Agenda of Development Committee

Development Committee

Meeting Date: Tuesday, 11 April, 2017

Location: Council Chambers, City Administrative Building, Bridge Road, Nowra

Membership (Quorum - 5)

Clr Patricia White - Chairperson

All Councillors

General Manager or nominee

Please note: Council’s Code of Meeting Practice permits the electronic recording and broadcast of the proceedings of meetings of the Council which are open to the public. Your attendance at this meeting is taken as consent to the possibility that your image and/or voice may be recorded and broadcast to the public.

Agenda

1. Apologies / Leave of Absence

2. Confirmation of Minutes

· Development Committee - 14 March 2017.................................................................. 1

3. Declarations of Interest

4. Mayoral Minute

5. Deputations and Presentations

6. Notices of Motion / Questions on Notice

Nil

7. Reports

DE17.24...... Planning Proposal PP006 - Halloran Trust Lands - Potential Biodiversity Certification Application...................................................................................................... 5

DE17.25...... Submission - Draft SEPP Education & SEPP Infrastructure Review........... 8

DE17.26...... Readoption of Development Services Policies............................................ 21

DE17.27...... Readoption of Community Consultation Policy for Development Applications 30

DE17.28...... Development Application – 7 Beach St, Huskisson - Lot B DP 359526...... 32

8. Confidential Reports

Nil

Development Committee – Tuesday 11 April 2017

Page ii

Development Committee

Delegation:

Pursuant to s377 (1) of the Local Government Act 1993 the Committee is delegated the functions conferred on Council by the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act), Local Government Act 1993 (LG Act) or any other Act or delegated to Council, as are specified in the attached Schedule, subject to the following limitations:

i. The Committee cannot make a decision to make a local environmental plan to classify or reclassify public land under Division 1 of Part 2 of Chapter 6 of the LG Act;

ii. The Committee cannot review a s82A or s96AB EPA Act determination made by the Council or by the Committee itself;

iii. The Committee cannot exercise any function delegated to the Council which by the terms of that delegation cannot be sub-delegated;

iv. The Committee cannot exercise any function which s377(1) of the LG Act provides cannot be delegated by Council; and

v. The Committee cannot exercise a function which is expressly required by the LG Act or any other Act to be exercised by resolution of the Council.

Schedule:

1. All functions relating to the preparation, making, and review of local environmental plans (LEPs) and development control plans (DCPs) under Part 3 of the EPA Act.

2. All functions relating to the preparation, making, and review of contributions plans and the preparation, entry into, and review of voluntary planning agreements under Part 4 of the EPA Act.

3. The preparation, adoption, and review of policies and strategies of the Council in respect of town planning and environmental matters and the variation of such policies.

4. Determination of variations to development standards related to development applications under the EPA Act where the development application involves a development which breaches a development standard by more than 10% and the application is accompanied by a request to vary the development standard under clause 4.6 of Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014 or an objection to the application of the development standard under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards.

5. Determination of variations from the acceptable solutions and/or other numerical standards contained within the DCP or a Council Policy that the General Manager requires to be determined by the Committee

6. Determination of development applications that Council requires to be determined by the Committee on a case by case basis.

7. Review of all determinations of development applications under sections 82A and 96AB of the EP&A Act.

8. Preparation, review, and adoption of policies and guidelines in respect of the determination of development applications by other delegates of the Council.

Minutes of the Development Committee

Meeting Date: Tuesday, 14 March 2017

Location: Council Chambers, City Administrative Building, Bridge Road, Nowra

Time: 5:01pm

The following members were present:

Clr Patricia White - Chairperson

Clr Amanda Findley

Clr Joanna Gash

Clr John Wells

Clr John Levett

Clr Nina Cheyne

Clr Annette Alldrick

Clr Kaye Gartner

Clr Andrew Guile – arrived 5.04pm

Clr Mitchell Pakes

Clr Bob Proudfoot

Mr Russ Pigg - General Manager

Apologies / Leave of Absence

Apologies received from Clr Watson and Clr Kitchener

Confirmation of the Minutes

RESOLVED (Clr Cheyne / Clr Gartner) MIN17.179

That the Minutes of the Development Committee held on Tuesday 14 February 2017 be confirmed.

CARRIED

Deputations and Presentations

DE17.20 – Subdivision Controls in Greenwell Point - Legal Advice and Policy

Direction

Mr Anthony Barthelmiss addressed the Committee speaking against the recommendation

Note: Clr Guile arrived 5.04pm during the Deputation.

DE17.22 – Future Potential Subdivision within the R2 Zone Hyams Beach

Mr Lee Carmichael addressed the Committee speaking against the recommendation

Mrs Vicki Fortescue addressed the Committee speaking for the recommendation

DE17.23 Development Application – Parson St Ulladulla – Proposed Lot 15 in Subdivision of Lot 3 DP 746228 and Lots 5 & 6 DP 805221

Jan Gregory, President of the Ulladulla Forum addressed the Committee speaking against the recommendation

Mr Tony Blazek addressed the Committee speaking for the recommendation

Reports

DE17.20 Subdivision Controls in Greenwell Point - Legal Advice and Policy Direction

HPERM Ref: D17/28315

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1. Form a position on development controls relating to flood risk management in Greenwell Point by selecting Option 1 or 2; and,

2. Undertake a review of the Lower Shoalhaven River Flood Risk Management Plan, Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014 and Chapter G9 of Shoalhaven Development Control Plan 2014 as required by this Interim Policy position.

RESOLVED (Clr Pakes / Clr Guile) MIN17.180

1. Not provide additional development restrictions in Greenwell Point and consider each development application on its merit in accordance with the provisions of Shoalhaven LEP 2014 and Shoalhaven DCP 2014; and

For: Clr White, Clr Gash, Clr Wells, Clr Levett, Clr Alldrick, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Proudfoot and Russ Pigg

Against: Clr Findley, Clr Cheyne and Clr Gartner

CARRIED

DE17.21 Restaurants and Cafes - A new interim restaurant authorisation system for liquor licences

HPERM Ref: D17/43541

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That this report be noted for information.

RESOLVED (Clr Findley / Clr Wells) MIN17.181

That the report regarding Restaurants and Cafes – A New interim restaurant authorisation system for liquor licenses be received for information.

CARRIED

DE17.22 Future Potential Subdivision within the R2 Zone Hyams Beach

HPERM Ref: D17/46796

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That:

1. Council note the findings of this report; and

2. Confirm the variations to the minimum lot size proposed in development application SF10534, as modified, not be supported and the application be determined under delegated authority.

RESOLVED (Clr Guile / Clr Gash) MIN17.182

That under delegated authority from Council, the Committee:

1. Note the findings of this report; and

2. Confirm the variations to the minimum lot size proposed in development application SF10534, as modified, be supported.

For: Clr Findley, Clr White, Clr Gash, Clr Wells, Clr Cheyne, Clr Alldrick, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes and Clr Proudfoot

Against: Clr Levett, Clr Gartner and Russ Pigg

CARRIED

DE17.23 Development Application – Parson St Ulladulla – Proposed Lot 15 in Subdivision of Lot 3 DP 746228 and Lots 5 & 6 DP 805221

HPERM Ref: D17/50496

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1. Confirm that it supports the proposed height variation to the 7.5m height limit and allow the increase sought;

2. Refer the application back to staff for determination by delegation;

3. That a review of the 7.5m building heights in this part of the town centre be included in any future review of DCP2014 Chapter S8 – Ulladulla Town Centre

RESOLVED (Clr Wells / Clr Findley) MIN17.183

That Council:

1. Confirm that it supports the proposed height variation to the 7.5m height limit and allow the increase sought;

2. Refer the application back to staff for determination by delegation;

3. That a review of the 7.5m building heights in this part of the town centre be included in any future review of DCP2014 Chapter S8 – Ulladulla Town Centre

4. Any review of the DCP in the near future be limited to South of Deering Street and the R3 zone.

For: Clr Findley, Clr White, Clr Gash, Clr Wells, Clr Levett, Clr Cheyne, Clr Gartner, Clr Pakes and Russ Pigg

Against: Clr Alldrick, Clr Guile and Clr Proudfoot

CARRIED

There being no further business, the meeting concluded, the time being 7.09pm.

Clr White

CHAIRPERSON

Development Committee – Tuesday 11 April 2017

Page 5

DE17.24 Planning Proposal PP006 - Halloran Trust Lands - Potential Biodiversity Certification Application

HPERM Ref: D17/5761

Group: Planning Environment & Development Group

Section: Strategic Planning

Purpose / Summary

Seek in principle endorsement to commence the process to potentially enable the Biodiversity Certification of land associated with the Halloran Trust Planning Proposal (PP) at Culburra Beach, Callala Bay and Kinghorne (near Currarong).

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That the Committee support in principle the preparation of a Biodiversity Certification Application for the Planning Proposal for the Halloran Trust Lands at Culburra Beach, Callala Bay and Kinghorne.

Options

1. Adopt the recommendation to support (in principle) Council being the applicant of a Biodiversity Certification Application associated with the Halloran Trust PP.

Implications: This will provide certainty in ensuring adequate land is conserved for biodiversity protection and management in association with and whilst moving forward with the PP. This also potentially provides a revenue stream for the ongoing management of the lands ultimately identified for conservation purposes.

2. Adopt an alternative recommendation.

Implications: The other alternative mechanism in this regard is BioBanking. Whilst this process is relatively similar procedurally, BioBanking does not guarantee land biodiversity protection and management at the strategic planning stage. Further approvals are required at the Development Approvals stage which can cause delays with the eventual development of the subject lands.

Background

Council received a PP request for land at Culburra Beach, Callala Bay and Kinghorne (near Currarong) known as the Halloran Trust Lands from Allen Price & Skarratts Pty Ltd on 4 August 2014. The PP relates to the land that has been deferred from the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014 and proposes to resolve/determine the zoning of the land.

Since receiving the PP request, Council supported the proposal in principle and submitted it to the NSW Government for Gateway determination in October 2014. The Gateway determination enabling the PP to proceed further was received on 16 November 2015.

Council staff in association with a Project Control Group (PCG), established by the NSW Government to assist with this significant project, have been working through the various aspects of the Gateway determination. Work has commenced on the detailed stage 1 assessments that are required to consider strategic biodiversity and water quality requirements. This report deals with an aspect of the biodiversity work that requires a decision by Council.

The Gateway determination required that a flora and fauna assessment and biodiversity offset strategy be prepared and to comply with the BioBanking Assessment Methodology or Biodiversity Certification Assessment Methodology.

Since receiving the Gateway determination the proponent has proceeded with engaging EcoLogical Pty Ltd to commence the field surveys and subsequent offset strategy in accordance with the Biodiversity Certification method. As part of this process, the proponent has requested that Council undertake the role of lodging the application that will be prepared and this requires a resolution of Council to initiate.

Biodiversity Certification Process

Biodiversity Certification is a mechanism that allows integration of planning for biodiversity conservation and proposed land use intensification at the strategic planning level. It is intended to run alongside and compliment/support the PP or rezoning process.

During the certification process the Planning Authority (in this case Council) must identify:

· Areas of high biodiversity value to be protected from development; and

· Other areas of lower biodiversity value, including cleared land that is suitable for development purposes.

An application for Biodiversity Certification is made to the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) and may be granted by the NSW Minister for Environment. An application must demonstrate that a conferral will result in an ‘improve or maintain’ outcome of biodiversity values. The application also sets out the land that is proposed for Biodiversity Certification (for development), proposed conservation measures (including financial contribution to fund conservation measures that improve biodiversity values) and the parties required to implement the conservation measures.

Biodiversity Certification of land provides certainty that a positive conservation outcome can be achieved by identifying land for biodiversity protection and management in perpetuity. In addition, it identifies a funding mechanism for the ongoing conservation and management. These key aspects are ‘locked in’ at the strategic planning stage and remove the requirement for further flora and fauna investigations at the subsequent Development Approval stage.

An application for Biodiversity Certification is generally developed in conjunction with a PP. Only a Planning Authority may apply to the NSW Minister for the Environment to have Biodiversity Certification conferred on specified land.

As indicated, the proponent of the Halloran Trust PP have requested that Council undertake the role of lodging the application.

Community Engagement

Biodiversity Certification applications must be publicly exhibited for a minimum period 30 days in accordance with the relevant legislation. Where the Biodiversity Certification application is associated with a current PP, the application is to be publicly exhibited concurrently with the PP where possible.

Financial Implications

The preparation of the necessary flora and fauna studies, including Biodiversity Certification Assessment and the Biodiversity Certification Strategy as required by OEH has been commissioned and funded by the proponent. However the work is being guided by the PCG for this overall project.

Council will be responsible for the management of the application (including advertising and exhibition, preparing a submissions report and staff attendance at meetings) and the associated costs will be funded by the proponent through payment of the relevant PP fees and charges.

Development Committee – Tuesday 11 April 2017

Page 8

DE17.25 Submission - Draft SEPP Education & SEPP Infrastructure Review

HPERM Ref: D17/93026

Group: Planning Environment & Development Group

Section: Strategic Planning

Attachments: 1. Submission - Department of Planning & Environment - proposed Education SEPP and review of Infrastructure SEPP ⇩

Purpose / Summary

The NSW Department of Planning & Environment (DP&E) is proposing to introduce a new education-based State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) called State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments & Child Care Facilities) 2017 (SEPP Education) and is reviewing the existing State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (Infrastructure SEPP).

The purpose of this report is to outline the key changes proposed and seek endorsement to provide the submission on these changes that is included as Attachment 1 to this report.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council make a submission (Attachment 1) to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment on the new State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments & Child Care Facilities) 2017 and the review of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007.

Options

1. Adopt the resolution and endorse Attachment 1 as Council’s submission.

Implications: This is the preferred option as it will enable Council to provide a submission on the proposed changes.

2. Make changes to the draft submission included as Attachment 1 and submit.

Implications: This option will still enable Council to provide a submission, however the implications of any possible changes are unknown and may require closer consideration or refinement.

3. Not make a submission.

Implications: This is not favoured as it will mean that Council does not provide input on the proposed changes which could impact on Council and/or the community.

Background

The NSW Government, through the DP&E, are proposing to introduce a new education-based planning policy called State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments & Child Care Facilities) 2017 (SEPP Education).

There are a number of related amendments to other environmental planning instruments that are also proposed as part of this overall policy package, including:

· Amendments to the SEPP (State and Regional Development) 2011 and SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 (Codes SEPP),

· Consequential changes to the SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007 (Infrastructure SEPP) and the Standard Instrument Local Environmental Plans (LEP’s).

Education Establishments & Child Care Facilities SEPP

This new SEPP intends to make it easier for child-care providers, schools, TAFE’s and universities to build new facilities and improve existing ones by streamlining the planning process to save time and money and deliver greater consistency across NSW.

This forms part of the NSW Government’s commitment to a simplified planning system. The new SEPP is broken into the various types of establishments and the proposals for each include;

Child Care Facilities

· Align national definitions and categories of early childhood education and care facilities with state planning definitions;

· Enable some types of early childhood education and care facilities to be considered as exempt or complying development;

· Adopt key requirements from the National Quality Framework for assessment of early childhood education and care facilities;

· Introduce standards for applications that Councils cannot refuse a development application for;

· Make it easier for the temporary relocation of early childhood education and care facilities in the event of an emergency.

· Update all Standard Instrument LEP’s across NSW to include the national definitions of early childhood education and care facilities and permit child care facilities in all R2 Low Density Residential and IN2 Light Industrial zones.

Schools

· Minor developments such as play equipment, landscaping, amenities buildings, single storey portable classrooms and sporting facilities will be permitted as exempt development at existing schools. If the proposed works meet all nominated development standards development approval is not needed.

· Provisions that are already in the Infrastructure SEPP for buildings such as classrooms, libraries, administration offices, school halls and canteens will be able to be undertaken as “complying development”.

· Permit these buildings to be constructed up to a maximum height of four storeys or 22 metres, provided they meet set requirements including side and rear street setbacks, privacy and landscaping.

· If a proposal does not meet all of the complying development standards, a development application must be submitted.

· All new schools and major expansions of existing schools with a project value of $20 million or more will become State Significant Development (SSD) and be assessed by the NSW Government.

· Roads and traffic safety outcomes are a key issue related for the development of schools - applications for complying development certificates, where the proposal increases student numbers by more than 50 students, must be accompanied by a traffic certificate from the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) certifying the impacts on the surrounding road network are acceptable. Applications for SSD will also require submission of a traffic impact report.

Tertiary Institutions

· The Infrastructure SEPP currently contains provisions for TAFE institutions and limited provisions for universities. It is proposed to transfer these provisions into the new SEPP and to consolidate all the provisions for educational facilities in one policy document.

· Planning provisions already exist in the Infrastructure SEPP permitting buildings on TAFE campuses as complying development, such as classrooms, libraries, lecture theatres, trade or training facilities, trade or training facilities, and administration offices. The new SEPP will expand these guidelines to also apply them to universities and introduce some additional development types such as cafes, take away food and drink premises and recreation facilities.

· If a proposal does not meet all the standards listed in the new SEPP, a development application must be submitted.

The detailed information package on this proposal is available on DP&E’s website at:

http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/Policy-and-Legislation/State-Environmental-Planning-Policies-Review/Draft-Education-SEPP

Infrastructure SEPP Review

The proposed changes to the Infrastructure SEPP intend to make it easier and faster to deliver and maintain social infrastructure including health facilities, correctional centres, emergency and police services, and also Council services.

Key changes for Council include:

· Optimising the use of commuter hubs by providing more services and conveniences at transport interchanges

· Enabling Councils to better manage and maintain their lands, including their operational lands

The proposed changes also include other operational and housekeeping improvements to ensure the policy remains up to date and effective.

Further information on this Review is also available on DP&E’s website at:

http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/Policy-and-Legislation/State-Environmental-Planning-Policies-Review/Draft-infrastructure-SEPP

Council staff comments

Council staff attended a DP&E workshop in Wollongong on the proposed changes. Relevant Council staff have also reviewed the proposed changes in detail and relevant comments have been collated into Council’s submission included as Attachment 1 to this report.

There are a number of concerns in relation the proposed changes and their potential impact on both the community and Council, including:

· Adding a new SEPP to the existing range of SEPP’s potentially increases the complexity of the planning system at a development assessment level for both Council planners, proponents and others;

· Increase in exempt and complying development and development without consent provides the community with less opportunities to have a say and they will potentially not realise the scale of changes until work commences on site or they view a set of drawings for a proposed development;

· The proposed controls in the new Education Establishments & Child Care Facilities SEPP seem to lack integration with the wider planning system. Development cannot be refused if it meets the criteria in the SEPP even when the planning issues cannot be overcome, i.e. child care centres in R2 Low Density Residential Zones or IN1 General Industrial or IN2 Light Industrial zones and family day care centres in bush fire prone areas without adequate assessment.

· Expanded exempt development for Education Facilities to allow building heights of 22 metres (four storeys).

· Controls appear to be metropolitan based and little consideration is given to different circumstances in regional areas.

Whilst there a number of changes that raise concerns, there are a number of changes included in the Infrastructure SEPP Review that are supported as they will increase Council’s ability to undertake required work on its land. This includes:

· Refining definitions in the Infrastructure SEPP to align with Standard Instrument LEP definitions;

· Increased ability for Council to carry out work on Council land without requiring consent; and

· Additional provisions for waste or resource management facilities for certain extensions and work carried out.

Community Engagement

The proposed changes were publicly exhibited from 8 February to 24 March 2017 with numerous documents available on DP&E’s website. DP&E have been advised that Council will provide its submission after the April Development Committee Meeting to enable its endorsement by Council.

Policy Implications

The proposed changes are explained and supported by a number of documents and policies including:

· Amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000

· Planning guidelines for child care facilities

· Design guidelines for school facilities

· An Environmental Assessment Code of Practice for non-government schools;

· A planning circular providing guidance to applicants and consent authorities in relation to development consent conditions that cap student and staff numbers; and

· An explanation of Intended Effect (EIE), setting out the detail of the package in plain English.

The new SEPP will also require amendments to the standard instrument LEP; however, this will not occur until such time as the SEPP comes into effect and an amendment to the Standard Instrument Order is made.

The finalisation this package of changes will see the implementation of State-wide Guidelines, which will override Council’s LEP and DCP controls. Any changes considered necessary to Council’s controls will be addressed when the final SEPP’s are made.

Financial Implications

There are no immediate financial implications for Council.

Risk Implications

At an overall level the proposed SEPP Review appears to increase complexity in the planning system at the development assessment level for Council planners, proponents and the community

With the increasing range of exempt and complying development and development without consent, along with the expanding Code SEPP, the community is slowly having fewer opportunities to have a say, particularly with regard to the legislative changes.

There are no immediate risks for Council, however there are some concerns that increasing State-wide Guidelines and the types of development that are permitted through the SEPP Review is concerning and may reduce the ability to consider development applications on their merit.

Development Committee – Tuesday 11 April 2017

Page 21

DE17.26 Readoption of Development Services Policies

HPERM Ref: D17/72708

Group: Planning Environment & Development Group

Section: Development Services

Attachments: 1. Burials - Private Burial Grounds ⇩

2. Assessment of Council's Own Development Applications ⇩

Purpose / Summary

To consider the re-adoption of existing policies which deal with the responsibilities of Planning Environmental & Development Group.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council adopt the following policies, with the minor amendments outlined in the report:

1. Private Burial Grounds

2. Policy for the Assessment of Council’s Own Development Applications

Options

1. Adopt the recommendation

Implications: The minor changes made to the policies will assist with policy

implementation and interpretation.

2. Not adopt the recommendation and give further instruction to staff.

Background

The Planning Environment & Development Group policies listed below have been reviewed, mostly without any substantive change but with minor amendments as follows:

The Private Burial Grounds Policy was developed to provide guidance with respect to private burial grounds, inlcuding, however not limited to, in which zones Council supports a private burial ground, who can be buried on private land and considerations when a Development Application is submitted.

In consultation with the Department of Planning and Environment, it was agreed that private burial grounds can be defined as a ‘cemetery’ under Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014 (SLEP 2014). A ‘cemetery’ is permissible with the consent of Council within land zoned RU1, RU2 and SP2 within SLEP 2014.

Accordingly, it is recommended that reference to private burial grounds throughout the policy be revised to read private cemetery, to relect the relevant definition under SLEP 2014.

Part 2 of the Policy contains references to both SLEP 2014 and zones contained within Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 1985 (SLEP 1985). It is recommended that:

a) the wording within this part be refined to clarify where Council will/won’t support a private cemetery;

b) reference to zones within SLEP 1985 be removed;

c) reference to Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan (Jerberra Estate) 2014 be included; and

d) reference to areas deferred from SLEP 2014 be included.

Furthermore, there are references to now defunct Departments and positions within Council. As part of this review the current Groups and positions within Council have been referred to.

Policy for the Assessment of Council’s Own Development Applications was formulated following Council’s consideration of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC)’s Position Paper on “Corruption Risks in NSW Development Approval Processes” dated September 2007. Any activity requiring development consent where Council is the applicant and landowner or where Council may have an interest in the land is subject to the policy’s provisions.

After consultation with ICAC, no relevant reviews or updates have been released on the ICAC Position Paper since 2007; as such, no circumstance has arisen to warrant revision of the policy. The only change is an update to the new name of the Group – Planning Environment & Development Group, on the front page of the policy.

Community Engagement

The Planning Environment & Development Group policies for readoption have been reviewed in conjunction with the following internal and external agencies:

a) Independent Commission Against Corruption,

b) Council’s Strategic Planning Section,

c) Council’s Bereavment Services, and

d) Department of Planning & Environment.

Development Committee – Tuesday 11 April 2017

Page 30

DE17.27 Readoption of Community Consultation Policy for Development Applications

HPERM Ref: D17/75255

Group: Planning Environment & Development Group

Section: Development Services

Attachments: 1. Community Consultation Policy - for Development Applications ( Including Subdivision ) and the Formulation of Development Guidelines and Policies (under separate cover) ⇨

Purpose / Summary

To consider the re-adoption of the existing Community Consultation Policy for Development Applications.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council adopt the policy with the minor amendments outlined in this report.

Options

1. Adopt the recommendation.

Implications: The minor amendments made to this policy will assist with policy implementation and interpretation.

2. Not adopt the recommendation and give further instruction to staff.

Background

The purpose of this policy is to ensure that the community is consulted during the processing of development applications and the formulation of development guidelines and policies; and that the community is informed of decisions made by Council.

The following minor amendments are proposed:

1. Modify reference of ‘Part V matters’ to ‘Part 5 matters’ as the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulations 2000 do not use Roman numerals.

2. Modify bullet point 6 under Part 1 Purpose to read ‘ensure that feedback is given to the community of decisions made.’

3. Delete bullet point 3 under Part 2 Statement as Council’s Community Consultation Strategy (POL04/29) as it no longer exists.

4. Modify reference of ‘Integrated Development’ to ‘Nominated Integrated Development’ within the 3^rd paragraph under Part 3.3.2 Legal Requirements as the thirty (30) day notification period only applies to Nominated Integrated Development.

5. Delete the 4^th paragraph under Part 3.3.2 Legal Requirements as it is incorrect and also no longer applies. The paragraph refers to a clause (No. 37A) in the Shoalhaven Local Enviornmental Plan 2014. This clause applied to Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 1985. Whilst this Plan still remains applicable to some land, this provision in the policy is considered superfluous.

6. Revise subject sites and delete street names in Diagram 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 3a and 3b due to concerns raised by the landowner/s.

7. Delete ‘Commercial Caravans’ and requirement under Table 2: Development Not Requiring Notification, as Council’s Policy Relating to the Parking of Caravans for Commercial and Community Activities within the City of Shoalhaven (POL12/124) no longer exists.

8. Relocate Part 3.3.19 Minor development/activities not requiring Notification to before Part 3.3.

These amendments are proposed to essentially ‘tidy up’ the current policy and are not substantive given the proposed amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. These proposed amendments, if implemented, will require Council to comprehensively review its community consultation policy.

Internal Consultation

Relevant officers within the Planning and Development Services Group were consulted and comments incorporated into the proposed amendments.

Development Committee – Tuesday 11 April 2017

Page 32

DE17.28 Development Application – 7 Beach St, Huskisson - Lot B DP 359526

DA. No: DA16/2070/4

HPERM Ref: D17/106804

Group: Planning Environment & Development Group

Section: Development Services

Description of Development: Demolition of existing dwelling and ancillary outbuilding, and Construction of a residential flat building

Owner: JACA Property Group Pty Ltd

Applicant: Lee Carmichael Town Planning

Notification Dates: 23 September 2016 to 10 October 2016

No. of Submissions: Five (5) objections, nil in support.

Purpose / Reason for consideration by Council

Council resolved to call in the application on 25 October 2016 due to public interest. This report is for Council’s information noting that the application will be the subject of a detailed addendum report.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority) (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council receives this report for information.

Options

1. Receives the report for information.

Implications: Council will be able to consider the report and note that there is an addendum report on the matter for separate and detailed consideration.

2. Not receive this report and make an alternative recommendation and provide direction to staff.

Background

The application is being put to Council following Council’s resolution to call in the application. The applicant and owners have requested the matter be put to the April meeting. This report and addendum is a response to that request.

The application requires further information to resolve solar impact /access issues which are a consequence of non-conforming setbacks.

There are also other non-compliances with respect to Council’s Development Control Plan and Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014.

These issues are detailed in the addendum report.

Development Committee – Tuesday 11 April 2017

Page 33

Local Government Amendment (governance & planning) act 2016

Chapter 3, Section 8A Guiding principles for councils

(1) Exercise of functions generally

The following general principles apply to the exercise of functions by councils:

(a) Councils should provide strong and effective representation, leadership, planning and decision-making.

(b) Councils should carry out functions in a way that provides the best possible value for residents and ratepayers.

(c) Councils should plan strategically, using the integrated planning and reporting framework, for the provision of effective and efficient services and regulation to meet the diverse needs of the local community.

(d) Councils should apply the integrated planning and reporting framework in carrying out their functions so as to achieve desired outcomes and continuous improvements.

(e) Councils should work co-operatively with other councils and the State government to achieve desired outcomes for the local community.

(f) Councils should manage lands and other assets so that current and future local community needs can be met in an affordable way.

(g) Councils should work with others to secure appropriate services for local community needs.

(h) Councils should act fairly, ethically and without bias in the interests of the local community.

(i) Councils should be responsible employers and provide a consultative and supportive working environment for staff.

(2) Decision-making

The following principles apply to decision-making by councils (subject to any other applicable law):

(a) Councils should recognise diverse local community needs and interests.

(b) Councils should consider social justice principles.

(d) Councils should consider the principles of ecologically sustainable development.

(e) Council decision-making should be transparent and decision-makers are to be accountable for decisions and omissions.

(3) Community participation

Councils should actively engage with their local communities, through the use of the integrated planning and reporting framework and other measures.

Chapter 3, Section 8B Principles of sound financial management

The following principles of sound financial management apply to councils:

(a) Council spending should be responsible and sustainable, aligning general revenue and expenses.

(b) Councils should invest in responsible and sustainable infrastructure for the benefit of the local community.

(c) Councils should have effective financial and asset management, including sound policies and processes for the following:

(i) performance management and reporting,

(ii) asset maintenance and enhancement,

(iii) funding decisions,

(iv) risk management practices.

(d) Councils should have regard to achieving intergenerational equity, including ensuring the following:

(i) policy decisions are made after considering their financial effects on future generations,

(ii) the current generation funds the cost of its services

Chapter 3, 8C Integrated planning and reporting principles that apply to councils

The following principles for strategic planning apply to the development of the integrated planning and reporting framework by councils:

(a) Councils should identify and prioritise key local community needs and aspirations and consider regional priorities.

(b) Councils should identify strategic goals to meet those needs and aspirations.

(d) Councils should ensure that the strategic goals and activities to work towards them may be achieved within council resources.

(e) Councils should regularly review and evaluate progress towards achieving strategic goals.

(f) Councils should maintain an integrated approach to planning, delivering, monitoring and reporting on strategic goals.

(g) Councils should collaborate with others to maximise achievement of strategic goals.

(h) Councils should manage risks to the local community or area or to the council effectively and proactively.

(i) Councils should make appropriate evidence-based adaptations to meet changing needs and circumstances.