	A condition has been recommended restricting waste collection to these hours.

(e) The Public Interest

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

Ecologically Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle

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

The four principles of ecologically sustainable development are:

· the precautionary principle,

· intergenerational equity,

· conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity,

· improved valuation, pricing and incentive mechanisms.

Climate change

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

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

· Development contributions will not be required towards augmentation of town water supply and sewerage system head works under Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993, as the site has sufficient credits from the previous use as a caravan park.

· Development contributions will be required in accordance with Section 7.11 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 towards road works in Hastings River Drive.

· 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 ⇩. DA2020 - 606.1 Recommended DA Conditions

2 ⇩. DA2020 - 606.1 Plans

3 ⇩. DA2020 - 606.1 Contributions Estimate

date of meeting:		Thursday 21 January 2021
location:		Via Skype
time:		2:00pm

Member	30/09/20	14/10/20	28/10/20	11/11/20	25/11/20	02/12/20	16/12/20
Paul Drake	P	P	P	P	P	P	P
Robert Hussey			P		P
David Crofts (alternate member)	P	P		P		P	P
Dan Croft (Group Manager Development Assessment) (alternates) - Development Assessment Planner	P	P	P	P	P	P	P

21/01/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
11/02/2021	Committee Room	2:00pm
25/02/2021	Committee Room	2:00pm
11/03/2021	Committee Room	2:00pm
25/03/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
08/04/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
22/04/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
13/05/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
27/05/2021	Committee Room	2:00pm
10/06/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
24/06/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
15/07/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
29/07/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
12/08/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
26/08/2021	Committee Room	2:00pm
09/09/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
30/09/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
14/10/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
28/10/2021	Function Room	2:00pm
11/11/2021	Committee Room	2:00pm
25/11/2021	Committee Room	2:00pm
09/12/2021	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.