Agenda of Development Assessment Panel - Wednesday, 5 April 2023

AGENDA

Development Assessment Panel

05/04/2023

Item: 05

Subject: DA2021 - 894.1 Staged Additions to Racecourse Comprising Horse Stables and Walkers at Lot 653 DP 43940, No.15 Tulloch Road, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Clint Tink

Applicant: Hopkins Consultants Pty Ltd

Owner: NSW Trade & Investment - Crown Lands

Estimated Cost: $1,655,000

Parcel no: 35954

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2021 - 894.1 for staged additions to racecourse comprising horse stables and walker yards at Lot 653, DP 43940, 15 Tulloch Road, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for staged additions to Port Macquarie Racecourse comprising horse stables and walker yards at the subject site (Port Macquarie Racecourse) and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Following exhibition of the application, no submissions were initially received. However, in November 2022 and before the DA was determined, a series of late submissions were received. In total, four (4) late submissions were received.

The application was subsequently reported to Council’s Development Assessment Panel (DAP) on 7 December 2022 where the following resolution was made:

That DA2021 - 894 be deferred to enable the applicant to address the apparent conflict with the operational requirements and noise impact of the development noting the acoustic assessment supporting the application and draft conditions F(15) and F(16).

A copy of the previous DAP report and conditions are attached for context. (Attachment 4).

Since the DAP meeting on 7 December 2022, the applicant has re-assessed their acoustic assessment (Attachment 5) based on the operational requirements of the racecourse to come up with a balanced outcome, subject to conditions. In particular, access via Tulloch Road and the use of the proposed development, is considered acceptable on noise grounds, subject to conditions limiting the number of vehicles at certain times of the night, restrictions on where vehicles park at night etc. The changes have been incorporated into this updated assessment and draft conditions of consent.

The development application and updated acoustic assessment were also re-exhibited with four (4) submissions being received.

Overall, 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 attached conditions (Attachment 1).

The reason for the application being referred to Council’s Development Assessment Panel (DAP) is because three (3) or more objections to the proposal have been received. A copy of the DAP Charter outlining the delegations and functions of the DAP is available on Council’s website.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The subject lot containing the proposed development/works has an area of 5.31ha. The lot forms part of the larger Port Macquarie Racecourse precinct, which exceeds 25ha.

The site is zoned RE2 Private Recreation 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:

· DA2005 - 637 approved an arrangement of stables (114 stalls), exercise yards etc in a similar location. The application was later modified and reduced in scale to 104 stalls. However, no evidence was found to show the DA commenced and has subsequently lapsed.

· The application is for a staged development comprising five (5) horse stable buildings that will house 20 horse stalls per building or 100 stalls total. Each building will also contain ancillary amenities, office, food storage etc. In addition to the horse stable buildings, five (5) horse walker yards are also proposed.

· The horse stable buildings will comprise colorbond construction on a concrete slab and measure approximately 11m wide by 53m long and 4.5m high.

· The application also includes a landscape plan, acoustic, odour, traffic and parking assessment in support of the proposal.

· Four (4) late submissions were received objecting to the development during the original notification period. A further four (4) submissions were received following the re-notification period.

· Construction of additional parking areas.

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

Application Chronology

· 16/2/2006 - DA2005 - 637 approved an arrangement of stables etc onsite. DA2005 - 637 was subsequently modified on 4 May 2009. No evidence was found to show the DA commenced and has subsequently lapsed.

· 1/9/2020 - Pre-lodgement meeting held to discuss proposal.

· 20/10/2021 - Application lodged with Council.

· 1/11/2021 - Council staff requested additional information from the applicant.

· 2-15/11/2021 - Notification period.

· 17/11/2021 - Applicant requested confirmation of whether or not any submissions were received during the notification period. Council staff advised that no submissions were received.

· 18-19/11/2021 - Comments from Essential Energy received and provided to the applicant.

· 25/3/2022 - Applicant provided partial response to Council’s previous request for additional information.

· 4/5/2022 - Applicant provided partial response to Council’s previous request for additional information.

· !7/5/2022 - Council staff requested additional information from the applicant in relation to the noise impact assessment.

· 24/5/2022 - Applicant provided partial response to Council’s previous request for additional information.

· 12/7/2022 - Advice received from Crown lands that a requirement to consolidate the racecourse lots was not required/supported.

· 25/7/2022 - DA status update provided to Racecourse consultant. Partial response to Council’s previous requests for additional information was provided.

· 27/7/2022 - Council staff requested clarification on the acoustic fence and landscaping.

· 4/8/2022 - Further advice provided from Crown lands regarding the consolidation of the racecourse lots not being supported.

· 6/9/2022 - Applicant sought meeting to discuss outstanding matters/issues.

· 9/9/2022 - Applicant provided partial response to Council’s previous request for additional information.

· 20/9/2022 - Applicant provided additional information for meeting.

· 21/9/2022 - Meeting held with the applicant regarding outstanding matters.

· 21/10/2022 - Applicant provided partial response to Council’s previous request for additional information.

· 26/10/2022 - Applicant provided response to Council’s previous request for additional information and asked for a DA status update.

· 27/10/2022 - Council staff provided update and requested clarification on staging.

· 31/10/2022 - Council staff requested clarification on traffic and car parking assessment.

· 1/11/2022 - Applicant consultant clarified the traffic and car parking assessment.

· 3/11/2022 - Applicant provided clarification on staging in response to Council’s previous request for additional information.

· 7-10/11/2022 - Four (4) late submissions received. Council staff advised the applicant of the late submissions and provided a redacted copy. Applicant acknowledged submissions.

· 14/11/2022 - Applicant requested a DA status updated, which was provided by Council staff.

· 7/12/2022 - Application was reported to DAP. Resolution was to defer the matter to enable the applicant to address the conflict between operational requirements and the acoustic assessment.

· 19/1/2023 - Applicant submitted an updated acoustic assessment. Correspondence between Council staff and the applicant also occurred regarding recommendations in the report.

· 6/2/2023 - Council staff sought clarification on the acoustic assessment.

· 3/3/2023 - Applicant provided an updated acoustic assessment. Council staff asked for clarification on the acoustic report.

· 7/3/2023 - Applicant provided clarification on the acoustic assessment.

· 10-23/3/2023 - Application and revised acoustic assessment were re-notified.

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 (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021

Chapter 4 Koala Habitat Protection 2021

Clause 4.4 - This SEPP applies to all non-rural zoned land within the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Government Area. The property is zoned RE2 Private Recreation (non-rural zone) so the SEPP applies.

Clause 4.9 - The property is over 1ha in size (including adjoining land in the same ownership) and does not have a KPOM in place.

Before consent is granted, Council is required to assess whether the development is likely to have any impact on koalas or koala habitat.

In accordance with Clause 4.9(3), Council is satisfied that the development is likely to have low or no impact on koalas or koala habitat for the following reasons:

1. The site of the development is already cleared and not likely to form any key koala habitat.

2. The development will still allow koala movement throughout the larger racecourse precinct, should a koala move through the cleared development area to access other trees/habitat on the larger racecourse precinct or adjoining vegetated areas.

Based on the above, consent to the development application on koala habitat grounds is supported.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021

Chapter 2 Coastal Management

Having regard to clause 2.8 (proximity to coastal wetlands) of this SEPP, the proposed development is not considered likely to result in any of the following:

(a) identifiable adverse impacts on the biophysical, hydrological and ecological integrity of the nearby coastal wetland; and

(b) identifiable impacts to water flows to the nearby coastal wetland.

In particular, the development is over 70m away from the coastal wetland area and Council’s Stormwater Engineer has also reviewed/accepted the proposal on stormwater grounds.

Chapter 4 Remediation of Land

Clause 4.6 - 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 site also has a history of being used for similar horse industry activities (ie walking horses, transporting horses, parking of horse floats etc).

State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021

Clause 45 - Referral to Essential Energy is 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.

A referral to Essential Energy was carried out with no objection received. Standard advice about Dial before you Dig, working near powerlines etc was provided, which was forwarded to the applicant.

Clause 2.119 refers to development with frontage to a classified road (Oxley Highway). In this case, the development does not create any additional crossovers onto the classified road or substantial increase in traffic. The development is also suitably setback 90m+ from the Oxley Highway and is not a use that would be sensitive to the level of traffic noise or vehicle emissions that may reach the development (ie no residential component proposed). Therefore, no adverse impact on the road network will occur.

Clause 2.120 refers to noise and vibration impacts from a classified road on non-road development. The clause only applies to certain sensitive receivers like residential accommodation, hospitals, educational establishments and the like. The clause does not apply to additions to a racecourse.

The development does not trigger any of the traffic generating development thresholds of Clause 2.122. 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.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Planning Systems) 2021

The development does not trigger any of the clauses or thresholds in the SEPP.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Primary Production) 2021

Part 2.5 Division 4 - The proposed development will create no adverse impact on any oyster aquaculture development or priority oyster aquaculture area.

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 RE2 Private Recreation. In accordance with Clause 2.3(1) and the RE2 zone landuse table, additions to the racecourse (recreation facility major) is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the RE2 zone are as follows:

o To enable land to be used for private open space or recreational purposes.

o To provide a range of recreational settings and activities and compatible land uses.

o To protect and enhance the natural environment for recreational purposes.

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

o The proposal is a permissible landuse;

o The development will complement the existing recreational use onsite.

o The development is to be located on an already disturbed area and will not impact on any natural environment.

· Clause 4.3 - There is no maximum building height limit onsite. Nonetheless, the proposed 4.58m height for the stables is not excessive and remains consistent with other structures onsite.

· Clause 4.4 - There is no floor space ratio (FSR) for the site. Nonetheless, the bulk and scale of the stables is not excessive and remains consistent with other structures onsite.

· Clause 5.10 - The site does not contain or adjoin any known heritage items or sites of significance. The area being developed is also disturbed from past activities.

· Clause 5.21 - The area of the lot being developed is not within a “flood planning area”. The “flood planning area” is located to the west of the development footprint.

· Clause 7.1 - The area of the lot being developed is not mapped as potentially containing acid sulfate soils. The mapped acid sulfate soils area is located to the west of the development footprint.

· Clause 7.4 - The area of the lot being developed is not within a floodplain risk management area. The floodplain risk management area is located to the west of the development footprint. Furthermore, the type of use proposed is not listed within the clause as requiring additional consideration of flood impacts.

· Clause 7.7 - The Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) for the site is 47.5m. Noting the existing contours for the site, the proposed stables are unlikely to exceed 20m and therefore not impact on the OLS.

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

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

None relevant.

(iii) Any Development Control Plan in force

Port Macquarie-Hastings Development Control Plan 2013

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B1: Advertising and Signage*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
1	Signage provisions.	No signage proposed.	N/A
*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 site contains sufficient area to accommodate storage and collection of waste from the development. In particular, the applicant will utilise a private collection arrangement and conditions of consent will cover the location/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 major cut and fill proposed. Only minor levelling will be required to establish the stables.	Yes
5	a) A certified practicing structural engineer must certify any retaining wall greater than 1.0m.	No retaining wall over 1m proposed.	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 fence combinations proposed that exceed 1.8m.	Yes
6	a) Significant land reforming proposals where >10% gross site area or >1.0ha is to have surface levels changed by more than 5m or where earthworks exceed an average of 10,000m3 per ha shall: − identify the impact of the proposed land reforming on the environment, landscape, - visual character and amenity, natural watercourses, riparian vegetation, topographical features of the environment and public infrastructure; − demonstrate compliance with the provisions of Council’s AUS-SPEC design specification; − assess the impacts and benefits of the proposal to all impacted persons and the general public; - provide measures to compensate for and minimise any net adverse impacts.	No significant land reforming proposed.	Yes
	b) The use of high earthworks batters should be avoided.	No high earthwork batters proposed.	Yes
	c) Preliminary plans indicating the final landform are required to be submitted with any master plan or subdivision application.	Development does not involve subdivision or master planning.	N/A
	d) The subdivision should be designed to fit the topography rather than altering the topography to fit the subdivision.	Development does not involve subdivision.	N/A
Environmental Management Areas and Buffers
7	a) For coastal floodplain endangered ecological communities a minimum, fully vegetated buffer of 35m must be provided.	The development is setback over 70m from the nearest endangered ecological community with vegetated/grassed areas provided in between.	Yes
	b) For Freshwater Wetland on Coastal Floodplain endangered ecological community a fully vegetated buffer of 100m is to be provided.	The development does not adjoin any Freshwater Wetland.	N/A
	c) For all other endangered ecological communities, a fully vegetated buffer of 50m must be provided.	The development is setback over 70m from the nearest endangered ecological community with vegetated/grassed areas provided in between.	Yes
	d) Stormwater management facilities may be considered within buffer areas only where the applicant can demonstrate the proposal is justified on the basis of practical engineering related site constraints and where it is adequately demonstrated that the applicable objectives are achieved.	There are existing stormwater facilities onsite that this development will utilise. Any new facilities (ie tanks for onsite detention) will not impact on the nearby endangered ecological communities.	Yes
	e) Fully vegetated buffers cannot contain road infrastructure or an asset protection zone.	No roads or asset protection zones proposed within the buffer areas.	Yes
	f) Where different buffers (including riparian buffers) apply to an area, the greater of the buffer widths applies.	The development setback to the coastal wetland exceeds buffer requirements.	Yes
8	a) Any habitat/vegetation which will be lost as a consequence of development is to be offset through the dedication of suitable land utilising expert ecological knowledge to determine the impact and offset based on the principle of ‘improve and maintain’.	No habitat or vegetation to be lost. The development is proposed on existing cleared/disturbed areas.	Yes
	b) Improvement and maintenance of existing habitat and corridors and the consolidation of fragmented bushland are to be considered as the first preference for any development offset.	As per comment on 8(a) above, no offsets are required.	Yes
	c) A Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) is to be prepared for any environmental land that is to be retained or used to offset development impacts.	As per comment on 8(a) above, no offsets are required and therefore no VMP triggered.	Yes
	d) VMPs are required to address Council’s VMP “Heads of Consideration”	As per comment on 8(a) above, no offsets are required and therefore no VMP triggered.	Yes
9	a) A minimum, fully vegetated buffer from the top of bank to both sides of a watercourse is to be provided in accordance with the following: − 10m for 1st order streams that flow intermittently. − 30m for 1st order streams that flow permanently. − 40m for 2nd order streams. − 50m for 3rd order streams. − 65m for 4th order streams.	The development is setback the required distances from nearby streams.	Yes
	b) Stormwater management facilities may be considered within buffer areas only where the applicant can demonstrate the proposal is justified on the basis of practical engineering related site constraints and where it is adequately demonstrated that the applicable objectives are achieved.	There are existing stormwater facilities onsite that this development will utilise. Any new facilities (ie tanks for onsite detention) will not impact on the buffer areas.	Yes
	c) Fully vegetated buffers cannot contain road infrastructure or an asset protection zone.	Buffer areas will not contain any new roads or asset protection zones.	Yes
Tree Management
10-14	Tree management provisions.	No tree removal proposed or required. As a result, tree management provisions do not apply.	N/A

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provision - B3: Hazards Management*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
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.	APZs/defendable space exist outside environmentally protection zones and can be contained within the site.	Yes
18	b) Perimeter roads are to be provided to all urban areas adjoining environmental management areas and their buffers. Refer to Figure 2.	Whilst not an urban/residential development, suitable perimeter roads exist onsite around the stables.	Yes

*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.	No new access to an arterial or distributor road proposed.		Yes
	b) Existing direct accesses from a development to arterial and distributor roads are rationalised or removed where practical.	No change to existing access points proposed or required.		N/A
	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.	No change to existing driveways proposed or required.		N/A
Parking Provision
24	a) Off-street Parking is provided in accordance with Table 3.	There is no specific parking rate for racecourses/stables within Council’s DCP. The closest use would be a recreation area that requires 30 spaces minimum plus any additional requirement of Council. The existing racecourse provides in excess of 30 spaces. As part of the assessment, Council staff also requested further information on parking. The applicant subsequently completed a traffic and parking assessment, which recommended a number of requirements. In summary, the report recommended 30 spaces for the stable uses, along with maintaining existing informal parking areas around the stables. The assessment and recommendations were reviewed by Council’s Engineering Section and deemed acceptable.		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.	Refer to comments on 24(a) above.		Yes
	c) Where a proposed development falls within more than one category Council will require the total parking provision for each category.	Refer to comments on 24(a) above.		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.	Refer to comments on 24(a) above.		Yes
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.	No on street parking proposed or required.		N/A
	b) On street parking is provided in accordance with AS2890.5.	No on street parking proposed or required.		N/A
27	a) On street parking will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that: − parking does not detract from the streetscape; and − that streetscape improvement works, such as landscaped bays and street trees are provided.	No on street parking proposed or required.		N/A
Parking Layout
28	a) Visitor and customer parking shall be located so that it is easily accessible from the street.	Proposed parking areas are easily accessible from the street via the racecourse’s internal road layout.		Yes
	b) Internal signage (including pavement markings) should assist customers and visitors to find parking and circulate efficiently and safely through a car park.	Some minor user signage will be required to addressed potential noise impacts (ie signage restricting the use of certain areas).		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.	Proposed parking areas are located behind the building lines of existing racecourse structures onsite.		Yes
	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.	Council’s Engineering Section have reviewed the application and consider the proposed formal parking areas are capable of complying.		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.	Whilst some parking areas are capable of being used as stacked parking (ie truck bays), the development does not rely on such an arrangement to meet parking requirements.		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.	Council’s Engineering Section have reviewed the application and consider the proposed formal parking areas are capable of complying.		Yes
30	a) Bicycle and motorcycle parking shall be considered for all developments.	The site contains suitable areas to accommodate compliant bicycle and motorcycle parking.		Yes
	b) Bicycle parking areas shall be designed generally in accordance with the principles of AS2890.3 - Parking facilities - Bicycle parking facilities.	The site contains suitable areas to accommodate compliant bicycle and motorcycle parking.		Yes
	c) Motorcycle parking areas shall be 1.2m (wide) x 2.5m (long).	The site contains suitable areas to accommodate compliant bicycle and motorcycle parking. Motorcycles can utilise car spaces if required.		Yes
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	A suitable landscape plan has been provided to screen the development from adjoining residential areas/Racewyn Close. Whilst not required, the site also contains other areas onsite that could be used for further landscaping.		Yes
	b) Landscaping areas shall be used throughout the car park and on the perimeters of the property where it addresses the public domain.	Refer to comment on 33(a) above, which is considered sufficient in this case. Parking areas are also minimal and well setback from property boundaries.		Yes
	c) Garden beds shall be a minimum of 3m in width between car parking areas and street boundaries.	The landscape screen width exceeds 3m.		Yes
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.	No plantings proposed or required on public land.		N/A
	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.	No plantings proposed or required on public land.		N/A
	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.	Proposed formal parking areas will be conditioned to be constructed of standard hardstand materials.		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.	Proposed formal parking areas will be conditioned to be constructed of standard hardstand materials.		Yes
	Drainage
36	a) All parking and manoeuvring spaces must be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	The application has been reviewed by Council’s Stormwater Engineer and considered capable of providing compliant stormwater measures to ensure no adverse stormwater runoff.		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.	No discharge to public kerb and gutter or table drains proposed or required.		Yes
37	a) Car parking areas should be drained to swales, bio retention, rain gardens and infiltration areas.	The application has been reviewed by Council’s Stormwater Engineer and considered capable of providing compliant stormwater measures to ensure no adverse stormwater runoff.		Yes
	Loading Bays
38	Loading bay provisions and design.	As part of the assessment, Council staff requested further information on parking. The applicant subsequently completed a traffic and parking assessment, which recommended a number of requirements. In summary, the report recommended 30 spaces for the stable uses, along with some truck/horse float spaces and maintenance of existing informal parking areas around the stables. The above requirements are considered acceptable in managing loading/unloading arrangements for the use. Furthermore, the assessment and recommendations were reviewed by Council’s Engineering Section and deemed acceptable.		Yes
39	a) The location and design of loading bays should integrate into the overall design of the building and car parking areas.	Loading areas are incorporated into the proposed stable precinct design.		Yes
	b) Where visible from the public domain, loading bays are located behind the building.	Loading bays/parking spaces are not readily visible from public areas. Existing vegetation, separation and proposed landscaping will be used to screen/reduce the impact of such facilities.		Yes
	c) Where loading bays are located close to a sensitive land use, adequate visual and acoustic screening is provided.	Refer to comments on 39(b) above.		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.	Stables that are ancillary to an existing recreation use (racecourse) are not considered to trigger the need for any social impact assessment or comment.	N/A
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 proposed development will be unlikely to create any adverse concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area. The development will also provide a level of natural surveillance within the locality. Lighting and CCTV can be installed retrospectively by the owner, should they wish to have further security in the future.	Yes

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

None proposed or relevant.

(iv) Any matters prescribed by the Regulations

None relevant.

(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 primary frontage to the Oxley Highway and a secondary access from Tulloch Road via a small section of Crown Road.

Adjoining the site of the proposed stables is the main racecourse building, track and carpark to the north and west. To the east is the Oxley Highway and then larger lot residential. South of the stables is Racewyn Close, which contains a mixture of housing and private horse racing related structures.

The design and application of conditions, will ensure the proposal does not have any significant adverse impacts to existing adjoining properties and satisfactorily addresses the public domain.

The proposal is considered to be sufficiently compatible with other 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. In particular, there are no iconic views from adjoining properties being lost. The main existing view from adjoining properties that would be impacted/lost is that of a privately owned/run racecourse.

The proposal does not have significant adverse lighting impacts with conditions being used to manage light spill.

There are no significant adverse privacy impacts. Adequate building separation and landscape screening 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.

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.

Site Frontage and Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed though the existing internal private road network. All accesses shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards, and conditions have been recommended to reflect these requirements.

The internal road network will require some minor augmentation as described in the applicant’s Traffic and Carparking Assessment prepared by Streetwise Road Safety and Traffic Services and dated 26 April 2022. These include the reconstruction of approximately 25m of pavement to lower a vertical crest to allow for safe clearance of appropriate vehicles.

Parking and Manoeuvring

The applicant’s Traffic and Carparking Assessment prepared by Streetwise Road Safety and Traffic Services and dated 26 April 2022 identifies that 30 carparking spaces are required to service this development. These spaces are shown in Figure 2.40 (Indicative parking to be provided as part of the stable proposal) and an appropriate condition has been included for this purpose. Additional public overflow and day parking (informal) has also been identified to the East and North of the proposal however does not specifically form part of this application.

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the current development site has several existing metered water services from Councils Water main and Recycled Water main.

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.

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

Appropriate conditions are recommended in this regard.

Sewer Connection

The development proposes to connect into the existing private sewer pump station on the racecourse land. No objection to such an arrangement has been raised by Council’s Sewer Section and detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the S.68 application.

Appropriate conditions are recommended in this regard.

Stormwater

Council’s Stormwater Section have reviewed the application and raised no objection to the proposal. In particular, the site naturally grades towards an existing dam within the site. It is proposed that the development will be drained overland to this existing dam via swales and piped culverts. The applicant has indicated via the submission that this dam will provide suitable attenuation to slow the flow of runoff from the site to meet Council Standards. Furthermore, the service plan shows conceptually that a GPT will be incorporated into the design to treat runoff from a water quality perspective. Similarly, to the above and in addition, it would be expected that the existing dam will also function to remove pollutants from stormwater prior to discharge from the site.

It is also noted that the site also contains suitable area to incorporate additional onsite detention via rainwater tanks if required.

Conditions have been added requiring that detailed modelling be submitted with the s68 application to demonstrate that the works comply with Council detention and water quality requirements.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are available to the site.

Heritage

Refer to comments on heritage in the LEP 2011 section of this report.

Other land resources

The proposal is located within an established racecourse site 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

An Air Quality Risk Assessment was carried out by Northstar Air Quality Pty Ltd. The report concludes that construction air quality amenity impacts from dust and construction vehicle/plant/equipment exhausts will be minor.

The operation of the proposed horse stables facility will require mitigation strategies to reduce potential air quality and odour impacts from liquid and solid wastes, including urine, faecal matter and stable bedding.

The assessment and mitigation measures were subsequently reviewed and accepted by Council’s Environmental Health Officer, subject to conditions. In summary, 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.

Flora and fauna

Construction of the proposed development will not require any removal/clearing of any native vegetation, does not trigger any clearing thresholds and is also not located within a mapped Biodiversity Values area. The site is also heavily disturbed from past activities onsite and unlikely to contain or impact on any threatened species. Development is considered to be compliant with the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.

Waste

Satisfactory arrangements are in place for proposed storage and collection of waste and recyclables. Bins will be provided in the stable buildings and removed daily. No adverse impacts anticipated, subject to standard precautionary site and operational management conditions recommended.

Energy

No adverse impacts anticipated.

Noise and Vibration

Subsequent to the original Matrix Thornton Noise Impact Assessment (NIA) considered by Council/DAP, the applicant has provided an updated assessment.

The NIA assessment concluded that there is potential for nearby residences in Racewyn Close to be impacted by noise from the development. However, through the imposition of conditions around hours of operation, deliveries, possible installation of acoustic fence at later stages in the development etc, the development would be accepted. Furthermore, the potential to impact on nearby residences would only occur when the buildings/structures closest to Racewyn Close are built (ie Stages 3, 4 & 5). In particular, this would be the trigger for the acoustic fence.

Due to the unusual nature of the use and the minimal noise impact occurring at the above later stages, the acoustic consultant has suggested that additional noise testing be carried out using further assessment of noise from the earlier built stages. This would give a more real life assessment and potentially show that the above acoustic fence is not required. Conditions are proposed to capture this process.

The NIA, mitigation measures and above review process were also considered and accepted by Council’s Environmental Health Officer. In summary, the construction and/or operations of the proposed development will not result in any significant adverse noise impacts, subject to imposition of conditions.

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

The Applicant has submitted a bushfire report prepared by a certified consultant, which confirms the development is capable of complying with bushfire protection requirements. In particular, the site is capable of providing safe access to/from the public road system for firefighters providing property protection during a bush fire and for occupant egress for evacuation, has suitable area for asset protection zones, has the ability to provide adequate services of water for the protection of buildings during and after the passage of bush fire etc.

Based on the bushfire report, the aims and objectives of Planning for Bushfire Protection are achieved. The development will not be impacted by bushfire, subject to imposition of conditions regarding asset protection zones, access etc.

Safety, security and crime prevention

The proposed development will be unlikely to create any adverse concealment/entrapment areas or crime spots that would result in any identifiable loss of safety or reduction of security in the immediate area. The development will also provide a level of natural surveillance within the locality.

Lighting and CCTV can be installed retrospectively by the owner, should they wish to have further security in the future.

Social impacts in the locality

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

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

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

Site constraints 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 the initial public exhibition of the application. A further four (4) submissions were received after the re-notification of the application and amended acoustic assessment. 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
There are existing noise complaints towards the properties in Racewyn Close that have horse related activities/ infrastructure. The proposed development will only increase such complaints. Noise impacts will be created from horse walkers, including horses and people using the walkers.	Refer to comments on Noise and Vibration above in this report. Through conditions, no significant adverse noise impacts will occur.
The area is not suitable for the development as it is used for parking. The proposal has also not considered parking for the development.	Refer to comments on Clause 24 of the DCP 2013 assessment above and under the heading Parking and Manoeuvring. The assessment has considered the impact of the development on existing and proposed parking.
The development has not shown all the natural water courses in the area to be built on. The current drainage of the area does not handle rainfall and has caused one of the adjoining properties to flood.	Council staff (including Council’s Stormwater Engineer) have considered the development, site characteristics and drainage. The development is considered capable of managing stormwater runoff to pre-development flows.
No horse walking machines have been shown on the DA, only sand rolls. They are not the same thing.	The application has been clarified to confirm the circular areas on the plan are horse walkers. The noise assessment has also considered the impacts of such structures as horse walkers.
There is no wall/fence proposed on the application but the Port Macquarie Race Club has confirmed one is proposed between the stables and neighbouring properties, inhibiting views of the racecourse. Seek assurance a fence/wall won’t be built.	Through the assessment of the application, it was identified that a 1.8m high wall/fence is required between the development and adjoining properties in Racewyn Close. The fence/wall is to mitigate potential noise impacts. The fence/wall is to be built on the racecourse land and is not dissimilar to a 1.8m high fence that is often done as exempt development. In addition to the above, the wall/fence is not required with initial stages of the development. As a result, the applicant has indicated that they will re-do the noise assessment (based on real life/site specific data) after the initial stages to see if the wall/fence is still required or can be changed. Should owners of properties in Racewyn Close wish to retain direct access to the racecourse land, it is suggested to approach the Port Macquarie Racecourse to make arrangements. In particular, there is scope to position/design the acoustic wall/fence to allow access.
The size of the proposed walkway for all the horse traffic going to and from the track will create a safety hazard for horses and humans.	Council does not have standards for width of horse walkways. However, it is noted that the design has been instructed/overseen by the Port Macquarie Racecourse and the widths also appear to be similar to other tracks onsite.
The road into the proposed development is lined with heavy bushland and the fire hazard is high. There is only one road in and out of the whole Sherwood area. The logistics of getting livestock out in an emergency would prove impossible.	Refer to comments on Bushfire above in this report. The impact of bushfires on the development is considered manageable/acceptable.
The applicant blocked a drain, which resulted in flooding to an adjoining house.	The application was reviewed by Council’s Stormwater Engineer and considered acceptable on stormwater grounds. Some works and detention will be required onsite to ensure any runoff does not create any flows that exceed pre-development.
Suggest Council visit the existing stable area to see why it could impact many things.	The existing stable area does not form part of the application. Any works or changes to that area would be subject to separate assessment.
Traffic impacts.	The application has been reviewed by Council’s Engineering Section and deemed acceptable on traffic grounds.
Boundary fencing.	Context of issue is not clear. No boundary fencing is required as part of the development application. Boundary fencing is also typically a civil matter.
Pump station where dam was filled.	Context of issue is not clear.
Concern over new noise limitations/potential conditions not being enforced. For example, who will open/close gates to manage traffic?	The applicant will be responsible for complying with conditions. Any non-compliances/enforcement can be investigated/carried out by Council’s Compliance Team. A person potentially not complying with a condition(s) is not grounds for refusal.
Noise impacts from truck brakes, horses kicking walls in the truck etc as they stop to open gates.	Refer to comments on Noise and Vibration above in this report. Through conditions, no significant adverse noise impacts will occur.
Noise from unloaded horses walking down to the stables on steep asphalt will create another noise and safety hazard.	Refer to comments on Noise and Vibration above in this report. Through conditions, no significant adverse noise impacts will occur. In terms of safety, this will be an issue for the Port Macquarie Racecourse to manage and they are the experts in horse management. Any changes outside what has been lodged in this application to achieve a safe environment for horses, trainers etc may be subject to separate application.
There is no suggestion on what lighting will be put in place for unloading operations, stables, horse walkers etc. Concern regarding lighting impacts on residents. Has the applicant given a predicted LUX level or required lighting plan.	Comments are noted. Council has applied conditions around lighting to ensure it is compliant.
Stormwater runoff impacts associated with dam being filled and diverting runoff into the adjoining coastal wetland. Was the filled in dam factored into the stormwater assessment? Recommend a full stormwater site inspection and report be done, factoring in the filled in dam and coastal wetland.	The application was reviewed by Council’s Stormwater Engineer and considered acceptable on stormwater grounds. Some works and detention will be required onsite to ensure any runoff does not create any flows that exceed pre-development. The applicant has advised that stormwater will be directed to the existing dam within the track (still exists), which was considered and accepted in principle by Council’s Stormwater Engineer. More detailed design will occur and be reviewed by Council Stormwater Engineering staff at the s68 stage but is considered achievable and will not impact on adjoining coastal wetland areas. The existing dam onsite that was filled and the associated impacts would be subject to separate compliance investigation/action. The filled in dam does not impact on this application and can be resolved separately if needed. Council’s Compliance Team will be notified of the issue separate to this DA.
The filled in dam was used as a dumping ground for waste. Potential contamination risk? How does Council know the site is not contaminated? Recommend a Level 1 Contamination report.	The existing dam onsite that was filled and associated impacts would be subject to separate compliance investigation/action. The filled in dam does not impact on this application and can be resolved separately if needed. Council’s Compliance Team will be notified of the issue separate to this DA. In terms of contamination, a site inspection, review of aerial photos and Council records did not give rise to the need for further investigation. Furthermore, the site is located clear of the filled in dam area and is not changing to a sensitive residential use that would warrant additional assessment in this case.
Could Council be in breach of regulations for not noticing the environmental oversight.	As stated above, the existing dam onsite that was filled and associated impacts would be subject to separate compliance investigation/action. The filled in dam does not impact on this application and can be resolved separately if needed. Council’s Compliance Team will be notified of the issue separate to this DA. The matter is not an oversight but rather is not relevant to this application.
Air quality impacts from horse walkers.	The applicant submitted an Air Quality Assessment, which along with the overall application, was subsequently reviewed and accepted by Council’s Environmental Health Officer with conditions.
Development will stop north easterly breezes and sunlight.	Using the Council criteria to assess shadow impacts within a residential setting (ie development does not overshadow a neighbours living room or principal private open space for more than 3 hours between 9am to 3pm on 21 June), the stables/buildings are approx. 4.6m high and located 9m away from the nearest southern neighbours. The criteria was run through a sun calculation program and showed the development would comply with Council’s criteria. As an example, between 10am and 2pm on 21 June, the shadow cast by the stables is predominately less than 9m (doesn’t reach neighbouring properties). Using the criteria to assess suitable air circulation within a residential setting, residential dwellings at 8.5m high can be setback 4m from a rear boundary. The development is less than 8.5m and setback 9m. Based on the above, the development will not adversely overshadow or restrict air circulation.
Property values will be impacted.	Property values are not a matter for consideration under s4.15.
Elevations of horse walkers not shown. Without the elevation/height being known, how have the fence heights been determined.	An image of the horse walker is shown in the acoustic assessment as being a light weight, open sided, single storey, round yard type structure. A 1.8m high fence is a common barrier/height used to reduce noise from single storey structures. Conditions will also be used to reinforce the design is consistent with those considered in the acoustic assessment.
Sensors for the acoustic assessment were placed near the houses not near the stables or walkers. Sensors were also placed behind existing house barriers and the proposed stables, creating a noise barrier. The only noise being picked up would be horses on crusher dust not concrete as proposed in the stables or traffic noise 100m away.	The acoustic assessment and sensor/logger location were reviewed and accepted by Council’s Environmental Health Officer. The normal approach is that you place the sensor/logger near the potential impacted use (ie house) to understand background noise levels.
Houses on Racewyn have existing barriers far greater than the proposed acoustic fence and the acoustic assessment still came back with readings above permissible levels. We feel it is in Council’s best interests to get a realistic feel and see them in both physical size and in a working environment, before making a decision. An inspection is recommended.	Refer to comments on Noise and Vibration above in this report. Noise impacts are considered to have been suitably assessed.
A reduced complex is more supportable (ie 3 stable blocks and 2 horse walkers) and should be located in the northern part of the site. The closest stables and walkers to residents to be taken off the current DA. Any expansion of the reduced complex can be re-assessed with more accurate tests/data.	Comment is noted. However, Council is assessing the development as lodged/applied for. The information provided with the application and subsequent assessment by Council staff, deem there to be no significant adverse impact and therefore the application is recommended for approval.
Air quality assessment and impacts questioned. Interesting to see mitigation measures.	Refer to comments on Air and microclimate above in this report and recommended conditions of consent.
Impact from flies. Will the Race Club provide neighbours with management techniques they plan to undertake? How will they be enforced? Conditions should be made available before approval is given.	Refer to comments on Air and microclimate above in this report and recommended conditions of consent. Compliance with the conditions will ensure that waste and other odour producing sources are minimised, which will subsequently minimise fly numbers. The applicant will be responsible for complying with conditions. Any non-compliances/enforcement can be investigated/carried out by Council’s Compliance Team. A person potentially not complying with a condition(s) is not grounds for refusal.
Need for onsite meeting between parties so a happy medium can be reached.	Comment is noted but an onsite meeting between parties is not a legislated requirement.
Other previous assessments (ie Air Quality Assessment) were not updated.	The changes made under the amended acoustic assessment were considered to not warrant upgrading other assessments.
Air Quality Assessment and other reports not on Council’s DA Tracker.	In terms of the Air Quality Assessment, this (and other items) were requested by Council staff during the assessment of the application. The Air Quality Assessment and other items were subsequently provided after the initial notification period. The DA Tracker was not updated as no submissions were received on the application (Note: the original submissions on this DA came in almost a year after the DA was lodged and outside the original notification period). Nonetheless, the issues raised in the submissions were still considered and the application was reported to DAP. The main reason for DAP deferring the DA centred around the operational requirements of the Port Macquarie Racecourse and the acoustic assessment. Therefore, when the acoustic assessment was amended, that information was made available on DA Tracker for consideration via the re-notification period. The Air Quality Assessment component remained unchanged and was therefore left as a document that could be obtained on request.
The car park plan does not work with the topography. Earthworks and changes to kerb and guttering will be required resulting in potential stormwater impacts. How can it comply when no site contour plan or finished levels have been provided? Suggest long sections and proper measured parking be provided. What civil works are required? Disabled parking?	The key with the car parking plan is that only 30 spaces are required. These spaces are shown in Figure 2.40 of the Traffic & Carparking Assessment and predominately occupy the flatter sections of the site, near the existing roads and proposed stables. The parking shown on the steeper eastern bank are not required by this application and are shown as informal overflow parking. The applicant also provided an addendum scaled plan to show the parking in Figure 2.40 was possible. Furthermore, Council’s Engineering staff have reviewed and accepted the proposed parking plan, location of spaces, factored in potential works to create the spaces etc. The more specific detailed design for the parking, disabled parking and associated civil works can occur at the Construction Certificate stage.
No loading bays for heavy vehicles, trucks and horse floats shown in stable area.	Loading bays for larger vehicles are provided to the north of the Stage 6 stables - see Figure 2.40 of the Traffic & Carparking Assessment. Driveway areas can also be used for informal unloading/loading of larger vehicles, during quieter times.
The acoustic assessment contains inaccuracies as follows: - trainer and staff numbers in the noise report are not consistent with what would occur onsite. - Horse walker was measured using 1 horse when there are actually 6-8 horse machines. - Horse walker noise threshold is incorrect and no way they can be run under the levels required. Why can’t a test be done on a machine that is in operation at a local trainer. - Horse kick is louder than someone yelling. - Noise report doesn’t account for jockeys, farriers, vets etc	Refer to comments on Noise and Vibration above in this report. Overall, this assessment relies on the expertise of the noise consultant and subsequent review of their assessment by Council’s specialist Environmental Health Officer to determine the acceptability of the report and potential noise impacts. Conditions of consent will then further reinforce the outcomes in the report to ensure the applicant/ Port Macquarie Racecourse is accountable to how the assessment was done. Where they can’t meet noise requirements or change operations to that shown in the reports, they will be subject compliance action.
The stables will house visiting trainers and their horses. This will increase numbers, noise, traffic etc onsite. Yet the applicant also say that they have to build walkers instead of sand rolls so that they can lease a full stable block and walker for a trainer to lease as a whole. Unfortunately, they don’t know what they are going to do so how can anyone give accurate assessments?	Comment is noted. The impacts of the stables and increase in traffic, parking, noise etc have been considered throughout this assessment report. Overall, this assessment has been carried out on the development being used as horse stables in general. This can include use by a local trainer or visiting trainer.
The volumes in the developer charges do not match what is proposed. More than 1.4 people will visit the site, 6 days a week.	Contributions have been calculated using rates/figures contained in Council’s Development Contributions Assessment Policy. The calculations have been further reviewed and accepted by Council’s Contribution Team as meeting the Policy.

(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.

Designated Development - Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021

Schedule 3, Part 2, Clause 29 identifies certain horse facilities that trigger designated development provisions as follows:

Development for the purposes of a facility or confined area operated on a commercial basis for the keeping or breeding of horses is designated development if the facility or area accommodates more than 400 horses.

The development is unlikely to accommodate more than 400 horses. In addition to the above, Clauses 48 and 49 also allow for alterations, additions and ancillary development without triggering designated development. In particular, alterations and additions can occur to an existing approved development (ie the racecourse), where such alterations/additions do not significantly increase the environmental impacts. Based on the requirements of Clause 48 and assessment above, the development is considered to meet such requirements.

Clause 49 also allows an ancillary component (ie stables) to another dominant development (ie racecourse) without triggering designated development.

Overall, the development is not considered to trigger the designated development provisions.

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 7.12 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

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

5. CONCLUSION AND STATEMENT OF REASON

The application has been assessed in accordance with Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Issues raised during assessment and public exhibition of the application have been considered in the assessment of the application. Where relevant, conditions have been recommended to manage the impacts attributed to these issues.

The proposed development does not raise any significant general public interest issues beyond matters already addressed in this report. Overall, the proposed development is consistent with the provisions and objectives of the relevant planning controls and will have an acceptable impact on the surrounding natural and built environment. Approval of the application is considered to be in the public interest as it achieves the LEP objectives for development in the zone. No significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality have been identified. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be in the public interest.

Attachments

1 ⇩. Attachment 1 - Recommended Conditions

2 ⇩. Attachment 2 - Plans

3 ⇩. Attachment 3 - Contribution Estimate

4 ⇩. Attachment 4 - Previous DAP Report

5 ⇩. Attachment 5 - Acoustic Assessment

AGENDA

Development Assessment Panel

05/04/2023

Item: 06

Subject: DA2022 - 364.1 Demolition of Dwelling and Construction of Residential Flat Building including Clause 4.6 Variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Building) & Strata Subdivision, Lot 200 DP 1289768, No. 30 Waugh Street, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Steven Ford

Applicant: Stewart Architecture Pty Ltd

Owner: Waugh Street (Port) Pty Ltd

Estimated Cost: $21,845,303.00

Parcel no: 71909

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA 2022 - 364 for Demolition of Dwelling and Construction of Residential Flat Building including Clause 4.6 variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Building) under Port Macquarie Local Environmental Plan 2011 & Strata Subdivision at Lot 200, DP 1289768, No. 30 Waugh Street, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting consent subject to the recommended conditions.

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a Demolition of Dwelling and Construction of Residential Flat Building including Clause 4.6 variation to Clause 4.3 (Height of Building) & Strata Subdivision at the subject site and provides an assessment of the application in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Following exhibition of the application, 8 submissions were received.

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 attached conditions (Attachment 1).

The reason for the application being referred to Council’s Development Assessment Panel (DAP) is because three (3) or more objections to the proposal have been received and the application includes a Clause 4.6 exception to a development standard under the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011. A copy of the DAP Charter outlining the delegations and functions of the DAP is available on Council’s website.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 2,037m².

The site is zoned R4 High Density Residential in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

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

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· Demolition of the existing single storey dwelling and detached garage.

· 5 Storey Residential Flat Building housing 40 dwellings.

· Ground floor landscaping and communal areas.

· Basement car parking with 80 parking spaces.

· Clause 4.6 variation to Clause 4.3 Height of Building

· Strata Subdivision

Refer to the plans of the proposed development at the end of this report

(Attachment 2).

Application Chronology

· 29/04/ 2022 - Application received

· 16/05/2022 to 30/05/2022 - Public notification

· 22/07/2022 - Amended plans received (Electrical engineering changes)

· 19/09/2022 - Amended Plans (elevations, engineering, communal facilities)

· 18/10/2022 to 31/10/2022 - Re-notification of Proposed Plans

· 24/02/2023 - Amended Basement level plans received.

3. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT

Section 4.15(1) Matters for Consideration

(a) The provisions (where applicable) of:

(i) Any Environmental Planning Instrument

State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021

Chapter 4 Koala Habitat Protection 2021

Clause 4.4 - This SEPP applies to all non-rural zoned land within the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Government Area.

Clause 4.10 - Having considered the SEPP, the application and on completion of a site inspection, Council is not prevented from granting consent in this case for the following reasons:

1. The property is not subject to a KPOM, and

2. The site not considered to be core koala habitat.

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

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

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

(i) the erection of a new building,

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

(iii) the conversion of an existing building, and

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

Based on the above, the SEPP must be considered.

Clause 6A - This clause applies in respect of the objectives, design criteria and design guidance set out in Parts 3 and 4 of the Apartment Design Guide for the following:

(a) visual privacy,

(b) solar and daylight access,

(d) apartment size and layout,

(e) ceiling heights,

(f) private open space and balconies,

(g) natural ventilation,

(h) storage.

If a development control plan contains provisions that specify requirements, standards or controls in relation to a matter to which this clause applies, those provisions are of no effect.

This clause applies regardless of when the development control plan was made.

Clause 28(2)(b) - The proposal has adequately addressed the design principles contained in the Apartment Design Guide. The application includes a design verification from a registered architect addressing the design quality principles as follows:

Requirement

Proposed

Complies

Principle 1: Context and neighbourhood character

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

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

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

The subject site is located in Port Macquarie’s Westport neighbourhood at 30 Waugh Street. The site consists of an amalgamation of two existing residential blocks which are substantially cleared. There is a single freestanding dwelling currently located on the site which has no heritage significance.

The site sits within an area currently undergoing a transformation into a denser residential neighbourhood. This density is clearly visible at the locality with the established character. The site directly to the south of the proposal also shows the transformation that is occurring, with the recent approval of a 6-storey residential development. The existing neighbouring development to the east, Pacific Court, its neighbours continuing east along Waugh Street, and various developments on the opposite side of the street show examples of the higher density developments that currently exist in the area.

The proposal therefore seeks to reference the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council’s strategy for this area to evolve into a vibrant residential neighbourhood. Furthermore, the proposal is in keeping with current neighbouring developments, as well as future permissible developments. The site and its immediate context are zoned ‘R4 - high density residential,’ permitting future residential developments to occur.

Yes

Principle 2: Built form and scale

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

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

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

The building form of the subject site has been derived generally in keeping with the planning controls within the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council DCP 2013.

The proposal responds to the varying desired characters of the street in which it is sited. The proposed five storey building with two basement levels, compliments the scale and height of other developments within the immediate vicinity, while also providing a scale that is in keeping with the desired future character for the area. The proposal sits within the permissible 17.5 metre height limit (excluding minor encroachments of lift overrun, rooftop plant and a minor portion of the roof – refer to Clause 4.6 justification).

All setbacks are generally in keeping with DCP requirements. The setback continuity reinforces the character of the area, complimenting the streetscape with active frontages, articulation, modern design and enhancing the sites orientation to the north.

The side and rear setbacks are maintained in order to provide side access and landscaping to screen and buffer the building on all sides.

The building form is split into two elements connected by a central, green breezeway, which breaks down the bulk of the building and articulates the entry location along the Waugh Street frontage. Apartments have been arranged to maximise river views and solar access to the north. Ground floor landscaping throughout the site provides outlook and amenity for residents.

Yes

Principle 3: Density

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

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

The site is zoned R4 High Density Residential under the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011 and is located in the Westport Neighbourhood. This precinct is supported under the LEP and DCP controls to evolve into a vibrant residential neighbourhood that provides denser, quality residential accommodation.

Height Limit – 17.5m

FSR – 1.8:1

The development complies with the LEP 2011 allowable rate for FSR and building heights, excluding minor height encroachments – refer Clause 4.6 Justification later in this report. Note no habitable floor levels encroach the height of building allowance.

Yes

Principle 4: Sustainability

Good design combines positive environmental, social and economic outcomes.

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

The site experiences good northerly aspect. As a result, 88% of proposed dwellings achieve the minimum of 3 hours’ direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter, with 100% of proposed dwellings receiving 2.5 hours of sunlight between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter.

70% of the proposed dwellings are naturally cross-ventilated, which exceeds the minimum 60% stipulated in the ADG. All dwellings are designed to maximise their aspect.

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

Landscaping includes deep soil planting in excess of the requirement (16.5% instead of the required 15%) and a mix of native and exotic plant species suitable for the microclimatic conditions of the site are proposed.

The project will meet the minimum BASIX requirements.

Yes

Principle 5: Landscape

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

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

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

The proposal integrates built form and landscaping to contribute to quality of the surrounding public domain and provide amenity and outlook to residents. The green, central breezeway provides opportunity for casual interaction between residents. Planting is proposed along the street frontage and side and rear boundaries to provide privacy to lower level dwellings and soften the street interface.

Coastal, native species have been included in the design to be responsive to place, create contextual fit and ensure the species are able to flourish given the potentially harsh coastal conditions.

The landscape includes deep soil planting in excess of the required 15%, with 16.5% site coverage. The front landscaping offers a layered garden which creates privacy and a buffer to the street.

The ground floor apartments enjoy gardens within or adjacent to their oversized outdoor courtyard spaces. The site is also bound with perimeter planting to maximise privacy.

Yes

Principle 6: Amenity

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

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

The proposal has been designed to provide the maximum amenity to future residents and to protect the amenity of neighbours. The building layout is efficient, legible and promotes equitable access.

The proposed 40 apartments are provided with generous living spaces and master bedrooms. Each dwelling exceeds the minimum private open space area requirements at all levels. All balconies and courtyards meet, and in some cases greatly exceed, the minimum ADG requirements.

Apartments are oriented to benefit from river views to the north. All dwellings are provided with storage that exceeds the minimum recommended volume.

Apartment layouts have been designed to maximise solar access to living spaces, and natural cross-ventilation.

Visual privacy is provided through a combination of building separation, angled building facades, the existing boundary fencing, courtyard walls, screens, and planting around the site perimeter.

Yes

Principle 7: Safety

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

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

A range of strategies have been implemented within the design in order to optimise safety and security of residents, neighbours and the community. These include:

· The building entry is clearly identifiable from the street

· Apartment layouts and the orientation of balconies encourages passive surveillance of the premises and street

· Car parking for residents is located in secure carpark accessed via Waugh Street.

· Secure access to the carpark, lobby and residential units will be provided in the form of keys, swipe cards or remote controls. Residents will have access to their residential floors via lift access or open, communication stairs.

· The apartment entries, open stairs and lift all address the central breezeway facilitating casual views and interaction

· Blind and dark alcoves are avoided on all levels

· All common areas and car parking will be appropriately lit

Yes

Principle 8: Housing diversity and social interaction

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

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

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

The mix of 2 and 3 bedroom apartments proposed will contribute to the diversity of housing demand in the Westport Neighbourhood and contribute to its transformation into a vibrant residential precinct.

The design offers communal areas providing opportunities for casual interaction, with communal benches, paths and wide circulation areas. The location is close proximity to the Port Macquarie CBD, and public recreation areas.

Yes

Principle 9: Aesthetics

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

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

The plans provide examples of the colours, textures and finishes.

The colours and materials provided indicate a contemporary quality design and finish. It is considered that the aesthetics of the building will respond appropriately to the surrounding environment and context of the existing and desired character of the locality and match the more recently constructed developments.

Yes

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

Apartment Design Guide (ADG) Objective	Design Guidance/Design Criteria (Italics)	Proposed	Complies
3A Site analysis
3A - 1 Site analysis illustrates that design decisions have been based on opportunities and constraints of the site conditions and their relationship to the surrounding context.	Each element in the Site Analysis Checklist should be addressed (Appendix 1 of ADG).	Adequate site analysis provided. Refer to plan number DA002 Site Analysis. The design has been overseen and directed by Marcus Graham (NSW Architects Registration 10921), a qualified designer and primary nominee of Stewart Architecture.	Yes
3B Orientation
3B - 1 Building types and layouts respond to the streetscape and site while optimising solar access within the development.	Buildings along the street frontage define the street, by facing it and incorporating direct access from the street (see figure 3B.1). Where the street frontage is to the east or west, rear buildings should be orientated to the north. Where the street frontage is to the north or south, overshadowing to the south should be minimised and buildings behind the street frontage should be orientated to the east and west (see figure 3B.2).	Dwellings have been oriented to maximise the northern aspect to living spaces, as well as to capture key views. Majority of bedroom spaces are positioned to the east or west which suits their night-time use. The arrangement of spaces responds directly to the qualities of the site.	Yes
3B - 2 Overshadowing of neighbouring properties is minimised during mid-winter.	Living areas, private open space and communal open space should receive solar access in accordance with sections 3D Communal and public open space and 4A Solar and daylight access. Solar access to living rooms, balconies and private open spaces of neighbours should be considered. Where an adjoining property does not currently receive the required hours of solar access, the proposed building ensures solar access to neighbouring properties is not reduced by more than 20%. If the proposal will significantly reduce the solar access of neighbours, building separation should be increased beyond minimums contained in section 3F Visual privacy. Overshadowing should be minimised to the south or downhill by increased upper level setbacks. It is optimal to orientate buildings at 90 degrees to the boundary with neighbouring properties to minimise overshadowing and privacy impacts, particularly where minimum setbacks are used and where buildings are higher than the adjoining development. A minimum of 4 hours of solar access should be retained to solar collectors on neighbouring buildings.	Solar access diagrams demonstrate living areas, private open space and communal open space receive adequate solar access satisfying this requirement. The development will retain sunlight to adjoining property in accordance with the specifications in 4A of the ADG. Solar access will not be reduced to any solar collectors on neighbouring buildings. Please refer DA221, which demonstrates that overshadowing of the proposed residential flat building adjoining the rear boundary the subject site has been minimised.	Yes
3C Public domain interface
3C - 1 Transition between private and public domain is achieved without compromising safety and security	Terraces, balconies and courtyard apartments should have direct street entry, where appropriate. Changes in level between private terraces, front gardens and dwelling entries above the street level provide surveillance and improve visual privacy for ground level dwellings (see figure 3C.1). Upper level balconies and windows should overlook the public domain. Front fences and walls along street frontages should use visually permeable materials and treatments. The height of solid fences or walls should be limited to 1m. Length of solid walls should be limited along street frontages. Opportunities should be provided for casual interaction between residents and the public domain. Design solutions may include seating at building entries, near letter boxes and in private courtyards adjacent to streets. In developments with multiple buildings and/or entries, pedestrian entries and spaces associated with individual buildings/entries should be differentiated to improve legibility for residents, using a number of the following design solutions: - architectural detailing - changes in materials - plant species - colours Opportunities for people to be concealed should be minimised	The proposal provides excellent public domain interface; - The main entrance has clear and direct street access - Topography and courtyard walls and fences provide appropriate privacy for the ground level dwellings - Upper floor dwellings overlook the public domain without compromising privacy and provide passive surveillance of the street. - Walls and screens are articulated along the frontage and are integrated into gardens and planting - Carparking servicing and screening is carefully integrated with the building façade. - The schedule of proposed finishes are appropriately durable.	Yes
3C - 2 Amenity of the public domain is retained and enhanced.	Planting softens the edges of any raised terraces to the street, for example above sub-basement car parking. Mail boxes should be located in lobbies, perpendicular to the street alignment or integrated into front fences where individual street entries are provided. The visual prominence of underground car park vents should be minimised and located at a low level where possible. Substations, pump rooms, garbage storage areas and other service requirements should be located in basement car parks or out of view. Ramping for accessibility should be minimised by building entry location and setting ground floor levels in relation to footpath levels. Durable, graffiti resistant and easily cleanable materials should be used. Where development adjoins public parks, open space or bushland, the design positively addresses this interface and uses a number of the following design solutions: - street access, pedestrian paths and building entries which are clearly defined - paths, low fences and planting that clearly delineate between communal/private open space and the adjoining public open space - minimal use of blank walls, fences and ground level parking. On sloping sites protrusion of car parking above ground level should be minimised by using split levels to step underground car parking	Landscape plan confirms adequate landscaping forward of the sub-basement car parking. Mail box is located at entrance/outside of secure entry point door. The sub-basement carparking servicing and screening is carefully integrated with the building façade Garbage storage areas are appropriately located within property and not visible to the street. A ramp for accessibility to the building is proposed at the main entry and addressed in the accessibility report. Substation located within front boundary and appropriately located and screened from the street.	Yes
3D Communal and public open space
3D - 1 An adequate area of communal open space is provided to enhance residential amenity and to provide opportunities for landscaping	Design Criteria 1. Communal open space has a minimum area equal to 25% of the site (see figure 3D.3) 2. Developments achieve a minimum of 50% direct sunlight to the principal usable part of the communal open space for a minimum of 2 hours between 9 am and 3 pm on 21 June (mid winter). Communal open space should be consolidated into a well-designed, easily identified and usable area. Communal open space should have a minimum dimension of 3m, and larger developments should consider greater dimensions. Communal open space should be co-located with deep soil areas. Direct, equitable access should be provided to communal open space areas from common circulation areas, entries and lobbies. Where communal open space cannot be provided at ground level, it should be provided on a podium or roof. Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, such as on small lots, sites within business zones, or in a dense urban area, they should: - provide communal spaces elsewhere such as a landscaped roof top terrace or a common room - provide larger balconies or increased private open space for apartments - demonstrate good proximity to public open space and facilities and/or provide contributions to public open space	35% of the site area is designed as ground level open landscape and circulation spaces which provide: • landscape character • opportunities for social interaction • passive use and outlook for residents The proposal does not provide a consolidated principal usable communal open space. However, this proposal achieves the communal open space objectives because: • The site is zoned as high density residential and boarders a commercial local centre zone, • All dwellings are provided with greater than the minimum required courtyard or balcony space. • The design caters for a central breezeway on each level, serving as central vertical space and wide circulation space providing opportunities for social interaction. • The breezeway exceeds the minimum dimension of 3m and will be open on the northern and southern ends. • The development is within close proximity to several public parks or walking trails. • The communal open space is accessible from common areas. • The building does not exceed the Floor space ratio of the PMHC LEP 2011.	Non-compliance is considered to be acceptable. Acceptable with utilisation of central breezeways as communal space
3D - 2 Communal open space is designed to allow for a range of activities, respond to site conditions and be attractive and inviting	Facilities are provided within communal open spaces and common spaces for a range of age groups (see also 4F Common circulation and spaces), incorporating some of the following elements: - seating for individuals or groups - barbecue areas - play equipment or play areas - swimming pools, gyms, tennis courts or common rooms. The location of facilities responds to microclimate and site conditions with access to sun in winter, shade in summer and shelter from strong winds and down drafts. Visual impacts of services should be minimised, including location of ventilation duct outlets from basement car parks, electrical substations and detention tanks	Communal furniture, landscaping and shelters have been included in the communal open space and circulation areas. The development provides a pathway that meanders the perimeter of the development through landscaped gardens. The development also provided a breezeway, open at both ends, that exceeds the minimum 3m dimension, allowing the opportunity for individuality of each entrance. The visual impact of services from the public domain or adjoining developments is minimised by centrally locating these elements behind each elevation or in the basement.	Acceptable, due to the scale of the develop-ment, adequate communal spaces have been provided. This is considered a minor non-compliance to the ADG.
3D - 3 Communal open space is designed to maximise safety	Communal open space and the public domain should be readily visible from habitable rooms and private open space areas while maintaining visual privacy. Design solutions may include: - bay windows - corner windows - balconies. Communal open space should be well lit. Where communal open space/facilities are provided for children and young people they are safe and contained.	Balconies of apartments will provide passive surveillance of ground level communal open space areas. The private open space at ground level has gated access to the communal area and would provide for some supervision of this space.	Yes
3D - 4 Public open space, where provided, is responsive to the existing pattern and uses of the neighbourhood	The public open space should be well connected with public streets along at least one edge. The public open space should be connected with nearby parks and other landscape elements. Public open space should be linked through view lines, pedestrian desire paths, termination points and the wider street grid. Solar access should be provided year round along with protection from strong winds. Opportunities for a range of recreational activities should be provided for people of all ages. A positive address and active frontages should be provided adjacent to public open space. Boundaries should be clearly defined between public open space and private areas	N/A	N/A
3E Deep soil zones
3E - 1 Deep soil zones provide areas on the site that allow for and support healthy plant and tree growth. They improve residential amenity and promote management of water and air quality	Design Criteria 1. Deep soil zones are to meet the following minimum requirements: a) < 650m², no min dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. b) 650-1500m², 3m dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. c) >1500m², 6m dimension, 7% site area deep soil zone. On some sites it may be possible to provide larger deep soil zones, depending on the site area and context: - 10% of the site as deep soil on sites with an area of 650m² - 1,500m² - 15% of the site as deep soil on sites greater than 1,500m². Deep soil zones should be located to retain existing significant trees and to allow for the development of healthy root systems, providing anchorage and stability for mature trees. Design solutions may include: - basement and sub-basement car park design that is consolidated beneath building footprints - use of increased front and side setbacks - adequate clearance around trees to ensure long term health - co-location with other deep soil areas on adjacent sites to create larger contiguous areas of deep soil. Achieving the design criteria may not be possible on some sites including where: - the location and building typology have limited or no space for deep soil at ground level (e.g. central business district, constrained sites, high density areas, or in centres) - there is 100% site coverage or non-residential uses at ground floor level. Where a proposal does not achieve deep soil requirements, acceptable stormwater management should be achieved and alternative forms of planting provided such as on structure.	The required deep soil zone is achieved in the rear landscape and is larger than the required 7% of site area. Achieving the minimum dimensions of 3m along the eastern and western boundaries and 6m along the rear boundary. The site does not contain any existing significant trees that require retention in deep soil zones.	Yes
3F Visual privacy
3F - 1 Adequate building separation distances are shared equitably between neighbouring sites, to achieve reasonable levels of external and internal visual privacy	Design Criteria 1. Separation between windows and balconies is provided to ensure visual privacy is achieved. Minimum required separation distances from buildings to the side and rear boundaries are as follows: a) Building height up to 12m (4 storey) need 6m setback to habitable and 3m to non-habitable. b) Buildings up to 25m (5-8 storeys) need 9m to habitable and 4.5m to non-habitable. c) Buildings over 25m (9+ storeys) need 12m to habitable and 6m to non-habitable. Note: Separation distances between buildings on the same site should combine required building separations depending on the type of room (see figure 3F.2). Gallery access circulation should be treated as habitable space when measuring privacy separation distances between neighbouring properties Generally, one step in the built form as the height increases due to building separations is desirable. Additional steps should be careful not to cause a 'ziggurat' appearance. For residential buildings next to commercial buildings, separation distances should be measured as follows: - for retail, office spaces and commercial balconies use the habitable room distances - for service and plant areas use the non-habitable room distances. New development should be located and oriented to maximise visual privacy between buildings on site and for neighbouring buildings. Design solutions include: - site layout and building orientation to minimise privacy impacts (see also section 3B Orientation) - on sloping sites, apartments on different levels have appropriate visual separation distances (see figure 3F.4). Apartment buildings should have an increased separation distance of 3m (in addition to the requirements set out in design criteria 1) when adjacent to a different zone that permits lower density residential development to provide for a transition in scale and increased landscaping (figure 3F.5). Direct lines of sight should be avoided for windows and balconies across corners. No separation is required between blank walls	The rear boundary of the proposal achieves a 6m separation. This complies with the aims of ADG for the first 4 storeys. A minor non-compliance occurs at the fifth storey, as the building line of habitable areas does not achieve 9m from the side boundaries. However, windows in the façades have been sufficiently considered and minimised to reduce the impact on neighbouring developments. Side boundaries largely achieve a building separation of 6m with the adjacent developments. Windows directly facing side boundaries have typically been setback further than the required 6m. Where this is not the case, the angling of façade walls and windows to direct views and outlook has been utilised to maintain visual privacy. A minor non-compliance occurs at the fifth storey, where the required separation is 9m. The proposed separation achieves reasonable levels of visual privacy because: • The primary outlook for these apartments is towards the north • The proposal largely achieves the required separation for the first four floors, and the same footprint is maintained for the fifth floor to maintain a coherent architectural form. • Balustrades are a mix of opaque and transparent design screening a downward view angle.	No, but considered acceptable due to minimal impacts and minor nature
3F - 2 Site and building design elements increase privacy without compromising access to light and air and balance outlook and views from habitable rooms and private open space	Communal open space, common areas and access paths should be separated from private open space and windows to apartments, particularly habitable room windows. Design solutions may include: - setbacks - solid or partially solid balustrades to balconies at lower levels - fencing and/or trees and vegetation to separate spaces - screening devices - bay windows or pop out windows to provide privacy in one direction and outlook in another - raising apartments/private open space above the public domain or communal open space - planter boxes incorporated into walls and balustrades to increase visual separation - pergolas or shading devices to limit overlooking of lower apartments or private open space - on constrained sites where it can be demonstrated that building layout opportunities are limited, fixed louvers or screen panels to windows and/or balconies. Bedrooms, living spaces and other habitable rooms should be separated from gallery access and other open circulation space by the apartment’s service areas. Balconies and private terraces should be located in front of living rooms to increase internal privacy. Windows should be offset from the windows of adjacent buildings. Recessed balconies and/or vertical fins should be used between adjacent balconies	Ground level communal open space is at a lower level than the ground floor apartments and landscaping has been proposed on top of the podium above the parking level. Lower level balconies are solid adjacent to the common building entry.	Yes
3G Pedestrian access and entries
3G - 1 Building entries and pedestrian access connects to and addresses the public domain	Multiple entries (including communal building entries and individual ground floor entries) should be provided to activate the street edge. Entry locations relate to the street and subdivision pattern and the existing pedestrian network. Building entries should be clearly identifiable and communal entries should be clearly distinguishable from private entries. Where street frontage is limited and multiple buildings are located on the site, a primary street address should be provided with clear sight lines and pathways to secondary building entries.	Entry locations address the street frontage. Ground level apartments have a balcony access from communal path. The main building entry is well defined and clearly identifiable from the street.	Yes
3G - 2 Access, entries and pathways are accessible and easy to identify	Building access areas including lift lobbies, stairwells and hallways should be clearly visible from the public domain and communal spaces. The design of ground floors and underground car parks minimise level changes along pathways and entries. Steps and ramps should be integrated into the overall building and landscape design. For large developments ‘way finding’ maps should be provided to assist visitors and residents (see figure 4T.3). For large developments electronic access and audio/video intercom should be provided to manage access	Building access point are clearly visible from the public domain and the access ramp and steps are appropriately integrated into the design and clear sightlines to central breezeway to lift and stairs. The proposal is not of a scale where wayfinding maps are considered necessary.	Yes
3G - 3 Large sites provide pedestrian links for access to streets and connection to destinations	Pedestrian links through sites facilitate direct connections to open space, main streets, centres and public transport. Pedestrian links should be direct, have clear sight lines, be overlooked by habitable rooms or private open spaces of dwellings, be well lit and contain active uses, where appropriate	N/A	N/A
3H Vehicle access
3H - 1 Vehicle access points are designed and located to achieve safety, minimise conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles and create high quality streetscapes	Car park access should be integrated with the building’s overall facade. Design solutions may include: - the materials and colour palette to minimise visibility from the street - security doors or gates at entries that minimise voids in the facade - where doors are not provided, the visible interior reflects the facade design and the building services, pipes and ducts are concealed. Car park entries should be located behind the building line. Vehicle entries should be located at the lowest point of the site minimising ramp lengths, excavation and impacts on the building form and layout. Car park entry and access should be located on secondary streets or lanes where available. Vehicle standing areas that increase driveway width and encroach into setbacks should be avoided. Access point locations should avoid headlight glare to habitable rooms. Adequate separation distances should be provided between vehicle entries and street intersections. The width and number of vehicle access points should be limited to the minimum. Visual impact of long driveways should be minimised through changing alignments and screen planting. The need for large vehicles to enter or turn around within the site should be avoided. Garbage collection, loading and servicing areas are screened. Clear sight lines should be provided at pedestrian and vehicle crossings. Traffic calming devices such as changes in paving material or textures should be used where appropriate. Pedestrian and vehicle access should be separated and distinguishable. Design solutions may include: - changes in surface materials - level changes - the use of landscaping for separation	The basement car park access is in the front façade of the building and is proposed to be provided with a security door at the access point. Entry is located behind the front building line. The access to the basement parking is via a single two-way driveway with sufficient separation from street to ensure pedestrian safety. The driveway length is relatively short and would not result in any adverse visual impacts. Car park access is integrated into the overall façade design and materials palette of the building. The vehicular entry is clearly separated from the main pedestrian entry with clear sightlines provided at pedestrian crossings. Private waste collection will be required. These requirements are capable of complying with standards.	Yes
3J Bicycle and car parking
3J - 1 Car parking is provided based on proximity to public transport in metropolitan Sydney and centres in regional areas Notes Port Macquarie is a nominated regional centre. In terms of using Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, Port Macquarie is a “sub-regional centre” as by definition it does not have access to rail. Medium density is 2 - <20 dwellings. High Density is 20 or more dwellings	Design Criteria 1. For development in the following locations: a) on sites that are within 800 metres of a railway station or light rail stop in the Sydney Metropolitan Area; or b) on land zoned, and sites within 400 metres of land zoned, B3 Commercial Core, B4 Mixed Use or equivalent in a nominated regional centre the minimum car parking requirement for residents and visitors is set out in the Guide to Traffic Generating Developments, or the car parking requirement prescribed by the relevant council, whichever is less The car parking needs for a development must be provided off street. Where a car share scheme operates locally, provide car share parking spaces within the development. Car share spaces, when provided, should be on site. Where less car parking is provided in a development, council should not provide on street resident parking permits Guide to Traffic Generating Developments Medium density residential flat buildings require: - 1 space per unit + - 1 space for every 5 x 2-bedroom unit + - 1 space for every 2 x 3-bedroom unit + - 1 space for 5 units (visitor parking). High density residential flat buildings for metropolitan sub-regional centres require: - 0.6 spaces per 1-bedroom unit - 0.9 spaces per 2-bedroom unit - 1.40 spaces per 3-bedroom unit + - 1 space per 5 units (visitor parking)	The site is located within close proximity of a B2 and B3 zone to the east of the site. Accordingly, car parking is required to meet the minimum requirements of the Guide to Traffic Generating Developments or the DCP (whichever is less). Guide to Traffic Generating Developments The proposal includes more than 20 dwellings and is characterised as a high density residential flat building for the purpose of parking generation. 20 x 0.9 spaces = 18 spaces. 20 x 1.4 spaces = 28 spaces. 40/5 = 8 visitor spaces. Total parking required = 54 spaces. DCP 20 x 1 space = 20 spaces. 20 x 1.5 = 30 spaces. 40/4 = 10 visitor spaces. Total parking required = 60 spaces (including 10 visitors). The Guide to Traffic Generating Developments therefore provide the lesser parking requirement and is the minimum parking required under the ADG. The proposal includes 80 spaces and exceeds the minimum requirement of 20 spaces. Note that there are only 6 dedicated visitor parking spaces. However, this is considered a minor variation given the majority of units will have 2 spaces and the total number of spaces exceed the minimum.	No, but considered acceptable based on the merit of the proposed develop-ment.
3J - 2 Parking and facilities are provided for other modes of transport	Conveniently located and sufficient numbers of parking spaces should be provided for motorbikes and scooters. Secure undercover bicycle parking should be provided that is easily accessible from both the public domain and common areas. Conveniently located charging stations are provided for electric vehicles, where desirable	Bicycle and car parking is provided within two levels of basement. Basement area is behind a secure entry and not accessible to the public.	Yes
3J - 3 Car park design and access is safe and secure	Supporting facilities within car parks, including garbage, plant and switch rooms, storage areas and car wash bays can be accessed without crossing car parking spaces. Direct, clearly visible and well lit access should be provided into common circulation areas. A clearly defined and visible lobby or waiting area should be provided to lifts and stairs. For larger car parks, safe pedestrian access should be clearly defined and circulation areas have good lighting, colour, line marking and/or bollards.	Basement storage areas are provided on each level of basement car parking. These appear to be easily accessible and secure. The lift, plant room, and pump room are also accessible with clearly defined pedestrian areas. Garbage room accessible from central vertical circulation area adjacent to the access ramp.	Yes
3J - 4 Visual and environmental impacts of underground car parking are minimised	Excavation should be minimised through efficient car park layouts and ramp design. Car parking layout should be well organised, using a logical, efficient structural grid and double loaded aisles. Protrusion of car parks should not exceed 1m above ground level. Design solutions may include stepping car park levels or using split levels on sloping sites. Natural ventilation should be provided to basement and sub-basement car parking areas. Ventilation grills or screening devices for car parking openings should be integrated into the facade and landscape design	Excavation for the basement car park will be minimised to two levels and appears to be an efficient circulation design. See Development Engineer’s comments later in this report. Part of the first basement level will be protruding out of the ground, however this is predominately less than 1m above the finished ground level, allows ventilation and has been well integrated into the building façade. Ventilation openings for the car park have been integrated into the design and will not be visible in the streetscape or from individual apartments.	Yes
3J - 5 Visual and environmental impacts of on-grade car parking are minimised	On-grade car parking should be avoided. Where on-grade car parking is unavoidable, the following design solutions are used: - parking is located on the side or rear of the lot away from the primary street frontage - cars are screened from view of streets, buildings, communal and private open space areas - safe and direct access to building entry points is provided - parking is incorporated into the landscape design of the site, by extending planting and materials into the car park space - stormwater run-off is managed appropriately from car parking surfaces • bio-swales, rain gardens or on site detention tanks are provided, where appropriate - light coloured paving materials or permeable paving systems are used and shade trees are planted between every 4-5 parking spaces to reduce increased surface temperatures from large areas of paving	At grade car parking has been avoided. All proposed parking is within basement levels and behind the front building line.	Yes
3J - 6 Visual and environmental impacts of above ground enclosed car parking are minimised	Exposed parking should not be located along primary street frontages Screening, landscaping and other design elements including public art should be used to integrate the above ground car parking with the facade. Design solutions may include: - car parking that is concealed behind the facade, with windows integrated into the overall facade design (approach should be limited to developments where a larger floor plate podium is suitable at lower levels) - car parking that is ‘wrapped’ with other uses, such as retail, commercial or two storey Small Office/Home Office (SOHO) units along the street frontage (see figure 3J.9). Positive street address and active frontages should be provided at ground level	Car parking area is enclosed along the street frontage and integrated into the façade and landscaping to improve the streetscape presentation. Sufficient active space, such as landscaping, entrance and balconies address the street frontage.	Yes
4A Solar and daylight access
4A - 1 To optimise the number of apartments receiving sunlight to habitable rooms, primary windows and private open space	Design Criteria 1. Living rooms and private open spaces of at least 70% of apartments in a building receive a minimum of 2 hours direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid-winter in the Sydney Metropolitan Area and in the Newcastle and Wollongong local government areas. 2. In all other areas, living rooms and private open spaces of at least 70% of apartments in a building receive a minimum of 3 hours direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid-winter. 3. A maximum of 15% of apartments in a building receive no direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid-winter The design maximises north aspect and the number of single aspect south facing apartments is minimised. Single aspect, single storey apartments should have a northerly or easterly aspect. Living areas are best located to the north and service areas to the south and west of apartments. To optimise the direct sunlight to habitable rooms and balconies a number of the following design features are used: - dual aspect apartments - shallow apartment layouts - two storey and mezzanine level apartments - bay windows To maximise the benefit to residents of direct sunlight within living rooms and private open spaces, a minimum of 1m² of direct sunlight, measured at 1m above floor level, is achieved for at least 15 minutes. Achieving the design criteria may not be possible on some sites. This includes: - where greater residential amenity can be achieved along a busy road or rail line by orientating the living rooms away from the noise source - on south facing sloping sites - where significant views are oriented away from the desired aspect for direct sunlight Design drawings need to demonstrate how site constraints and orientation preclude meeting the design criteria and how the development meets the objective.	Sun penetration plans submitted, which confirm adequate sunlight access to living areas. (Drawing No. DA008) The Applicant states that the building was designed to optimise the number of apartments receiving direct sunlight to living rooms and private open space. Considering the orientation of the site being north to south, the majority of the units either have an eastern or western aspect. 100% of dwellings received at least 2.5 hours, and 88% of dwellings received 3 hours of sunlight between the hours of 9am and 3pm in mid-winter. As demonstrated by solar access diagrams. The design attempts to maximise the northern aspect by orientating living and private open space to the north for all dwelling. All living areas are located to achieve the best solar access for the proposed building orientation. All living areas and private open space achieve greater than 1m2 of direct sunlight measured 1m above the floor level for more than 15 minutes during the day. To alleviate any doubt, none of the apartments will receive no direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm at midwinter. The design maximises the number of north-facing apartments, or north facing aspect of the apartment being either North-east or North-west. There are no single aspect south-facing apartments are proposed.	No, variation to 3 hours for some of the apartments considered acceptable.
4A - 2 Daylight access is maximised where sunlight is limited	Courtyards, skylights and high level windows (with sills of 1,500mm or greater) are used only as a secondary light source in habitable rooms. Where courtyards are used: - use is restricted to kitchens, bathrooms and service areas - building services are concealed with appropriate detailing and materials to visible walls - courtyards are fully open to the sky - access is provided to the light well from a communal area for cleaning and maintenance - acoustic privacy, fire safety and minimum privacy separation distances (see section 3F Visual privacy) are achieved. Opportunities for reflected light into apartments are optimised through: - reflective exterior surfaces on buildings opposite south facing windows - positioning windows to face other buildings or surfaces (on neighbouring sites or within the site) that will reflect light - integrating light shelves into the design - light coloured internal finishes	The design does not rely upon courtyards, skylights or high level windows to habitable rooms for solar access..	N/A
4A - 3 Design incorporates shading and glare control, particularly for warmer months	A number of the following design features are used: - balconies or sun shading that extend far enough to shade summer sun, but allow winter sun to penetrate living areas - shading devices such as eaves, awnings, balconies, pergolas, external louvers and planting - horizontal shading to north facing windows - vertical shading to east and particularly west facing windows - operable shading to allow adjustment and choice - high performance glass that minimises external glare off windows, with consideration given to reduced tint glass or glass with a reflectance level below 20% (reflective films are avoided)	The design incorporates appropriate passive sun control elements. Most of the northern façade includes deep balconies for solar shading. Glazing to eastern and western facades that is not protected by deep balconies has been minimised. Its considered that appropriate shading features included in the design.	Yes
4B Natural ventilation
4B - 1 All habitable rooms are naturally ventilated	The building's orientation maximises capture and use of prevailing breezes for natural ventilation in habitable rooms. Depths of habitable rooms support natural ventilation. The area of unobstructed window openings should be equal to at least 5% of the floor area served. Light wells are not the primary air source for habitable rooms. Doors and openable windows maximise natural ventilation opportunities by using the following design solutions: - adjustable windows with large effective openable areas - a variety of window types that provide safety and flexibility such as awnings and louvers - windows which the occupants can reconfigure to funnel breezes into the apartment such as vertical louvers, casement windows and externally opening doors	Design and orientation of the building facilitates natural ventilation. Depth of rooms and corridors support ventilation. The majority of apartments have multiple openings, such as, balcony sliding doors and living area windows considered large effective openable areas	Yes
4B - 3 The number of apartments with natural cross ventilation is maximised to create a comfortable indoor environment for residents	Design Criteria 1. At least 60% of apartments are naturally cross ventilated in the first nine storeys of the building. Apartments at ten storeys or greater are deemed to be cross ventilated only if any enclosure of the balconies at these levels allows adequate natural ventilation and cannot be fully enclosed. 2. Overall depth of a cross-over or cross-through apartment does not exceed 18m, measured glass line to glass line. The building should include dual aspect apartments, cross through apartments and corner apartments and limit apartment depths. In cross-through apartments external window and door opening sizes/areas on one side of an apartment (inlet side) are approximately equal to the external window and door opening sizes/areas on the other side of the apartment (outlet side) (see figure 4B.4). Apartments are designed to minimise the number of corners, doors and rooms that might obstruct airflow. Apartment depths, combined with appropriate ceiling heights, maximise cross ventilation and airflow	The submitted plans show 70% of apartments to be naturally cross ventilated. The overall depth of apartments does not exceed 18m. Ventilation diagrams provided, indicate airflow paths being less than 18m. The apartment floor plans minimise the number of doorways or corners obstructing ventilation and airflow.	Yes
4C Ceiling heights
4C - 1 Ceiling height achieves sufficient natural ventilation and daylight access	Design Criteria 1. Measured from finished floor level to finished ceiling level, minimum ceiling heights are: Minimum ceiling height for apartment and mixed use buildings Habitable rooms = 2.7m Non-habitable = 2.4m For 2 storey apartments = 2.7m for main living area floor and 2.4m for second floor, where its area does not exceed 50% of the apartment area Attic spaces = 1.8m at edge of room with a 30 degree minimum ceiling slope If located in mixed use areas = 3.3m for ground and first floor to promote future flexibility of use These minimums do not preclude higher ceilings if desired. Ceiling height can accommodate use of ceiling fans for cooling and heat distribution.	Ceiling heights of 2.7m are provided for habitable rooms and 2.4m for non-habitable rooms. Location is not considered a mixed use area, therefore no consideration required for future flexibility of ground and first floors.	Yes
4C - 2 Ceiling height increases the sense of space in apartments and provides for well-proportioned rooms	A number of the following design solutions can be used: - the hierarchy of rooms in an apartment is defined using changes in ceiling heights and alternatives such as raked or curved ceilings, or double height spaces - well-proportioned rooms are provided, for example, smaller rooms feel larger and more spacious with higher ceilings - ceiling heights are maximised in habitable rooms by ensuring that bulkheads do not intrude. The stacking of service rooms from floor to floor and coordination of bulkhead location above non-habitable areas, such as robes or storage, can assist	The proposal includes well-proportioned rooms with consistent ceiling height.	Yes
4D Apartment size and layout
4D - 1 The layout of rooms within an apartment is functional, well organised and provides a high standard of amenity	Design Criteria 1. Apartments are required to have the following minimum internal areas: Studio = 35m² 1 bedroom = 50m² 2 bedrooms = 70m² 3 bedrooms = 90m² The minimum internal areas include only one bathroom. Additional bathrooms increase the minimum internal area by 5m² each. A fourth bedroom and further additional bedrooms increase the minimum internal area by 12m² each. 2. Every habitable room must have a window in an external wall with a total minimum glass area of not less than 10% of the floor area of the room. Daylight and air may not be borrowed from other rooms. Kitchens should not be located as part of the main circulation space in larger apartments (such as hallway or entry space). A window should be visible from any point in a habitable room. Where minimum areas or room dimensions are not met apartments need to demonstrate that they are well designed and demonstrate the usability and functionality of the space with realistically scaled furniture layouts and circulation areas. These circumstances would be assessed on their merits	All apartment areas exceed the minimum floor areas. · 2 bedrooms vary between 78m2 to 82m2 · 3 bedrooms vary between 97m2 to 101m2 All habitable rooms have a window or glass door in an external wall that is at least 10% of the floor area of the room. Kitchens are not located in circulation areas and windows are visible from all habitable rooms.	Yes
4D - 2 Environmental performance of the apartment is maximised	Design Criteria 1. Habitable room depths are limited to a maximum of 2.5 x the ceiling height. 2. In open plan layouts (where the living, dining and kitchen are combined) the maximum habitable room depth is 8m from a window. Greater than minimum ceiling heights can allow for proportional increases in room depth up to the permitted maximum depths. All living areas and bedrooms should be located on the external face of the building. Where possible: - bathrooms and laundries should have an external openable window. - main living spaces should be oriented toward the primary outlook and aspect and away from noise sources	Room depth complies for all apartments. All living rooms and bedrooms are located on the external face of the building. Laundries and bathrooms are mechanically ventilated. Main living areas are oriented towards the side boundaries and frontage of the site. Ceiling heights of habitable rooms comply. All bedrooms and living areas are located on the external face of the building or open onto private balconies. Open plan living/kitchen/dining in majority of the apartments comply with the maximum 8m depth from a window. Note, the front apartments exceeds the maximum depth , however, from the peninsula of the kitchen bench is 7.3m and the standing area within the kitchen is approximately 8.5m from a window, which is an acceptable variation based on the merit of the design.	No, but considered acceptable
4D - 3 Apartment layouts are designed to accommodate a variety of household activities and needs	Design Criteria 1. Master bedrooms have a minimum area of 10m² and other bedrooms 9m² (excluding wardrobe space). 2. Bedrooms have a minimum dimension of 3m (excluding wardrobe space). 3. Living rooms or combined living/dining rooms have a minimum width of: • 3.6m for studio and 1 bedroom apartments • 4m for 2 and 3 bedroom apartments 4. The width of cross-over or cross-through apartments are at least 4m internally to avoid deep narrow apartment layouts. Access to bedrooms, bathrooms and laundries is separated from living areas minimising direct openings between living and service areas. All bedrooms allow a minimum length of 1.5m for robes. The main bedroom of an apartment or a studio apartment should be provided with a wardrobe of a minimum 1.8m long, 0.6m deep and 2.1m high. Apartment layouts allow flexibility over time, design solutions may include: - dimensions that facilitate a variety of furniture arrangements and removal - spaces for a range of activities and privacy levels between different spaces within the apartment - dual master apartments - dual key apartments Note: dual key apartments which are separate but on the same title are regarded as two sole occupancy units for the purposes of the Building Code of Australia and for calculating the mix of apartments - room sizes and proportions or open plans (rectangular spaces (2:3) are more easily furnished than square spaces (1:1)) - efficient planning of circulation by stairs, corridors and through rooms to maximise the amount of usable floor space in rooms	All bedroom and living room dimensions comply with the minimum requirements. All bedrooms have a minimum 1.5m length of robe. Access to bedrooms, bathrooms and laundries is separated from the living areas. Rooms are generally of a regular shape and provide for a variety of furniture layouts.	Yes
4E Private open space and balconies
4E - 1 Apartments provide appropriately sized private open space and balconies to enhance residential amenity	Design Criteria 1. All apartments are required to have primary balconies as follows: a) Studio apartments = 4m² b) 1 bedroom apartments = 8m² and 2m min depth. c) 2 bedroom apartments = 10m² and 2m min depth. d) 3+ bedroom apartments = 12m² and 2.4m min depth. The minimum balcony depth to be counted as contributing to the balcony area is 1m. 2. For apartments at ground level or on a podium or similar structure, a private open space is provided instead of a balcony. It must have a minimum area of 15m² and a minimum depth of 3m. Increased communal open space should be provided where the number or size of balconies are reduced. Storage areas on balconies is additional to the minimum balcony size. Balcony use may be limited in some proposals by: - consistently high wind speeds at 10 storeys and above - close proximity to road, rail or other noise sources - exposure to significant levels of aircraft noise - heritage and adaptive reuse of existing buildings In these situations, Juliet balconies, operable walls, enclosed wintergardens or bay windows may be appropriate, and other amenity benefits for occupants should also be provided in the apartments or in the development or both. Natural ventilation also needs to be demonstrated	All balconies and terraces comply with the minimum areas and dimensions, (all exceeding 12m² and a minimum depth of 2.4m). Ground level balconies are screened with a barrier to the communal landscaping.	Yes
4E - 2 Primary private open space and balconies are appropriately located to enhance liveability for residents	Primary open space and balconies should be located adjacent to the living room, dining room or kitchen to extend the living space. Private open spaces and balconies predominantly face north, east or west. Primary open space and balconies should be orientated with the longer side facing outwards or be open to the sky to optimise daylight access into adjacent rooms.	Primary private open space areas are located adjacent to living areas and are oriented to face north, east, and west. Each unit has been designed to provide private open space with the best solar access based on orientation. The balconies are oriented with the longer edge facing outwards and will maximise sunlight access into the building.	Yes
4E - 3 Private open space and balcony design is integrated into and contributes to the overall architectural form and detail of the building	Solid, partially solid or transparent fences and balustrades are selected to respond to the location. They are designed to allow views and passive surveillance of the street while maintaining visual privacy and allowing for a range of uses on the balcony. Solid and partially solid balustrades are preferred. Full width full height glass balustrades alone are generally not desirable. Projecting balconies should be integrated into the building design and the design of soffits considered. Operable screens, shutters, hoods and pergolas are used to control sunlight and wind. Balustrades are set back from the building or balcony edge where overlooking or safety is an issue. Downpipes and balcony drainage are integrated with the overall facade and building design. Air-conditioning units should be located on roofs, in basements, or fully integrated into the building design. Where clothes drying, storage or air conditioning units are located on balconies, they should be screened and integrated in the building design. Ceilings of apartments below terraces should be insulated to avoid heat loss. Water and gas outlets should be provided for primary balconies and private open space	Balcony and courtyard design is integrated into the overall architectural form and language of the building and detailed to avoid opportunities for climbing and falls. Clothes drying facilities on balconies are not shown on the plans, but are capable of being accommodated.	Yes
4E - 4 Private open space and balcony design maximises safety.	Changes in ground levels or landscaping are minimised. Design and detailing of balconies avoids opportunities for climbing and falls.	All balconies are level and landscaping does not provide any opportunities for climbing.	Yes
4F Common circulation and spaces
4F - 1 Common circulation spaces achieve good amenity and properly service the number of apartments	Design Criteria 1. The maximum number of apartments off a circulation core on a single level is eight. 2. For buildings of 10 storeys and over, the maximum number of apartments sharing a single lift is 40. Greater than minimum requirements for corridor widths and/ or ceiling heights allow comfortable movement and access particularly in entry lobbies, outside lifts and at apartment entry doors. Daylight and natural ventilation should be provided to all common circulation spaces that are above ground. Windows should be provided in common circulation spaces and should be adjacent to the stair or lift core or at the ends of corridors. Longer corridors greater than 12m in length from the lift core should be articulated. Design solutions may include: - a series of foyer areas with windows and spaces for seating - wider areas at apartment entry doors and varied ceiling heights Design common circulation spaces to maximise opportunities for dual aspect apartments, including multiple core apartment buildings and cross over apartments. Achieving the design criteria for the number of apartments off a circulation core may not be possible. Where a development is unable to achieve the design criteria, a high level of amenity for common lobbies, corridors and apartments should be demonstrated, including: - sunlight and natural cross ventilation in apartments - access to ample daylight and natural ventilation in common circulation spaces - common areas for seating and gathering - generous corridors with greater than minimum ceiling heights - other innovative design solutions that provide high levels of amenity Where design criteria 1 is not achieved, no more than 12 apartments should be provided off a circulation core on a single level. Primary living room or bedroom windows should not open directly onto common circulation spaces, whether open or enclosed. Visual and acoustic privacy from common circulation spaces to any other rooms should be carefully controlled	The proposal provides 8 apartments per circulation area on each level which is in keeping with the ADG recommended number. Direct and legible access is provided between circulation spaces and apartment entries through a generous, open breezeway. At each end of corridor is stair access and mid-way use of voids or permanent communal seating will provide suitable articulation, solar access and ventilation. It is considered that the circulation areas will accumulatively achieve reasonable amenity for the end user.	Yes
4F - 2 Common circulation spaces promote safety and provide for social interaction between residents	Direct and legible access should be provided between vertical circulation points and apartment entries by minimising corridor or gallery length to give short, straight, clear sight lines. Tight corners and spaces are avoided. Circulation spaces should be well lit at night. Legible signage should be provided for apartment numbers, common areas and general wayfinding. Incidental spaces, for example space for seating in a corridor, at a stair landing, or near a window are provided. In larger developments, community rooms for activities such as owner’s corporation meetings or resident use should be provided and are ideally co-located with communal open space. Where external galleries are provided, they are more open than closed above the balustrade along their length.	Apartments are directly accessed off the central corridor on each level. There are no corners and identifiable concerns regarding identifying levels or apartments. Wayfinding and communal seating provided on each level of the development with eight apartments off the access core on each level.	Yes
4G Storage
4G - 1 Adequate, well designed storage is provided in each apartment	Design Criteria 1. In addition to storage in kitchens, bathrooms and bedrooms, the following storage is provided: a) Studio apartments = 4m³. b) 1 bedroom apartments = 6m³. c) 2 bedroom apartments 8m³. d) 3+ bedroom apartments = 10m³. At least 50% of the required storage is to be located within the apartment. Storage is accessible from either circulation or living areas. Storage provided on balconies (in addition to the minimum balcony size) is integrated into the balcony design, weather proof and screened from view from the street. Left over space such as under stairs is used for storage	Storage provision for each unit type has been provided on DA005 – Plan – Site. Areas of storage in kitchens, bedrooms and bathrooms have been excluded from these calculations. Each apartment includes dedicated storage cage within car parking levels and suitable storage within apartments. No storage on balconies proposed, but capable of being retrofitted and still comply with minimum balcony dimensions. Storage is considered to be located within an accessible location	Yes
4G - 2 Additional storage is conveniently located, accessible and nominated for individual apartments	Storage not located in apartments is secure and clearly allocated to specific apartments. Storage is provided for larger and less frequently accessed items. Storage space in internal or basement car parks is provided at the rear or side of car spaces or in cages so that allocated car parking remains accessible. If communal storage rooms are provided they should be accessible from common circulation areas of the building. Storage not located in an apartment is integrated into the overall building design and is not visible from the public domain.	Storage in basement car park is secure with storage cages on both basement levels. Separate clear pedestrian access is provided to the areas.	Yes
4H Acoustic privacy
4H - 1 Noise transfer is minimised through the siting of buildings and building layout	Adequate building separation is provided within the development and from neighbouring buildings/adjacent uses (see also section 2F Building separation and section 3F Visual privacy). Window and door openings are generally orientated away from noise sources. Noisy areas within buildings including building entries and corridors should be located next to or above each other and quieter areas next to or above quieter areas. Storage, circulation areas and non-habitable rooms should be located to buffer noise from external sources. The number of party walls (walls shared with other apartments) are limited and are appropriately insulated. Noise sources such as garage doors, driveways, service areas, plant rooms, building services, mechanical equipment, active communal open spaces and circulation areas should be located at least 3m away from bedrooms.	Doesn’t comply with separation distances. Window and door openings are oriented away from the common driveway and pedestrian accesses. Bedrooms are located away from the lifts, but some bedrooms adjoin the lift or adjoining wall are provided with appropriate acoustic insulation. Corridors are stacked vertically throughout the building and the number of party walls is minimised by the inclusion of the central breezeway All bedrooms are located greater than 3m from the vehicle entry.	No, acceptable separation proposed.
4H - 2 Noise impacts are mitigated within apartments through layout and acoustic treatments	Internal apartment layout separates noisy spaces from quiet spaces, using a number of the following design solutions: - rooms with similar noise requirements are grouped together - doors separate different use zones - wardrobes in bedrooms are co-located to act as sound buffers Where physical separation cannot be achieved noise conflicts are resolved using the following design solutions: - double or acoustic glazing - acoustic seals • use of materials with low noise penetration properties - continuous walls to ground level courtyards where they do not conflict with streetscape or other amenity requirements	Apartment layouts separate noisy and quiet uses.	Yes
4J Noise and pollution
4J - 1 In noisy or hostile environments the impacts of external noise and pollution are minimised through the careful siting and layout of buildings	To minimise impacts the following design solutions may be used: - physical separation between buildings and the noise or pollution source - residential uses are located perpendicular to the noise source and where possible buffered by other uses - non-residential buildings are sited to be parallel with the noise source to provide a continuous building that shields residential uses and communal open spaces - non-residential uses are located at lower levels vertically separating the residential component from the noise or pollution source. Setbacks to the underside of residential floor levels should increase relative to traffic volumes and other noise sources - buildings should respond to both solar access and noise. Where solar access is away from the noise source, non-habitable rooms can provide a buffer - where solar access is in the same direction as the noise source, dual aspect apartments with shallow building depths are preferable (see figure 4J.4) - landscape design reduces the perception of noise and acts as a filter for air pollution generated by traffic and industry. Achieving the design criteria in this Apartment Design Guide may not be possible in some situations due to noise and pollution. Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, alternatives may be considered in the following areas: - solar and daylight access - private open space and balconies - natural cross ventilation	N/A	N/A
4J - 2 Appropriate noise shielding or attenuation techniques for the building design, construction and choice of materials are used to mitigate noise transmission	Design solutions to mitigate noise include: - limiting the number and size of openings facing noise sources - providing seals to prevent noise transfer through gaps - using double or acoustic glazing, acoustic louvers or enclosed balconies (wintergardens) - using materials with mass and/or sound insulation or absorption properties e.g. solid balcony balustrades, external screens and soffits	Acoustic treatments to walls, lifts and openings will be implemented to mitigate noise, in accordance with relevant NCC requirements are capable of satisfying this clause.	Yes
4K Apartment mix
4K - 1 A range of apartment types and sizes is provided to cater for different household types now and into the future	A variety of apartment types is provided The apartment mix is appropriate, taking into consideration: - the distance to public transport, employment and education centres - the current market demands and projected future demographic trends - the demand for social and affordable housing - different cultural and socioeconomic groups Flexible apartment configurations are provided to support diverse household types and stages of life including single person households, families, multi-generational families and group households.	Mix of 2 and 3 bedroom dwellings are proposed within the development, of vary typologies.	Yes
4K - 2 The apartment mix is distributed to suitable locations within the building	Different apartment types are located to achieve successful facade composition and to optimise solar access (see figure 4K.3). Larger apartment types are located on the ground or roof level where there is potential for more open space and on corners where more building frontage is available.	The apartment mix is evenly distributed.	Yes
4L Ground floor apartments
4L - 1 Street frontage activity is maximised where ground floor apartments are located	Direct street access should be provided to ground floor apartments. Activity is achieved through front gardens, terraces and the facade of the building. Design solutions may include: - both street, foyer and other common internal circulation entrances to ground floor apartments - private open space is next to the street - doors and windows face the street Retail or home office spaces should be located along street frontages. Ground floor apartment layouts support small office home office (SOHO) use to provide future opportunities for conversion into commercial or retail areas. In these cases provide higher floor to ceiling heights and ground floor amenities for easy conversion.	All ground floor apartments feature individual access points off the provided landscape pathways, which are accessible from the street.	Yes
4L - 2 Design of ground floor apartments delivers amenity and safety for residents	Privacy and safety should be provided without obstructing casual surveillance. Design solutions may include: - elevation of private gardens and terraces above the street level by 1-1.5m (see figure 4L.4) - landscaping and private courtyards - window sill heights that minimise sight lines into apartments - integrating balustrades, safety bars or screens with the exterior design Solar access should be maximised through: - high ceilings and tall windows - trees and shrubs that allow solar access in winter and shade in summer	All ground floor apartments include courtyard walls and raised landscape planters allowing visual and acoustic privacy.	Yes
4M Facades
4M - 1 Building facades provide visual interest along the street while respecting the character of the local area	Design solutions for front building facades may include: - a composition of varied building elements - a defined base, middle and top of buildings - revealing and concealing certain elements - changes in texture, material, detail and colour to modify the prominence of elements Building services should be integrated within the overall façade. Building facades should be well resolved with an appropriate scale and proportion to the streetscape and human scale. Design solutions may include: - well composed horizontal and vertical elements - variation in floor heights to enhance the human scale - elements that are proportional and arranged in patterns - public artwork or treatments to exterior blank walls - grouping of floors or elements such as balconies and windows on taller buildings Building facades relate to key datum lines of adjacent buildings through upper level setbacks, parapets, cornices, awnings or colonnade heights. Shadow is created on the facade throughout the day with building articulation, balconies and deeper window reveals.	Building façade will provide visual interest in the street. The building articulation and balconies will create shadowing to the façade. The central breezeway brings light, air and nature into the heart of the development and enhances the resort-like feel. A layered pedestrian entry sequence is integrated with the breezeway and clearly defined.	Yes
4M - 2 Building functions are expressed by the facade	Building entries should be clearly defined. Important corners are given visual prominence through a change in articulation, materials or colour, roof expression or changes in height. The apartment layout should be expressed externally through facade features such as party walls and floor slabs	Building entry is clearly defined with covered entry, pedestrian path and landscaping.	Yes
4N Roof design
4N - 1 Roof treatments are integrated into the building design and positively respond to the street	Roof design relates to the street. Design solutions may include: - special roof features and strong corners - use of skillion or very low pitch hipped roofs - breaking down the massing of the roof by using smaller elements to avoid bulk - using materials or a pitched form complementary to adjacent buildings Roof treatments should be integrated with the building design. Design solutions may include: - roof design proportionate to the overall building size, scale and form - roof materials compliment the building - service elements are integrated	The apartment roof is unobtrusive and extends to provide shade and shelter to balconies.	Yes
4N - 3 Roof design incorporates sustainability features	Roof design maximises solar access to apartments during winter and provides shade during summer. Design solutions may include: - the roof lifts to the north - eaves and overhangs shade walls and windows from summer sun. Skylights and ventilation systems should be integrated into the roof design	The roof design incorporates appropriate shading of windows for the upper floor apartments. The lift overrun and utilities will not be visible from the public domain.	Yes
4O Landscape design
4O - 1 Landscape design is viable and sustainable	Landscape design should be environmentally sustainable and can enhance environmental performance by incorporating: - diverse and appropriate planting - bio-filtration gardens - appropriately planted shading trees - areas for residents to plant vegetables and herbs - composting - green roofs or walls Ongoing maintenance plans should be prepared. Microclimate is enhanced by: - appropriately scaled trees near the eastern and western elevations for shade - a balance of evergreen and deciduous trees to provide shading in summer and sunlight access in winter - shade structures such as pergolas for balconies and courtyards Tree and shrub selection considers size at maturity and the potential for roots to compete (see Table 4) Table 4 requires - For site area up to 850m² = 1 medium tree per 50m² of deep soil zone - Between 850 - 1,500m² = 1 large tree or 2 medium trees per 90m² of deep soil zone - Greater than 1,500m² = 1 large tree or 2 medium trees per 80m² of deep soil zone	A landscaping plan has been provided with the application. Significant amount of planting in the frontage and communal open space footpath along perimeter of the site. The landscape has been designed with great diversity in planting stock. Landscape zones buffer and provide separation to the street interface and side boundaries.	Yes
4O - 2 Landscape design contributes to the streetscape and amenity	Landscape design responds to the existing site conditions including: - changes of levels - views - significant landscape features including trees and rock outcrops Significant landscape features should be protected by: - tree protection zones (see figure 4O.5) - appropriate signage and fencing during construction Plants selected should be endemic to the region and reflect the local ecology	The proposal will contribute to the streetscape with the proposed landscaping at the site frontage. The site does not contain any significant existing native vegetation that requires retention/protection.	Yes
4P Planting on structures
4P - 1 Appropriate soil profiles are provided	Structures are reinforced for additional saturated soil weight. Soil volume is appropriate for plant growth. Considerations include: - modifying depths and widths according to the planting mix and irrigation frequency - free draining and long soil life span - tree anchorage Minimum soil standards for plant sizes should be provided in accordance with Table 5. Table 5 requires - Large trees 12-18m high, up to 16m crown spread at maturity = need 150m³ of soil at a depth of 1,200mm and area of 10m x 10m or equivalent. - Medium trees 8-12m high, up to 8m crown spread at maturity = need 35m³ of soil at a depth of 1,000mm and area of 6m x 6m or equivalent. - Small trees 6-8m high, up to 4m crown spread at maturity = need 9m³ of soil at a depth of 800mm and area of 3.5m x 3.5m or equivalent. - Shrubs need soil depth of 500-600mm - Ground cover needs soil depth of 300-450mm - Turf needs soil depth of 200mm	The proposal incorporates significant opportunities for planting over the basement and in the breezeway, contributing to the quality and amenity of the communal spaces and public domain. Planting zones have been designed to achieve 600 – 800mm soil depth where planting is proposed above structures.	Yes
4P - 2 Plant growth is optimised with appropriate selection and maintenance	Plants are suited to site conditions. Considerations include: - drought and wind tolerance - seasonal changes in solar access - modified substrate depths for a diverse range of plants - plant longevity A landscape maintenance plan is prepared. Irrigation and drainage systems respond to: - changing site conditions - soil profile and the planting regime - whether rainwater, stormwater or recycled grey water is used	The submitted landscape plan includes details of establishment, maintenance and irrigation of plantings.	Yes
4P - 3 Planting on structures contributes to the quality and amenity of communal and public open spaces	Building design incorporates opportunities for planting on structures. Design solutions may include: - green walls with specialised lighting for indoor green walls - wall design that incorporates planting - green roofs, particularly where roofs are visible from the public domain - planter boxes Note: structures designed to accommodate green walls should be integrated into the building facade and consider the ability of the facade to change over time.	Proposal includes balcony plantings and planting areas visible from the public domain.	Yes
4Q Universal design
4Q - 1 Universal design features are included in apartment design to promote flexible housing for all community members	Developments achieve a benchmark of 20% of the total apartments incorporating the Liveable Housing Guideline's silver level universal design features	The Applicant states that 25% of dwellings in the development have been designed to achieve the Liveable Housing Guideline’s Silver Level design features which exceeds the ADG minimum recommendation.	Yes
4Q - 2 A variety of apartments with adaptable designs are provided	Adaptable housing should be provided in accordance with the relevant council policy Design solutions for adaptable apartments include: - convenient access to communal and public areas - high level of solar access - minimal structural change and residential amenity loss when adapted - larger car parking spaces for accessibility - parking titled separately from apartments or shared car parking arrangements	The Applicant states that 25% of dwellings in the development have been designed to achieve the Liveable Housing Guideline’s Silver Level design features which exceeds the ADG minimum recommendation.	Yes
4Q - 3 Apartment layouts are flexible and accommodate a range of lifestyle needs	Apartment design incorporates flexible design solutions which may include: - rooms with multiple functions - dual master bedroom apartments with separate bathrooms - larger apartments with various living space options - open plan ‘loft’ style apartments with only a fixed kitchen, laundry and bathroom	Apartments are large and provide flexible layouts.	Yes
4R Adaptive reuse
4R - 1 New additions to existing buildings are contemporary and complementary and enhance an area's identity and sense of place	Design solutions may include: - new elements to align with the existing building - additions that complement the existing character, siting, scale, proportion, pattern, form and detailing - use of contemporary and complementary materials, finishes, textures and colours Additions to heritage items should be clearly identifiable from the original building. New additions allow for the interpretation and future evolution of the building.	N/A	N/A
4R - 2 Adapted buildings provide residential amenity while not precluding future adaptive reuse	Design features should be incorporated sensitively into adapted buildings to make up for any physical limitations, to ensure residential amenity is achieved. Design solutions may include: - generously sized voids in deeper buildings - alternative apartment types when orientation is poor - using additions to expand the existing building envelope Some proposals that adapt existing buildings may not be able to achieve all of the design criteria in this Apartment Design Guide. Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, alternatives could be considered in the following areas: - where there are existing higher ceilings, depths of habitable rooms could increase subject to demonstrating access to natural ventilation, cross ventilation (when applicable) and solar and daylight access (see also sections 4A Solar and daylight access and 4B Natural ventilation) - alternatives to providing deep soil where less than the minimum requirement is currently available on the site - building and visual separation – subject to demonstrating alternative design approaches to achieving privacy - common circulation - car parking - alternative approaches to private open space and balconies	N/A	N/A
4U Energy efficiency
4U - 1 Development incorporates passive environmental design	Adequate natural light is provided to habitable rooms (see 4A Solar and daylight access). Well located, screened outdoor areas should be provided for clothes drying	The proposal provides adequate solar access and a balcony/terrace is provided for each apartment for open air clothes drying.	Yes
4U - 2 Development incorporates passive solar design to optimise heat storage in winter and reduce heat transfer in summer	A number of the following design solutions are used: - the use of smart glass or other technologies on north and west elevations - thermal mass in the floors and walls of north facing rooms is maximised - polished concrete floors, tiles or timber rather than carpet - insulated roofs, walls and floors and seals on window and door openings - overhangs and shading devices such as awnings, blinds and screens Provision of consolidated heating and cooling infrastructure should be located in a centralised location (e.g. the basement)	The building incorporates appropriate design solutions for passive heating and cooling.	Yes
4U - 3 Adequate natural ventilation minimises the need for mechanical ventilation	A number of the following design solutions are used: - rooms with similar usage are grouped together - natural cross ventilation for apartments is optimised - natural ventilation is provided to all habitable rooms and as many non-habitable rooms, common areas and circulation spaces as possible	All apartments have good natural cross ventilation.	Yes
4V Water management and conservation
4V - 1 Potable water use is minimised	Water efficient fittings, appliances and wastewater reuse should be incorporated. Apartments should be individually metered. Rainwater should be collected, stored and reused on site. Drought tolerant, low water use plants should be used within landscaped areas	The proposed development meets the BASIX requirements for water efficiency. The building is provided with a 10,000 litre rainwater storage tank, and water collected will be used for irrigation of landscaped communal areas.	Yes
4W Waste management
4W - 1 Waste storage facilities are designed to minimise impacts on the streetscape, building entry and amenity of residents	Adequately sized storage areas for rubbish bins should be located discreetly away from the front of the development or in the basement car park. Waste and recycling storage areas should be well ventilated. Circulation design allows bins to be easily manoeuvred between storage and collection points. Temporary storage should be provided for large bulk items such as mattresses. A waste management plan should be prepared	The basement car park includes waste storage rooms. The proposal also includes a waste collection room in the basement and a room for storage of bulky items. There appears to be adequate circulation space and level accessibility.	Yes
4W - 2 Domestic waste is minimised by providing safe and convenient source separation and recycling	All dwellings should have a waste and recycling cupboard or temporary storage area of sufficient size to hold two days worth of waste and recycling. Communal waste and recycling rooms are in convenient and accessible locations related to each vertical core. For mixed use developments, residential waste and recycling storage areas and access should be separate and secure from other uses. Alternative waste disposal methods such as composting should be provided	Apartments are capable of accommodating waste storage sufficient for 2 days. The basement storage areas are easily accessible from the lift.	Yes
4X Building maintenance
4X - 1 Building design detail provides protection from weathering	A number of the following design solutions are used: - roof overhangs to protect walls - hoods over windows and doors to protect openings - detailing horizontal edges with drip lines to avoid staining of surfaces - methods to eliminate or reduce planter box leaching - appropriate design and material selection for hostile locations	The design includes roof overhangs and for weather protection. Planter boxes can be designed to prevent leaching.	Yes
4X - 2 Systems and access enable ease of maintenance	Window design enables cleaning from the inside of the building. Building maintenance systems should be incorporated and integrated into the design of the building form, roof and façade. Design solutions do not require external scaffolding for maintenance access. Manually operated systems such as blinds, sunshades and curtains are used in preference to mechanical systems. Centralised maintenance, services and storage should be provided for communal open space areas within the building.	Building design includes balcony areas for the majority of external windows and glass doors, which would allow for convenient cleaning. Central services and storage are provided in common areas of the building.	Yes
4X - 3 Material selection reduces ongoing maintenance costs	A number of the following design solutions are used: - sensors to control artificial lighting in common circulation and spaces - natural materials that weather well and improve with time such as face brickwork - easily cleaned surfaces that are graffiti resistant - robust and durable materials and finishes are used in locations which receive heavy wear and tear, such as common circulation areas and lift interiors	The building generally employs robust materials which avoid applied finishes where possible. Each floor of the building can be accessed by maintenance staff.	Yes

Clause 30(1) - Consent cannot be refused on the following grounds if the development satisfies the relevant design criteria:

(a) if the car parking for the building will be equal to, or greater than, the recommended minimum amount of car parking specified in Part 3J of the Apartment Design Guide,

(b) if the internal area for each apartment will be equal to, or greater than, the recommended minimum internal area for the relevant apartment type specified in Part 4D of the Apartment Design Guide,

(c) if the ceiling heights for the building will be equal to, or greater than, the recommended minimum ceiling heights specified in Part 4C of the Apartment Design Guide.

As noted in the above assessment, the proposed development would satisfy the relevant design criteria for car parking, internal area and ceiling heights and consent could not be refused on any of these grounds.

Clause 30(2) - Development consent must not be granted if, in the opinion of the consent authority, the development does not demonstrate that adequate regard has been given to:

(a) the design quality principles, and

(b) the objectives specified in the Apartment Design Guide for the relevant design criteria.

As noted in the above assessment table, it is considered that satisfactory regard has been given to the design quality principles and the objectives specified in the Apartment Design Guide.

In accordance with Clause 143A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, a certifying authority must not issue a Construction Certificate for the development unless the certifying authority has received the statement by the qualified designer verifying that the plans and specifications achieve or improve the design quality of the development for which development consent was granted, having regard to the design quality principles.

In accordance with Clause 154A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, a certifying authority must not issue an occupation certificate to authorise a person to commence occupation or use of the development unless the certifying authority has received the statement by the qualified designer verifying that the development achieves the design quality of the development as shown in the plans and specifications in respect of which the construction certificate was issued, having regard to the design quality principles.

Conditions have been recommended requiring the design verification statements noted above.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021

Chapter 2 Coastal Management

Clause 2.5 - This SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.

The site is located within a coastal environment area.

Having regard to clauses 2.10 of the SEPP the proposed development is not considered likely to result in any of the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

Clause 2.12 - The proposal is not likely to cause increased risk of coastal hazards on the land or other land.

Chapter 4 Remediation of Land

Clause 4.6 - 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 (number 1294715M) 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 (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021

Clause 2.48 - Development in proximity to electricity infrastructure - referral to Essential Energy has been completed having regard 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,

Essential Energy have no specific concerns regarding the development, but have provided some general advice. The advice received from Essential Energy has been forwarded the Applicant for consideration.

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 R4 High Density Residential.

· Clause 2.3(1) and the R4 zone landuse table - Residential Flat Buildings is a permissible landuse with consent.

The objectives of the R4 zone are as follows:

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

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

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

o To provide for tourist and visitor accommodation in key tourist precincts of urban areas of the Council area, while also encouraging increased population levels.

o To encourage development that has regard to the desired future character of streets and supports active and safe uses at pedestrian level.

· Clause 2.3(2) - The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives as the development will contribute to the variety of housing types and densities to meet the housing needs of the community.

· Clause 4.1 - The site has a minimum standard 1000m2 lot size for subdivision. The proposal however proposes only a strata subdivision which is not subject to the minimum 1000m² lot size for subdivision.

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

The building height limit for the site is identified on the Height of Buildings Map as being 17.5m. The proposed development is 17.9m, which exceeds the height by 0.40m. This represents a variation of 3%. Refer to the massing diagram plan, which demonstrate the areas of the building that exceed the height limit. It is noted that the variation only occurs to the small section of the roof area central to the site.

Massing Diagram Screenshots from Plan Number D006 - Massing Diagrams

In considering the height variation, compliance with the following objectives of Clause 4.3 of the LEP must be considered:

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

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

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

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

In this case, the variation is compliant with the Clause 4.3 objectives for the following reasons:

1. The proposed exceedance relates to the lift overrun, a screened mechanical plant zone, and the roof to the north-east façade of the proposed development.

2. The lift overrun is proposed at a height of 17.65 metres above the existing ground level (at the highest point). An exceedance of the 17.5 metre building height control by 0.15 metres (at the highest point). This zone has been designed to be located as close to the centre of the built form as possible to ensure its impact on the streetscape and adjacent development is minimal.

3. The mechanical services portion is proposed at a height of 17.9 metres above the existing ground level (at the highest point). An exceedance of the 17.5 metre building height control by 0.40 metres (at the highest point). This zone has been designed to be located as close to the centre of the built form as possible to ensure its impact on the streetscape and adjacent development is minimal.

4. The small portion of front roof is proposed at 17.75 metres above the existing ground level (at the highest point). An exceedance of the 17.5 metre building height control by 0.25 metres (at the highest point).

5. The variation is minor (ie 3%) and the majority of the built form of the dwelling is well below the height limit.

6. The proposed height variation does not create any adverse visual impact, view loss, impact on privacy or loss of solar access to adjoining developments.

7. The highest portion of the height exceedance represents less than 10% of the overall building height.

· Clause 4.6 – This clause establishes a degree of flexibility for certain development standards in certain circumstances, which have demonstrated that a better planning outcome will occur from that flexibility. In this regard, the proposal seeks a variation to the building height standard as identified under Clause 4.3 of this report. Assistance on the approach to a variation is taken from NSW Land and Environment Court and NSW Court of Appeal decisions in:

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

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

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

The assessment will now step through and address the requirements of Clause 4.6(3) and (4).

Clause 4.6(3) states the following:

4.6(3) Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered a written request from the applicant that seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard by demonstrating:

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

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

Comments: In considering the above, the Applicant has submitted a request in writing (Attachment 3) to justify the contravention of the building height standard for the following reasons (as summarised):

1. The standard is unnecessary in the circumstances as there will be minimal impact on the streetscape or any adjoining properties. The existing single level dwelling is somewhat underdevelopment for both the existing and future character of the locality.

2. The variation only applies to the small pointed section of the overall height, which is does not have adverse impacts to the overall bulk and scale from the street.

3. The majority of the built form is below the height limit.

4. The development still provides adequate natural light and ventilation between dwellings and open space areas. In particular, no adverse overshadowing will be created by the proposed variation.

5. The variation does not create any privacy issues.

6. The proposal meets the objectives of the Local Environmental Plan.

Clause 4.6(4) states the following:

4.6(4) Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless:

(a) the consent authority is satisfied that:

i. the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by sub clause (3), and

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

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

The above components of Clause 4.6(4) are repeated below with associated comments on compliance.

4.6(4)(a)(i) the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by sub clause (3)

Comments: It is noted that the applicant has submitted a written request to vary the height limit. This assessment report will now consider whether the request satisfies and adequately addresses the matters required by sub clause 3.

In addressing Clause 3(a), Wehbe established ‘five methods’ to test whether compliance with the standard was unreasonable or unnecessary. Having regard to the ‘five methods’, any of which could support consideration of the variation, the following comment is provided:

1. The objectives of the height standard are achieved notwithstanding the non-compliance with the numerical 17.5m height standard - refer to comments on Clause 4.3 above in this report. Therefore, compliance with the standard would be unnecessary in this case.

In addressing Clause 3(b) and that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard, the following comments are provided:

1. The proposed development will meet the objectives of maximum building height - refer to comments on Clause 4.3 above in this report.

2. The building will not have any identifiable adverse impacts to adjoining properties.

3. The proposed variation will not result in a development which is out of character with that envisioned for the immediate locality.

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

4.6(4)(a)(ii) the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out, and

Comments: Compliance with the zone and height control objectives are addressed earlier in this report. In summary, the development was considered to comply with the relevant zone and height objectives and therefore have no implications on public interest.

4.6(4)(b) the concurrence of the Secretary has been obtained.

Comments: As per the Planning Circular PS20-002, Council via the Development Assessment Panel can assume the Director’s Concurrence for variations to height variation. In addition, the variations are less than 10% and able to be determined. The review and sign off by the Group Manager provides transparency to the decision. Furthermore, the decision must also be reported to Council for their information, a public register of variations maintained and quarterly reporting to the Department.

Having regard to the above requirements it is recommended that the height variation using clause 4.6 be supported.

· Clause 4.4 - The floor space ratio of the proposal is 1.8:1 which complies with the maximum 1.8:1 floor space ratio applying to the site. (See Drawing No. DA010 attached to this report).

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

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

No draft instruments apply 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.	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).	The depth of the cut varies around the perimeter of the basement due to the existing topographic condition. Due to the depth of excavation structural consideration will be required to ensure the support of excavated walls. The proposal has been designed to minimise instances of 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.	Yes
5	a) A certified practicing structural engineer must certify any retaining wall greater than 1.0m.	No retaining wall greater than 1m outside of the building footprint proposed, however precautionary 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.	NA - no fence proposed along the street frontage.	NA

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provisions - B2: Environmental Management*
6	a) Significant land reforming proposals where >10% gross site area or >1.0ha is to have surface levels changed by more than 5m or where earthworks exceed an average of 10,000m3 per ha shall: − identify the impact of the proposed land reforming on the environment, landscape, - visual character and amenity, natural watercourses, riparian vegetation, topographical features of the environment and public infrastructure; − demonstrate compliance with the provisions of Council’s AUS-SPEC design specification; − assess the impacts and benefits of the proposal to all impacted persons and the general public; - provide measures to compensate for and minimise any net adverse impacts.	NA	NA
	b) The use of high earthworks batters should be avoided.	NA	NA
	c) Preliminary plans indicating the final landform are required to be submitted with any master plan or subdivision application.	NA	NA
	d) The subdivision should be designed to fit the topography rather than altering the topography to fit the subdivision.	NA	NA
Environmental Management Areas and Buffers
7	a) For coastal floodplain endangered ecological communities a minimum, fully vegetated buffer of 35m must be provided.	NA	NA
	b) For Freshwater Wetland on Coastal Floodplain endangered ecological community a fully vegetated buffer of 100m is to be provided.	NA	NA
	c) For all other endangered ecological communities, a fully vegetated buffer of 50m must be provided.	NA	NA
	d) Stormwater management facilities may be considered within buffer areas only where the applicant can demonstrate the proposal is justified on the basis of practical engineering related site constraints and where it is adequately demonstrated that the applicable objectives are achieved.	NA	NA
	e) Fully vegetated buffers cannot contain road infrastructure or an asset protection zone.	NA	NA
	f) Where different buffers (including riparian buffers) apply to an area, the greater of the buffer widths applies.	NA	NA
8	a) Any habitat/vegetation which will be lost as a consequence of development is to be offset through the dedication of suitable land utilising expert ecological knowledge to determine the impact and offset based on the principle of ‘improve and maintain’.	NA	NA
	b) Improvement and maintenance of existing habitat and corridors and the consolidation of fragmented bushland are to be considered as the first preference for any development offset.	NA	NA
	c) A Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) is to be prepared for any environmental land that is to be retained or used to offset development impacts.	NA	NA
	d) VMPs are required to address Council’s VMP “Heads of Consideration”	NA	NA
9	a) A minimum, fully vegetated buffer from the top of bank to both sides of a watercourse is to be provided in accordance with the following: − 10m for 1st order streams that flow intermittently. − 30m for 1st order streams that flow permanently. − 40m for 2nd order streams. − 50m for 3rd order streams. − 65m for 4th order streams.	NA	NA
	b) Stormwater management facilities may be considered within buffer areas only where the applicant can demonstrate the proposal is justified on the basis of practical engineering related site constraints and where it is adequately demonstrated that the applicable objectives are achieved.	NA	NA
	c) Fully vegetated buffers cannot contain road infrastructure or an asset protection zone.	NA	NA
Tree Management - Land to which State Environmental Planning Policy SEPP (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 Applies
10	a) Prescribed vegetation for the purposes of the SEPP (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 is any tree identified in Table 1 or is a mangrove or cycad and is: - 3 metres or higher in height, or - has a trunk diameter of 100mm measured at 1.0metre above ground level; or - a hollow bearing tree	No hollow bearing tree assessment was submitted with the assessment. Two trees greater than 3m in height to be removed are within 10m of the existing dwelling and appears removal can be managed by standard conditions, which will create no adverse issues.	No
10	b) The above criteria does not apply to a tree where the nearside trunk is 3 metres from the nearest external wall of an existing, permanent dwelling or manufactured home and is located within the same property. Such trees may be removed without a permit or development consent. This Provision does not apply to areas mapped as Core Koala Habitat under the LEP. A permit will be required in these instances.	Proposed trees are further than 3m from the external wall of the existing dwelling.	NA
11-13	Tree management provisions.	No significant tree removal proposed. Only a couple of small planted palms to be removed, which will create no adverse issues.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Part B- General Provisions- B4: Transport, Traffic Management, Access and Car Parking*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed			Complies
Road Hierarchy
22	a) In new areas (as distinct from established areas with a pre-existing road pattern) each class of route should reflect its role in the road hierarchy by its visual appearance and related physical design standards, including varying levels of vehicle and pedestrian access.	NA				NA
	b) 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.	NA				NA
	c) All new roads are designed in accordance with Council’s AUS-SPEC design specification documents.	NA				NA
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.	One vehicle driveway crossing is proposed to serve the development. It is located at the north-eastern corner of the site and has been designed to: • avoid driveways near intersections and bends • minimise streetscapes dominated by driveways and garage doors maximise on-street parking				Yes
	b) Existing direct accesses from a development to arterial and distributor roads are rationalised or removed where practical.	NA				NA
	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.	On crossover proposed. Existing crossover will be removed and Kerb replaced.				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 1 or 2-bedroom unit + 1 visitor’s space per 4 units. / 1.5 spaces per each 3 or 4-bedroom unit + 1 visitor’s space per 4 units.	2 Bedroom units 20 x 1 space = 20 spaces. 3 Bedroom Units 20 x 1.5 = 30 spaces. Visitor spaces 40/4 = 10 visitor spaces. Total parking required = 60 spaces (including 10 visitors). Note parking considered earlier under SEPP 65. Total provided spaces = 80		Yes, in total numbers. Note parking considered in more detail earlier under SEPP 65.
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.	Parking is located within the basement. All parking spaces will be screened from the street frontage.		Yes
	d) Parking design and layout is provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1 - Parking facilities - Off-street car parking.	Capable of complying, See detailed notes below.		Yes
34	a) All parking and manoeuvring spaces must be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Capable of complying.		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.	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
42	a) A social impact assessment shall be submitted in accordance with the Council’s Social Impact Assessment Policy.	The applicant provided a social impact comment in accordance with Council’s Policy. Overall, the development is considered to have the following positive social impacts: · Increase in housing; · Increase mix of accommodation in the area catering for various markets; · Employment opportunities during constructions of the facility; · Development compatible with the transitioning nature of the area (ie modern higher density accommodation). · Further invigoration of precinct. Potential negative issues have been considered throughout this report and either deemed acceptable or can be resolved through conditions.	Yes
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. The proposal addresses the principles of crime prevention through the following methods: • Windows and balconies of lower-level apartments provide casual surveillance to street frontages and communal open spaces • Clear sightlines are provided to the main building entry and entrapment locations are avoided • Ground level pathways and landscaping have been designed to maximise natural access control • External gates provide secure to the central breezeway and communal open spaces at ground level • Lighting	Yes

*DCP 2013: PART C - Development Specific Provisions - C2: Residential Flat Development, Tourist and Visitor Accommodation, and Mixed Use Development*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
Site Design and Analysis
57	a) A site analysis plan 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 - any existing trees and other significant vegetation, including major and significant trees on adjacent properties, particularly those within 9 m of the site - the location, height and use of buildings surrounding the site, and those across any road adjacent to the site, including their setback distances - heritage and archaeological features - the built form, scale and character of surrounding and nearby development, including fencing, boundaries and landscaping - pedestrian and vehicle access - views and solar access to surrounding residents - private open space and windows of habitable rooms of nearby properties which have an outlook to the site - difference in levels between the site and adjacent properties at their boundaries - street frontage features including poles, trees, kerb crossovers, bus stops and other services - heritage features and buildings of the surrounding locality and landscape - direction and distance to local facilities including local shops, schools, public transport and recreation and community facilities - characteristics of, and distance to any nearby public open space - any nearby bushland or environmentally sensitive land - any significant local noise, odour or pollution sources - any other notable features or characteristics of the site	Site analysis plan has been provided satisfying this clause. Refer DA002 Plan – Site Analysis & Context and DA004 Plan – Site.	Yes
Site Layout
58	a) All applications are to include a site plan, which annotates the manner in which site attributes and constraints have been considered, as follows: - appropriateness of built form and landscape in relation to the site context, topography and urban character - building arrangement and relationship to streets and open space - access ways within and beyond the site - location, function and opportunities for casual surveillance of open space - ongoing site management considerations (i.e. garbage, mail collection, stormwater etc) - location of existing and proposed stormwater and sewer pipes - private open space and security - parking arrangements and reduced dominance of driveways - heritage and conservation opportunities and constraints (where relevant) - energy efficiency in building design and siting - solar access to subject development and adjoining residences	Plans provided are considered to satisfy this clause. The plans provided demonstrate that the proposal has been designed and responds to site constraints to ensure a pleasant, manageable, and functional living environment and public amenity. The proposal responds appropriately to its topographic condition and considers the neighbouring context and legislative requirements.	Yes
Streetscape and Front Setback
59	a) In an established street, the primary setback should be within 20% of the average setback of the adjoining buildings in a R1 General Residential zone.	N/A - area is zoned R4 High-Density Residential	N/A
	b) A minimum setback of 3.0m is required from all street frontages in a R3 Medium Density Residential and R4 High-Density Residential zone.	3.31m front setback to front building line has been achieved. See DWG No. DA006 and DA103	Yes
	c) Where tourist accommodation is proposed a maximum setback of 9 metres is permitted to allow for a swimming pool within the front setback.	N/A - no tourist accommodation proposed.	N/A
60	a) Balconies and other building extrusions may encroach up to 600mm into the required front setback.	The proposal is wholly sited behind the 3m front setback.	Yes
	b) Buildings should generally be aligned to the street boundary.	The proposal is aligned to the street boundary.	Yes
	c) Primary openings on all developments are aligned to the street boundary or to the rear of the site.	Opening and communal circulation corridors are aligned to the street boundary.	Yes
Side and Rear Setbacks
61	a) The following setbacks to all sites, except where the side boundary is a secondary street frontage: - Buildings should be set back a minimum of 1.5m from side boundaries, for a maximum of 75% of the building depth. - Windows in side walls should be set back 3m from side boundaries. - Where the site is adjacent to an existing strata-titled building, buildings should be set back a minimum of 3m from side boundaries.	Proposed side setback are of 3m (minimum) to the ground floor terraces and 6m setback to the building line is proposed. The objectives of this clause are considered to be achieved.	Yes
	b) Side walls adjacent to existing strata-titled buildings should be articulated and modulated to respond to the existing buildings.	The side walls are considered well-articulated. The longest straight wall is 10.15m and setback almost 8m from the side boundary. Each unit has an angled design and deep balcony which provides sufficient articulation to create visual interest and respond to the existing amenity of the area.	Yes
	c) A minimum rear setback of 6.0m from the building and sub basements is required.	The rear building line achieves a 6m rear setback.	Yes
62	a) A party wall development may be required if site amalgamation is not possible and higher density development is envisaged by these controls.	N/A	N/A
63	a) Party wall development can occur only with the agreement and consent of the adjoining property owner. Exposed party walls should be finished in a quality comparable to front facade finishes	N/A	N/A
64	a) Corner sites should be consolidated with adjacent sites, so that the building turns the corner.	N/A	N/A
64	b) If this is not possible, a minimum setback of 6.0m should extend to the secondary street.	N/A	N/A
65	a) Where sites adjacent to open space are to be developed, the edge of the open space should be defined with a public road and buildings should address the open space.	N/A	N/A
Deep Soil Zone (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)
66	a) Deep soils zones are to meet the minimum requirements.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
66	b) Deep soil zones are to be contiguous across sites and within blocks.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
67	a) Deep soil zones should accommodate existing advanced trees, and allow for advanced tree planting.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
68	a) Deep soil zones should be integrated into the stormwater management measures for the development and the site.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
Energy Conservation and Solar Access (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)
69	a) Where practical, sunlight to the principal area of ground-level private open space of adjacent properties should not be reduced to less than 3 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on June 22. Where existing overshadowing by buildings and fences is greater than this, sunlight should not be reduced by more than 20%.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
69	b) Where practical, buildings should not reduce the sunlight available to the windows of living areas that face north in existing adjacent dwellings to less than the above specification.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
70	a) Apartments are to provide an internal clothes drying space to discourage the use of mechanical clothes drying.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
Landscaping (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)
71	a) Plans for the design and planting of open space areas should be submitted with the development application and include:	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
	b) Existing vegetation and proposed general planting and landscape treatment (including species).	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
	c) Design details of hard landscaping elements and major earth cuts, fills and any mounding.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
	d) Location and design of any communal recreational facilities, including methods of protecting the privacy of nearby dwellings, where applicable.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
	e) Street trees in accordance with Council's Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
72	a) Existing vegetation is to be retained and habitat and ecology enhanced where practical.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
73	a) Street trees are to be provided along the full frontage/s of the site, generally at a rate of 1 per 20m interval, in accordance with Council's Indigenous Street and Open Space Planting List.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
Private Open Space (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)
74	a) All dwellings at ground floor level are encouraged to have a total minimum area of 15m2 in one area with minimum dimension of 3m: - have a maximum grade of 5%; and - be directly accessible from a ground floor living area.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
74	b) Private open space may include clothes drying and garbage storage areas.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
75	a) Dwellings located on or above the first floor are to have balconies with a minimum clear, unobstructed area and width according to apartment type as follows: - Studio - 4m2 - 1 bedroom - 8m2, minimum 2m wide - bedroom - 10m2, minimum 2m wide - bedroom - 12m2, minimum 2.4m wide	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
76	a) Communal open space and private open spaces are separated by landscaping, fencing or some other means that indicates the change between public and private realm.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
Fences and Walls
77	a) Solid front fences built on or near boundaries should be: - setback 1.0m from the front boundary; - suitably landscaped to reduce visual impact, and. - provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites.	No front fence proposed 1m from front boundary. Courtyard walls and balustrades adjacent to the front boundary are setback 3.3m from the front boundary.	Yes
77	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: o 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 o be erected up to the front boundary for maximum lengths of 6.0m or 50% of the street frontage, whichever is less; and o have openings which make it not less than 25% transparent; o provide a 3m x 3m splay for corner sites, and o provide a 900mm x 900mm splay for vehicle driveway entrances.	No front fence proposed. The adjoining balustrades are at an appropriate height to provide security, privacy and comply with BCA requirements for balustrade heights. 3m setback provides adequate splay dimensions.	Yes
78	a) Fences constructed of chain wire, solid timber or masonry and solid steel are not permitted along the primary road frontage even if it is consistent with the existing streetscape.	Integrated courtyard walls and balustrades are utilised to define boundaries.	Yes
	b) For tennis courts or other similar areas, chain wire fences should be black or dark green plastic coated mesh.	N/A	N/A
	c) Solid fences enclosing these facilities should not be permitted over 1.8m.	Integrated courtyard walls and balustrades are utilised to define boundaries.	Yes
Acoustic Privacy
79	a) Buildings are designed so that: - busy noisy areas within the apartment face the street; and - quiet areas face the rear or side of the lot - bedrooms have line of sight separation of minimum 3m from parking areas, streets and shared driveways.	The proposal has been designed to ensure rooms are appropriately located in relation to the street and common open spaces to ensure appropriate acoustic privacy. All bedrooms are located greater than 3m from a vehicle entry. Quiet areas within the development generally face the side boundaries.	Yes
79	b) Openings of adjacent dwellings should be separated by a distance of at least 6m.	Openings to adjacent dwellings are separated by a distance of more than 6m.	Yes
80	a) Uses are to be coupled internally and between apartments i.e. noisy internal and noisy external spaces should be placed together.	Apartments have been designed to ensure noisy internal and noisy external spaces are placed together or appropriately partitioned.	Yes
Visual Privacy (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)
81	a) Direct views between living area windows of adjacent dwellings should be screened where: - ground and first floor windows are within a 9m radius from any part of the window of the adjacent dwelling; - other floor windows are within a 12m radius; - direct views from living rooms of dwellings into the principal area of private open space of other dwellings should be screened or obscured where they are within a 12m radius.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
	b) 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 open space; - Screening that has 25% openings (max), is permanently fixed and is made of durable materials.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
	c) A window in a dwelling(s) should have a privacy screen if: - It is a window in a habitable room, other than a bedroom, that has a floor level of more than 1m above ground level (existing), and - The wall in which the window is located has a setback of less than 3 metres from a side or rear boundary, and - The window has a sill height of less than 1.5m.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
	d) A balcony, deck, patio, pergola, terrace or veranda should have a privacy screen if it: - Has a setback of less than 3m from a side or rear boundary; and - Has a floor area more than 3m2; and - Has a floor level more than 1 metre above ground level (existing).	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
Accessibility
82	a) Developments should be designed in accordance with Australian Standard AS1428.	The proposal is designed in accordance with AS1428.1. A accessibility compliance report has been provided as part of this application.	Yes
83	a) Barrier free access to at least 20% of dwellings in the development is provided.	All dwellings are accessible via a lift from the basement car park and the main pedestrian entry. 25% of dwellings in the development are capable of achieving the Liveable Housing Guideline’s Silver Level design features which exceeds the ADG minimum recommendation.	Yes
Social Dimensions and Housing Affordability
84	a) Developments should be located close to areas of open space, recreation and entertainment facilities and employment areas.	The proposal is situated close to areas of open space, Hastings River, Port Macquarie CBD and Gordon street commercial area.	Yes
84	b) Where the Local Environmental Plan permits a floor space ratio greater than 1:1 a ratio of not less than 1:1 should be achieved.	Proposed FSR is 1.8:1. Which satisfies this clause and does not exceed the LEP mapping.	Yes
85	a) A variety of apartment types including studio, 1, 2, 3 and 3+ bedroom apartments are provided within the development.	There are a variety of 2 and 3 bedroom units.	Yes
	b) Studios and 1-bedroom apartments are not to exceed 20% of the total number of apartments within the development.	N/A	N/A
	c) A mix of 1 and 3 bedroom apartments are provided on the ground level to cater for improved accessibility for disabled, elderly people or families with children.	Ground floor units consist of 4 x 2 bedroom and 4 x 3 bedroom.	Yes
86	a) Developments should consider the principles of the Council’s Affordable Housing Strategy in any application for a residential flat building.	Noted by Applicant. The mix of 2 and 3-bedroom apartments proposed will contribute to the diversity of housing choices in the Westport Neighbourhood. The development will contributed to housing availability in the area.	Yes
Roof Form
87	a) Lift over-runs and service plants should be integrated within roof structures.	Lift overruns and services plants are minimal and unobtrusive in nature. These structures will not be visible from the public domain.	Yes
	b) Outdoor recreation areas on flat roofs should be landscaped and incorporate shade structures and wind screens to encourage use.	No rooftop terrace or communal space proposed.	N/A
	c) Outdoor roof areas should be oriented to the street.	No rooftop terrace or communal space proposed.	N/A
	d) Roof design should generate an interesting skyline and be visually interesting when viewed from adjoining developments.	The proposal has a roof design that responds appropriately to the DCP and LEP requirements. The roof design is integrated into the façade and articulated.	Yes
Facade Composition and Articulation
88	a) Facade composition should: - be designed with a balance of horizontal and vertical elements; - respond to environmental and energy needs, such as sun shading, light shelves and bay windows; - incorporate wind mitigation; - reflect the uses within the buildings. - include a combination of the following design elements: o defined base, middle and top levels; o a mixture of window types; o variation in floor height (particularly at lower levels); o balustrade detail that reflects the type and location of the balcony; o setting back the top levels of the building; o street level features that reinforce the human scale; and o balconies, awnings and recesses that create shadowing.	The façade design has been carefully articulated and designed to ensure an interesting and appropriate streetscape is provided. A range of materials are employed which respond to the proposal’s coastal context and are selected with durability in mind.	Yes
Entries and Corridors (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)
89	a) Entrances should be clearly identifiable from street level.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
	b) Entries should provide a clear line of transition between the public street, the shared private circulation spaces and the residential apartments.	N/A	N/A
	c) Entries should provide clear line of sight between one circulation space and the next.	N/A	N/A
	d) Entries should avoid ambiguous and publically accessible small spaces in entry areas.	N/A	N/A
	e) Entries should be sheltered and well lit.	N/A	N/A
	f) Entries and circulation spaces should be sized appropriately to encourage adequate area for the movement of furniture.	N/A	N/A
	g) Lobby widths should be a minimum of 1.8m wide and 3.0m high.	N/A	N/A
	h) Lobby lengths should be minimised and avoid tight corners.	N/A	N/A
	i) Longer lobbies should be articulated by: - changing the direction or width of a corridor; - using a series of foyer areas; - providing windows along or at the end of corridor.	N/A	N/A
Balconies (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)
90	a) A minimum of one balcony (including enclosed balcony or terrace) is to be provided per apartment.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
	b) The main balcony is to be directly accessible from the living area.	N/A	N/A
	c) The balconies should be designed to take advantage of favourable climatic conditions.	N/A	N/A
	d) Balconies and balustrades should be designed to balance views out of the building while affording adequate privacy to the residents of the apartment.	N/A	N/A
91	a) Balconies should include sunscreens, pergolas, shutters and operable walls.	N/A (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)	N/A
	b) Balconies should be recessed to provide shadowing to the facade of the building to create visual interest and articulation.		N/A
	c) Solid balustrades are discouraged but may be considered where it is demonstrated that outlook and privacy is achieved and that there is sufficient articulation or visual interest in the building facade to accommodate the solid element.		N/A
Laundries and Clothes Drying Facilities
92	a) Secure open air clothes drying facilities that: - are easily accessible; - are screened from the public domain and communal open spaces; and - have a high degree of solar access.	Capable of complying. All dwellings have generous balconies or courtyards with good solar access to facilitate open air clothes drying.	Yes
Mailboxes
93	a) Mailboxes should be integrated into building design and sighted to ensure accessibility and security.	Mailboxes will be integrated into the building design in the front entrance zone.	Yes
Safety and Security
94	a) Developments should establish a hierarchy of space and clearly define the transition from public through to private space.	The proposal has been designed to clearly define the transition from public through to private space.	Yes
	b) Entrances should: - be orientated towards the public street and encourage visibility between entrances, foyers and the street. - provide direct and well-lit access between car parks and dwellings, between car parks and lift lobbies, and to all unit entrances. - optimise security by grouping clusters to a maximum of eight, around a common lobby.	The main entrance is oriented towards Waugh Street with a direct line of site from the street to the central breezeway and circulation area. The lobby and circulation space has sufficient natural light and will be provided with additional electrical lighting. A maximum of 8 apartments are accessed from the common breezeway on each level.	Yes
	c) Surveillance is to be facilitated by: - views over public open spaces from living areas where possible. - casual views of common internal areas, such as lobbies and foyers, hallways, recreation areas, and car parks. - the provisions of windows and balconies. - separate entries to ground level apartments	Views over street frontages and communal open spaces from living room windows and balconies. The apartment entries, open stair and lift all address the central breezeway facilitating casual views and interaction.	Yes
	d) Concealment should be avoided by: - preventing blind or dark alcoves which might conceal intruders particularly near lifts and stairwells, at the entrance and within indoor car parks, along corridors and walkways. - providing appropriate levels of illumination for all common areas. - providing graded car park illumination, with the lighting of entrances higher than the minimum acceptable standard.	Blind and hidden areas have been avoided on all levels. Common areas and basement level will be well lit and gated.
	e) Access to all parts of the building (including, apartments, different floors, balconies, common areas) is to be controlled.	Ground floor and basement entries are proposed to have controlled locks.
Site Storage (only applicable to non-SEPP 65 buildings)
95	a) Accessible storage facilities provided as part of the basement or garage area should be secure and only accessible to the unit tenant.	N/A	N/A
95	b) One dedicated bike storage space should be provided per dwelling as part of the basement, garage area or dwelling area.	N/A	N/A
Utilities
96	a) Compatible public utility services are to be co-ordinated in common trenching in order to minimise excavations for underground services.	All services are integrated into the design with no adverse impact on residents or neighbours. Capable of complying.	Yes
	b) Above ground utility infrastructure such as substations, inspection cabinets are to be integrated into the design of the building or complementary to the building design in terms of colour, materials and design.	All services are integrated into the design with no adverse impact on residents or neighbours.	Yes
	c) The site and the individual dwellings are to be numbered for easy identification by visitors and emergency personnel.	Appropriate measures included in design.	Yes
	d) Common aerials and satellite dishes, with signal amplifiers are provided as appropriate.	Rooftop aerials not visible from street frontage.	Yes

DCP 2013: Part D - Locality Specific Provisions - D1.3 Westport Neighbourhood

DCP Objective

Development Provisions

Proposed

Complies

New Streets and Laneways

201

a) New laneways, park edge streets and through site pedestrian links are to be provided.

N/A

b) New laneways are to be a minimum 8 metre reserve width for two way traffic with a 1.5 metre wide planting zone along the residential interface.

N/A

c) New laneways are to be a minimum 6 metres reserve width for one way traffic and include a 1.5 metre wide planting zone along one side.

N/A

d) New park edge streets are to be a minimum 12 metres reserve width with a footpath along the northern side and parallel parking bays along the park edge.

N/A

e) New pedestrian through-site links are to be a minimum 2 metres wide.

N/A

f) Lighting, paving, street furniture and street tree planting are to be provided in accordance with Council specification.

N/A

Lot Size and Frontage

202

a) A minimum lot frontage of 24 metres at the property line is required for residential flat development.

The proposed development has a site frontage of 40.5m

Yes

b) On sites with multiple street frontages, a reduced frontage of 18 metres may be appropriate,

N/A

c) Where it is demonstrated that adequate on-site parking, setbacks, separation and deep soil can be achieved.

Proposed plans can achieve adequate on-site parking, setbacks, separation and deep soil zones.

yes

Building Height

203

General

a) Buildings do not exceed the maximum height of buildings shown in the local environmental plan maps.

Proposed building height exceeds the LEP height of building. See Clause 4.6 variation earlier in this report.

No, but minor variation considered acceptable.

b) Setbacks and building alignments are to be consistent.

Setbacks are considered consistent and satisfy this clause.

Yes

Streetscape and Front Setbacks

204

a) Setbacks and building alignments are to be consistent.

Front setback is consistent

Yes

b) Where no setback is shown, buildings are to be setback 3 metres from the street.

Front balconies are setback 3m from front boundary and the building line of habitable living areas are well articulated and varied across the street frontage.

Yes

Side and Rear Setback

205

a) Buildings are setback:

- 3 metres from side boundaries, and

- 6 metres from the rear boundary.

The proposal is setback 3m from the side boundaries and 6m from the rear boundary.

Yes

b) South of Gordon Street, where existing residential uses are located to the rear, the rear setback is 10 metres.

N/A - development situated north of Gordon Street.

N/A

c) Party wall development is not appropriate in the precinct.

N/A

Kooloonbung Creek

206

a) Where possible, buildings are to address Kooloonbung Creek pedestrian/cycle way with secondary building entries and individual entries to ground floor units.

N/A

b) Where topography and flood management limit the ability for units to engage with the pathway, upper level balconies and communal open space are to overlook and contribute to the surveillance of the creek corridor.

N/A

Building Separation

207

a) Side and rear walls are to be articulated to achieve privacy separation with balconies and windows of adjacent buildings. Separation distances are to be measured from the boundary as:

- Up to 4 storeys/12 metres - 6 metres for habitable rooms and balconies, 3 metres for non-habitable rooms

- Between 5 and 8 storeys/up to 25 metres - 9 metres for habitable rooms and balconies, 4.5 metres for non-habitable rooms.

Internal living areas and balconies generally achieve a 6m setback.

Note the fifth storey is aligned with the lower levels and has not been stepped to achieve the 9m requirement.

The non-compliances are proposed for the building separation distances to the side and rear boundaries. Refer ADG Compliance Report for detail on proposed separation distances.

· The proposal achieves the DCP building separation objectives because:

· The scale of the proposal is in keeping with the desired high-density character of the area

· Good solar access and natural ventilation is provided within the site.

· Reasonable levels of visual privacy and outlook are achieved.

· A combination of courtyard walls, screens and planting are proposed at ground level along the two side boundaries to maximise visual privacy within the site and to the adjacent residential developments

No, but considered acceptable

b) Where an existing strata-titled building adjacent to the proposed development site does not provide adequate separation, privacy screens or louvers are to augment the above separation distances.

Communal Open Space

208

a) Communal open space is to be at least 25 per cent of the site area.

31.5% of the site area is designed as ground level open landscape and circulation spaces which provide:

• landscape character

• opportunities for social interaction

• passive use and outlook for residents

Yes

b) Where it is demonstrated that 25 per cent is not achievable due to site size constraints, provide a minimum 5 square metres per dwelling unit as consolidated communal open space.

N/A

c) A minimum 2 hours sunlight is provided to the principle portion of communal open space between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter.

No principle communal area provided.

N/A

d) Requirements for communal open space may be reduced where a development contributes to the enhancement of public open space. In particular, properties along Gore Street may contribute to the linear park in lieu of communal open space.

N/A

e) Roof top communal open space is to be setback from building edges and located to minimise overlooking to adjacent properties.

None proposed

N/A

Deep Soil

209

a) Deep soil is to be provided at the following rates:

Site area	Minimum deep soil zone (% of site area)
Less than 650m2	7%
650 to 1 500m2	10%
Greater than 1 500m2	15%

The total proposed deep soil area of 16.5% exceeds the DCP minimum requirement of 15%.

Yes

b) The deep soil zone is to have a minimum dimension of 6 metres. On small sites, where it can be demonstrated that 6 metres is unachievable, a 3 metre minimum may be permitted.
Note: As deep soil is typically located along the rear boundary, sites likely to be constrained include sites under 30 metres deep, with lane way access and frontage, or where a new lane way is provided.

The widths of these zones (in some areas) are less than the minimum DCP dimension of 6m. However, the rear of the site achieves a minimum of 6m and the 3m along the side boundaries.

Yes

c) Deep soil zones are to be consolidated on a site and where possible, co-located with adjoining deep soil zones.

The deep soil zone along the street frontage is co-located with deep soil zones in the verge and adjoining developments.

Yes

d) Up to 10 per cent of a deep soil zone may be paved but only where paving is specifically designed to allow for tree root growth. For example, a paving profile of up to 250mm deep or decks with shallow pad footing.

A communal path is proposed through the deep soil zone. No adverse concerns are anticipated.

Yes

Fences and Retaining Walls

210

a) Fences within 1 metre of the boundary are to follow the street alignment with a maximum height of 1.2 metres.

No front fences are proposed to the Waugh Street boundary.

b) On sites where the ground floor level is above the ground level at the boundary or in flood affected areas, a secondary higher fence or balustrade may be appropriate setback 1 metre from the boundary and up to 2 metres high above the boundary level.

Ground level apartments are located above street level and balcony balustrades are designed to allow passive surveillance of the street.

c) Any fences or retaining walls over 1.2 metres above the boundary level should be 50 per cent transparent above the 1.2 metre datum.

d) Where the site slopes along the street, fencing should be incrementally stepped to reduce its height

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

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

The proposal does not have significant adverse lighting impacts.

There are no significant adverse privacy impacts.

The proposal has impacts to views sharing.

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.

A submission was received from 32 Waugh Street, with regards to view sharing impacts. This site contains a two-storey multi dwelling housing development and detached garage. Along the shared side boundary is the developments driveway, garages, front doors and on the first level all will Eastern facing balconies that enjoy views. The adjoining sites have the same development controls of landuse zoning, height of building and floor space ratio.

Step 1 - At ground level the dwelling enjoys a north east aspect across the development site. See site photo below for context.

The first level balconies most impacted of the adjoining development has a northern eastern aspect across the vacant area and rooflines to the landform interface and ocean. The view across the development site and impacted by the detached garage, existing single storey dwelling and distant developments. See photo below for context.

(Pic: Domain website, first level balcony, 3/32 Waugh St and the roofline of the single storey dwelling to be demolished on the right hand side of the image).

Step 2 - The orientation of the block and dwellings at 32 Waugh Street results in the views being enjoyed across the side boundary. The water views for all dwellings are from the upper level through bedroom windows and bedroom balcony for each dwelling, with primary living areas being on the ground floor. For context below are photos taken from ground level standing height of the north east elevation and view across the side boundary.

Above; Images of views from standing height at ground level.

Step 3 - Sitting and standing views of the ocean and land interface across the

development site at ground level are considered insignificant and exist primarily because the adjoining site is cleared and underdevelopment.

The standing and sitting views from the upper floor of Unit 2 and 3 towards the northeast land and ocean interface will be substantially lost due to the first and second levels of the proposed development. The view loss can be described as moderate-severe. Views from Unit 1 will be primarily maintained and impacts described as negligible.

Step 4 - The proposal is compliant and considerably within the applicable building height, floor space controls and other development controls such as setbacks. There are no variations that impact on the extent of view loss from this property.

The established character of the location is medium to high density development, which is consistent with the R4 High Density Residential land zoning objectives and established character. Noting the view sharing principles, the subject view would be given little weight as the proposed development is considered reasonable in design.

It is noted that the views impacted are from bedrooms and secondary balconies, the primary living areas of 32 Waugh Street dwellings are on the ground floor and orientated to the West. The North-East aspect of units 2 and 3 ground floor primary living areas are obscured by Unit 3 detached garage and boundary fence. It is also observed that a height of a single storey dwelling with minimum front setback to the street would also have a comparable impact to the proposed development.

Based on the above, view sharing has been compromised, however is considered acceptable.

Roads and site frontage

The site has road frontage to Waugh Street, being a sealed public road under the care and control of Council. Waugh Street at the frontage of the site has a one-way road formation of approximately 6.5m wide, within a road reserve width of approximately 30m wide.

Waugh Street is classified as a Local Street, and is a grade separate, one way, no through road at the frontage of the development site. Vehicles enter Waugh Street from the eastern intersection with Gore Street, loop around a cul-de-sac at the western extents near Park Street (a historical intersection but closed off some time ago), before returning to the Gore Street intersection at the east. Waugh Street is grade separated along the frontage, with a varying 1.5 to 2.5m batter down to the opposite side. The batter is not formalised (gravel shoulders), is sporadically vegetated in places and with some sections as turf. Along the frontage of this development site, Waugh Street has upright SA kerb and gutter, and a formation width of 6.5m, with gravel shoulders on the opposite side. Further east and west along Waugh Street, there are intermittent sections of footpath paving as has been placed by adjoining developments.

Traffic and transport

The application includes a Traffic Impact & Carparking Assessment completed by StreetWise Road Safety & Traffic Services Pty Ltd, dated 22 April 2022

(Attachment 4).

Conclusions and recommendations of this assessment include:

· The additional vehicle trips to be generated by the development will not have a significant impact on the efficiency or safety of the local road network.

· The local roads and nearby intersections have the capacity to cater for the additional trips to be generated by the development.

Using RMS Guide to Traffic Generating Developments TDT2013/04a, it is noted that the average trip generation per unit in a regional area is around 4.58 vehicle trips per unit per day. With 40 units in this development, this equates to approximately 183 additional daily vehicle movements within Waugh Street and the nearby local road network.

The additional traffic as outlined within the Traffic Impact & Carparking Assessment associated with this development is unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts in terms of transport and traffic within the locality of this site. The existing road network and intersections will satisfactorily cater for the increase in traffic generation as a result of the development.

Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed though an individual driveway with direct frontage to Waugh Street, being a council-owned public road. Due to the type and size of development, additional works are required to include:

· concrete footpath paving (minimum 1.2m wide) along the full frontage

Access and footpath paving shall comply with Council AUSPEC and Australian Standards, and conditions have been recommended to reflect these requirements. Refer to relevant conditions of consent.

Parking and manoeuvring

A total of 80 parking spaces have been provided on-site. Parking and driveway widths on site can comply with the 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 imposed to reflect these requirements.

Refer to relevant conditions of consent.

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site has an existing 20mm metered water service from the water main in the centre of Waugh Street.

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

Appropriate conditions are recommended in this regard.

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is connected to Sewer via two junctions to the existing sewer main, which traverses the development site. There is a second main that crosses the south eastern portion of the development site. Due to the scale of the proposed development and increased load on the sewer infrastructure, the proposed development shall discharge all sewage to a new or existing sewer manhole.

The proposed finished floor level of the basement is lower than the existing sewer main invert. As such, relocation of the sewer main around the building is required. Rerouting of the sewer network upstream of the development site into Sewer Pump Station Catchment 4 is not supported as the existing SPS4 is at capacity. Therefore, Council’s preference is to relocate the sewer main around the building and reconnect the main to the existing sewer main at the eastern property boundary which gravitates to SPS17 as currently is the case. The main is to be upgraded from 150mm to 225mm to cater for future loads within the catchment. Controlled fill in the northern portion of the development site will be required to ensure sufficient cover over the sewer main.

A sewer strategy and plans are required from a hydraulic consultant for the whole of the development on the site stage by stage. All work will need to comply with the requirements of Council’s adopted AUSPEC Design and Construction Guidelines and Policies.

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards the street frontage and is currently serviced via a kerb outlet connection to the existing kerb and gutter.

The legal point of discharge for the proposed development is a direct connection to Council’s kerb and gutter with the use of an approved adaptor. Stormwater from the proposed development is planned to be disposed of in this manner which is consistent with the above requirements.

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

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

· On site stormwater detention facilities

· Water quality controls

Appropriate conditions are recommended in this regard.

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.

Heritage

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

Other land resources

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

Water cycle

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

Soils

Air and microclimate

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

Flora and fauna

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

Waste

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

Energy

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

Noise and vibration

Bushfire

The site is not identified as being bushfire prone.

Safety, security and crime prevention

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. Adequate casual surveillance is available.

Social impacts in the locality

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

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative Impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

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

(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
Views - particularly from units at 26 and 32 Waugh Street adjoining the proposed development.	View impacts of been addressed earlier in this report. The proposed view impacts from primary living area is considered as moderate to severe, however the proposed development does not propose any significant variations to the height of building, floor space ratio provision and meets the objectives of the R4 landuse zoning. The view lines are over the side boundary and views that do not capture a significant land mark. The proposed design provides a balanced outcome regarding amenity to neighbours.
Solar Access - profoundly impact the already paucity of natural light of adjoining dwellings.	Shadow diagrams have been provided as part of the supporting documents. All though morning sunlight and afternoon solar access may be impacted. The plans have indicated compliance with the development provisions of not preventing 3 hours of natural sunlight to primary living areas of the adjoining developments. The proposal orientation satisfies the planning provisions.
The height of the Building - Clause 4.6 variation to Clause 4.3 (height of building) of Port Macquarie Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011. If approved, this will cause a precedent in the vicinity for future redevelopments.	The clause 4.6 variation to clause 4.3 height of building has been addressed earlier in this report. It was noted that the variation will not result in additional floor area above the development provision and the variation will not be significant from the public domain or provide identifiable adverse impacts to the locality.
The Road (Waugh St section) is a no though road. Accumulative Traffic - the size of the development (40units) as being excessive for the street. This would significantly increase traffic is what is otherwise a quiet street which is part of the appeal and value for residents.	A Traffic Impact Assessment was provided as part of the supporting documents. Council’s development engineers have reviewed to the documentations and agree that that the existing road has capacity for the additional traffic. A construction traffic management plan will be put into place prior to the commencement of construction.
The dominance of such a building on the high side of the street would be considerable therefore exceeding heights and setbacks is not in character to the street scape.	Waugh Street and the immediate locality has an established character of high density development, ranging from single storey townhouses to 5 storey residential flat buildings. The proposed design has satisfied the zoning objectives and development provisions. The modern design of the proposal is considered to address the future desired character of the area.
Further impact to on street car parking experienced from the type housing provided along Waugh street.	As addressed earlier in the report, the proposal provides 80 car parking spaces, which exceeds the minimum requirement for the proposed units by an additional 20 parking spaces. Based on the number of off street car parking proposed, refusal cannot be supported.
If consideration was given to dropping just one storey off this development, it would be in keeping with the immediately surrounding area aesthetically.	The building height is considered acceptable and detailed earlier in this report, particularly addressing the Port Macquarie Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011.

(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.

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 ⇩. Attachment 1 - Recommended Conditions

2 ⇩. Attachment 2 - Plans

3 ⇩. Attachment 3 - Clause 4.6 Justification

4 ⇩. Attachment 4 - Traffic Impact Assessment

AGENDA

Development Assessment Panel

05/04/2023

Item: 07

Subject: DA2019 - 934.1 Caravan Park at Lot 5 DP 524972 Parklands Close, Port Macquarie

Report Author: Development Assessment Planner, Chris Gardiner

Applicant: J W Crowe

Owner: J W Crowe

Estimated Cost: $225,000

Parcel no: 20183

Alignment with Delivery Program

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

RECOMMENDATION

That DA2019 - 934.1 for a Caravan Park at Lot 5, DP 524972, Parklands Close, Port Macquarie, be determined by granting deferred commencement consent subject to the recommended conditions and the following being satisfied within 2 years of the date of the consent:

1. The proponent shall submit to Council evidence that the extension of Wandella Drive and internal access road approved under development consent DA2019 - 227 have been completed to the satisfaction of the roads authority (for works in Wandella Drive) and the Principal Certifying Authority (for works within the site).

Executive Summary

This report considers a development application for a caravan 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 on three occasions, 136 submissions and an e-petition with over 31,500 signatures were received objecting to the proposal for various reasons. Issues raised in the submissions have been considered in the assessment of the application and are discussed in detail within this report. Where relevant, conditions have been recommended to address the impacts attributed to these issues.

The application has been the subject of a lengthy assessment process in order for several important site suitability matters to be addressed/resolved. The proposal has been amended through the assessment process including reduction in the number of sites from 13 to 9, removal of an access road connection to Parklands Close, improved tree retention and landscaping.

The proposed development is consistent with the provisions and objectives of the relevant planning controls and it is considered that is will have an acceptable impact on the surrounding natural and built environment.

This report recommends that the development application be granted a deferred commencement consent as the proposal relies upon completion of an access road approved under separate development consent DA2019 - 277. The recommended conditions are included in Attachment 1.

The reason for the application being referred to Council’s Development Assessment Panel (DAP) is because three (3) or more objections to the proposal have been. A copy of the DAP Charter outlining the delegations and functions of the DAP is available on Council’s website.

1. BACKGROUND

Existing Sites Features and Surrounding Development

The site has an area of 1.683 hectares.

The site is zoned part R1 General Residential, RE2 Private Recreation, and C2 Environmental Conservation in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Local Environmental Plan 2011, as shown in the following zoning plan:

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

The site contains a number of existing buildings associated with the former Fantasy Glades theme park. Consent has been granted under DA2019 - 277 to convert the former Cinderella’s Castle at the southern end of the site to a café. The majority of other existing buildings on the site are proposed to be retained and restored as relics of the former use, but are not intended to be occupied.

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT

Key aspects of the proposal include the following:

· A caravan park with 1 short-term site and 8 long-term sites;

· Conversion of an existing building to a community building containing laundry and storage facilities;

· Associated access roads, car parking and landscaping

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

Application Chronology

· 18 December 2019 - Application lodged.

· 23 January 2020 to 5 February 2020 - Application advertised and notified to nearby property owners.

· 12 February 2020 - Additional information requested from Applicant.

· 7 April 2020 - Additional information requested by NSW Rural Fire Service.

· 3 September 2020 - Amended plans and additional information submitted by Applicant.

· 13 October 2020 - Further additional information requested from Applicant.

· 30 November 2020 - Further additional information requested by NSW Rural Fire Service.

· 9 April 2021 - Further additional information and amended plans submitted by Applicant.

· 16 April 2021 to 29 April 2021 - Amended proposal re-notified.

· 3 June 2021 - Further additional information requested from Applicant.

· 8 June 2021 - Comments on proposal received from Biodiversity Conservation Division of NSW Department of Planning and Environment.

· 20 April 2022 - Further additional information and amended plans submitted by Applicant.

· 21 July 2022 - Amended Biodiversity Development Assessment Report submitted by Applicant.

· 29 July 2022 to 11 August 2022 - Amended proposal re-notified.

· 27 September 2022 - Bush Fire Safety Authority issued by NSW Rural Fire Service.

· 31 October 2022 - Further additional information requested from Applicant.

· 10 November 2022 - Comments on amended proposal received from Biodiversity Conservation Division of NSW Department of Planning and Environment.

· 12 December 2022 - Additional information submitted by Applicant.

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 (Housing) 2021

Schedule 7A (Clause 2(1)(a)) - This Policy does not apply to a development application made, but not yet determined, on or before the commencement date. As the application was lodged before the commencement date of the SEPP, former State Environmental Planning Policy No. 21 - Caravan Parks continues to apply to the proposal. See assessment below.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 21 - Caravan Parks

8 Development consent required for caravan parks

(1) Development for the purposes of a caravan park may be carried out only with the development consent of the Council.

(2) Before granting development consent to the use of land for the purposes of a caravan park, a Council must determine:

(a) the number of sites (if any) within that land that the Council considers are suitable for long-term residence, within the meaning of the Local Government (Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds) Transitional Regulation 1993, and

(b) the number of sites (if any) within that land that the Council considers are not suitable for long-term residence, but are suitable for short-term residence, within the meaning of that Regulation.

(3) A Council must not grant development consent to the use of land for the purposes of a caravan park unless it imposes as a condition of that consent a condition specifying the maximum number of sites (if any) within that land that may be used for long-term residence.

(4) The holder of an approval under Part 1 of Chapter 7 of the Local Government Act 1993 to operate a caravan park or camping ground on land must not, without the development consent of the Council, allow a person to occupy a site within that land:

(a) for a continuous period of more than 3 months, except as provided by paragraph (b), or

(b) for a continuous period longer than the period (if any) for which the person is allowed to be accommodated within the land by an extension that has been granted under clause 19 (6) of the Local Government (Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds) Transitional Regulation 1993,

if such a use of that site was not lawful under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 when this Policy commenced.

(4A) Except as provided by subclause (4), nothing in this Policy or any other environmental planning instrument requires separate development consent to be obtained for the installation or placement of a moveable dwelling on land on which development for the purposes of a caravan park is being lawfully carried out.

(5) This clause does not apply to any land that is authorised to be used for the purposes of a manufactured home estate by a development consent granted pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No 36—Manufactured Home Estates or dedicated or reserved under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974.

The proposal seeks consent for eight (8) long-term sites and one (1) short-term site. A condition is recommended specifying the maximum number of long-term and short-term sites permitted.

10 Matters to be considered by Councils

A Council may grant a development consent required by this Policy only after it has considered the following:

(a) whether, because of its location or character, the land concerned is particularly suitable for use as a caravan park for tourists or for long-term residence,

(b) whether there is adequate provision for tourist accommodation in the locality of that land, and whether existing or potential tourist accommodation will be displaced by the use of sites for long-term residence,

(c) whether there is adequate low-cost housing, or land available for low-cost housing, in that locality,

(d) whether necessary community facilities and services are available within the caravan park to which the development application relates or in the locality (or both), and whether those facilities and services are reasonably accessible to the occupants of the caravan park,

(e) any relevant guidelines issued by the Director, and

(f) the provisions of the Local Government (Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds) Transitional Regulation 1993.

The application does not propose to convert any existing short-term sites and the proposal will not result in the displacement of any short-term residents or loss of tourist accommodation.

The proposal will provide long-term accommodation in an environmental setting with satisfactory access to public open space and facilities. The area has a significant stock of tourist accommodation and it is not expected that the long-term sites within the proposed caravan park would displace existing tourist accommodation.

The below table considers the applicable provisions of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021:

CLAUSE	REQUIREMENT	COMMENT/COMPLIANCE
Part 3, Division 1 Operation of caravan parks and camping grounds
71 Factors for consideration before approval is granted	(1) Council must be satisfied that the estate will be designed in accordance with Division 3; and (2) Council must have regard to the Floodplain Development Manual.	(1) Yes- refer to comments on Division 3 (2) Site is flood prone. See comments under clause 5.21 of LEP.
72 Matters to be specified in approval	Any approval must specify the number, size and location of the dwelling and camping sites.	Section 68 approval to operate will need to specify these matters.
73 Conditions of approval	The consent must be conditioned to ensure the design, construction, maintenance and operation of the estate is in accordance with Division 3.	Section 68 approval to operate will need to specify these matters.
Part 3, Division 3 Caravan parks and camping grounds
83 Minimum size of caravan park or camping ground	(1) A caravan park must not have an area of less than— (a) 1 hectare, or (b) if a lesser area is permitted on the land by an environmental planning instrument—the lesser area. (2) A camping ground is not required to have a minimum area	The overall site has an area of 1.683 hectares. Even excluding the part of the site proposed to be used as a café, the caravan park would have an area exceeding 1 hectare.
84 Community amenities	(1) A minimum of 10% of the total land area of a caravan park or camping ground must be reserved for recreation or other communal activities. (2) The council may allow a lower percentage, not less than 6% of the total land area of the caravan park or camping ground, to be reserved for recreation or other communal activities. (3) Before allowing a lower percentage, the council must consider— (a) the type and range of amenities to be provided, and (b) other matters the council considers relevant.	More than 10% of the site area is available for recreation and communal activities.
85 Size of dwelling sites and camp sites	(1) A long-term site must have an area of at least 80 square metres. (2) A short-term site must have an area of at least 65 square metres. (3) A camp site must have an area of at least— (a) for a camp site for which a separate parking space is provided within 30 metres of the camp site—40 square metres, or (b) otherwise—50 square metres.	The proposal includes 8 long-term sites, with site areas ranging from 100.3m² to 144.3m², and 1 short-term site with an area of 101.2m².
86 Site identification	(1) A dwelling site must be numbered or identified with its site boundaries clearly outlined. (2) The site identification must be easily recognised.	Capable of complying. Would need to be in place prior to Section 68 approval to operate.
87 Dwelling sites to have road frontage	A dwelling site must have vehicular access to an access road.	All dwelling sites have vehicular access to an access road.
88 Setbacks of community buildings	(1) A community building must not be located within 10 metres of the boundary of a caravan park, camping ground, dwelling site or camp site. (2) The council may allow the following distances if satisfied the community building has been or will be properly screened, fenced, enclosed or otherwise treated— (a) 3 metres or more from the boundary of a caravan park or camping ground, and (b) 5 metres or more from the boundary of a dwelling site or camp site.	Proposed community building is setback approximately 5m from the property boundary, 6m from site 4, and 9m from site 5. The building has a small floor area and will predominantly be used for washing and drying clothes. The entry door is located on the eastern elevation of the building and is oriented away from sites 4 and 5. The submitted landscape plan identifies dense screen planting to the east and north of the building to screen it from neighbouring residential uses. A reduced setback is considered acceptable in these circumstances.
89 Setbacks of dwelling sites and camp sites from road frontages	(1) A dwelling site or camp site must not be located closer than— (a) 10 metres to a public road, or (b) 3 metres to another boundary of the caravan park or camping ground. (2) The council may allow a lesser distance if satisfied the dwelling site or camp site has been or will be properly screened, fenced, enclosed or otherwise treated.	Sites 5, 6, and 7 have corners located at 2.5m from northern boundary, with the majority of each of these sites achieving 3m separation. The submitted landscape plan includes dense screen plantings along the northern boundary adjacent to these sites. The proposed setback is considered acceptable.
90 Use of buffer zones	Nothing in this Part prevents land within a required setback from being used for— (a) community amenities, access roads, car parking spaces, footpaths or landscaping, or (b) a similar purpose allowed by the council.	Buffer zones proposed to be used for landscaping and access roads.
91 Separation distances	(1) A moveable dwelling must not be installed within the following distance of another moveable dwelling— (a) if located on a long-term site—3 metres, or (b) if located on a short-term site or camp site—2.5 metres. (2) This section does not prohibit the installation of semi-detached relocatable homes on adjoining dwelling sites if they are separated by construction complying with the fire safety and sound insulation provisions in the Building Code of Australia, Volume Two, section 3.7.1 and 3.8.6 for class 1 buildings.	The proposed sites are of adequate dimensions for future moveable dwellings to be installed with appropriate separation distances. Compliance would need to be demonstrated prior to the issue of a Section 68 approval to operate.
92 Entrance and exit roads	(1) A road forming an entrance to or exit from a caravan park or camping ground must be at least 7 metres wide. (2) For a divided road, the width of the sealed portion of the road on either side of the median strip must be at least 5 metres. (3) The council may specify in an approval the way in which an entrance or exit road must meet the sealed portion of other access roads. approval for the caravan park or camping ground.	The extension of Wandella Drive to the site access under DA2019 - 277 is considered to form the entrance road and has a width of at least 7m. The entrance road tapers to the access road at the divided section inside the site boundary.
93 Forecourt	A caravan park must have an area— (a) to accommodate incoming vehicles, and (b) measuring at least 4 metres by 20 metres.	Forecourt 16.5m long x 2.5m wide proposed. The Applicant has indicated that they are proposing to lodge a Section 82 objection to this standard with the application for an approval to operate the caravan park.
94 Width of roads	(1) The width of an access road must be— (a) for a two-way access road—at least 6 metres, and (b) for a one-way access road—at least 4 metres. (2) The direction of travel for a one-way access road must be indicated by means of conspicuous signs.	The two-way access road has a width of 5.5m through the vegetated area and a minimum width of 6m adjacent to the long-term sites. The Applicant has indicated that they are proposing to lodge a Section 82 objection to this standard with the application for an approval to operate the caravan park. There are no one-way roads proposed that require direction of travel to be marked.
95 Speed limits	The speed limit on an access road must— (a) not exceed 15 kilometres per hour, and (b) be indicated by means of conspicuous signs.	Capable of complying. Would need to be in place prior to Section 68 approval to operate.
96 Resident parking	(1) A caravan park or camping ground must contain at least 1 resident parking space for each dwelling site or camp site. (2) The parking space for a dwelling site or camp site may be on-site or off-site. (3) An off-site parking space must be marked to identify the dwelling site or camp site to which it relates. Example— An off-site space may marked by line marking, marker pegs or other similar markings. (4) An off-site parking space for a dwelling site or camp site must be in the location specified in the approval. (5) An off-site parking space must have minimum dimensions of— (a) for angle parking—5.4 metres by 2.5 metres, and (b) otherwise—6.1 metres by 2.5 metres.	The Statement of Environmental Effects indicates that parking will be provided on individual sites (likely under elevated homes). The submitted plans include earthworks and retaining to create a 6.1m deep parking area at the front of each of the sites.
97 Visitor parking	(1) A caravan park or camping ground must contain at least 1 visitor parking space— (a) for every 10 long-term sites in the caravan park or camping ground, and (b) for every 20 short-term sites in the caravan park or camping ground, and (c) for every 40 camp sites in the caravan park or camping ground, and (d) for a remaining part, if any, of a number of sites specified in paragraphs (a)–(c). Example— A caravan or camping ground containing 90 short-term sites must contain at least 5 visitor parking spaces. (2) At least 4 visitor parking spaces must be provided for a caravan park or camping ground. (3) Each parking space must have minimum dimensions of— (a) for angle parking—5.4 metres by 2.5 metres, or (b) otherwise—6.1 metres by 2.5 metres. (4) Visitor parking spaces must be clearly identified.	Four (4) visitor parking spaces proposed, which complies with the minimum requirement.
98 Visitor parking for people with disabilities	(1) A caravan or camping ground must contain— (a) at least 1 visitor parking space for people with a disability (a *disabled parking space), or (b) if the caravan or camping ground contains 100 sites or more—at least 1 additional disabled parking space for— (i) the first 100 sites, and (ii) every further 100 sites, and (iii) a remaining part, if any, of 100 sites. Example—* A caravan or camping ground containing 235 sites must contain at least 3 disabled parking spaces. (2) A disabled parking space must be— (a) provided in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.1:2004, Parking facilities, Part 1: Off-street parking, and (b) clearly identified as a disabled parking space. (3) A disabled parking space may be counted as a visitor parking space.	One visitor parking space for people with disabilities proposed.
99 Road surfaces	All access roads, including all passing and parking bays, must— (a) have an all-weather sealed or other surface finish specified in the approval, and (b) be adapted to the land to enable adequate drainage and remove excessive grades.	Condition recommended requiring access roads to have sealed surface.
100 Lighting	All access roads must be adequately lit between sunset and sunrise.	Lighting will be required for new access roads. Condition recommended confirming this requirement.
101 Water supply	(1) A caravan park or camping ground must be— (a) connected to a mains water supply, or (b) provided with an alternative water supply service as specified in the approval. (2) A dwelling site must be connected to the water supply service for the caravan park or camping ground. (3) Each water supply connection must— (a) be located within 30 metres of the 4 camp sites, and (b) include a standpipe and hose tap. (4) The water supply service must comply with— (a) the Plumbing and Drainage Act 2011 and the regulations made under that Act, and (b) the requirements of a relevant statutory body. (5) The water supplied for human consumption or domestic purposes must comply with the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 6 published in October 2011 by the National Health and Medical Research Council.	Water supply will be required for each dwelling site. Details to be provided with S68 application.
102 Sewerage	(1) A caravan park or camping ground must be— (a) connected to a main sewer, or (b) provided with an alternative sewage disposal system as specified in the approval. (2) A long-term site must be connected to the sewage disposal system for the caravan park or camping ground. (3) Short-term sites and camp sites in a caravan park or camping ground must be provided with at least 1 soil waste dump point— (a) for the disposal of closet waste from caravan holding tanks, and (b) located to permit adequate access by caravans and campervans. (4) Short-term sites must be provided with a disposal point— (a) for the disposal of sullage from a moveable dwelling installed on the site, and (b) as specified in the approval. (5) The sewage disposal system must comply with— (a) the Plumbing and Drainage Act 2011 and the regulations made under that Act, and (b) the requirements of a relevant statutory body. (6) In this section— *sullage* means domestic waste from baths, basins, showers, laundries and kitchens, including floor wastes.	All sites and the community building will be required to be connected to sewer.
103 Drainage	(1) A caravan park or camping ground must be provided with a stormwater drainage system. (2) All dwelling sites and camp sites must be adequately drained.	See comments later in this report under Stormwater.
104 Electricity Supply	(1) A dwelling site must be supplied with electricity from a reticulated electricity service. (2) For a long-term site, the electricity must be supplied by means of an electrical circuit connected to a separate electricity meter. (3) The electrical circuit must be installed in accordance with— (a) for a long-term site—the Electricity Code of Practice, and (b) for a short-term site—AS/NZS 3001:2008, Electrical installations—Transportable structures and vehicles including their site supplies. (4) If a dwelling site is provided with electricity otherwise than by a direct connection to the local electricity supply authority’s electricity main, the occupant of the dwelling site may only be charged reasonable charges for the supply of the electricity.	Condition recommended requiring satisfactory arrangement certification for provision of electricity supply to the development.
105 Common trenches	A common trench may be used for the installation of services in accordance with guidelines provided in AMCORD.	Noted.
106 Modification of calculations	In calculating the number of facilities under this Subdivision— (a) 2 camp sites are taken to be equivalent to 1 dwelling site, and (b) the following must not be included— (i) dwelling sites reserved for use by self-contained moveable dwellings, and (ii) dwelling sites provided with ensuite facilities.	Noted. See calculations below under clauses 107-109. The Applicant has noted in the Statement of Environmental Effects that all sites will have self-contained movable dwellings and these have been excluded from the calculations.
107 Number of showers and toilets to be provided.	Facilities to be provided in accordance with table.	All sites have been noted to be reserved for self-contained movable dwellings and no communal shower or toilet facilities are required. A condition is recommended requiring all sites to be restricted to self-contained moveable dwellings or provide ensuite facilities.
108 Facilities for people with disabilities	Minimum one facility required. Can be disregarded if all sites proposed to be designated for self-contained moveable dwellings.	Not required due to restriction for self-contained movable dwellings.
109 Other facilities	(1) All showers and handbasins required by this Subdivision must be supplied with hot and cold running water. (2) A mirror must be provided— (a) for each handbasin, or (b) if 2 or more handbasins are provided together—for each pair of handbasins. (3) The following must be provided in a facility containing toilets for the use of females— (a) at least 1 sanitary napkin disposal unit, or (b) for a facility containing at least 10 toilets for the use of females—at least 1 additional sanitary napkin disposal unit for— (i) every 10 toilets, and (ii) a remaining part, if any, of 10 toilets.	N/A
110 Construction of shower blocks and toilet blocks	(1) Except as otherwise provided in an approval, the shower and toilet facilities in a caravan park or camping ground must be contained in a shower or toilet block— (a) constructed of brick or concrete masonry block, and (b) with a non-slip floor of tile or other impervious material adequately drained to outlets, and (c) with smooth, hard, durable and water-resistant interior finishes, and (d) containing shower recesses with tile or other impervious finishes to a height of at least 1.8 metres, and (e) with tile or other impervious skirtings around water closet cubicle walls, and (f) with tile or other impervious finish around handbasins, and (g) with adequate lighting, both inside and outside, and adequate ventilation at all times, and (h) with all walls, ceilings and floors, fixtures, fittings and appliances maintained in a clean and sanitary condition. (2) A building containing both male and female facilities must be divided for the private use of each sex. (3) Toilets must be provided in individual cubicles having a minimum floor area of 1.1 square metres and a minimum width of 0.8 metre.	N/A
111 Proximity of dwelling sites to shower blocks and toilet blocks	(1) A long-term site must be located within 75 metres, measured in a straight line, of a shower or toilet block. (2) A short-term site or camp site must be located within 100 metres, measured in a straight line, from a shower or toilet block. (3) This section does not apply to a dwelling site— (a) reserved for use by self-contained moveable dwellings, or (b) provided with ensuite facilities.	N/A
113 Washing Machines	(1) A caravan park or camping ground must be provided with at least— (a) 1 washing machine for every 25 long-term sites, and (b) 1 additional washing machine for a remaining part, if any, of 25 long-term sites exceeding 12, and (c) 1 washing machine for every 30 short-term sites, and (d) 1 additional washing machine for a remaining part, if any, of 30 short-term sites exceeding 15. (2) At least 2 washing machines must be provided in a caravan park or camping ground.	Development requires a minimum of 2 washing machines. The submitted plans show 2 washing machines in the proposed community building.
114 Laundry Tubs	(1) A caravan park or camping ground must be provided with— (a) at least 1 laundry tub for every 50 long-term sites, and (b) at least 1 additional laundry tub for a remaining part, if any, of 50 long-term sites, and (c) at least 1 laundry tub for every 60 short-term sites, and (d) at least 1 additional laundry tub for a remaining part, if any, of 60 short-term sites. (2) At least 1 laundry tub must be provided in a caravan park or camping ground.	Development requires a minimum of one laundry tub. The submitted plans show one laundry tub in the proposed community building.
115 Clothes dryers	(1) A caravan park or camping ground must be provided with— (a) at least 1 mechanical clothes dryer for every 60, and remaining part of 60 greater than 30, long-term sites, and (b) at least 1 mechanical clothes dryer for every 80, and remaining part of 80 greater than 40, short-term sites. (2) At least 1 mechanical clothes dryer must be provided in a caravan park or camping ground.	Development requires a minimum of one mechanical clothes dryer. The submitted plans show two combined washing machine/dryers in the proposed community building.
116 Drying area	(1) A caravan park or camping ground must be provided with clothes line space at the rate of 2 metres of line for each dwelling site. (2) At least 50 metres of clothes line space must be provided in a caravan park or camping ground.	Minimum 50m of clothes drying area required. 50m of clothes line proposed.
117 Water supply	Washing machines and laundry tubs required to be provided in a caravan park or camping ground must be supplied with both hot and cold water.	Noted. This would need to be confirmed prior to the issue of a Section 68 approval to operate.
118 Ironing facilities	A caravan park or camping ground must be provided with at least 1 of each of the following for every 60, and remaining part of 60, short-term sites— (a) an ironing board, (b) an electric iron, (c) a power point available for connection to an electric iron.	Capable of being provided in the community building. This would need to be confirmed prior to the issue of a Section 68 approval to operate.
119 Construction of laundry blocks	Except as otherwise provided in an approval, the laundry facilities in a caravan park or camping ground must be housed in a laundry block— (a) constructed of brick or concrete masonry block, and (b) with a non-slip floor of tile or other impervious material adequately drained to outlets, and (c) with smooth, hard, durable and water-resistant interior finishes, and (d) with adequate lighting, both inside and outside, and adequate ventilation at all times, and (e) with walls, ceilings and floors, fixtures, fittings and appliances maintained in a clean and sanitary condition, and (f) maintained in a serviceable and safe condition	The community building containing the laundry facilities is brick veneer construction and the internal finishes are capable of complying with these requirements.
126 Garbage removal	Arrangements specified in an approval must be implemented and maintained— (a) for the removal of garbage, and (b) to keep garbage receptacles in a clean and sanitary condition.	The Statement of Environmental Effect indicates that the sites are proposed to have individual waste bins stored on each site and collected by a private waste contractor. This is considered acceptable given the long-term tenure of all the sites. The swept path plans indicate that a waste collection vehicle can turn around within the development and egress in a forward manner. A condition is recommended requiring confirmation of satisfactory arrangements for a private waste collection service prior to the issue of a Section 68 approval to operate the caravan park.
127 Fire hydrants	(1) No part of a dwelling site, camp site or community building within a caravan park or camping ground may be situated more than 90 metres from a fire hydrant. (2) Any fire hydrant located within a caravan park or camping ground must: (a) be a double-headed as pillar-type fire hydrant, and (b) be maintained to the standard specified in the approval for the caravan park or camping ground.	Compliant hydrant coverage will need to be provided prior to the issue of an approval to operate.
128 Fire hose reels	(1) Fire hose reels must be installed so that each dwelling site or camp site in the caravan park or camping ground can be reached by a fire hose.	Compliant fire hose reel coverage will need to be provided prior to the issue of an approval to operate.
129 Car washing bay	A caravan park must be provided with an area for washing vehicles.	Adequate area available. Details would need to be confirmed with the application for a Section 68 approval to operate the caravan park.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021

Chapter 4 - Koala Habitat Protection 2021

Clause 4.16 - A development application made in relation to land, but not finally determined before this Chapter applied to the land, must be determined as if this Chapter had not commenced in its application to the land. The application was made and not finally determined prior to the commencement of this policy, and the application is therefore required to be assessed under the relevant provisions of State Environmental Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2021. See assessment comments below.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2021

Clause 18 - A development application made, but not finally determined, before the commencement of this Policy in relation to land to which this Policy applies must be determined as if this Policy had not commenced. The application was made and not finally determined prior to the commencement of this policy, and the application is therefore required to be assessed under the relevant provisions of State Environmental Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2020. See assessment comments below.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2020

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

Clause 10 - The site is subject to a Koala Plan of Management (KPoM) approved under DA2019 - 277.1. The table below provides an assessment of the consistency of the proposed development with the ameliorative measures in Part 8.0 of the KPoM.

Provision	Comment	Complies
8.1 General Clearing Measures	Conditions are recommended in relation to the required koala permeable tree protection fencing and general construction management provisions.	Yes
8.2 Pre-clearing Survey and Clearing Supervision	A condition is recommended requiring pre-clearing surveys by an ecologist in accordance with this provision.	Yes
8.3 Habitat Retention	All primary koala food trees listed in the KPoM are proposed to be retained.	Yes
8.4 Habitat Replacement	All secondary koala food trees and other browse species listed in the DCP are required to be offset at a ratio of 1:1 with primary/preferred food tree species. The proposed development involves the removal of 11 DCP listed trees, and 11 offset plantings are proposed. A Vegetation Management Plan will be required to confirm details of the establishment and management of the offset plantings.	Yes
8.5 Domestic Animals	A condition is recommended prohibiting the keeping of, or entering the site with, domestic pets.	Yes
8.6 Food Waste Disposal	The KPoM requires that all food waste stored outside buildings to be in lockable bins with the lid firmly sealed. A condition is recommended requiring the private waste arrangements for the site to accommodate this bin type or for all food and garden waste to be stored within building/s between collections.	Yes
8.7 Road Signage and Speed Control	Conditions are recommended requiring appropriate koala warning and speed control signage.	Yes
8.8 Barbed Wire Removal	A condition is recommended requiring confirmation of removal of the barbed wire fencing prior to the issue of an approval to operate the caravan park. A condition is also recommended requiring any new fencing constructed within or around the site is to be designed to allow Koala movement and is not to provide a barrier or obstruction to fauna. Design options include providing a minimum 30cm gap at the bottom of the fence or Koala ladders over the fence.	Yes
8.9 Artificial Lighting	Any exterior lighting required for the caravan park is recommended to be strategically positioned so as to not direct light towards adjoining vegetation to the west. Such lighting is recommended to be sensor-based.	Yes
8.10 Disease	A condition is recommended requiring the contact details of the Koala Hospital to be displayed on site during construction and operation of the development to encourage the reporting of sick or injured koalas.	Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021

Chapter 2 - Coastal Management

Clause 2.5 - This SEPP prevails over the Port Macquarie-Hastings LEP 2011 in the event of any inconsistency.

Clause 2.7 - The proposal does not include any works in the mapped coastal wetland area, and does not trigger the designated development provisions.

Clause 2.8 - The subject site includes land in the proximity area to coastal wetland and littoral rainforest. The application has demonstrated that there would not be any significant adverse impacts on the biophysical, hydrological, or ecological integrity of the coastal wetland or littoral rainforest. The development provides for acceptable vegetated buffers and the quality and quantity of water flows will be managed with the proposed stormwater bio-retention basin. It is noted that the part of the site subject to the development proposal drains away from both the coastal wetland in the north-west corner of the site and the littoral rainforest on the eastern side of Pacific Drive.

Clauses 2.10 and 2.11 - The proposed development is not considered likely to result in any of the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The bulk, scale and size of the proposed development is sufficiently compatible with the surrounding coastal and built environment.

Clause 2.12 - The proposal is not likely to cause increased risk of coastal hazards on the land or other land.

Chapter 4 – Remediation of Land

Clause 4.6 - 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 (Industry and Employment) 2021

Chapter 3 - Advertising and Signage

The submitted proposal does not include any signage. It is expected that the operator of the proposed caravan park would want some form of business identification signage in the future. A condition is recommended requiring separate consent for any signage that is not Exempt Development.

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 RE2 Private Recreation, R1 General Residential, and C2 Environmental Conservation as shown in the map extract below:

The proposed caravan park is located predominantly in the RE2 zone, but relies on emergency access via R1 zoned land to Parklands Close. The proposal does not include any works in the C2 zone.

· Clause 2.3(1) - The development has been characterised as a caravan park, which is permissible with consent in the RE2 and R1 zones.

Caravan park is defined in the LEP as follows:

caravan park means an area of land, with access to communal amenities, used for the installation or placement of caravans, or caravans and other moveable dwellings, but does not include farm stay accommodation.

While the proposal has been indicated to be predominantly for manufactured homes, it has been characterised as a caravan park on the basis that the development includes both caravans and other moveable dwellings. The Land and Environment Court of NSW has accepted in Wakefield Planning Pty Limited v Yass Valley Council [2014] NSWLEC 1131 that it is sufficient for a single caravan site in a development containing other moveable dwellings to satisfy the characterisation of a caravan park.

The private access road to Parklands Close can be characterised as being for the purpose of the caravan park (although roads are also permissible in the zone).

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 RE2 zone are as follows:

o To enable land to be used for private open space or recreational purposes.

o To provide a range of recreational settings and activities and compatible land uses.

o To protect and enhance the natural environment for recreational purposes.

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

o The long-term sites would provide an alternative housing type to provide for the housing needs of the community.

o The development includes provisions that adequately protect the important components of the natural environment on the site.

o The removable nature of manufactured homes would allow for the land to be reverted to private recreational use in the future.

· Clause 4.3 - The Height of Buildings Map identifies a maximum building height of 8.5m for the site. The proposal is for a caravan park and seeks consents for the sites only, with any future manufactured homes to be installed in accordance with Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993. An existing single storey building having a height of 3.5m will be retained and converted to use as a community building. A condition is recommended restricting the maximum height of any future manufactured homes installed in the caravan park to 8.5m. This will ensure that the character remains compatible with other development in the locality.

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

· Clause 5.21 - 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 dwelling sites and roads in the caravan park are located above the relevant flood planning level;

o Some historic buildings from the former Fantasy Glades use are located at a lower level and close to the floodway. A condition is recommended preventing the use of the refurbished historic buildings for habitable purposes due to their location and existing floor levels.

· Clause 7.4 – Flood risk management – The proposal includes evacuation routes located above the PMF level.

(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.	The Statement of Environmental Effect indicates that the sites are proposed to have individual waste bins stored on each site and collected by a private waste contractor. This is considered acceptable given the long-term tenure of the majority of sites.	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 excavation of up to 3.25m to provide level parking areas on each site in the caravan park, and fill of up to 1m on the low side of the access road. The excavation and retaining walls within the caravan park sites are likely to ultimately be contained within the footprint of future manufactured homes. The application included concept plans indicating the intention for future manufactured homes to be constructed over the parking areas. A condition has been recommended requiring engineering certification of the of the retaining walls to ensure their structural suitability. Stormwater drainage is capable of being managed within the site and the earthworks would not direct any surface water onto adjoining property. There would be no adverse privacy impacts associated with the earthworks. While the proposal is a variation to the numerical control, it is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the provision and an adequate design response to the existing site topography.	No, but acceptable
5	a) A certified practicing structural engineer must certify any retaining wall greater than 1.0m.	A condition is recommended requiring engineering certification of the proposed retaining walls.	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 proposed.	N/A
Environmental Management Areas and Buffers
7	a) For coastal floodplain endangered ecological communities (EEC) a minimum, fully vegetated buffer of 35m must be provided.	Buffer of 25 - 30m including approximately 20m that is fully vegetated. The ecological assessment has demonstrated that the buffer will be sufficient to protect an identified EEC on the site from edge effects in accordance with the objectives of this provision.	No, but acceptable
	b) For Freshwater Wetland on Coastal Floodplain endangered ecological community a fully vegetated buffer of 100m is to be provided.	N/A	N/A
	c) For all other endangered ecological communities, a fully vegetated buffer of 50m must be provided.	N/A	N/A
	d) Stormwater management facilities may be considered within buffer areas only where the applicant can demonstrate the proposal is justified on the basis of practical engineering related site constraints and where it is adequately demonstrated that the applicable objectives are achieved.	The proposed bio-retention basin is located within the buffer to the EEC. The basin location is practical from an engineering perspective. The basin will improve the quality and quantity of stormwater entering the EEC and is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the buffer areas.	Yes
	e) Fully vegetated buffers cannot contain road infrastructure or an asset protection zone.	No road infrastructure is contained within the buffer area, but part of the buffer includes a bushfire asset protection zone. The maintenance of the APZ will allow for the retention of existing canopy trees and grass cover, which will protect the EEC from water quality impacts and edge effects.	No, but acceptable
	f) Where different buffers (including riparian buffers) apply to an area, the greater of the buffer widths applies.	Noted.
8	a) Any habitat/vegetation which will be lost as a consequence of development is to be offset through the dedication of suitable land utilising expert ecological knowledge to determine the impact and offset based on the principle of ‘improve and maintain’.	Offsets have been proposed in accordance with the relevant provisions of the DCP and KPoM. Residual impacts in this case will also require the settlement of biodiversity credits in accordance with the Biodiversity Offset Scheme.	Yes
	b) Improvement and maintenance of existing habitat and corridors and the consolidation of fragmented bushland are to be considered as the first preference for any development offset.	The proposal will retain the existing corridor along Wrights Creek and provides for the ongoing maintenance of significant vegetation through a Vegetation Management Plan.	Yes
	c) A Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) is to be prepared for any environmental land that is to be retained or used to offset development impacts. d) VMPs are required to address Council’s VMP “Heads of Consideration”	A condition has been recommended requiring a VMP in accordance with Council’s guidelines to be approved prior to any vegetation removal or the commencement of works.	Yes
9	a) A minimum, fully vegetated buffer from the top of bank to both sides of a watercourse is to be provided in accordance with the following: − 10m for 1st order streams that flow intermittently. − 30m for 1st order streams that flow permanently. − 40m for 2nd order streams. − 50m for 3rd order streams. − 65m for 4th order streams.	Council’s GIS identifies a 2^nd order stream running adjacent to the western boundary of the site. The required 40m buffer is generally provided within the existing C2 zone and would not be impacted by the proposed development footprint.	Yes
	b) Stormwater management facilities may be considered within buffer areas only where the applicant can demonstrate the proposal is justified on the basis of practical engineering related site constraints and where it is adequately demonstrated that the applicable objectives are achieved.	N/A	N/A
	c) Fully vegetated buffers cannot contain road infrastructure or an asset protection zone.	No asset protection zones or road infrastructure located in riparian buffer.	Yes
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.	A Koala Plan of Management (KPoM) applies to the site and the development will provide offset plantings in accordance with the KPoM. The DCP provision for offsets is not applicable in this instance.	N/A
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	HBT’s have been identified by survey and shown on the site plan.	Yes
	b) Any tree that scores less than 8 using the HBT assessment protocol may be considered for removal subject to compensatory measures specified below.	Two (2) HBT’s scoring less than 8 are proposed to be removed and offset with appropriate nest boxes.	Yes
	c) Any tree that scores 8-12 using the HBT assessment protocol may be considered for removal if management measures are ‘impractical to allow retention’	Six (6) HBT’s scoring between 8-12 are proposed to be removed for the development. Their location makes them impractical for retention due to proximity to caravan sites and infrastructure. These trees are proposed to be offset with appropriate nest boxes.	Yes
	d) Any tree that scores more than 12 using the HBT assessment protocol the assessment must be retained and afforded a development exclusion buffer or located within environmental lands.	All hollow bearing trees scoring greater than 12 are proposed to be retained.	Yes
	e) Where a development exclusion buffer is proposed it shall have a radius of 1.25 times the height of the tree measured from its base.	It is not possible to provide development exclusion buffers to the full extent required by this provision. The majority of hollow bearing trees scoring greater than 12 have their exclusion buffer compromised by existing residential development to the east of the site and existing buildings associated with the former Fantasy Glades theme park. The trees have been provided with Tree Protection Zones in accordance with AS 4970/2009 Protection of trees on development sites to ensure that their health is not adversely impacted by the proposed works. An Arboricultural Impact Assessment has been submitted and includes appropriate measures to protect these trees. In the absence of an effective exclusion buffer, a condition is recommended requiring that the trees be inspected annually by an appropriately qualified Arborist and appropriate measures implemented to manage the ongoing risk to residents and buildings.	No, but acceptable
14	a) A strategy for tree removal (timing and methodology) that minimises impacts on native wildlife shall accompany any development that proposes the removal of HBTs.	The submitted Biodiversity Development Assessment Report includes an appropriate methodology for removal of the hollow bearing trees.	Yes
	b) The removal of HBTs is to be offset by the retention of recruitment trees. Compensatory recruitment trees shall be provided at the rate of two for one for trees that scored 8-12, Development Control Plan 2013 page 25 and at the rate of one for one for trees that scored less than 8. A tree can be considered to be a compensatory recruitment tree under the following criteria: - Does not have any major structural defects or is suffering from disease that would lead to premature death; and - Is from the same vegetation community and same genus; and - Are to be located within environmental lands and managed in accordance with a VMP; and - Have a DBH of 50cm or greater and do not possess hollows. For Blackbutt Eucalyptus pilularis a DBH of 100cm or greater applies.	The submitted Biodiversity Development Assessment Report addresses recruitment trees.	Yes
	c) The removal of HBTs are to be offset by the installation of nesting boxes of similar number and size as those to be removed.	The ecological assessment recommends installation of a minimum of: · 4 glider nest boxes; · 4 microbat boxes nest boxes; and · 4 small bird nest boxes. Nest box details will need to be confirmed in the VMP.	Yes
	d) Nesting boxes are to be installed like for like (both type and number, and host tree to genus level) and must be located within proposed open space or environmental lands.	To be confirmed in VMP.	Yes
	e) Nesting Boxes are to be installed and maintained within environmental lands in accordance with a VMP.	To be confirmed in VMP.	Yes
	f) Nesting Boxes to be inspected and maintained by a qualified ecologist.	To be confirmed in VMP.	Yes
	g) Any HBT that will not afford protection via an exclusion buffer or within environmental lands will attract the same offsetting requirements as if it was to be removed.	Offsets account for HBT’s that have not been afforded exclusion buffer.	Yes

*DCP 2013: Part B - General Provision - B3: Hazards Management*
DCP Objective	Development Provisions	Proposed	Complies
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.	No asset protection zones proposed on environmental land.	Yes
18	b) Perimeter roads are to be provided to all urban areas adjoining environmental management areas and their buffers. Refer to Figure 2.	N/A	N/A
Flooding
19	a) Development must comply with Council’s Floodplain Management Plan and Flood Policies.	See comments under Clause 5.21 of the LEP.	Yes

*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 does not have direct access to an arterial or distributor road.		Yes
	b) Existing direct accesses from a development to arterial and distributor roads are rationalised or removed where practical.	N/A		N/A
	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.	Single access point to Wandella Drive proposed, with emergency egress to Parklands Close via an existing crossover. The access arrangements would not result in any loss of parking.		Yes
Parking Provision
24	a) Off-street Parking is provided in accordance with Table 3.	Table 3 specifies that caravan parks are to provide parking in accordance with the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021. See comments earlier in this report regarding compliance with the regulation.		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.	N/A		N/A
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.	N/A		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
27	a) On street parking will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that: − parking does not detract from the streetscape; and − that streetscape improvement works, such as landscaped bays and street trees are provided.	N/A		N/A
Parking Layout
28	a) Visitor and customer parking shall be located so that it is easily accessible from the street.	Two of the visitor parking spaces have been located outside the boom gate for convenient visitor access.		Yes
	b) Internal signage (including pavement markings) should assist customers and visitors to find parking and circulate efficiently and safely through a car park.	Internal access roads will require signage and pavement markings in accordance with the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021 prior to the issue of an approval to operate, as recommended in the proposed conditions.		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 located 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 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 required to comply with Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021 rather than the Australian Standard.		No, but acceptable
	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.		N/A
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 required to comply with Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021 rather than the Australian Standard.		No, but acceptable
30	a) Bicycle and motorcycle parking shall be considered for all developments.	None proposed.		N/A
	b) Bicycle parking areas shall be designed generally in accordance with the principles of AS2890.3 - Parking facilities - Bicycle parking facilities.	N/A		N/A
	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	Landscaping satisfactory given that no large-scale parking areas are proposed.		No, but acceptable
	b) Landscaping areas shall be used throughout the car park and on the perimeters of the property where it addresses the public domain.	Landscaping satisfactory given that no large-scale parking areas are proposed.		Yes
	c) Garden beds shall be a minimum of 3m in width between car parking areas and street boundaries.	Parking located at rear of the site.		N/A
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.	N/A		N/A
	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.	N/A		N/A
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.	Condition recommended requiring access roads and parking areas to be a sealed surface.		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.	Unsealed gravel pavement not considered appropriate for proposal.		N/A
Drainage
36	a) All parking and manoeuvring spaces must be designed to avoid concentrations of water runoff on the surface.	Concept stormwater management plan demonstrates that roads and parking areas are capable of draining to bio-retention basins.		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.	No discharge to kerb and gutter proposed.		Yes
37	a) Car parking areas should be drained to swales, bio retention, rain gardens and infiltration areas.	Drained to bio-retention basin.		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.	A Social Impact Statement has been submitted with the application, which is discussed in more detail later in this report.	Yes
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 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. Future homes on the long term sites will provide supervision of the space and casual surveillance. The resident manager will also provide improved supervision and security.	Yes

Based on the above assessment, the variations discussed above are limited and considered acceptable having regard to the relevant objectives of the DCP. Cumulatively, the variations do not amount to any adverse impacts 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

Consent authority may require buildings to be upgraded – Clause 94

The application includes a NCC/BCA Compliance and Fire Safety Upgrading Report for the existing building that is proposed to be converted to a community building for the caravan park. The report includes the following recommendations for making the building safe and suitable for it intended new use:

i. Any new building work is to comply with the provisions of the National Construction Code/Building Code of Australia which are relevant to the building’s classifications.

ii. Portable fire extinguishers are to be installed throughout the subject building in accordance with the requirements of Clause E1.6 of the NCC/BCA and Australian Standard 2444 – 2001.

iii. The operation and positioning of the latches on the exit door is to comply with clause D2.21 of the NCC/BCA.

iv. A Balustrade complying with NCC/BCA Clause 2.16 is to be provided to the external verandah/balcony area.

v. Prior to the use of the subject building as a Community Building the schedule of fire safety measures is to be updated so as to reflect the presence of all fire safety measures within the subject building and displayed in a conspicuous location within the building.

vi. The fire safety measures are to be maintained in accordance with the annual maintenance requirements for same.

vii. Given the age and condition of the building it is recommended that electrical checks should be conducted every 12 months.

viii. An Emergency Evacuation Procedures Plan shall be developed and implemented within the building. The plan shall comply with the applicable requirements of AS 3745 – 2010.

The report has been reviewed by Council’s Building Surveyor and the recommendations are considered to be generally appropriate. An additional upgrade to the egress from the building has been recommended to ensure that there is a compliant path of travel from the building to a road or open space. Appropriate conditions have been recommended to ensure that the building upgrades above are detailed in the Construction Certificate documentation and completed prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

Two other existing buildings from the former Fantasy Glades theme park are identified as being retained on the western side of the caravan park access road. It is understood that these buildings are intended to be retained as a relic of the former use and will be able to be viewed by residents, but will not be occupied or used for any purpose associated with the caravan park. These buildings have therefore not been assessed for any fire safety upgrades. A condition is recommended confirming that the occupation or use of these buildings is prohibited.

(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 southerly street frontage orientation to an unformed section of Wandella Drive and a northerly frontage to Parklands Close via an access handle approximately 6m wide.

Adjoining the site to the north is four residential dwellings, which share their rear boundary with the site.

Adjoining the site to the east is a mix of residential uses of varying height and density, generally sharing their rear boundary with the site.

Adjoining the site to the south and west is a public reserve along the Wrights Creek corridor. A public boardwalk runs along the southern boundary of the site and connects to Calwalla Crescent to the west.

The proposal is not considered to be imcompatible with other 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.

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.

Lighting Impacts

The proposal will involve lighting of all access roads between sunset and sunrise to comply with the requirements of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021. A condition is recommended requiring all exterior lighting to comply with AS4282 - Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting, and the recommendations of the BDAR for minimising lighting impacts on the retained vegetation.

Roads

The site has road frontage to Parklands Close to the north, and an unformed section of Wandella Drive to the south. Parklands Close and Wandella Drive (to the east of the site) both have a pavement width of approximately 12.5m.

An extension to Wandella Drive to provide access to the site has previously been approved under DA2019 - 277, and the proposal relies upon completion of this work. A deferred commencement condition is recommended requiring completion of the relevant access roads prior to any consent operating, with a timeframe of 2 years recommended.

Traffic and Transport

The development is expected to generate an average of 4 vehicle trips per day per dwelling site. The proposed caravan park includes 9 sites, and will generate 36 vehicle trips per day, in addition to the traffic already assumed for the approved café under DA2019 - 277. The additional traffic is within the capacity of the existing road network within the immediate locality.

Site Frontage and Access

Vehicle access to the site is proposed via an extension to Wandella Drive under separate development consent DA2019 - 277, generally as shown below. A deferred commencement condition is recommended requiring completion of the relevant access roads prior to any consent operating.

The internal access is proposed to be extended from the northern end of the car park approved under DA2019 - 277 to the caravan park sites and facilities. An emergency egress is also proposed to Parklands Close in accordance with the requirements of Planning for Bush Fire Protection. Internal access roads will be required to be completed prior to the issue of a Section 68 approval to operate the caravan park. A condition is recommended confirming that the Parklands Close egress is to be used in emergencies only.

Parking and Manoeuvring

The development includes four (4) designated visitor parking spaces (including one disabled space). Parking for the caravan park sites is proposed to be provided on the individual sites, with the front of each site intended to be levelled for this purpose. Parking and driveway widths on site can comply with relevant Australian Standards (AS 2890) and/or the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021 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 demonstrate that adequate area is available and conditions have been recommended to reflect these requirements.

Water Supply Connection

Council records indicate that the development site currently has a 20mm metered water service.

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 Section 68 application, and an appropriate condition has been recommended in this regard.

Sewer Connection

Council records indicate that the development site is currently connected to the trunk sewer main that traverses the development site.

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

Detailed plans will be required to be submitted for assessment with the Section 68 application, and an appropriate condition has been recommended in this regard.

Stormwater

The site naturally grades towards Wrights Creek and is largely un-serviced, other than some minor outlets from the existing small scale structures.

The legal point of discharge for the proposed development is defined as on site disposal, with discharge ultimately to Wrights Creek.

Stormwater from the proposed development is planned to be disposed of via a combined detention and water quality basin overland to Wrights Creek. This approach meets AUSPEC requirements with regard to stormwater discharge. Detailed plans and specifications of this system will be required to be submitted with the S68 application.

In addition to the above, the site is currently bordered by a number of existing residential allotments to the east, which currently have no formal legal point of discharge. These existing lots presumably currently drain overland into the subject development site.

It is considered that the development as proposed will make it more difficult for those existing adjoining upstream lots to obtain an easement for drainage over the development site in future. Furthermore, the additional and new hardstand areas proposed, would add complexity and cost to the construction of an associated future interallotment drainage system. As a result, a condition has been recommended requiring that an interallotment drainage system be provided within the development site, to enable those adjacent upstream lots to be provided with a legal point of discharge to an interallotment drainage system.

Other Utilities

Telecommunication and electricity services are capable of being provided to the site and proposal.

Heritage

No known items of Aboriginal or European heritage significance exist on the property. An AHIMS search by the Applicant didn’t identify any sites of significance in the locality. The part of the site subject to the development proposal is relatively undisturbed, with only a small number of buildings associated with the former Fantasy Glades use existing.

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.

Soils

Air and microclimate

Flora and fauna

The proposed development includes the removal of 0.31 hectares of native vegetation within the development footprint and modification of 0.33 hectares of native vegetation within the APZ footprint, as shown below.

The Biodiversity Offset Scheme applies for the following reasons:

· The land is identified on the Biodiversity Values Map; and

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

The Applicant has submitted a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) prepared by an accredited assessor. The report has been reviewed by Council’s Ecologist and the NSW Department of Planning and Environment and it is considered that adequate measures have been taken to avoid or minimise biodiversity impacts. Particularly, adequate avoidance has been demonstrated through the retention of the areas of the site with the highest environmental value, including the coastal wetland, Swamp Sclerophyll Forest EEC, primary koala food trees, and high value hollow bearing trees.

An assessment of serious and irreversible impacts for the Swift Parrot has been included in the BDAR, which concluded that the development will not result in any serious and irreversible impacts.

The development will require the retirement of the following ecosystem credits and species credits to offset the impacts of the development:

Impacted plant community type

Number of ecosystem credits

IBRA sub-region

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

PCT 1569 Flooded Gum - Brush Box - Tallowwood mesic tall open forest on ranges of the lower North Coast

Macleay Hastings, Carrai Plateau,

Coffs Coast and Escarpment,

Comboyne Plateau, Karuah Manning,

Macleay Gorges, Mummel

Escarpment and Upper Manning.

Any IBRA subregion that is within 100

kilometres of the outer edge of the impacted site.

North Coast Wet

Sclerophyll Forests

This includes PCT's:

487, 613, 661, 684, 686, 692, 693, 694, 695, 699, 747, 748, 752, 812, 826, 827, 1073, 1208, 1217, 1222, 1237, 1244, 1245, 1257, 1259, 1260, 1261, 1265, 1266, 1282, 1284, 1285, 1504, 1561, 1562, 1563, 1566, 1567, 1568, 1569, 1572, 1573, 1575, 1579, 1841, 1843, 1915

Impacted species	Number of species credits	IBRA sub-region
Lathamus discolour/Swift Parrot (Fauna)	14	Anywhere in NSW
Phascolarctos cinereus / Koala (Fauna)	11	Anywhere in NSW
Oberonia titania / Red-flowered King of the Fairies (Flora)	11	Anywhere in NSW

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

The BDAR also includes a number of recommendations in Part 5.6 for measures to minimise impacts on biodiversity. A condition has also been recommended requiring implementation of the recommendations in Part 5.6 of the BDAR at the relevant stages of the development.

Waste

The Statement of Environmental Effect indicates that the sites are proposed to have individual waste bins stored on each site and collected by a private waste contractor. This is considered acceptable given the long-term tenure of the majority of sites.

Swept path diagrams demonstrate that a waste collection vehicle can manoeuvre within the development, and enter and exit the site driving forwards.

Standard precautionary site management condition also recommended for construction waste.

Energy

The development will provide for future caravans and manufactured homes that are not currently subject to any energy efficiency requirements.

Noise and vibration

The proposal is for a tourist/residential use and the development does not include any commercial of industrial activities anticipated to generate significant noise. Noise from the development would be restricted to the activities or the residents and guests, and vehicles entering and exiting the site (as is the case for neighbouring residential uses). The proposal includes a resident manager, who will be responsible for managing the behaviour of residents and guests.

The noise impacts of increased traffic accessing the site have been considered having regard to the screening tests in the Department of Planning’s Development near rail corridors and busy road: interim guideline (see below).

Based on the estimated traffic generation of 36 vehicles per day at a distance of more than 10m from the nearest dwelling façade, no acoustic treatment is required to manage vehicle noise. It is noted that the maximum permitted vehicle speeds in the caravan park would be substantially lower than assumed in the screen test and this is very conservative.

A standard precautionary site management condition is recommended restricting construction to standard hours.

Bushfire

The site is identified as being bushfire prone.

In accordance with Section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997, the application proposes development for a special fire protection purpose. The applicant has submitted a bushfire report, which was forwarded to the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS).

The RFS have issued a Bush Fire Safety Authority for the development on 27 September 2022, subject to conditions. The conditions are recommended to be incorporated into the consent.

Safety, security and crime prevention

Social impacts in the locality

The application includes a Social Impact Statement prepared by Complete Planning Solutions. The report identifies the following anticipated positive and negative social impacts associated with the proposed development.

Positive Social Impacts

1. Provision of ‘luxury’ housing in the Port Macquarie area;

2. Development site is within proximity to commercial, recreation and community services;

3. Increased economic and social benefits to local businesses;

4. Enrichment of the local community by supporting a diversity of population;

5. Provision of housing stock diversity in Port Macquarie; and

6. Plan of Management promotes/ensures positive social behaviour of residents.

Negative Social Impacts

1. Impacts on existing social cohesion of the existing community;

2. Risk perception within the existing community (as identified from the community survey);

3. Increased concentration of people in close proximity to each other and other local residents;

4. Increased traffic and impact on road safety in local area; and

5. Impact on the existing character/identity of the local area.

In relation to the suggested positive impacts, it is not considered likely that the development would result in ‘luxury’ housing in the Port Macquarie area. The proposed caravan park sites would accommodate manufactured homes with maximum floor areas of between 65m² and 94m². It is not considered critical that the housing be ‘luxury’ in order for the development to have an acceptable social impact, providing that the potential negative impacts can be appropriately managed.

The identified negative social impacts are largely proposed to be managed through a Plan of Management for the caravan park, which includes standards of expected behaviour and interaction between residents and neighbours. The proposal relies upon a resident manager effectively implementing the Plan of Management, which is common for this type of development.

A condition is recommended confirming the requirement for the caravan park to have a resident manager.

Economic impact in the locality

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

Site design and internal design

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

Construction

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

Cumulative impacts

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

(c) The suitability of the site for the development

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

Site constraints of flooding, bushfire, and biodiversity values have been adequately addressed and appropriate conditions of consent recommended.

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

136 written submissions and an e-petition with over 31,500 signatures 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	Comment
The proposed tree removal and regular maintenance will affect habitat and fauna in the area.	The ecological impacts of the development have been appropriately considered in the Biodiversity Development Assessment Report, as discussed earlier in this report. The application has demonstrated appropriate avoidance of biodiversity impacts with the most significant parts of the site including the EEC, coastal wetland, primary koala food trees, and high value hollow bearing trees being retained and protected. Residual impacts will require retirement of biodiversity credits in accordance with the Biodiversity Offset Scheme, as recommended in the proposed conditions.
Increased noise impacts on neighbours. No noise assessment has been submitted with the application.	The proposal is for a tourist/residential use and the development does not include any commercial of industrial activities anticipated to generate significant noise. The noise impacts associated with the café approved under DA2019 - 277 have been considered separately in the assessment of that application and are not relevant to the current proposal. Noise from the proposed caravan park would be restricted to the activities of the residents and guests, and vehicles entering and exiting the site (as is the case for neighbouring residential uses). The proposal includes a resident manager, who will be responsible for managing the behaviour of residents and guests.
The development will result in increased crime and anti-social behaviour.	Crime and anti-social behaviour cannot be prevented entirely through the planning process for any type of development. However, the principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) can assist in minimising these risks. The proposal is consistent with the CPTED principles in the following ways: · The development will increase activity, lighting, and passive surveillance of the site, which is a deterrent to crime as it increases the risk of offenders being caught. · The development will include an on-site manager, who will be able to monitor the activities of residents and visitors to the site. · The vehicular access to the caravan park will be restricted by a boom gate or similar. · The tourist component of the development will encourage regular maintenance of the buildings and grounds.
The site is a wetland and is not a healthy environment for human occupation.	No public health guidelines have been issued that suggest that occupation of land in such proximity to a wetland is unhealthy. Much of the existing housing in the locality is located closer to Wrights Creek than the sites in this proposal.
The submitted Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) states that there will be a risk to the koala population of the area due to vehicle strike, introduction of feral and domestic predators, light spill, and trampling of threatened flora species.	Noted. The BDAR also concludes that with the recommended mitigation measures these risks can be appropriately managed.
The proposal is inconsistent with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Koala Recovery Strategy 2018, which identifies habitat loss and fragmentation as the principal cause of decline in koala populations.	The Wrights Creek corridor provides for the north-south movement of koalas and connects to the Sea Acres nature reserve to the south. The proposed caravan park is located in the north-east corner of the site where movement of koalas is already obstructed by existing development in Pacific Drive and Parklands Close. A corridor width of more than 200m would be retained, which substantially exceeds the width of the corridor north of Parklands Close and south of Wandella Drive. The development will retain all primary koala food trees in accordance with the Koala Plan of Management, and koalas would not be prevented from moving freely through the proposed caravan park to access the food resources.
Development should not be permitted in core koala habitat.	State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021 permits development in core koala habitat providing that it is carried out in accordance with a Koala Plan of Management that has been approved by Council and the NSW Department of Planning and Environment.
Offsetting by planting trees elsewhere is not acceptable or sufficient.	The submitted Vegetation Management Plan provides for all offset plantings to be accommodated within the site.
The koala is an international icon and a major drawcard for Port Macquarie. Council should be doing more to protect koala habitat.	Council has a broader role in protecting koala habitat outside the development assessment process. The consent authority’s obligations for consideration of development applications are set out in the relevant legislation, as discussed throughout this report. The consent authority has no powers to consider purchasing land, or changes to land use zoning through the development assessment process.
The development will destroy the forested setting that makes the Shelly Beach area special.	The proposal will remove a limited number of trees, but overall will retain a forested character.
Object to the approval of the Applicant’s objection under Section 82 of the Local Government Act 1993 to various regulations applicable to caravan parks.	The application seeks development consent under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and there is no scope for the consent authority to approve an objection under Section 82 of the Local Government Act 1993. The Section 82 objection could only be considered as part of a subsequent application for approval to operate a caravan park (if consent was granted to this proposal).
The proposed caravan park does not include an amenities block, as required by the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021.	In accordance with Clause 106 of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021, communal shower and toilet facilities are not required for any site set aside for self-contained moveable dwellings or having ensuite facilities. A condition has been recommended requiring all sites to be set aside for self-contained moveable dwellings or have ensuite facilities.
Object to sites 5, 6, and 7 being setback 2.5m from the property boundary, rather than the required 3m.	The reduced setback applies to only a corner of each of these site, equating to an area of approximately 0.25m² of each site. The variation is not expected to provide any potential for future manufactured homes to be constructed any closer to the neighbouring property than would ordinarily be permitted. The Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021 provides for the setback to be reduced where Council is satisfied that the sites will be appropriately screened or otherwise treated. The submitted landscape plan identifies screen landscaping between these sites and the property boundary. If Council staff were not satisfied that the screening had suitably established at the time of an application for approval to operate the caravan park, the sites could be easily altered to achieve a minimum 3m setback.
The minimum road width of 5.5m specified by the RFS should not take precedence over the 6m width required by the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021. The increased width is necessary for vehicles towing caravans to circulate and pass safely.	The proposed road widths are discussed earlier in this report. It is open for the Applicant to make a Section 82 objection to this standard at the time of the application for approval to operate the caravan park. If the variation was not supported, the proponent would need to lodge a modification to the DA to consider the relevant impacts of an increased road width.
The approved hours of operation for the proposed café on the same site under DA2019 - 277 are 7.00am to 6.00pm Monday to Sunday, with all garbage collection and deliveries to be carried out within these hours. As the proposed caravan park is only accessible via the café car park, caravan park vehicles should not be permitted to enter or exit the site between 6.00pm and 7.00am.	The approved hours of operation for the café were determined having regard to the commercial aspects of the proposed use and the likely noise impacts. It is not considered reasonable to restrict the hours that caravan park residents and guest could enter and exit the site via the Wandella Drive access.
Site 9 is nominated as a caravan site, but it would be impossible to manoeuvre a caravan into.	Site 9 would be difficult to manoeuvre a large caravan into. It would likely rely upon the towing vehicle to drive onto the grass at the end of the turning bay, or multiple manoeuvres in the widened central area adjacent to Sites 4 and 5. Notwithstanding this limitation, it is not a requirement of the legislation to provide adequate manoeuvring for all caravan sizes in a caravan park. It would ultimately be up to the future residents to determine whether the site dimensions were adequate for their needs at the time of booking.
The community building with laundry and storage facilities is not accessible for people with a disability.	The proposed community building is an existing building and the consent authority can only require the building to be upgraded to provide essential fire safety measures to protect the building’s occupants. It is not possible for the consent authority to require existing buildings to be brought into full compliance with the current accessibility requirements of the National Construction Code. The proponent could still potentially be liable to claims under the Disability Discrimination Act if disabled access was not provided.
The retained scrub turpentine will be compromised by the adjacent retaining wall and bio retention basin.	The scrub turpentine was damaged in a storm and died during the assessment process. The tree no longer requires protection through the development design and layout.
Other than the parking areas at the front of each site, Sites 1-8 will have a significant slope, which will result in future relocatable dwellings being substantially elevated at the front of the sites.	Noted. A condition has been recommended restricting the height of manufactured homes on sites 1-8 to a maximum of 8.5m above finished ground level, to ensure that the development is consistent with the height and scale of adjoining residential development.
The extent of earthworks and height of retaining walls exceeds the maximum permitted in the DCP.	The merits of the proposed DCP variations relating to earthworks are discussed earlier in this report.
It is not acceptable to allow a reduction in the dimensions of the forecourt area. The proposed dimension will not safely accommodate an average sized caravan.	A reduction in the dimensions of the forecourt can only be approved through a Section 82 objection with an application for an approval to operate. There is considered to be some merit in investigating a reduction to the forecourt area dimensions if it can be demonstrated that there would not be a need for multiple vehicles or caravans to queue while waiting to check in.
The proposed community building is too close to the boundary with residential property.	Clause 88 of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021 provides for a setback of less than 10m from the boundary of the caravan park where Council is satisfied that it is adequately screened or otherwise treated. The proposal has limited openings facing the boundaries and includes landscaping in these locations. It is also noted that the community building is only intended to be used for laundry facilities and storage and is not likely to have regular activity.
Site 9 appears to be located within the 25m APZ and is inconsistent with the bushfire requirements.	Site 9 does not require an APZ as it is proposed to be a short-term site for caravans and tents, and there will be no buildings on this site. The RFS have supported this arrangement on the basis that there will be no occupation of the site during periods of ‘extreme’ or ‘catastrophic’ fire danger rating and the community building is available as a safe harbourage for the occupants of Site 9 should refuge onsite be required.
The application notes two existing buildings from the former Fantasy Glades use will be retained within the APZ. The future use of these buildings is not clear.	The buildings are proposed to be retained as relics of the former Fantasy Glades theme park, but they are not intended to occupied or used for any purpose associated with the caravan park. A condition is recommended confirming that these buildings are not to be occupied. Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019 allows for non-habitable buildings within an APZ, providing that they are not located within 6m of a habitable building.
The plans do not show a car washing bay, as required by clause 130 of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2005.	The regulation does not require a dedicated car washing bay, it just requires there to be an area available for washing vehicles. It is considered that there is sufficient area available to accommodate vehicle washing and details would need to be confirmed with the application for an approval to operate the caravan park.
Disagree that the proposal will result in a reduction of crime through the reactivation of a derelict site.	The Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles support the notion that increased activity and passive surveillance can have a positive impact in deterring crime.
The development will sever the important wildlife corridor along Wrights Creek, connecting to the Sea Acres Nature Reserve.	The proposed development is at the fringe of the corridor and will not sever its connection along Wrights Creek or to the Sea Acres Nature Reserve to the south. The retained corridor adjacent to the proposed caravan park would be much wider than the majority of the Wrights Creek corridor.
The proposal is for a residential development under the guise of a caravan park, and is not consistent with the LEP zone objectives.	The proposal is consistent with the LEP definition of a ‘caravan park’ and has to be assessed accordingly. Caravan parks are permitted with consent in the RE2 zone and are not contrary to the zone objectives.
The development does not provide adequate buffer to the mapped coastal wetland or E2 (C2) zone.	The adequacy of the buffer is discussed earlier in this report under the relevant DCP provisions.
The proposal includes multiple sites adjoining the rear boundary of neighbouring residential dwellings. This will result in significant light and noise pollution and appropriate acoustic barriers should be provided.	As the proposal is for a tourist/residential use lighting and noise from future caravans or manufactured homes is likely to be compatible with adjoining residential uses. The access road is setback from the boundaries of neighbouring residential property and lighting to meet the requirements for a caravan park is capable of being provided in a manner that does not affect the amenity of neighbour (eg sensor lights). A condition has been recommended requiring all external lighting to comply with AS 4282. Screen landscaping is also proposed between sites 5-9 and the northern boundary, which would further reduce lighting impacts on neighbouring property. Typical residential fencing is considered appropriate in this context and acoustic barriers are not warranted.
The submitted plans do not accurately reflect the proximity of dwellings on neighbouring property.	The site has been inspected and recent aerial photography reviewed during the assessment to get an accurate understanding of the context.
How will the development reduce vehicle strike and dog attack impacts on the local koala population in accordance with the Koala Recovery Strategy 2018.	The Koala Plan of Management for the site includes provisions to reduce the risks of vehicle strike and dog attacks. Vehicle speeds within the proposed caravan park would be restricted to 10km/h and dogs are prohibited on the premises.
Disagree with the BDAR comments that the development will not impede the movement of koalas. With 9 sites so close together, koalas will not be able to move through the north and north-east of the site.	As noted earlier, the proposed development is on the fringe of the Wrights Creek corridor in a location where movement to the east and north is already obstructed by existing dwellings in Parklands Close and Pacific Drive. A significant corridor width would still be retained. Future manufactured homes on the site are likely to be elevated, which would allow koalas to move under and between buildings.
Council should carry out more detailed surveys to confirm the extent of koala movement through the site.	The site has already been confirmed to be core koala habitat and a Koala Plan of Management adopted. It is not necessary to carry out further surveys for the purpose of assessing this application.
The koala food tree offset ratio of 1:1 is not adequate and Council should require more offset trees, as is typically required in other locations.	The offset ratio is set by the adopted Koala Plan of Management for the site and there is no scope to require additional offset plantings.
Concerns that there is inadequate sunlit space on the site for the offset plantings to successfully establish and grow to maturity. How will Council adequately monitor this?	A Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) will be required for the development offsets and will include details of planting locations, establishment and maintenance programs. The VMP will need to be to the satisfaction of Council’s Natural Resources Management team. New VMP’s typically have a 5 year monitoring period with annual reporting and inspections by Council staff.
Council should purchase the site as a koala reserve.	The consent authority has no role in property transactions.
Impacts from road extension in Wandella Drive and alterations to boardwalk.	The roadworks and alterations to the boardwalk at the end of Wandella Drive have been approved under separate DA2019 - 277 and do not form part of this application.
How can the Council guarantee the existing boundary high barbed wire fence will be removed and a new fence that allows koalas and other fauna to move freely will be erected along the new boundary?	The Koala Plan of Management has a requirement for annual reporting and audit by Council staff. It is understood that part of the barbed wire fencing through the EEC has already been removed.
Impacts on koalas during the lengthy construction and tree clearing phase of the development. How will Council ensure that this work is appropriately supervised and any fauna moved on safely.	The recommended conditions require clearing to be carried out in accordance with the methodology identified in the Biodiversity Development Assessment Report. Conditions of consent are legally enforceable by Council’s Compliance Team where necessary.
The BDAR does not address the clearing in Wandella Drive.	The clearing in Wandella Drive is subject to a separate development consent (DA2019 - 277) and is not part of the subject proposal. It does not need to be considered in the BDAR.
Could you please inform us as to how the proposed development protects the Grey-headed Flying Fox and the Little Bent-wing Bat as this is unclear in the BDAR?	The BDAR identifies that as no suitable breeding habitat exists within the development site for the Little Bentwing Bat nor the Grey-headed Flying Fox, species credits for these species are not required under this proposal. Foraging habitat for these species will be offset through ecosystem credits. The potential roosting sites for the Little Bent-wing Bat were identified as existing man-made structures on the site, which are proposed to be retained in the development.
The hollow bearing trees must be retained and provided with an exclusion buffer 1.25 times the height of the tree in accordance with the DCP requirements.	All hollow bearing trees scoring over 12 on the assessment protocol are proposed to be retained. The exclusion zone is less than 1.25 times the height of the tree, but has been determined to be adequate by a suitably qualified Arborist. A condition has been recommended requiring annual inspection and management of the retained hollow bearing trees to ensure that they are not subsequently removed due to safety risks.
It is unclear in the BDAR how the rare orchid Red-flowered King of the Fairies will be protected on the property.	The BDAR recommends the following protection measures for the Red-flowered King of the Fairies: • Accurate survey of all threatened flora species on site and location shown on plan (location of orchids is not to be made available to public) • Clearing and construction contractors briefed on presence of threatened plants and protection measures • Clearing limit fenced to ensure no encroachment into adjacent forest and potential damage to threatened plants • Trees are not to be felled into adjacent forest and there is to be no damage to vegetation beyond the defined clearing limit. • An ecologist must carry out checks of tree protection zones and clearing limits prior to clearing • The VMP prepared for the site is to include specific measures for protection of threatened plants. This is to contain background information on the species along with specific onsite measures to manage the population during construction and post development to ensure risks and threats are minimised.
Concerns about erosion and sedimentation impacts on remaining bushland.	A condition has been recommended requiring appropriate erosion and sediment control measures during the construction phase. The bio-retention basin would manage ongoing water quality to protect Wrights Creek and the retained bushland.
Concerns that excavation will adversely impact the stability of neighbouring property if not properly retained.	A condition has been recommended requiring engineering certification for the proposed retaining walls. With the exception of Site 9, the retaining walls are located a substantial distance from the boundaries of neighbouring property.
The development will increase weed invasion into Wrights Creek and the Calwalla Reserve.	The Vegetation Management Plan for the development will need to incorporate appropriate weed management for the term of the plan (typically 5 years). The submitted landscape plan also includes a Lomandra border planting along the edge of the EEC to restrain the spread of weeds from the caravan park.
It is misleading to call the proposal a caravan park, given that only a single caravan site is proposed. The development should be assessed as a manufactured home estate or residential development.	The proposal is consistent with LEP definition of a caravan park. A review of case law has confirmed that as long as the development includes both caravans and manufactured homes it can reasonably be characterised as a caravan park.
The submitted plans only show 3 visitor parking spaces. A minimum of 4 are required.	The submitted plans provide 4 visitor parking spaces.
No visitor parking for people with disabilities is shown on the plans.	The plans include 1 visitor parking space for people with disabilities.
Adequacy of the proposed turning bays for garbage collection vehicles.	Swept path diagrams have been submitted with the application, confirming that a garbage collection vehicle can manoeuvre within the site.
What is the design of the future manufactured homes on the sites and how many bedrooms will they have?	The application for a caravan park is only required to provide details of the access roads, sites, and facilities. The design of future manufactured homes has not been provided in the application. The installation of manufactured homes would be subject to the requirements of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021.
Will owners be allowed to have dogs on site?	No. The Koala Plan of Management prohibits dogs on the site. A condition has been recommended confirming this restriction.
Where will the manager’s residence be? The on-site manager needs to be present to manage, noise, behaviour, disputes, etc	The manager would occupy a manufactured home on one of the long-term sites. A condition has been recommended requiring that the manager occupies the first manufactured home installed in the caravan park, and that the manager be residing on the site prior to the installation of any further manufactured homes.
Will residents and visitors have access to walk around the property, and how will this affect the koala population?	Residents and visitors will have access to walk around the site, with the exception of the EEC on the western side of the property, which will have pedestrian access prevented by removal of existing paths and installation of a Lomandra border planting. The Koala Plan of Management does not make any recommendations about restricting pedestrian movements through the site.
Can the concerned residents in the area have a tour of the property and the opportunity to meet with the ecologist who prepared the BDAR.	The concerned residents could request this of the property owner. Council cannot force a property owner to provide access for this purpose.
Concerns that trees have already been removed without Council consent.	Council’s Compliance team have investigated several complaints regarding tree removal at the premises and there was no evidence that these activities were unlawful. The instances investigated were confirmed to relate to removal of storm damaged vegetation or removal of trees that had been authorised by a separate permit issued by Council.
Does the development have enough parking for both the café and visitors to the caravan park?	The café parking was considered adequate in the separate consent issued for that use (DA2019 - 277). Visitor parking for the caravan park includes 4 spaces, which satisfies the requirements of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021.
Traffic safety will be reduced at the intersection of Wandella Drive and Pacific Drive with the increased traffic from the development. There is already limited sight distance to the south.	The additional traffic generation associated with the development will not exceed the AUSTROADS warrants for upgrades to the existing intersection of Pacific Drive and Wandella Drive.
Reduction in pedestrian safety for boardwalk at the end of Wandella Drive.	The existing consent for the café under DA2019 - 277 requires the boardwalk to be relocated to the southern side of Wandella Drive and clear of the site access. The proposal will not affect the safety of the boardwalk.
How will regular use of the emergency access to Parklands Close by residents and visitors be prevented?	A condition is recommended requiring a gate, removable bollards, or other similar treatment to prevent vehicular access other than in emergencies. Pedestrian use of the Parklands Close access would not be restricted.
The emergency access is not wide enough for emergency services vehicles.	The emergency access is capable of complying with the requirement of the RFS, noting that the community building is setback 4m from the property boundary and the Bush Fire Safety Authority permits short constrictions to a width of 3.5m.
The caravan park dwellings would unreasonably overlook neighbouring properties and reduce privacy.	The rear of the caravan park sites are approximately 1m below the existing ground level of the neighbouring residential properties. Single storey manufactured homes are expected to achieve adequate privacy with normal boundary fencing. Two storey manufactured homes require approval to install under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993, and there is opportunity for Council to review potential privacy impacts with such an application.
The application doesn’t include any architectural or engineering plan of the future manufactured homes on sites 1-8. Given that these sites are narrow and steep, it is anticipated that the homes would have to be significantly elevated and this will not be aesthetically appealing.	The application is for a caravan park only and installation of manufactured homes is subject to a separate process.
The application significantly understates the number of people that would be expected to occupy the caravan park.	The numbers stated by the Applicant have not been relied upon in the assessment of the application.
Don’t believe that it will be possible to effectively restrict future occupants to people over the age of 50.	Agreed. Restrictions on occupants are generally only effective for genuine seniors housing. No conditions have been recommended in this regard.
The development will provide unrestricted access for people to walk through the site and cause crime, safety, and amenity impacts on neighbours.	The removal of the existing barbed wire fencing, as required by the Koala Plan of Management, would provide similar opportunity without any subsequent development of the site. As noted earlier in this report, increased activity, passive surveillance, and lighting are expected to reduce the opportunity for crime. The operator of the caravan park would have the opportunity to investigate koala friendly fencing options if unauthorised access became a problem.
The proposed visitor parking will be used by residents and visitors will be forced to park in the street in Parklands Close.	It cannot be assumed that this would be the case. The proposal provides the minimum amount of resident and visitor parking required by the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021.
There is no internal pedestrian path connection to Wandella Drive or Parklands Close and residents will have to walk along the caravan park roads, which is a safety issue.	Vehicle speeds within the caravan park will be restricted to a maximum of 10km/h and the access roads can safely be used as a shared zone for vehicles and pedestrians.
Having people permanently living on this site will increase bushfire risk due to residents smoking.	It cannot be assumed that future residents would smoke. The development will require maintenance of a substantial asset protection zone adjacent in the north-east corner of the site, which would improve bushfire safety to neighbouring properties compared to an undeveloped site.
Can restrictions on lighting fires be put in place for the property?	Council cannot restrict the lighting of fires for the purpose of cooking, heating, or recreation. However, directions can be issued in the event that smoke from such a fire is causing justifiable nuisance. The operator of the caravan park could impose such restrictions on the residents if they chose to. Any fire bans issued by the NSW Rural Fire service during periods of high bushfire danger would also still apply to the premises.
Increased noise impacts from the Castle Café.	Noise impacts associated with the proposed café have been separately considered under DA2019 - 277 and are not relevant to the current proposal.
Impacts of lighting of caravan park roads. The legislation requires road to be adequately lit between sunset and sunrise.	Conditions have been recommended requiring all external lighting (including lighting of access roads) to comply with AS 4282 and the recommendations of the BDAR.
Current boundary fencing with neighbouring property will not be adequate if the development goes ahead. Existing boundary fencing should be replaced at the developer’s cost.	A suitable dividing fence could be negotiated between the property owners in accordance with the Dividing Fences Act 1991.
The extent of clearing for the proposal is considered to be above the threshold for the Biodiversity Offset Scheme. A BDAR should be submitted with the application.	A BDAR has been submitted.
The plans do not demonstrate that egress to Parklands Close is achievable in the space available.	The egress to Parklands Close has been amended to be an emergency egress only. A road to the standards specified in the Bush Fire Safety Authority is capable of being accommodated in the available space.
The access road from Parklands Close and hedge planting to the western side of the access handle will compromise access to the garage of the dwelling on adjoining Lot 4 DP 516513.	During the assessment process a new driveway to the garage of the dwelling on adjoining Lot 4 DP 516513 has been constructed within the lot boundaries. There is no longer any conflict with the proposed emergency egress.
The submitted application doesn’t address noise impacts associated with pedestrians and vehicles utilising the access connection to Parklands Close	The egress to Parklands Close will be for emergency purposes only and is not expected to generate significant vehicle noise. Pedestrian use of the access is not considered to be a noise generating activity that would require noise impact assessment.
The application should demonstrate that a vehicle towing a caravan can manoeuvre through the caravan park road network.	AS 2890 does not have a standard turning template for a vehicle towing a caravan. It is generally assumed that if the caravan park roads and comply with the required widths, and the sites comply with the minimum dimensions that they are suitable for the intended use.
The turning movements of waste collection and emergency vehicles has not been shown on the submitted plans.	Amended plans have been submitted demonstrating the functionality of the access road for an 8.8m long service vehicle, which is the average size of a waste collection or fire fighting vehicle.
The proposal will affect the visual amenity of Pacific Drive with the loss of canopy trees to the west of the existing dwellings.	The proposal will only involve removal of selected trees and the retained koala food trees and hollow bearing trees will have canopies visible from Pacific Drive. It is not considered that the vegetated backdrop to the existing buildings along Pacific Drive would be substantially altered.
The social impact assessment has not considered recent studies that have found that caravan parks can be “hot spots” for crime in busy holiday coastal regions.	The proposed caravan park is of a small scale, with a resident manager and long-term residents. It is not considered likely to be subject to the same crime risks as a larger tourist park.
The proposal to use offsets will result in net biodiversity loss. Replacement plantings take 10 years to be a viable food source or habitat.	The Koala Plan of Management provides for offset plantings in the manner proposed.
Traffic congestion from additional vehicles entering and leaving Parklands Close.	The Parklands Close access will be for emergencies only and would not result in additional traffic regularly using Parklands Close.
A bus has previously been driven into the site without permission via the Council reserve off the end of Parklands Close. There are concerns that the emergency access will just become an access for heavy vehicles.	A condition has been recommended prohibiting the use of the Parklands Close access by vehicles, other than in emergencies. The condition could be enforced in the event that the access was used inappropriately.
Pets kept by residents would affect the koala population.	The Koala Plan of Management does not permit the keeping of domestic pets and a condition has been recommended confirming this restriction.
The development will increase the demand for water supply and will affect water security during droughts.	Council’s Water and Sewer Section have reviewed the proposal and are satisfied that the development can be provided with adequate water supply. Council has broader plans to address water security for a growing population.
It is unlikely that the development will result in luxury homes, as stated in the application.	Agreed. Manufactured homes in caravan parks typically provide lower cost accommodation and the application has been assessed on that basis.
The proposal is for a gated community style of development and fencing will create barriers in core koala habitat.	The submitted plans do not identify any fencing within the site that would create barriers for the movement of koalas through the site.
The splitting of the applications for the proposed café and caravan park on the site has created the perception of reduced impacts when each proposal is considered separately. The combined impacts of the two proposals need to be considered.	The consent authority can only consider the individual proposals as submitted. The relevant impacts of each proposal have been appropriately considered.
The bushfire assessment should be reviewed having regard to the catastrophic 2019 bushfires.	The NSW Rural Fire Service have reviewed the proposal since the 2019 bushfires. Their Bush Fire Safety Authority was issued in 2022.
Council should obtain an independent ecological assessment not paid for by the Applicant.	The ecological assessment has been independently reviewed by Council’s Ecologist.
The Social Impact Assessment notes the need for social cohesion. The owner currently has barbed wire fencing and ‘Keep Out’ signs. It is hard to believe that social cohesion will be promoted following the development.	The current security measures at the site are an attempt to prevent unauthorised access to an unoccupied site. If the development proceeded and the caravan park sites were occupied, there would be adequate supervision of the site and security fencing would not be necessary.
The KPoM states that there will be no increased risk of vehicle strike. How is this possible when the proposal will result in additional vehicles and has new roads through core koala habitat.	The caravan park would have a speed limit of 10km/h. Data regarding vehicle strike injuries/deaths suggests that they typically occur on roads where vehicles are travelling at higher speeds and are unable to stop in time. In a low speed environment there is very little risk of vehicle strike.
The estimated cost of works provided by the Applicant is understated and would not cover the cost of constructing the manager’s residence, let alone the other caravan park earthworks and infrastructure.	The estimated cost of works only covers the cost of the caravan park works, including roads, earthworks, services and building alterations. The cost of installing manufactured homes is not required to be included.
The socio-economic benefit of the proposal noted in the Social Impact Statement relies on the future manufactured homes being larger ‘luxury’ homes that are more likely to attract families. Based on the proposed sizes of the sites, manufacture homes would likely have a maximum floor area of approximately 80m², and could not be considered luxury family homes.	It is agreed that the future manufactured homes are likely to be of a modest size and are unlikely to be considered ‘luxury’ homes. The assessment of the application has not relied upon this statement.
Approval of the caravan park would create a precedent for additional sites to be approved in the future.	Any future proposal for expansion would need to be considered on its merits and any consent to the current application would not create a precedent for the outcome of a subsequent application. Given the site constraints, and the fact that the number of site has had to be reduced as a result of the assessment of the current proposal, it is unlikely that the site would be suitable for future expansion.
The development should protect all koala browse species and all hollow bearing trees. The proposal is only seeking to retain primary koala food trees and hollow bearing trees scoring over 12.	The DCP and Koala Plan of Management do not require all koala food trees and hollow bearing trees to be retained. They include appropriate offsets for any such trees removed.
The density of the buildings is too great for the site and its environmental values.	Based on the area of the proposed caravan park sites, it is expected that the floor area of future manufactured homes would not exceed 1000m². In the context of the overall site, this equates to a floor space ratio of 0.06:1, which is a substantially lower density than the surrounding residential development. The environmental values of the site have been carefully considered in the assessment of the application and the scale of the proposal has been reduced to appropriately protect significant trees, coastal wetland and EEC on the site.
Garbage stored near the amenities building will have adverse odour impacts on nearby residents.	The plans do not identify any waste storage adjacent to the community building. It has been indicated that waste bins would be stored on the individual sites. The community building provides laundry and storage facilities only and does not include any food preparation or dining areas. Any waste generated by the use of the community building is unlikely to be of a type that would generate odour. Waste bins for the community building are also capable of being stored inside the building.
The proposed caravan park has an area of less than 1 hectare.	The site has an area of 1.683 hectares. Even if the part of the site approved for use as a café is excluded from the calculation, the caravan park area still exceeds 1 hectare.
Object to the short time available to make submissions on the application.	The timeframe for making submissions was consistent with Council’s Community Participation Plan. Submissions made outside the exhibition periods were still accepted and considered in the assessment of the application. The proposal was exhibited on three occasions in amended forms.
The accuracy of the data quoted from the community survey used in preparation of the Social Impact Statement cannot be confirmed and the stated finding should not be relied upon.	Council’s notification process provided the opportunity for affected property owners in the locality to confirm what their concerns are in relation to the proposal. The data in the Social Impact Statement was not relied upon as being accurate for the purpose of the assessment.
The proposed Plan of Management for the caravan park has not been through the relevant process required by the Local Government Act 1993.	The provisions in the Local Government Act 1993 relating to Plans of Management apply to the management of public land by Council and other public authorities. They do not apply to the operation of a caravan park on privately owned land.
The proposed Plan of Management has been written in a way that it could be changed by the proponent.	The Plan of Management is essentially a private set of rules established by the operator of the caravan park for the residents and their guest. The content of the Plan could be changed over time to address management issues. The Plan of Management cannot be inconsistent with the conditions of any development consent. The recommended conditions cover relevant management issues that are deemed necessary for Council to regulate.
The application suggests that the manager would only be available on site during business hours, which is inconsistent with the Social Impact Statement recommendation for a full time on-site manager.	The recommended conditions confirm the requirement for an on-site manager.
Access to the caravan park relies upon a separate application (DA2019 - 277), which is yet to be determined.	DA2019 - 277 was granted consent on 6 May 2020 and provides for the construction of an access road from the end of Wandella Drive to the café car park. As the current proposal relies upon the completion of these works for access, a deferred commencement condition is recommended requiring confirmation of the satisfactory completion of the access road approved under DA2019 - 277 before any consent for the caravan park could operate.
The Plan of Management refers to the property being a ‘secure gated site’, but the application suggests that the gate would be open during daylight hours.	The application plans only identify a boom gate at the southern end of the access road and a boom gate on the Parklands Close emergency egress. Any other fencing arrangements would require separate consent. It would be up to the operator of the caravan park whether they close the southern boom gate during daylight hours to prevent unauthorised vehicular access.
The statement in the Plan of Management regarding the management of visitors is impractical.	Agreed. The assessment has not assumed that visitors to the site would be prevented from outdoor recreational activities within the site.
The content of the questions used in the community survey were deliberately aimed at gaining support for the proposal and did not cover many of the key issues of concern for the community.	Council’s notification process provided the opportunity for affected property owners in the locality to confirm what their concerns are in relation to the proposal.
There are already many caravan parks and cafes in town. Council has a duty of care regarding business competition.	Competition is generally considered to be positive for the economy as it promotes innovation, better pricing and service. State policy prevents Councils from introducing planning controls that prevent/reduce competition.
Two or three high end luxury eco cabins would be more appropriate for the site.	The consent authority has to assess the proposal as submitted and cannot consider the merits of alternative developments on the subject land. It is noted that eco tourist facilities are prohibited under the current RE2 zoning.
The Parklands Close access will result in headlight glare to neighbouring living areas.	The Parklands Close access would only be used in emergencies.
The application has not considered the impact on the leaf tail gecko, which is regularly found on site.	The leaf tail gecko is not listed as a Threatened Species in Schedule 1 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and does not require consideration in the BDAR.
Has the Applicant sought comments from the Local Aboriginal Land Council regarding the cultural significance of the site.	The Statement of Environmental Effects does not indicate that the Applicant has consulted with the Local Aboriginal Land Council. It is noted that it is not a legislative requirement to do so. The Applicant has carried out an AHIMS search, which did not identify any known sites in the vicinity of the property. A standard precautionary condition has been recommended requiring works to cease and appropriate investigation carried out if any relics are discovered during construction.
The park should have a policy on the type of material and design required for each dwelling and that these standards are Certified at final inspection by the PCA or Council.	The caravan park operator could implement their own standards for the design and materials of any manufactured homes installed on the site. Council would not be able to regulate the design or finishes, noting that further approval would not be required to install single storey manufactured homes on the caravan park sites.
Council should take a bond from the developer to ensure the protection of the trees proposed to be retained.	The legislation only permits Council to take a bond in relation to public infrastructure. It is not legally possible to take a bond for the protection of trees on private property.
How is compliance with the Koala Plan of Management followed up and monitored?	The KPoM requires an annual monitoring report for the first 5 years. The first annual report was provided and audited by Council staff in July 2022.
Concerns that the cost of the development will be higher than planned for and it could be left incomplete.	This is a risk with any development proposal.
The proposal to build manufactured homes on the site, rather than install pre-built homes will extend the period that the construction phase will disturb adjoining properties.	The provisions of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates, Caravan Parks, Camping Grounds and Moveable Dwellings) Regulation 2021 cannot be varied through a development consent and this is not a relevant matter for consideration on the development application. This concern could be considered as part of any future Section 82 objection to allow manufactured homes to be constructed on site.
The proposed 11.00pm noise restrictions are inappropriate in a residential area.	The development would be subject to standard noise controls under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. Noise after 10.00pm in residential areas is typically considered offensive noise.
Soft plantings adjacent to the boundary will be inadequate to reduce noise impacts on neighbours.	The plantings adjacent to the boundary are intended to provide visual screening, rather than any noise reduction. Noise barriers are not considered necessary in this location.
The intensity of external lighting should be restricted by a condition.	A condition has been recommended requiring all external lighting to comply with AS 4282 and the recommendations of the BDAR.
An average sized caravan would not fit on the designated caravan site. If the caravan was parked diagonally to fit, the vehicle would be unable to park within the site.	Site 9 has a depth of 13.3m to the retaining wall, which would be sufficient as the maximum legal length of a caravan is 12.5m.
The proposed road layout will not allow for semi-trailers to deliver manufactured homes.	The developer would need to investigate options for delivery and installation when the final designs have been determined. There is scope for buildings to be delivered to the site in multiple parts and assembled on site. Manufactured homes could also potentially be craned into the site from Parklands Close.
The extent of clearing for the development needs to be more clearly defined on the plans.	A tree clearing plan has been provided that clearly identifies all trees proposed to be removed and retained.
The proposed retaining walls will affect root zones of adjacent trees.	The proposed retaining walls extend less than 10% into the Tree Protection Zone of retained trees. This is consistent with AS 4970 Protection of trees of development sites.

(e) The Public Interest

The proposed development satisfies the provisions or objectives of the 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

Potential climate change risks have been considered in relation to flood impacts, with the flood planning level including a climate change allowance and additional freeboard.

4. DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS APPLICABLE

Section 7.11 Contributions

In assessing s7.11 contributions, Council staff have reviewed the development in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council Development Contributions Assessment Policy (DCAP) and applicable Contribution Plans.

No contribution credit applies to the site.

The proposed development will comprise a caravan park including 8 long-term sites and 1 short-term site. The Applicant has indicated that all sites will be fully self-contained, and contributions have been charged accordingly. The contributions estimate has been based each of the long-term sites containing a 2 bedroom dwelling. Additional contributions would be applicable for any 3 or 4 bedroom manufactured homes - refer Attachment 3.

Having considered the above, the proposed development will increase the demand for public amenities/services as listed under the following Contribution Plans:

1. Port Macquarie-Hastings Administration Building Contributions Plan 2007

2. Hastings S94 Administration Levy Contributions Plan

3. Port Macquarie-Hastings Open Space Contributions Plan 2018

4. Hastings S94 Major Roads Contributions Plan

5. Port Macquarie-Hastings Community Cultural and Emergency Services Contributions Plan 2005

As a result, s7.11 contributions apply and a condition of consent has been recommended to ensure payment.

Section 7.12 Contributions

The proposed development will comprise a caravan park and does not contain any commercial/industrial component. As a result, s7.12 contributions do not apply.

Section 64 Water and Sewer Contributions

In assessing s64 water and sewer contributions, Council staff have reviewed the development in accordance with the Port Macquarie-Hastings Council Development Contributions Assessment Policy (DCAP) and applicable Development Servicing Plans.

No contribution credit applies to the site.

Having considered the above, the proposed development will increase the demand on water and sewer services.

As a result, s64 contributions apply and a condition of consent has been imposed to ensure payment.

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.

Overall, the proposed development is consistent with the provisions and objectives of the relevant planning controls and will not result in an unacceptable impact on the surrounding natural and built environment. Approval of the application is considered to be not contrary to the public interest as it achieves the LEP objectives for development in the zone. No significant adverse environmental, social or economic impacts on the locality have been identified. Accordingly, the proposal is recommended to be approved subject to the attached conditions.

Attachments

1 ⇩. Attachment 1 - Recommended Conditions

2 ⇩. Attachment 2 - Plans

3 ⇩. Attachment 3 - Development Contributions Estimate

Member	18/01/23	15/02/23	01/03/23	15/03/23
David Crofts (Independent Chair)	P	P	P
Chris Gee (Independent Member)	P	P	P	P
Michael Mason (Independent Member)			P	P
Dan Croft (Group Manager Development Services)		P	P	P
Tony McNamara (Independent Member)		P		P
Other attendees
Mayor Peta Pinson				P
Grant Burge (Development Engineering Coordinator)	P		P	P
Kerrod Franklin (Acting Development Engineering Coordinator)
Patrick Galbraith-Robertson (Development Planning Coordinator)	P		P
Steven Ford (Development Assessment Planner)	P			P
Chris Gardiner (Development Assessment Planner)
Vanessa Penfold (Development Assessment Planner)				P
Clinton Tink (Development Assessment Planner)
Jon Power (Act Development Engineer Coordinator)
Beau Spry (Development Assessment Planner)
Ben Roberts (Development Assessment Planner)		P
Councillor Josh Slade
Councillor Sharon Griffiths
Kate Kennedy (Building Surveyor)
Warren Wisemantel
Deputy Mayor Adam Roberts
Bob Slater (Development Assessment Planner)
Alton Dick (Stormwater Engineer)

18/01/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
01/02/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
15/02/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
01/03/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
15/03/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
05/04/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
19/04/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
03/05/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
17/05/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
07/06/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
21/06/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
05/07/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
19/07/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
02/08/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
16/08/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
06/09/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
20/09/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
04/10/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
18/10/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
01/11/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
15/11/2023	Function Room	2.00pm
06/12/2023	Function Room	2.00pm

1.0 OBJECTIVES

2.0 KEY FUNCTIONS

Delegated Authority of Panel

3.0 MEMBERSHIP

3.1 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

5.1 Meeting Format

5.2 Decision Making

5.3 Quorum

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

9.0 CONDUCT AT MEETINGS

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.