Development & Environment Committee

 

 

Meeting Date:     Tuesday, 05 May, 2020

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

Time:                   5.00pm

 

Membership (Quorum - 5)

Clr Joanna Gash - Chairperson

Clr Greg Watson

All Councillors

Chief Executive Officer or nominee

 

 

 

Please note: The proceedings of this meeting (including presentations, deputations and debate) will be webcast and may be recorded and broadcast under the provisions of the Code of Meeting Practice.  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 & Environment Committee - 7 April 2020.............................................. 1

3.    Declarations of Interest

4.    Call Over of the Business Paper

5.    Mayoral Minute

6.    Deputations and Presentations

7.    Notices of Motion / Questions on Notice

Nil

8.    Reports  

Planning Environment & Development

DE20.36...... DA19/1846 - 204, 206 & 208 Kinghorne Street -  Lot 1 DP 130928, Lot A DP 370205 & Lot 5 DP 542693 and 19 & 21 Gould Avenue - Lot A DP 392035 & Lot B DP 370205.......................................................................................................... 13

DE20.37...... DA19/1841 - 44 Duncan St Huskisson - Lot 6 Sec 9 DP 758530............... 23

DE20.38...... DS19/1522 Modification of Consent – 123 & 132 Forster Drive Bawley Point – Lot 21 DP 1217069 & Lot 33 DP1259627............................................................... 38

DE20.39...... Outcomes - Shoalhaven Local Heritage Assistance Fund 2019-2020........ 56

DE20.40...... Proposed Policy Review - Nowra CBD Contributions Discount Subsidy.... 68

DE20.41...... Exhibition Outcomes and Proposed Finalisation - Planning Proposal - Ulladulla CBD (Southern part) Building Height and Zoning Amendment............................ 74

DE20.42...... Proposed Heritage Bushfire Planning Proposal - Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014 (PP053)....................................................................................... 81

DE20.43...... Quarterly Review for Compliance Matters................................................... 85      

9.    Confidential Reports                     

Nil


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page i

 

Development & Environment Committee

Delegation:

Pursuant to s377(1) of the Local Government Act 1993 (LG Act) the Committee is delegated the functions conferred on Council by the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act), 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 section 8.11 or section 8.9 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

a.    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.

b.    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 7 of the EPA Act.

c.    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.

d.    Determination of variations to development standards related to development applications under the EPA Act where the development application involves a development which seeks to vary 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.

e.    Determination of variations from the acceptable solutions and/or other numerical standards contained within the DCP or a Council Policy that the Chief Executive Officer requires to be determined by the Committee

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

g.    Review of determinations of development applications under sections 8.11 and 8.9 of the EP&A Act that the Chief Executive Officer requires to be determined by the Committee.

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

i.     The preparation, adoption and review of policies and strategies of the Council in respect to sustainability matters related to climate change, biodiversity, waste, water, energy, transport, and sustainable purchasing.

j.     The preparation, adoption and review of policies and strategies of the Council in respect to management of natural resources / assets, floodplain, estuary and coastal management.  


 

 

 

 

Minutes of the Development & Environment Committee

 

 

Meeting Date:     Tuesday, 7 April 2020 (Reconvened Thursday 9 April 2020)

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

Time:                   5.10pm

 

 

The following members were present:

 

Clr Joanna Gash - Chairperson

Clr Amanda Findley

Clr John Wells

Clr Patricia White

Clr Kaye Gartner – (Remotely)

Clr Nina Digiglio – (Remotely)

Clr Annette Alldrick – (Remotely)

Clr John Levett

Clr Andrew Guile – (Remotely)

Clr Mitchell Pakes

Clr Greg Watson

Clr Mark Kitchener

Clr Bob Proudfoot

Mr Stephen Dunshea - Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Procedural Motion - Adjournment of Meeting

procedural motion (rESOLVEd) (Clr Pakes / Clr Watson)                                     MIN20.244

That the meeting be adjourned to reconvene at the conclusion of the Extra ordinary Meeting.

CARRIED

 

 

The Meeting adjourned the time being 5.11pm

 

The meeting reconvened the time being 7.11pm

 

The following members were present:

 

Clr Joanna Gash - Chairperson

Clr Amanda Findley

Clr Patricia White

Clr Kaye Gartner – (Remotely)

Clr Nina Digiglio – (Remotely)

Clr Annette Alldrick – (Remotely)

Clr John Levett

Clr Andrew Guile – (Remotely)

Clr Mitchell Pakes

Clr Greg Watson

Clr Mark Kitchener

Clr Bob Proudfoot

Mr Stephen Dunshea - Chief Executive Officer

 

 

The Mayor advised that Council is now in Breach of the Public Health Order and Recommendations for gathering in a space for more than 4 hours and advised that this meeting will be adjourned to a date to be determined.

 

The meeting adjourned the time being 7.18pm

 

The meeting reconvened Thursday 9 April 2020 the time being 4.00pm.

 

The following members were present:

 

Clr Joanna Gash – Chairperson

Clr Amanda Findley (Remotely)

Clr John Wells

Clr Patricia White

Clr Kaye Gartner – (Remotely)

Clr Nina Digiglio – (Remotely)

Clr Annette Alldrick – (Remotely)

Clr John Levett (Remotely)

Clr Andrew Guile – (Remotely)

Clr Mitchell Pakes

Clr Greg Watson

Clr Mark Kitchener

Clr Bob Proudfoot

Mr Stephen Dunshea - Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Apologies / Leave of Absence

Nil

 

 

Confirmation of the Minutes

RESOLVED (Clr Watson / Clr Levett)                                                                                  MIN20.245

That the Minutes of the Development & Environment Committee held on Tuesday 03 March 2020 be confirmed.

CARRIED

 

 

Declarations of Interest

 

Clr Kitchener – “DE20.25 Development Application – Lake View Drive Burrill Lake– Lot A DP21307 – Significant Non Pecuniary Interest declaration - his wife and friends who assisted with his campaign are members of the Mollymook outriggers club – Will leave the room and will not take part in discussion or vote.

 

Stephen Dunshea - DE20.22 Development Application 83 Quay Road, Callala Beach Lot 17 Sec N DP 818 – Less than significant non-pecuniary Interest declaration – he lives on the same street as the proposed development – Will remain in the room and take part in discussion and vote.

 

Call Over of the Business Paper

RESOLVED (Clr Proudfoot / Clr Pakes)                                                                               MIN20.246

That all items in the business paper be considered in the order they appear in the agenda.

CARRIED

 

 

 

Deputations and Presentations

 

DE20.22 Development Application – 83 Quay Road, Callala Beach – Lot 17 Sec N DP 8188

Mr Lee Carmichael submitted a VIDEO deputation FOR the recommendation.

Mr John Steinthal submitted a WRITTEN Deputation and VIDEO from concerned residents AGAINST the recommendation.

DE20.23 - Development Application - DA19/1852 – 43 Tahnee Street, Sanctuary Point – Lot 47 DP 1243551

Mr Robert Freeman submitted a WRITTEN Deputation AGAINST the recommendation.

DE20.25 – Development Application – Lake View Drive BURRILL LAKE– Lot A DP21307 – (Page 34)

Mr Hank Lann submitted a WRITTEN Deputation AGAINST the recommendation.

Mr Paul Watkins Representing Mollymook Outrigger Canoe Club submitted a VIDEO deputation FOR the recommendation.

DE20.26 - Development Application - 1 Princess Avenue South Burrill Lake - Lot 47 DP 1051945

Ms Lorraine Dixon submitted a VIDEO deputation AGAINST the recommendation.

DE20.28 Review - Clause 2.8 Temporary Use of Land, Shoalhaven LEP 2014

Mr John Willmott submitted a WRITTEN Deputation AGAINST the recommendation.

DE20.29 - Review - Tourist & Visitor Accommodation - Planning Provisions (page 83)

Mr Stuart Coughlan, representing The Berry Forum, submitted a WRITTEN Deputation AGAINST the recommendation.

Mr Anthony Houghton, representing Berry Chamber of Commerce submitted a WRITTEN Deputation FOR the recommendation.

DE20.30 - Planning Proposal (PP035 ) - Lot 3 DP 846470, Jervis Bay Road, Falls Creek - Public Exhibition Detail Confirmation

Mr Stuart Dixon submitted a WRITTEN Deputation FOR the recommendation.

 

Motion

RESOLVED (Clr Pakes / Clr White)                                                                                     MIN20.247

That Council deal first with the items for which deputations had been received.

CARRIED

 

 

Reports

 

DE20.22     Development Application – 83 Quay Road, Callala Beach – Lot 17 Sec N DP 8188

HPERM Ref: D19/378379

Stephen Dunshea – Less than significant non-pecuniary Interest declaration – he lives on the same street as the proposed development – Remained in the room and took part in discussion and vote

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council approve Development Application DA19/1847 for construction of a two-storey dwelling at 83 Quay Road, Callala Beach – Lot 17 Sec N DP 8188, subject to the recommended conditions of consent contained in Attachment 1 of this report.

 

RESOLVED (Clr Proudfoot / Clr White)                                                                               MIN20.248

That Council approve Development Application DA19/1847 for construction of a two-storey dwelling at 83 Quay Road, Callala Beach – Lot 17 Sec N DP 8188, subject to the recommended conditions of consent contained in Attachment 1 of this report.

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Alldrick, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Clr Findley, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio and Clr Levett

CARRIED

Note: A Rescission Motion has been received on this item.

 

 

DE20.25     Development Application – Lake View Drive BURRILL LAKE– Lot A DP21307

HPERM Ref: D20/64858

Clr Kitchener – Significant Non Pecuniary Interest declaration - his wife and friends who assisted with his campaign are members of the Mollymook outriggers club – Left the room and did not take part in discussion or vote.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That the Development Application for relocation of the Childrens Playground within the reserve and the construction of a boat shed for the storage of paddle powered boats on the land at Lake View Drive Burrill Lake - Lots A DP 21307 be approved subject to the recommended conditions of consent contained in Attachment 2 of this report.

 

RESOLVED (Clr Watson / Clr White)                                                                                   MIN20.249

That

1.    The Development Application for relocation of the Childrens Playground within the reserve and the construction of a boat shed for the storage of paddle powered boats on the land at Lake View Drive Burrill Lake - Lots A DP 21307 be refused for the following reasons:

a.    The alienation of the Public Reserve for private use is unacceptable to the local community

b.    The building is out of character with the built environment of the local area.

c.    The building will obstruct existing views

2.    The Chief Executive Officer (Director – Planning Environment and Development) work with the applicant in an endeavour to find a more suitable location for the development.

For:             Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Clr Gash, Clr Findley, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick and Clr Levett

CARRIED

Note: A Rescission Motion has been received for this item.

 

 

DE20.26     Development Application – 1 Princess Avenue South Burrill Lake –Lot 47 DP1051945

HPERM Ref: D20/76497

Clr Kitchener returned to the meeting.

 

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1.    Confirm that it supports the proposed variation, under clause 4.6 of Shoalhaven Local Environment Plan 2014, to the 11m maximum building height to allow for the development of the motel to a maximum 12.8m in height.

2.    Refer the application back to staff for determination

 

Motion (Clr Pakes / Clr White)

That Council:

1.    Confirm that it supports the proposed variation, under clause 4.6 of Shoalhaven Local Environment Plan 2014, to the 11m maximum building height to allow for the development of the motel to a maximum 12.8m in height.

2.    Refer the application back to staff for determination.

 

Amendment (Clr Gartner / Clr Levett)

That That DA 19/2160/4 be returned to Council for final determination, due to the considerable public interest.

For:             Clr Findley, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett and Clr Proudfoot

Against:    Clr Gash, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener and Stephen Dunshea,

LOST

 

RESOLVED (Clr Pakes / Clr White)                                                                                     MIN20.250

That Council:

1.    Confirm that it supports the proposed variation, under clause 4.6 of Shoalhaven Local Environment Plan 2014, to the 11m maximum building height to allow for the development of the motel to a maximum 12.8m in height.

2.    Refer the application back to staff for determination.

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Clr Findley, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett and Clr Proudfoot

CARRIED

 

 

DE20.28     Review - Clause 2.8 Temporary Use of Land, Shoalhaven LEP 2014

HPERM Ref: D20/71160

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1.    Not proceed to amend Clause 2.8 (Temporary use of land) in the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014 at this point.

2.    Monitor the outcome of both the Destination Sydney Surrounds South work in this regard and the relevant NSW Council Planning Proposals regarding function centres in rural areas and staff report back to Council at the appropriate point regarding opportunities that arise for Shoalhaven.

3.    Prepare an amendment to Shoalhaven Development Control Plan 2014 to provide guidance regarding temporary use developments as outlined in this report and receive a further report on the proposed detail of the draft DCP amendment prior to it proceeding to public exhibition.

4.    Advise relevant stakeholders of this resolution; including CCBs, Shoalhaven Tourism Advisory Group, the Development/Tourism Industry, those who made a submission/submitted a questionnaire and attendees of the information session.

5.    Update the Strategic Planning Works Program to reflect the outcomes of this resolution.

 

RESOLVED (Clr White / Clr Wells)                                                                                      MIN20.251

That Council:

1.    Not proceed to amend Clause 2.8 (Temporary use of land) in the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014 at this point.

2.    Monitor the outcome of both the Destination Sydney Surrounds South work in this regard and the relevant NSW Council Planning Proposals regarding function centres in rural areas and staff report back to Council at the appropriate point regarding opportunities that arise for Shoalhaven.

3.    Prepare an amendment to Shoalhaven Development Control Plan 2014 to provide guidance regarding temporary use developments as outlined in this report and receive a further report on the proposed detail of the draft DCP amendment prior to it proceeding to public exhibition.

4.    Advise relevant stakeholders of this resolution; including CCBs, Shoalhaven Tourism Advisory Group, the Development/Tourism Industry, those who made a submission/submitted a questionnaire and attendees of the information session.

5.    Update the Strategic Planning Works Program to reflect the outcomes of this resolution.

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Findley, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Nil

CARRIED

 

 

 

 

DE20.29     Review - Tourist & Visitor Accommodation - Planning Provisions

HPERM Ref: D20/20045

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1.    Provide ‘in principle’ support for a Planning Proposal (PP) to amend  the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014 to introduce a new Part 7 ‘Additional local provisions’ clause based on the model clause ‘Rural and nature-based tourist facilities’ provided at Attachment 2,

2.    Receive a further report in due course that considers the implications of any guidance material/revised model clause released by the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) and that presents a PP for consideration to obtain the required resolution to proceed to Gateway, as appropriate.

3.    Continue the preparation of a draft amendment to Shoalhaven Development Control Plan 2014 Chapter G15: Tourist and Visitor Accommodation, in accordance with:

a.    Council’s previous resolution of 5 March 2019 (MIN19.113), and

b.    The further investigation areas outlined in Attachment 1. 

4.    Receive a further report on the proposed detail of the draft DCP amendment prior to it proceeding to public exhibition.

5.    Advise relevant stakeholders of this resolution; including Community Consultative Bodies, the Development/Tourism Industry and those who made a submission/submitted a questionnaire.

6.    Update the Strategic Planning Works Program to reflect the outcomes of this resolution.

 

RESOLVED (Clr Watson / Clr Pakes)                                                                                  MIN20.252

That the report be moved for information.

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Findley, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Nil

CARRIED

 

 

DE20.30     Planning Proposal (PP035 ) - Lot 3 DP 846470, Jervis Bay Road, Falls Creek  - Public Exhibition Detail Confirmation

HPERM Ref: D20/52111

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1.    Update the Planning Proposal for Lot 3 DP 846470, Jervis Bay Road, Falls Creek (PP035) to reflect the completed studies, and include the following changes prior to public exhibition:

a.    Update zoning, minimum lot size, and terrestrial biodiversity maps to reflect the revised development footprint.

b.    The intended outcome be revised to allow up to 13 residential lots, no smaller than 4,000 m2.

c.    Replace the reference to amending Clause 4.2B of the LEP with a statement that the legal mechanism to achieve the intended outcome of the Planning Proposal will be determined in consultation with NSW Parliamentary Counsel.

2.    Place the Planning Proposal and the supporting information on public exhibition for a minimum of 28 days.

3.    Adopt a policy position that should the Planning Proposal ultimately be finalised on the basis of a minimum lot size of 4,000 m2 , that town water will not be supplied to the subject land (regardless of whether the land/subdivision complies with Council’s Rural Water Supply Policy).

 

RESOLVED (Clr White / Clr Wells)                                                                                      MIN20.253

That Council:

1.    Update the Planning Proposal for Lot 3 DP 846470, Jervis Bay Road, Falls Creek (PP035) to reflect the completed studies, and include the following changes prior to public exhibition:

a.    Update zoning, minimum lot size, and terrestrial biodiversity maps to reflect the revised development footprint.

b.    The intended outcome be revised to allow up to 13 residential lots, no smaller than 4,000 m2.

c.    Replace the reference to amending Clause 4.2B of the LEP with a statement that the legal mechanism to achieve the intended outcome of the Planning Proposal will be determined in consultation with NSW Parliamentary Counsel.

2.    Place the Planning Proposal and the supporting information on public exhibition for a minimum of 28 days.

3.    Adopt a policy position that should the Planning Proposal ultimately be finalised on the basis of a minimum lot size of 4,000 m2 , that town water will not be supplied to the subject land (regardless of whether the land/subdivision complies with Council’s Rural Water Supply Policy).

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Findley, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Nil

CARRIED

 

DE20.23     Development Application - DA19/1852 – 43 Tahnee Street, Sanctuary Point – Lot 47 DP 1243551

HPERM Ref: D20/86809

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Development Application DA19/1852 to construct multi dwelling housing (seven (7) dwellings) at Lot 47 DP 1243551, 43 Tahnee Street, Sanctuary Point be approved subject to the recommended conditions of consent contained in Attachment 2 of this report.

 

RESOLVED (Clr Proudfoot / Clr Alldrick)                                                                             MIN20.254

That DA19/1852 be refused on the grounds that the bulk and scale of the development is not consistent with other development in the area.

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Findley, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Kitchener and Clr Proudfoot

Against:    Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson and Stephen Dunshea

CARRIED

Note: A rescission motion was received on this item.

 

Procedural Motion

RESOLVED (Clr Pakes / Clr Wells)                                                                                      MIN20.255

That the following items be resolved ‘en bloc’:

·    DE20.24 Development Application - 204 Kinghorne St  NOWRA - Lot 1 DP 130928

·    DE20.27 Landscape Screening and Bushfire Protection Measures - Planning Proposal (PP029) - Hitchcocks Lane, Berry

·    DE20.31 Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019 Adoption

·    DE20.32 Bomaderry Creek Bushcare Group Action Plan

·    DE20.33 Grant Offer: Moeyan Hill Environmental Works funded through Catchment Action NSW

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Findley, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Nil

CARRIED

 

 

Items marked with an * were resolved ‘en block’.

 

DE20.24     Development Application - 204 Kinghorne St NOWRA - Lot 1 DP 130928

HPERM Ref: D20/93764

RESOLVED* (Clr Pakes / Clr Wells)                                                                                    MIN20.256

That Council

1.       Receive this report as an update on the progress of the assessment of DA19/1846.

2.       Receive a further report following the finalisation of the assessment of DA19/1846.

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Findley, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Nil

CARRIED

 

 

DE20.25     Development Application – Lake View Drive Burrill Lake– Lot A DP21307

HPERM Ref: D20/64858

Item dealt with earlier/later in the meeting see MIN20.249

 

 

DE20.26     Development Application – 1 Princess Avenue South Burrill Lake –Lot 47 DP1051945

HPERM Ref: D20/76497

Item dealt with earlier/later in the meeting see MIN20.250

 

 

 

 

 

DE20.27     Landscape Screening and Bushfire Protection Measures - Planning Proposal (PP029) - Hitchcocks Lane, Berry

HPERM Ref: D19/374064

RESOLVED* (Clr Pakes / Clr Wells)                                                                                    MIN20.257

That Council:

1.    Note the update on the status of Planning Proposal PP029.

2.    Give ‘in principle’ endorsement to locating a proposed landscaped screen adjacent to the southern boundary of the subject land as follows:

a.    Minimum 12 m wide landscaped buffer incorporating an 8 m wide planting area and 2 m wide buffer on either side.

b.    The landscaped buffer is to be maintained by the landholder in accordance with a positive covenant on the adjoining land.

3.    Secure the Proponent’s commitment to implement the above measures via a Voluntary Planning Agreement to be exhibited concurrently with the PP.

4.    Prepare a draft amendment to Chapter N3 (Berry Residential Subdivision) of Shoalhaven Development Control Plan (DCP) 2014 to incorporate the above provisions and any other key recommendations of the supporting studies.

5.    Commence the preparation of an amendment to Shoalhaven Contributions Plan 2019 project 01OREC0009 (Land acquisition for passive open space - Princes Highway, Berry) to recognise the demand the additional lots will place on the passive open space network in the Huntingdale subdivision area.

6.    Prepare a report on the PP package prior to public exhibition, including the updated PP, draft Planning Agreement, and proposed amendments to the CP and DCP.

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Findley, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Nil

CARRIED

 

 

DE20.28     Review - Clause 2.8 Temporary Use of Land, Shoalhaven LEP 2014

HPERM Ref: D20/71160

Item dealt with earlier/later in the meeting see MIN20.251

 

 

DE20.29     Review - Tourist & Visitor Accommodation - Planning Provisions

HPERM Ref: D20/20045

Item dealt with earlier/later in the meeting see MIN20.252

 

 

DE20.30     Planning Proposal (PP035 ) - Lot 3 DP 846470, Jervis Bay Road, Falls Creek  - Public Exhibition Detail Confirmation

HPERM Ref: D20/52111

Item dealt with earlier/later in the meeting see MIN20.253

 

 

DE20.31     Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019 Adoption

HPERM Ref: D20/75763

RESOLVED* (Clr Pakes / Clr Wells)                                                                                    MIN20.258

That Council receive this report for information.

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Findley, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Nil

CARRIED

 

 

DE20.32     Bomaderry Creek Bushcare Group Action Plan

HPERM Ref: D20/77395

RESOLVED* (Clr Pakes / Clr Wells)                                                                                    MIN20.259

That Council adopt the Bomaderry Creek Bushcare Group Action Plan presented as Attachment 1.

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Findley, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Nil

CARRIED

 

 

DE20.33     Grant Offer: Moeyan Hill Environmental Works funded through Catchment Action NSW

HPERM Ref: D20/78148

RESOLVED* (Clr Pakes / Clr Wells)                                                                                    MIN20.260

That Council

1.    Accept the grant offer of $10,500 made by Local Land Services under the Mountains to Sea Biodiversity Corridors project funded through Catchment Action NSW; and

2.    Note co-contributions by Council of $9,465 funded under existing operational budgets (job numbers 15910 and 15915).

3.    Write to Local Land Services  thanking them for the grant.

For:             Clr Gash, Clr Findley, Clr Wells, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Guile, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against:    Nil

CARRIED

 

 

Procedural Motion - Matters of Urgency

RESOLVED (Clr Watson / Clr Pakes)                                                                                  MIN20.261

That the following matters be introduced as matters of urgency.

1.    RD20/1001 – DA Determination Review Section 8.2(1)(a) - Westbrook Rd Nowra - Lot 340 DP 755952 

2.    DS20/1046 5 Kendall Cres Burrill Lake– Lot 3 DP 15648

CARRIED

 

The Chairperson ruled the matters as urgent due to public interest.

 

 

DE20.34     Additional Item - RD20/1001 - DS20/1046

RESOLVED (Clr Watson / Clr Pakes)                                                                                  MIN20.262

That

1.    RD20/1001 DA Determination Review Section 8.2(1)(a) -  Westbrook Rd Nowra - Lot 340 DP 755952 be called in for determination of Council on the grounds of public interest.

2.    DS20/1046 5 Kendall Cres Burrill Lake– Lot 3 DP 15648 which was previously called in to Council now be determined under the delegation of the CEO (Director of Planning Environment and Development).

CARRIED

 

 

 

 

The Chairperson advised a rescission motion has been received for item DE20.25 Development Application – Lake View Drive BURRILL LAKE– Lot A DP21307.

 

 

There being no further business, the meeting concluded, the time being 6.15pm.

 

 

Clr Gash

CHAIRPERSON

 

 

 

 


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page 1

 

 

DE20.36     DA19/1846 - 204, 206 & 208 Kinghorne Street -  Lot 1 DP 130928, Lot A DP 370205 & Lot 5 DP 542693 and 19 & 21 Gould Avenue - Lot A DP 392035 & Lot B DP 370205

 

DA. No:               DA19/1846/4

 

HPERM Ref:       D20/23645

 

Section:              Development Services

Approver:           Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group 

Attachments:     1.  Urban Perspectives s4.15 Assessment Report (under separate cover)

2.  Determination Document - Refusal (under separate cover)

3.  Determination Document - Approval (under separate cover)   

Description of Development: Construction of a residential apartment complex consisting of 91 apartments

 

Owner: Tonandua Pty Ltd

Applicant: PDC Planners

 

Notification Dates: 18 September to 3 October 2019

 

No. of Submissions:  Nil

 

Purpose / Reason for consideration by Council

On 20 January 2020, the Development & Environment Committee resolved to call in the Development Application (DA) for determination by Council (DE20.8). This report is prepared in response.

 

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Development Application DA19/1846 for the ‘Construction of a residential apartment complex consisting of 91 apartments’ be determined by way of refusal for the reasons set out in the Section 4.15 Assessment Report (Attachment 1) and in the Notice of Determination (Attachment 2) to this report.

 

 

Options

1.    Refuse the Development Application (DA) in accordance with the recommendation.

Implications: The proposal would not proceed in its current form. The applicant can, however, apply for a section 8.2 review of Council’s decision and/or could lodge an appeal with the NSW Land and Environment Court against Council’s decision.

2.    Approve the DA.

Implications: Council would have to provide the grounds to support the proposal, that is, provide reasons to support the development, having regard to section 4.15 considerations.  Should Council resolve to approve the DA a suite of conditions have been drafted for consideration.  Under some circumstances, third parties (i.e. objectors) can seek a judicial review of Council’s decision in the NSW Land and Environment Court.

3.    Alternative recommendation.

Implications: Council will need to specify an alternative recommendation and advise staff accordingly.

Location Maps

Background

History

On 1 November 2017, a development application (RA17/1002) was lodged in relation to the subject site.

It is noted that, due to the Capital Investment Value (CIV) exceeding $20 million threshold outlined in the then applying Schedule 4A of the EP&A Act, the relevant determining authority was the Southern Regional Planning Panel (SRPP).

In March 2018, the threshold for a regional development was increased to the current figure of $30 million and transferred into Schedule 7 of the SEPP (State and Regional Development) 2011.

An assessment report was finalised by Council officers and submitted to the SRPP for consideration in April 2019. The report recommended refusal.

On 9 April 2019, a report (D19/87704) was prepared (RD19.1) and submitted to the Council Regional Development Committee outlining the content and recommendations to the SRPP. The Regional Development Committee resolved, That Council

1.      Allow Tonandura Pty Ltd to withdraw its Development Applications in respect of RA17/1002 and invite the company to resubmit.

2.      Should a new application be submitted, provide a refund of up to 50% of the Development Application fees which will inevitably be recouped in the resubmission process.

Shortly before the SRPP meeting was held to determine RA17/1002 the applicant elected to withdraw the development application.

The current application before the Council consists of identical plans to the plans which were the subject of the assessment and recommended refusal which was withdrawn in April 2019. The clause 4.6 exception request was amended between the two applications as was the Statement of Environmental Effects, however, generally everything else is the same as that assessed for the previous application RA17/1002.

With the changes made to the CIV threshold for consideration of development applications, Council is now the determining authority for the proposal.

On 28 August 2019, the applicant lodged the current application DA19/1846 with Council.

Between 18 September 2019 and 3 October 2019, the matter was notified to nearby property owners and principal consulting bodies. No submissions were received in response to the notification.

 

Proposed Development

The development application (DA), proposes the construction of a residential apartment complex consisting of 91 apartments as follows:

Two x four storey residential buildings containing:

4 x studio apartments;

16 x one-bedroom apartments;

45 x two-bedroom apartments;

26 x three-bedroom apartments; and

A basement car parking area with 140 spaces.

Two-way vehicular access to the basement is proposed from Gould Avenue.

Remnant vegetation on all lots is proposed to be removed.

A site plan, ground floor, elevations, landscape plan and photomontages are provided in Figures 1 – 9.

The demolition of the existing dwellings on the site are not included in this application and will be subject of a separate Complying Development Certificate (CDC).

 

Figure 1 - Site Plan of the proposed development.

 

Figure 2 - Basement floor plan of the proposed development.

 

 

Figure 3 – Elevation of the proposed development (southern – Kalandar Street).

 

 

 

Figure 4 - Elevations of the proposed development (northern elevation).

Figure 5 - Elevation of the proposed development (western elevation - Kinghorne Street).

 

Figure 6 - Elevation of the proposed development (eastern elevation - Gould Avenue).

 

 

Figure 7 - Landscape plan of the proposed development.

 

Figure 8 - Photomontage view from the south-eastern (Kalandar Street at Gould Avenue).

 

Figure 9 - Photomontage view from the south west (Kinghorne Street).

 

Subject Land and Surrounds

The land is located on the corner of Kinghorne and Kalandar Street and Gould Avenue in Nowra. The site comprises 5 separate parcels of land being 204, 206 and 208 Kinghorne Street and 19 and 21 Gould Avenue - Lot 1 DP 130928, Lot A DP 370205 and Lot 5 DP 542693 Lot A DP 392035 and Lot B DP 370205.

An extract from the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014 (SLEP 2014) Land Use Zoning Map is provided in Figure 10.

 

Figure 10 - Extract from the SLEP 2014 Land Use Zoning Map. The site outlined in red.

 

Planning Assessment

The assessment report has been prepared by external consultants: Urban Perspectives. As Council staff had carried out an assessment of the previously withdrawn Regional Application, to demonstrate impartiality, an external assessment was commissioned from a party that had no previous involvement in the application.

A detailed discussion of the key issues is contained in the attached section 4.15 Assessment report.

The report recommends refusal of the development application based upon the reasons for refusal outlined under Section 8 of the report.

 

Policy Implications

A key policy consideration is height.

Currently, there is a 11m height limit which applies to the site.

The development exceeds the 11m height limit under clause 4.3 of SLEP 2014 by as much as 2.32m. The issue was addressed by the applicant via a formal clause 4.6 variation statement. The matter is discussed in the attached section 4.15 report in further detail.

 

Consultation and Community Engagement:

This DA has been exhibited in accordance with Council’s Community Consultation Policy for Development Applications (including subdivision) and the Formulation of Development Guidelines and Policies as follows:

o   Individual property owners within a 120-metre radius of the site and the Nowra Chamber of Commerce were notified of the proposal. The notification period was from 18 September to 3 October 2019;

o   The proposal was advertised in the South Coast Register;

o   The application and supporting documentation were on display on Council’s website.

No submissions were received by Council.

 

Financial Implications:

There are potential cost implications for Council in the event of a refusal of the application.

Such costs would be associated with defending any appeal in the Land and Environment Court (the Court) of NSW.

 

Legal Implications

Pursuant to section 8.2 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act), a decision of the Council (i.e. in this instance the RPP) may be subject of a formal review by the applicant in the event of approval or refusal. Alternatively, an applicant who is dissatisfied with the determination of the application by the Council may appeal to the Court against the determination pursuant to section 8.7 of the EP&A Act.

 

Summary and Conclusion

This application has been assessed having regard for section 4.15 (Matters for consideration) under the EP&A Act. Based upon the recommendations of the s4.15 Assessment Report (Attachment 1) Development Application No. DA19/1846 be refused.

Accordingly, to the recommendations of the s4.15 Assessment Report, the DA is recommended to be refused for the following reasons:

·    Non-compliance with SEPP 65 design quality principles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9 and to the Apartment Design Guide Objectives 3A, 3B1, 3C2, 3D1, 3J2, 4A1, 4B1, 4B3, 4E1, 4G1, 4L2, 4Q2 (s4.15(1)(a)(i) of the EPA Act);

·    The applicant’s written request to vary the height of building development standard under clause 4.3 of SLEP 2014 is not supported and has not adequately addressed matters required to be demonstrated by cl 4.6(3)(a) and (b) of SLEP 2014 (s4.15(1)(a)(i) of the EPA Act); 

·    The development is likely to have adverse impacts on the built environment (s4.15(1)(b) of the EPA Act);

·    The site is not suitable for the development as proposed (s4.15(1)(c) of the EPA Act); and

·    The development is not in the public interest (s4.15(1)(e) of the EPA Act).

 


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page 1

 

 

DE20.37     DA19/1841 - 44 Duncan St Huskisson - Lot 6 Sec 9 DP 758530

 

DA. No:               DA19/1841/4

 

HPERM Ref:       D20/103812

 

Section:              Development Services

Approver:           Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group 

Attachments:     1.  S4.15 Assessment Report (under separate cover)

2.  Determination Document (under separate cover)   

Description of Development: Demolition of existing structures, construction of a residential flat building consisting of 17 residential units with basement parking

 

Owner: Newbuck Investments Pty Ltd

Applicant: Warren Design Pty Ltd

 

Notification Dates: On 18 September 2019, the Development Application (DA) was notified for 14 days.

                                 On 14 November 2019, the DA was renotified for 14 days.

 

No. of Submissions:  Thirty-two (32) submissions were received in total over the two (2) notification periods. All submissions received were in objection to the proposed development. 

 

Purpose / Reason for consideration by Council

On 1 October 2019, the Development & Environment Committee resolved in relation to Item No. DE19.94 ‘that Council call in the Development Application DA19/1841 - 44 Duncan Street, Huskisson due to public interest.’ (MIN 19.714).

 

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Development Application DA19/1814 for the demolition of existing structures, construction of a residential flat building consisting of 17 residential units with basement vehicle parking at 44 Duncan Street, Huskisson - Lot 6 Sec 9 DP 758530 be approved subject to the recommended conditions of consent contained in Attachment 2 of this report.:

 

 

 

Options

1.    Approve the DA in accordance with the recommendation of this report.

Implications: This would allow the applicant to act upon the Development Consent (Attachment 2) and commence works on the subject site.

 

2.    Refuse the application.

Implications: Council would need to determine the grounds on which the application is refused, having regard to section 4.15 considerations.

 

3.    Alternative recommendation.

Implications: Council will need to specify an alternative recommendation and advise staff accordingly.

 

Figure 1 - Location Map

Figure 1 - Aerial image of the subject site in the local context.

Background

On 27 August 2019, the DA was lodged with Council.

On 9 September 2019, Council requested additional information to enable the continued assessment of the application.

On 18 September 2019, the DA was advertised and notified for a period of 14 days. A total of twenty-eight (28) submissions were received by Council. The matters raised in the submission have been addressed later in this report.

On 28 October 2019, the applicant submitted additional information to address Council’s initial request for additional information dated 9 September 2019.

On 14 November 2019, the DA was re-notified for 14 days. A total of four (4) submissions were received by Council. The matters raised in the submission have been addressed later in this report.

On 28 November 2019, a site visit was conducted at the subject site and the surrounding area (D18/350425).

On 1 April 2020, the NSW Rural Fire Service issued their General Terms of Approval (D20/117983).

 

Proposed Development

The applicant seeks development consent for the demolition of existing structures, construction of a residential flat building with basement vehicle parking and storage below four storeys of residential apartments consisting of 17 units.

The development consists of a mix of studio, one, two and three-bedroom units. Units range in size from 45m2 (studio apartment) to 103m2 (3 bedrooms and study). A site plan, elevations and 3D perspectives of the development are provided in Figures 2 – 7 below.

 

Figure 2 - Site Plan of the proposed development at 44 Duncan Street, Huskisson.

Figure 3 - Digital rendition of the south-eastern elevation of the proposed development at 44 Duncan Street, Huskisson.

Figure 4 - Digital rendition of the north-western elevation of the proposed development at 44 Duncan Street, Huskisson.

Figure 5 - Northern and southern elevation of the proposed development at 44 Duncan Street, Huskisson.

Figure 6 - Eastern elevation of the proposed development at 44 Duncan Street, Huskisson. Note: in relation to the eastern elevation and the building height, the elevation provides the foreground and background elevation on the one plane. The inclusion of the rear elevation and slope of the site considers the natural ground level and the way the building rises gradually with the slope of the site. The building is fully compliant with the Maximum Height of Building Development Standard under Clause 4.3 of Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014.

 

 

Figure 7 - Western elevation of the proposed development at 44 Duncan Street, Huskisson.

 

The applicant also seeks development consent for the cubic strata subdivision of the resulting residential flat building.

 

Subject Land

The site is located on the north-eastern corner of Duncan and Keppel Streets, 550m south-east of the Huskisson commercial centre and 240m west of the Jervis Bay foreshore. The land is legally identified as Lot 6 Sec 9 DP 758530 and is described as 44 Duncan Street, Huskisson.

 

Site & Context

The lot is a regular shaped allotment with a total land area of 1,011.6 square metres and is bound by 3 local roads namely; Duncan Street (along the western boundary), Keppel Street (along the southern boundary) and Kent Lane (an unformed local road, to the east of the site).

Vehicle access to the existing residential dwelling is obtained off Duncan Street. The site slopes gradually from the west to the unformed Kent Lane in the east. The site does not benefit from an easement to drain water with runoff from the site naturally draining to the unformed Kent Lane to the rear of the site and the Crown reserve (Lot 701 DP 1029715).

There is limited native vegetation located on the subject site with ornate landscaping to the curtilage of the existing dwelling and along the southern boundary (it would appear that the ornate landscape screening planted by the current owner/occupier is located within the road reserve). A large eucalyptus tree is located on the council road reserve on the immediate southern boundary.

Existing on the site is a single storey weatherboard and corrugated iron dwelling house and detached garden shed.

The surrounding adjoining development includes undeveloped land to the east (Kent Lane, undeveloped private land, unformed road reserve and further undeveloped Crown Land). To the north (42 Duncan Street - Lot 5 Sec 9 DP 758530) the site has been developed for low-scale detached residential accommodation consisting of a single storey dwelling house. Properties immediately to the west of the subject site on Duncan Street (43 and 45 Duncan Street - Lot 19 & 20 Lot 20 Sec 8 DP 758530) have been developed similarly with single-storey detached dwelling houses present on both lots. On the southern side of Keppel Street, adjacent the subject site, the two lots (43 and 46 Duncan Street -  Lot 20 & 21 Sec 13 DP 758530) have been developed with a detached dual-occupancy and two-storey dwelling house located on the respective lots.

In the broader local context, there are examples of other forms and densities of residential accommodation. On the western side of Duncan Street, there are examples of multi-dwelling housing (villas and townhouses). There is an example of a residential flat building located at the corner of Duncan and Bowen Street. There are further examples of residential flat buildings within the B4 Mixed Use zones on Bowen, Beach and Moona/Murdoch Streets to the east and south of the site.

Due to the nature of the area and the focus on tourism, there are a number of tourist and visitor accommodation developments scattered in the surrounding area and two caravan parks along the Jervis Bay foreshore. 90m to the south-east of the site is the Huskisson Beach Holiday Park and 230m to the north-east is the White Sands Holiday Park.

 

Figure 8 – Zoning Map extract – Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan

History

The site has been historically used for residential purposes with the current dwelling house having a number of additions, including a covered deck, front verandah, carport and detached garage which date back to the mid-1970s. As the existing improvements on the site are proposed to be demolished a detailed review of the development history of the site is not warranted. However, it is noted that on 21 November 2002, Council granted Development Consent DA02/3032 for development described as ‘Demolition of an Existing dwelling and the Construction of Four Townhouses’ at 44 Duncan Street, Huskisson Lot 6 Sec 9 DP 758530. From Council’s records, it does not appear that that the Development Consent was physically commenced before the lapsing date.

 

Issues

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (SEPP 65) and Apartment Design Guide (ADG)

SEPP 65 applies to the proposed development for a residential flat building of 3 or more storeys and containing 4 or more self-contained dwellings.

The applicant has submitted a SEPP 65 Design Statement (D20/6044) prepared by Alan Kempster (B.Arch AIA - Architect Reg no. 3655).

The SEPP 65 Design Statement has addressed the Schedule 1 Design Quality Principles of SEPP 65. Council’s assessment of the design quality principles is provided in the s.4.15 Assessment Report under Appendix A of this Report.

It is considered that the design quality of the development, when evaluated against the design quality principles, is satisfactory and meets relevant objectives.

Clause 30(2) of SEPP 65 requires residential apartment development to be designed in accordance with the ADG.

The development has been assessed against the ADG and a full assessment is provided within the s.4.15 Assessment Report under Appendix A of this Report.

Parts 3 and 4 of the ADG provide objectives, design criteria and design guidance for the siting, design and amenity of apartment developments. In accordance with ADGs, development needs to demonstrate how it meets the objective and design criteria. The design criteria set a clear measurable benchmark for how the objective can be practically achieved. If it is not possible to satisfy the design criteria, applications must demonstrate what other design responses are used to achieve the objective and the design guidance can be used to assist in this.

The development is broadly compliant with each of the objectives under Part 3 and 4 of the guide, however, the development is non-complaint with the following Design Criteria under Section 3F Visual Privacy of Part 3 of the ADG.

3F Visual Privacy

Objective 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:

 

Building Separation Requirement to side and rear boundaries:

 

 

Non-compliance

The potential for visual privacy impacts is largely restricted to the northern elevation.

The applicant’s Apartment Design Guide Compliance Table (D19/381533) and supporting architectural plans prepared by Alan Kempster show that the separation distance of the development to the northern boundary does not comply with the Design Criteria 1 as follows:

·    On the upper floors; first, second and loft; the balconies extend to a minimum of 3m and a maximum of 4m from the northern boundary.

·    The balconies to units 6, 9, 12 and 15 are oriented to the east and west but extend out to the 3m offset from the northern boundary.

·    Balconies to units 7, 8, 13 and 14 are oriented to the north and are 4m offset from the common property boundary.

·    The outer edge of the terraces to units 13 and 14 extend to within 3m of the common northern boundary,

 

Design Response

To protect privacy on the adjoining site to the north, a fixed full-height privacy screen is proposed to part of the balcony. A 1.6m high fixed privacy screen is proposed to the remaining portion of the balcony (refer to Figure 9 below).

Figure 9 - Excerpt of the northern elevation showing the partial full-height and partial 1.8m high privacy screens to northern facing balconies

Units 13 and 14 (with upper-level lofts) include a 1.2m wide planter box around the perimeter of their applicable terrace to provide additional setback and vegetative screening. The functional edge of the terrace is therefore 4.2m from the common boundary and the opportunity for overlooking and privacy concerns are minimised

The proposed fixed privacy screens (fixed and full height to units 7, 8, 13 and 14) and landscape planting are considered to be appropriate and achieve the objective of the visual privacy for the adjoining development to the north of the subject site.

Conclusion

The development demonstrates general compliance with all objectives and design criteria under Part 3 and 4 of the ADG (excluding Design Criteria No. 1 of 3F Visual Privacy under Part 3 of the ADG). The applicant has provided design responses to respond to the numerical non-compliance with the minimum required separation distances from buildings to the side and rear boundaries to achieve comparative separation between windows and balconies, to ensure that visual privacy is achieved. The design response is considered to be suitable and practical.

It is noted that the development is non-compliant with further design guidance under Part 3 and 4 of the ADG, however, the design guidance should be read as providing advice on how the objectives and design criteria can be achieved through appropriate design responses, or in cases where design criteria cannot be met. Where a development has not achieved the nominated design guidance and the development has otherwise met or exceeded the relevant objective and design criteria, strict compliance with the design guidance is not required. The development has demonstrated that an alternative design response has been used to achieve the objectives and design criteria.

The table below provides a summary of the development non-compliance with the Design Guidance of Part 3 and 4 of the ADG.

Apartment Design Guide  (ADG)

PART 3 - SITING THE DEVELOPMENT

Part 3C - Public Domain Interface

Design Guidance

Terraces, balconies and courtyard apartments should have direct street entry, where appropriate

Ground floor unit floor levels do not have street level entry. All-access has been provided through a central lobby which can be accessed from both street frontages.

 

The addition of multiple access points for individual units along the frontage of Duncan and Keppel Street would reduce the potential for additional landscaping and would not provide a continuous path of travel from the shared pathway to the units due to the grade separation from the street and the need for stairs.

Part 3E - Deep Soil Zones

Design Guidance

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

The site is 1,011.6m2 and is considered to be a small block for the purpose of considering this specific landscaping design criteria. However, given its proximity to public open recreation spaces and provision of private recreation spaces, there is a reduced necessity to provide additional open space on this site. It is noted that the site is located within walking distance of local recreation areas, beaches and parks:

• 500m walk of Huskisson Beach and associated public recreational areas;

• 420m of Jervis Bay National Park (active recreation); and

• 450m of White Sands Park and Shark Net Beach.

To achieve the 10% deep soil landscaping an additional 30.35m2 of landscaping would be required. The addition of this small deep soil area is not likely to result in a demonstrable better-landscaped outcome or improved amenity and recreational opportunities for occupants.

Additional landscaping is proposed as a condition of the development consent along the Duncan and Keppel Street frontages to soften the development and aide in the transition of the low scale development to the south and this development.

The landscaping is to be planted between the property boundary and the shared path running to the frontage of the site.

PART 4 - DESIGNING THE BUILDING

PART 4A - Solar And Daylight Access

Design Guidance

Single aspect, single-storey apartments should have a northerly or easterly aspect.

Only two single-aspect south-facing units are proposed (unit 5 and 10).

Despite the non-compliance for these units, it is considered that the development as a whole provides satisfactory solar access to units and meets the objective and design criteria:

·   76.5% of units received greater than 2 hours of direct sunlight.

·   11.7% of units receive no direct sunlight.

Design Guidance

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.

Two units (unit 5 and 10) have no direct sun at the winter solstice, however, all remaining units receive at least one hour of direct sunlight.

Additional access to light for these units is provided through the use of light wells in the central core of the building.

PART 4D – Apartment Size And Layout

Design Guidance

All living areas and bedrooms should be located on the external face of the building.

Bedrooms of unit 5 and 10 and bedroom 2 of unit 17 are oriented against the light well through the centre of the building.

All living areas are oriented to the external walls of the building.

PART 4H - Acoustic Privacy

Design Guidance

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.

While the development meets the objectives of Section 4H it is noted that the development does not achieve strict compliance with the design guidance that: ‘[n]oise sources such as garage doors, driveways, service areas, plant rooms, building services, mechanical equipment, active communal open spaces and circulation areas should be located at least 3m away from bedrooms.’

The driveway is within 3m of the bedrooms of unit 3 and the common open space is within 3m of the bedrooms of unit 2.

The impacts on these units are considered to be acceptable and are unlikely to significantly impact on the amenity of the residents of these units. The use of landscaping and grade separation is provided to minimise noise impacts.

PART 4L - Ground Floor Apartments

Design Guidance

Direct street access should be provided to ground floor apartments.

 

Access to all the units is by way of the communal circulation areas

This is considered to be a more appropriate design outcome than individual access points for each ground floor unit. The centralised access provides a safe and uniform point of pedestrian access to units and enables additional landscaping to be provided along Keppel and Duncan Street that may have otherwise be broken up by access paths connecting to the shared path proposed along the street frontage.

Design Guidance

Retail or home office spaces should be located along street frontages.

No retail spaces are proposed as part of the development.

Design Guidance

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.

The site is not located on the fringe of the R3 Medium Density zone and over 550m south-east of the Huskisson commercial core. While the units would be capable of being adapted for use as a home business (subject to compliance with the Codes SEPP) it is unlikely that the ground floor units would be capable of being used for commercial or retail use.

PART 4O - Landscape Design

Design Guidance

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.

The site is relatively small and with basement parking, there is little room for deep soil zones and tree plantings.

Additional landscaping is to be provided along Keppel and Duncan Street that will break and reduce the perceived height of the building and length of horizontal portions of the design when viewed from Keppel Street.

PART 4U - Energy Efficiency

Design Guidance

Well located, screened outdoor areas should be provided for clothes drying.

While the development meets the objectives of Section 4U it is noted that the development does not meet one of the design guidance statements, which states that: Well located, screened outdoor areas should be provided for clothes drying.

A condition is recommended to ensure that unsightly clothes drying racks are not located and viewable from the public domain

PART 4V – Water Management and Conservation

Design Guidance

Rainwater should be collected, stored and reused on site.

Rainwater is collected and stored onsite, however it is directed to the street network. 

An amended landscape plan is recommended to ensure water conservation on-site and drought-tolerant landscaping has been used to reduce the reliance on mains water for conserving water 

A condition is recommended to require an amended stormwater drainage design plan that would enable the reuse of rainwater on the landscaped areas.

PART 4W – Waste Management

Design Guidance

Alternative waste disposal methods such as composting should be provided.

No allowance for communal composting has been made, however, each unit is capable of accommodating small scale composting if desired.

 

A full assessment of the development against Part 3 and 4 of the ADG is provided in the s4.15 Assessment Report provided as Attachment 1 to this Report.

Height Bulk and Scale of the Development

The height, bulk and scale of the development are usually based on subjective judgement and therefore consideration of height and bulk can be meaningful only against the background of local planning controls, such as maximum height, floor space ratio, site coverage and setbacks.

The Land and Environment Court (LEC) has recognised that DCP controls play a key role in the assessment of height and bulk. This was highlighted in the case of Veloshin v Randwick Council [2007] NSWLEC 428, where Senior Commissioner Roseth established the planning principle: assessment of height, bulk and scale, as follows:

The appropriateness of a proposal’s height and bulk is most usefully assessed against planning controls related to these attributes, such as maximum height, floor space ratio, site coverage and setbacks. The questions to be asked are:

1.    Are the impacts consistent with impacts that may be reasonably expected under the controls?

2.    How does the proposal’s height and bulk relate to the height and bulk desired under the relevant controls?

Finally, in the absence of specific planning controls that address the bulk and character, there must be a consideration of whether the planning intent for the area appears to be the preservation of the existing character or the creation of a new one?

In response to the first question, the development is likely to result in impacts consistent with impacts that may be reasonably expected under; SLEP 2014, SDCP 2014 and the ADG. The design is consistent with the maximum height of buildings under Clause 4.3 and is generally consistent with the site coverage and setback controls under the ADG.

In relation to the second question, the development is consistent with the height and bulk under SLEP 2014, SDCP 2014 and the ADG. SDCP 2014 does not provide guidance for the design of residential flat buildings and therefore the design of the development is guided by the objectives and design criteria under Part 3 and 4 of the ADG. The application has demonstrated broad compliance with these parts of the ADG.

Finally, in the absence of specific planning controls that address the bulk and character, Council must consider whether the planning intent for the area appears to be the preservation of the existing character or the creation of a new one? It is noted that there is no Area Specific Controls that relate to the subject site under SDPC 2014. Council has adopted Area Specific Controls in relation to the Huskisson Town Centre (Chapter N18) and Huskisson Mixed Use Zones (Chapter N19).  The subject site is not identified on the applicable area of development control that relates to these chapters. There are no planning controls currently in place that seek to maintain the bulk and predominant existing character of the locality. However, as mentioned the development is a type foreshadowed strategically via the application of the SLEP 2014 with design guidance provided by application of the State Policy underpinned by the ADG.

 

Planning Assessment

The DA has been assessed under s4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).  Please refer to Attachment 1.

 

Policy Implications

There are no Policy implications as a result of the development as proposed.

 

Consultation and Community Engagement:

Thirty-two (32) public submissions were received concerning Council’s notification of the development.  All submissions received were objecting to the development.  The notification was made in accordance with Council’s Community Consultation Policy with letters being sent within a 100m buffer of the site. Local Community Consultative Bodies were also notified of the application. The notification was for a two (2) week period.

On 18 September 2019, the development application was notified for 14 days.

On 14 November 2019, the development application was renotified for 14 days.

The key issues raised as a result of the notification are provided are summarised as follows:

·    Design and character;

·    Site suitability;

·    Building height;

·    Bulk and scale;

·    Amenity impact- noise and privacy and overlooking;

·    Traffic impacts; and

·    Non-compliance with planning controls

 

A full assessment of the submissions is provided in the S.4.15 Assessment Report provided as Attachment 1 of this Report.

 

Financial Implications:

There are potential cost implications for Council in the event of a refusal of the application. Such costs would be associated with defending any appeal in the Land and Environment Court, should the applicant utilise appeal rights afforded under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).

 

Legal Implications

Pursuant to section 8.2 of the EP&A Act, a decision of the Council may be subject of a review by the applicant in the event of approval or refusal. If such a review is ultimately pursued (if the recommendation is not adopted), the matter would be put to Council for consideration.

Alternatively, an applicant may also appeal to the Court against the determination pursuant to section 8.7 of the EP&A Act.

 

Summary and Conclusion

·    The development is permitted within the zone and is consistent with the objectives of the zone.

·    The development will result in additional residential accommodation in an accessible location and close to facilities and public open space areas and beaches.

·    The development is generally compliant with SEPP 65 and the ADG.

·    The development is consistent with the limited development controls applicable to the development under Chapter G13: Medium Density and Other Residential Development and all other relevant chapters of SDCP 2014.

·    The development provides sufficient car parking on the site through the provision of 25 basement car parking spaces (including two (2) accessible car parking spaces).

·    The site is suitable for the proposed development taking into account the existing and future development in the locality which will see further multi-dwelling housing and residential flat building development to respond to the growing population and demand for residential units in the growing coastal community of Huskisson.

·    The potential traffic impacts of the development on the local road network are satisfactory and appropriate conditions are recommended for the inclusion of two (2) local area traffic management devices along Keppel Street with associated lighting and signage.

·    The assessment of the public interest has considered the competing and conflicting public interests associated with the development and granted equal weight to the consideration of relevant interests associated with the development. Furthermore, the assessment has considered the need to balance the public interest against private interests in the scope of the development.

·    Having regard to the above, approval is recommended subject to the imposition of suitable conditions of consent as attached to this report.

 

 


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page 1

 

 

DE20.38     DS19/1522 Modification of Consent – 123 & 132 Forster Drive Bawley Point – Lot 21 DP 1217069 & Lot 33 DP1259627

 

DA. No:               DS19/1522

 

HPERM Ref:       D20/131137

 

Section:              Ulladulla Service Centre

Approver:           Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group 

Attachments:     1.  Draft Modified Development Consent - Events for Willinga Park (under separate cover)

2.  Section 4.55 (2) Modification Assessment report (under separate cover)   

Description of Development: Modification of the Willinga Park Events Development Application

 

Owner: Capital Property Corp Pty Ltd

Applicant: Capital Property Corp Pty Ltd

 

Notification Dates: On 15 January 2020 the application was notified for a period of 14 days. Following the submission of a further modification to amend the event hours of operation, the application was renotified for a period of 14 days from 25 February 2020

 

No. of Submissions:  First Notification Period (15 January 2020)

                                      Three (3) in objection

 

Second Notification Period (25 February 2020)

                                      Three (3) in objection

 

Purpose / Reason for consideration by Council

At the Development & Environment Committee meeting of Council held on 3 March 2020 Council resolved to “call-in” the DA for determination.

 

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That the application to modify the development application for the hosting of events at Willinga Park on the land at 123 & 132 Forster Drive Bawley Point - Lot 3 DP 527264 & Lot 21 DP1217069 be approved subject to the recommended conditions of consent contained in Attachment 1 of this report.

 

 

Options

1.   Approve the development application (DA) in accordance with the recommendation of this report.

Implications: This would allow the applicant to vary the DA requirements for events at the subject site.

 

 

2.   Refuse the application.

Implications: Council would need to determine the grounds on which the application is refused, having regard to section 4.15 considerations.

 

3.   Alternative recommendation.

Implications: Council will need to specify an alternative recommendation and advise staff accordingly.

 

Location Map

 

Background

History

Development consent DA18/1237 was issued on 27 August 2019. This consent allowed Hosting of events open to the public at Willinga Park in accordance with the Event Plan of Management. Plans and documents were endorsed in accordance with Condition 1 of the consent on the same date.

 

Proposed Modification

Permission is sought under Section 4.55 (2) to modify the existing consent in the following manner:

 

Explanation of Terms

·    Increase number of attendees for Category A Events from 2001-5000 people to 3001-5000.

·    Increase number of attendees for Category B Events from 1000-2000 people to 1000-3000.

·    Non-equine Events increased from 1000 people to 5000 people.

·    Sessions increased from 8.00am – 10.00pm to 7.00am – 11.00pm

·    Annual Events Ratio Limit (AERL)

Conditions

·    Delete condition 4:

·    Modify condition 7

·    Amend condition 8 to increase the number of events including the following:

Maximum of 4 Category A events increased to 8 per year

Maximum of 8 Category B events increased to 12 per year

Maximum of 6 non-equine events increased to 12 per year

·    Amend condition 9 regarding Annual Events Proposed Schedule

·    Amend condition 10 regarding Annual Events Record

·    Delete condition 14 regarding notification of residents

·    Delete condition 19(g) regarding No smoking & 19 (h) regarding access to structures

·    Amend condition 20 regarding outdoor lighting

·    Modify condition 23 regarding traffic management

·    Amend condition 24 regarding noise

·    Delete condition 27(b) regarding notification to Council

·    Amend condition 30 regarding Noise Complaints

·    Delete condition 32(b) regarding Security

 

Subject Land

The subject site, known as ‘Willinga Park’, is located at 123 and 132 Forster Drive, to the west of Bawley Point. Willinga Park is an agricultural estate and equestrian centre  used extensively for horse grazing and the breeding and training of Australian Stock Horses.

The site—formally identified as Lot 21 DP 1217069 (82.384 ha) and Lot 3 DP 527264 (82.690 ha)—is an irregular shaped allotment with a total land area of 165.074 hectares. This subject site forms part of a larger estate of around 800 hectares. Access to the site is via Forster Drive; Forster Drive is an east-west aligned sealed road, which connects with Murramarang Road, then Bawley Point Road to the Princes Highway at Termeil.

The site is predominantly zoned RU2 Rural Landscape, pursuant to Shoalhaven Environmental Plan 2014. Parts of the northern portion of Lot 21 are zoned E2 Environmental Conservation. These lands coincide with the southern foreshores of Willinga Lake. The applicant has previously advised that no events or event related activities will occur on the parts of the site that are zoned E2 Environmental Conservation.

Site & Context

The subject allotments (which comprise the northern-eastern portion of the site) includes, on Lot 21: Equine Education centre, show jumping arena, in addition to the main residence, stables complex, covered dressage arena, open dressage training arena, open dressage Grand Prix arena, warm-up arena, stockyards, round yards, equine gym and hydrotherapy pool, vet’s room, food concessions and café/commercial kitchen, visitor amenities, Willinga Park Botanic Gardens, a horticultural depot associated with the botanic gardens, service shed, and several dams; and on Lot 3: manager’s residence, open dressage arena/polocrosse field and pavilion, camp draft arena with judges box, camp draft pavilion, cattle yards, competition stockyards, covered and open stockyards, event parking, visitor amenities, pump shed, and hay shed. The proposed events are to utilise existing (built) facilities and other more recently approved facilities that are separate current and/or approved development applications

In the broader context, the northern boundary of the site comprises the southern foreshores of Willinga Lake. Willinga Lake includes “coastal wetlands” pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018, which extend along the northern boundary of the site. The site is otherwise surrounded by remnant grazing lands and forested slopes. Land to the south-west forms a 600 hectare extension of the Willinga Park estate. Land to the east comprises residential dwellings, on the cusp of the Bawley Point residential area, on large lots; the nearest adjoining dwellings to the east are at No’s 103 and 122 Forster Drive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proposal

An assessment of the proposed modifications to the consent are addressed in the table below:

Existing Condition

Proposed Amendment

Assessment

Explanation of Terms

Category A Event – International Event that could include any of the equine disciplines with 2001 to 5000 people in attendance per session.

 

 

Category A Event – An event that could include any of the equine disciplines with 3001 to 5000 people in attendance per session.

 

 

The applicant has advised that there was an omission in the original submission. Category A events were meant to be 3001-5000

The relevance of an international event has been removed to allow any event between the 3001-5000 to occur. The current wording of the condition may not permit a national or regional event.

The amendment is considered reasonable and can be supported.

Category B Event - International or National Event that could include any of the equine disciplines from 1000 to 2000 people in attendance per session.

 

Category B Event – An event that could include any of the equine disciplines from 1000 to 3000 people in attendance per session.

 

The applicant has justified the amendment as follows:

In light of a change to the Category A definition, this definition needs to be amended to cater for 1000-3000 patrons.

As above there is no need for an event to be international or national to be a class B event – alternately, if it, for example, was just a local event and had 2,500 patrons, it would not be classified at all and could arguably not be permitted or alternately not count for noise purposes – we can assume this is not the intention of Council to prohibit local and regional events.

The amendment is considered reasonable and can be supported

 

Non-Equine Event - Events relating to architecture, gardens, sculptures and tours up to 1000 people in attendance per session.

 

Non-Equine Event - Events relating to architecture, gardens, sculptures and tours up to 5000 people in attendance per session.

 

It would be expected that non-equine events at the facility would generate more than 1000 attendees. Hence to account for larger non-equine events such as Sculptures by the Sea which has occurred previously at the site the increase is considered reasonable and can be supported.

Session – each period

 between 8.00am and 10.00pm within a 24-hour calendar day.

 

Session – each period

 between 7.00am and 11.00pm within a 24-hour calendar day.

 

The change in hours by 1 hour either side of the existing hours is not considered to create an increase in significant amenity impacts and any impacts can be mitigated by the conditions of consent already in place by the Development approval

Annual Events Ratio Limit (AERL) – is a defined number set by council that restricts the aggregate number and location of event sessions that can operate at Willinga Park in each calendar year. The AERL for Willinga Park is set at 180.

 

Annual Events Ratio Limit (AERL) – is a defined number set by council that restricts the aggregate number and location of event sessions that can operate at Willinga Park in each calendar year. The AERL for Willinga Park is set at 180.

If the Owner can demonstrate to the satisfaction of Council that an Event caused less noise than has been allowed for in the Acoustics Report, then that event and the relevant sessions that did not exceed the noise criteria then, with the agreement of Council, those events sessions shall not count towards the AERL for that year.

Further, where the Owner can demonstrate to Council following noise monitoring of event sessions at an event venue that the Event Sessions Ratio for a Venue should be reassessed from the numbers in the decision, Council will consider revising that number.

This can be supported providing the applicant can demonstrate that events have created less noise than has been allowed for in the Acoustic Report.

4. No events are permitted until all relevant conditions of this consent have been met or unless other satisfactory arrangements have been made with Council (i.e. a security).

Deleted

The development consent is binding and it is expected that the applicant must comply with the conditions of consent. The condition is superfluous to the consent and can be deleted.

6. Events Hours of Operation

 

All events are limited to between the hours of 8.00am and 10.00pm.

 

6. Events Hours of Operation

All events are limited to between the hours of 7.00am and 11.00pm.

As discussed in the preceding sections. The amendment of the condition is supported.

7. Annual Events Ratio Limit (AERL)

 

The Annual Events Ratio (AER) of all public events conducted at Willinga Park must not exceed the (AERL) of 180 in any calendar year.

 

Annual Events Ratio Limit (AERL)

 

The Annual Events Ratio (AER) of all public events

conducted at Willinga Park must not exceed the (AERL) of 180 in any calendar year.

 

Every twelve months, at the end of each calendar year,

the Owner can apply to Council to have this number

revised upwards having regard to the number and scale of events and the number and nature of complaints, if required.

 

 

This can be considered as discussed above. The amendment of the condition is supported.

8. Frequency and Duration of Public Events

 

The frequency and duration of public events at Willinga Park is restricted as follows:

 

(a)  No events are permitted in the month of January each year

(b)  A maximum of 4 Category A events are permitted per calendar year

(c)  A maximum of 8 Category B events are permitted per calendar year

(d)  A maximum of 6 Non-Equine events are permitted per calendar year

(e)  A Maximum of 1 Category A and 1 Category B event is permitted for the Campdraft Arena and Polocrosse Arena per calendar year

8. Frequency and Duration of Public Events

 

The frequency and duration of public events at Willinga Park is restricted as follows:

 

(a)  No events are permitted between (and including) December 23rd and January 5th for Larger Category A and B events.

(b) A maximum of 8 Category A events are permitted per calendar year

(c)  A maximum of 12 Category B events are permitted per calendar year

(d) A maximum of 12 Non-Equine events are permitted per calendar year

(e)  A Maximum of 1 Category A and 1 Category B event is permitted for the Campdraft Arena and Polocrosse Arena per calendar year

 

 

 

 

 

(a)  The revised condition still allows for non-equine events for up to 5000 people between these dates which contravenes the intent of the condition which is to limit impacts on the area during peak holiday period. The condition will be reworded so that there are no events between Dec 23-Jan 5.

(b) (C) & (D) There are existing conditions within the consent to ensure amenity of the surrounding area is protected and reporting responsibilities with the plan of management which provide necessary procedures and actions to rectify any significant matters of concern.

(e) Use of the Campdraft Arena and Polocrosse Arena for more than 1 Category A & B events can be reviewed on request and pending Council is satisfied that mitigation of noise issues has been adequately addressed

The amendments to the condition are supported.

9. Annual Events Proposed Schedule

 

The Willinga Park Events Manager must provide Council with an Excel spreadsheet prior to all events for each calendar year detailing:

 

a)   The name of each event

b)   The proposed venue for each event

c)   the proposed event Category

d)   the proposed dates & duration of each event and session

e)   the expected number of participants and spectators

f)    the calculated event ratio for each event and the Annual Event Ratio

g)   The name and contact details of the event manager likely to be responsible for each event

9. Annual Events Proposed Schedule

 

The Willinga Park Events Manager must provide council with a preliminary Excel spreadsheet at the start of the calendar year detailing:

a) The name of each proposed event

b) The proposed venue for each event

c) the proposed category of events

d) the proposed dates and duration of each event and session

e) the expected number of participants and spectators

f) The name and contact details of the event manager likely to be responsible for each event

The applicant has indicated that providing a schedule prior to all events would not be practical as events are added throughout the year.

Whilst a preliminary events calendar as it stands at the start of the year could be provided to Council.

It is acknowledged that some events are also dependant on applicants, cattle or prize money and can be re-scheduled or cancelled

The amendment to the condition is supported.

10. Annual Events Record

 

The Willinga Park Events Manager must provide Council with an Excel spreadsheet within 7 days of the end of each calendar year detailing:

 

(a)     The name and contact details of the event manager responsible for the relevant events

(b)     The name of each event held

(c)     The venue for each event

(d)     the event Category

(e)     the dates & duration of each event and session held

(f)      the recorded number of participants and spectators for each session/event

(g)     the calculated event ratio for each event and the Annual Event Ratio

(h)     any events cancelled due to weather/bushfire or other reason

(i)      detail of any complaints received, and the action taken to address same

10. Annual Events Record

 

The Willinga Park Events Manager must provide Council with an excel spreadsheet within the first week of February of the following previous Calendar year detailing:

(a)  The name and contact details of the event manager responsible for the relevant events

(b)  The name of each event held

(c)  The venue for each event

(d)  the event category

(e)  the dates and duration of each event and session held

(f)  the recorded number of participants and spectators for each session/event

(g)  the calculated event ratio for each event and the Annual Event ratio

(h)  any events cancelled due to weather/bushfire or other reason

(i)   detail of any complaints received by Council or to Willinga Park, and the action taken to address same

The timeframe allows for adequate time for the completion of the record.

It is noted that the wording should be changed to ‘previous’ rather than ‘following’

The amendment to the condition is supported.

14. Notification of Residents

 

The Willinga Park event management team must make all reasonable efforts to ensure that residents likely to be significantly affected by noise from the major events are given prior written notification. This notification must include a readily contactable complaint hotline and an event coordinator must be dedicated to managing and responding to any complaints received during the entire event and this person(s) must be available on this number during the entire event.

 

The details of customer mobile hotline telephone number must be submitted to Council’s Customer Service Centre prior to the commencement of each event.

 

Deleted

This is already established with the current events through targeted advertising and standard advertisements and posters in local shops. Deletion of the condition is supported

19. Temporary Structures

 

(g)  There is to be NO SMOKING in ANY of the subject structures, and appropriate signage is to be displayed in conspicuous locations throughout the site.

 

(h)  All structures to which members of the public may by allowed access, are to be supervised by responsible persons at all times when occupied by the public.

 

 

Delete

 

 

 

 

 

Delete

 

·    The venue can provide adequate smoking areas for venues, as per the Australian standards. All events currently held at Willinga Park have designated Smoking areas and have no issues.

 

·    All events are already monitored, and security is provided where appropriate. Deletion of the condition is supported.

20. Outdoor Lighting

 

Any outdoor display/security lighting must be located or shielded so that no additional light is cast on adjoining land. Outdoor lighting, other than that required for reasonable security, must not be used between the hours of 10.00 p.m. and 6.00 a.m. on any day.

 

20.Outdoor Lighting

 

Any outdoor display/security lighting must be located or

shielded so that no additional light is cast on adjoining

land. Outdoor lighting, other than that required for

reasonable security, must not be used between the hours

of 11.00 p.m. and 7.00 a.m. on any day

 

The modification of the condition is considered appropriate as it will match proposed opening hours.

23. Traffic Management

 

(a)  An annual event based Traffic Management  Plan (TMP) must be prepared and implemented to Council’s satisfaction addressing all proposed events for the site a minimum of four (4) months prior to the first event for each year. [Cont…]

 

(c) For events with the equivalent impact of a Class 1 event as per the ‘Guide to Traffic and Transport Management for Special Events’ the traffic Management Plan and associated documentation is to be submitted to Councils traffic Unit for referral to the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee. In such instance the aforementioned application documents are to be submitted four (4) months

prior to the first event for each year to allow for

this process.

 

(d) A Notice of Intention to Hold a Public Assembly for any event likely to exceed (500) persons must be submitted to and consent must be obtained directly from the Police at the Nowra and Ulladulla Police Stations by the applicant a minimum of four (4) weeks prior to each event.

 

(e ) NSW Police retain the power to stop an event

where it considers public safety to be

compromised. The event organiser must heed

any direction given by NSW Police for the

duration of the approval.

 

(f) Due to the anticipated impacts to the Princes Highway the event organiser must obtain a Road Occupancy Licence (ROL) from Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) a minimum of 3 months prior to each event and must comply with all conditions of the ROL (including submission of the TMP) [cont..]

 

 

(j)   All residents/business owners who may be affected by the activity being personally notified by the organisers a minimum of one (1) month prior to each event.  The organisers shall address any concern expressed with respect of the proposed closure/traffic disruption in the first instance, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

(k)  All bus operators, taxi companies and emergency service providers (including ambulance and fire fighting services) that may be affected by the activity being personally notified by the organisers one (1) month prior to each event.

 

 

 

(l)   Advertisement of the temporary road closure and/or traffic disruption together with associated traffic management proposals is to be implemented a minimum of three (3) weeks prior to the date of the relevant event.
NOTE – All media advertisements of road closures, traffic disruptions and events, are the responsibility of the applicant.

 

(m) The applicant must organise an event debrief within one (1) month of the completion of an event. Invitations to attend the debrief must be provided to relevant RMS, Council, and NSW Police representatives. Attached to the invitations to attend the debriefs shall be a traffic impact report detailing the impacts of each event. If, following successive debriefs, the event management is considered acceptable to RMS, Police and Council going forward, the periodic reviews may be considered annually. Following each review, it will be determined that either:

i.    The DA may continue operation if there have been no unacceptable impacts in the view of Council, RMS, or NSW Police; or

ii.    That the DA is to cease effect, at the direction of either Council, RMS, or NSW Police, if it is considered by any party that the impacts of the proposal are not acceptable or compromise public safety; or

iii.   the applicant may be required to implement any reasonable suite of mitigation measures recommended following the traffic impact review and debrief process, at the discretion of Council, RMS or NSW Police. this could include adjustments to the traffic management plan, physical internal or external works, or both

 

(n)  The traffic impact reports to be prepared by the applicant for the periodic reviews/debriefs shall include participation data, traffic and parking data (which are to be recorded for each event by the applicant for the purpose of the applicant preparing a detailed traffic impact assessment of each events impacts and including an assessment of whether any mitigation measures will need to be implemented for future events). The traffic impact reports need to consider internal and external impacts (Including any impacts to the Princes Highway), and include seasonal variation assessment of the traffic data, and a projected 10 year forecast of impacts if the event were to be repeated going forward.

 

23. Traffic Management

 

(a)  An annual event-based Traffic Management Plan (TMP) must be prepared and implemented to Councils satisfaction addressing all proposed events for the site a minimum of six (6) weeks prior to the first event for each year. [Cont..]

 

 

Deleted or modified

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

(a)  It is considered that existing conditions of consent and RMS General terms of Approval that the reduced timeframe is acceptable and it is considered that the RMS requirements covers the majority of the traffic requirements for Willinga Park.

 

(c)  The requirements of the condition are  required to account for potential Class 1 events. Whilst the applicant has advised that there will be no Class 1 events this does not preclude it occurring in the future.

The condition must be retained.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(d) This condition can be deleted as it is also covered in condition 15 of the consent

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The police have powers to stop events if required. This is not a relevant condition of consent rather it is considered advice.

 

 

 

 

 

Deletion of the condition is supported as the matter is addressed by the General Terms of Approval from RMS & condition 23

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conditions are in place which address these matters. It is considered onerous on the applicant to provide debriefs with the various authorities when there are conditions that can be utilised to address any amenity impacts as a result of traffic.

 

Deletion of the condition is considered reasonable and supported.

 

 

Conditions are in place which address these matters. It is considered onerous on the applicant to provide debriefs with the various authorities when there are conditions that can be utilised to address any amenity impacts as a result of traffic.

 

Deletion of the condition is considered reasonable and supported.

 

Conditions are in place which address these matters. It is considered onerous on the applicant to provide debriefs with the various authorities when there are conditions that can be utilised to address any amenity impacts as a result of traffic.

 

Deletion of the condition is considered reasonable and supported.

 

 

 

 

Conditions are in place which address these matters. It is considered onerous on the applicant to provide debriefs with the various authorities when there are conditions that can be utilised to address any amenity impacts as a result of traffic. It also seems onerous on the applicant to be required to provide debriefs in accordance with the condition when Events have occurred in the past without complaint.

 

Deletion of the condition is considered reasonable and supported.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conditions are in place which address these matters. It is considered onerous on the applicant to provide debriefs with the various authorities when there are conditions that can be utilised to address any amenity impacts as a result of traffic.

 

Deletion of the condition is considered reasonable and supported.

24. Noise

(d)  Only nominated people are permitted to use the PA system;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(e)  The system is not to be used for providing running commentary on events.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(g) Speakers serving the participants at the show jumping, camp draft arenas and polocrosse fields must be limited to number and located on the eastern side of each venue and orientated toward the west (as outlined in the Environmental Noise Impact Assessment, Ref 48.5299.R5B:MSC prepared by The Acoustic Group dated 03/10/18).

 

(h) Whilst PA system may be used between 8am and 10pm on any given event days, the program schedule must ensure that the separate PA systems are not used simultaneously.

 

 

ii Spectator Noise

(b)The underside of all the roof area over tiered seating areas shall be lined with acoustic absorption (as outlined in the Environmental

Noise Impact Assessment, Ref 48.5299.R5B: MSC prepared by The Acoustic Group dated 03/10/18).

 

iii Traffic Noise

A traffic noise assessment needs to be completed

for the vehicle numbers, maximum vehicles per

hour as detailed by Revised A – Traffic Impact

Statement D18/391664. This updated traffic

noise assessment needs to consider traffic noise

to be under the EPA LAeq (1 hr) limit of 55 dB(A)

as well as additional traffic on roads during night

time (10pm to 7am) under the EPA LAeq (1 hr)

limit of 50 dB(A).

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deleted

 

The applicant has advised that at times, PA’s need to be used by non-nominated persons at short notice. Further it would be difficult to enforce the condition and given the nature of the events it is not anticipated that the PA system would be utilised by extensive numbers of people at any one time.  Deletion of the condition is supported.

 

The applicant has advised the following:

Due to the nature of sporting events, running commentary is a mandatory requirement to ensure the crowd are aware of the events occurring within the specific arena/event space. This is both for crowd information but also for competitors and for the safety of the events. All events at Willinga have had running commentary including at the Camp Draft arena and this has been successful. Importantly all commentary and noise must be respectful in tone and volume for the safety of the animals and the competitors. It is also relevant that there is not large crowd noise at equine events.

This is considered reasonable and there are conditions in place on the consent which allow for noise management issues to be resolved.

 

Deletion of the condition is supported as this is covered in the acoustic report which forms part of the consent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deletion of the condition is considered reasonable and there are conditions in place on the consent which allow for noise management issues to be resolved and surrounding amenity of nearby residences maintained

 

There is no requirement in the Acoustic report for acoustic absorption and there are conditions in place to address noise issues as a result of the events. The deletion of the condition is supported.

 

 

Deletion of the condition is supported as it is covered in condition 25.

27. Notification of Council

(b)  Prior to a major event which uses sound amplification equipment and has a crowd capacity of 2,000 or more people, the organiser must also in this correspondence provide the name and contact details of a person appointed as the Willinga Park events representative in respect to sound monitoring of that event.

 

 

Deleted

 

This is covered in the plan of management and condition 9 of the consent. The deletion of the condition is supported.

30. Noise Complaints

 

Should a substantiated complaint be received concerning offensive noise about the operation of the event, which was not satisfactorily resolved at the time, the Council has the right to request that the activity or use of the equipment attracting complaint is ceased forthwith until immediate noise control measures are implemented to ensure that the noise criteria are complied with.

 

30. Noise Complaints

 

Should a substantiated complaint be received concerning of “offensive noise” as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 about the operation of the event, which was not satisfactorily resolved at the time, the Council has the right to request that the activity or use of the equipment attracting complaint is ceased forthwith until immediate noise control measures are implemented to ensure that the noise criteria are complied with.

 

 

The amended condition provides a definition of ‘offensive noise’. The amendment is supported

32. Security

 

(b)  Security must be maintained at all times. The event manager must ensure that all security staff adhere to the provisions of the approved Security Plan.

 

Deleted

 

The condition is covered in the security plan and therefore superfluous to the consent. The deletion of the condition is supported.

 

Issues

Frequency of Events

It is considered that the request to increase events at the site is reasonable and the actual increase results in an additional 14 events for a total of 32 events. The request is considered reasonable in the context of the facility, its generous separation from residential areas and the type of events which are generally not events which generate noise such as music or sporting events.

There is also an existing Event Management & Traffic Management Plan in place and existing conditions on the consent which assists in managing and minimising impacts on the amenity of the surrounding area.

Increase in Non-Equine Events

It is also considered that the commercial viability of the venue relies on a venue space having multiple numbers of revenue streams and non-equine events are considered as an alternative to the main use as an equine facility. Limiting equestrian only events to Willinga Park limits the potential use of the site and restricts the use to those with an interest in horse related activities. Non-equine events allow for the venue to be open to the general public and allow for accessibility to a greater audience to experience the facility. It also strengthens and diversifies the local economy.

Increased patronage to all event categories

The increase in patronage number to all event categories is considered reasonable in the context of the facility as a whole. The  original assessment considered patron numbers up to a maximum of 5000. The proposed modification to patron numbers does not increase the patronage beyond the 5000-maximum threshold for all event categories, which is what was considered under the original approval.

Regardless from a local economic perspective the increase patronage will promote local tourism in the area and creates innovative tourism experiences and encourages investment that meets demand and supports growth in tourism.

Increased hours of operation

The modification to the hours to increase the hours from 8.00am-10.00pm to 7.00am-11.00pm is considered reasonable and assists in the management of events. The 7.00am start has occurred at past events such as the  camp draft. The applicant has also stated that it also minimises the time that animals are out in the heat of the day.

The 11.00pm finish allows for a more flexible procedure for the events. It allows for events to finish naturally and adequate preparation time for shut down.

This is considered acceptable given it is limited to one hour only either side of the original approved hours.

Amenity

The potential amenity issues that could occur relate to the additional increase in hours and addition number of events. Potential impacts on the amenity of the surrounding area will be from the associated traffic and noise of the event. These matters have been considered under the original application and existing condition of the development consent minimises any detrimental amenity impacts to the surrounding area.

Willinga Park have also taken reasonable steps to ensure that associated traffic and noise impacts on surrounding amenity are minimised which has been demonstrated with past events where Council has not received any complaints.

It is also noted that a letter of support was also submitted with the application from the nearest residential receptor at 122 Forster Drive, Bawley Point.

 

Traffic and access

Traffic matters were addressed under the original development consent. In this regard the thrust of the modification is to increase the number of events and increase patron numbers to all events.

It is considered that the surrounding road infrastructure can accommodate the additional events and additional patron numbers for the non-equine and Category B Events. There are also conditions in place to address any concerns that may arise from traffic matters.

Adequate on-site infrastructure and car parking is provided, and no further upgrade works are considered necessary.

 

Planning Assessment

Besides the other matters discussed in this report, the previous assessment against the provisions of Section 4.15 of the EP & A Act are still relevant.  Please refer to Attachment 2.

 

Policy Implications

There are no specific policy implications that arise from this matter.

 

Consultation and Community Engagement:

The DA was notified in accordance with Council’s Community Consultation Policy for Development Applications. Submissions were received by Council objecting to the proposal. The concerns raised are outlined below:

On 15 January 2020, the development application was notified for a period of 14 days. A total of three (3) submissions were received during the notification period.

On 25 February 2020, the application was re-notified for a period of 14 days, following the amendment by the applicant in relation to the proposal to:

•      Increase the event hours of operation from 8.00am-10.00pm to 7.00am-11.00pm.

A total of three (3) submissions were received following the re-notification of the development application.

Objector Concerns

Key issues raised as a result of the notification are provided below.

·    Increased Traffic

·    Noise

·    Hours of operation

·    Event Ratio

·    Non-equine events

·    Patron numbers

·    Frequency of events

 

The majority of objector concerns have been addressed in the preceding sections of the report.

 

Summary and Conclusion

It is considered that the proposed modifications are not of consequence in the context of the use as allowed under the Development Consent.  In forming this view, a full assessment of the merits of the proposed modifications has been undertaken having regard to the development controls which apply and the conditions of the consent itself.

The application is acceptable and is recommended for approval subject to modification of conditions as per the modified development consent (attachment 1).

 


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page 1

 

 

DE20.39     Outcomes - Shoalhaven Local Heritage Assistance Fund 2019-2020

 

HPERM Ref:       D20/42601

 

Section:              Strategic Planning

Approver:           Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group 

Attachments:     1.  Final Project Report - Shoalhaven Local Heritage Assistance Program 2019-2020   

Reason for Report

·    Detail the outcomes of the Shoalhaven Local Heritage Assistance Program (the Grant Program) for 2019-2020.

·    Establish a revised reporting arrangement for the Grant Program for subsequent financial years.

 

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1.    Receive the annual Summary Project Report (Attachment 1), detailing the outcomes of the Local Heritage Assistance Fund Program 2019-2020, for information.

2.    Endorse the proposed reporting arrangement for subsequent financial years, namely one main program report per annum to:

a.    Detail the NSW Heritage Grants funding offers received for the relevant financial years from the NSW Government and obtain endorsement to accept the offers.

b.    Commence the Shoalhaven Local Heritage Assistance Fund for the coming year and reallocate any declined offers amongst the remaining successful and eligible applicants, if required.

c.    Undertake amendments to the Shoalhaven Heritage Strategy to meet NSW Grant requirements, as required.

3.    Extend the review date in the Shoalhaven Heritage Strategy 2019-2022 to 30 June 2021.

4.    Endorse a bush fire relief theme for the 2020-2021 Local Heritage Assistance Fund Program to assist in the restoration of bush fire affected heritage items and write to affected landowners advising of the grant application process, with any remaining funds to be allocated as per the existing process.

 

 

Options

1.    Adopt the recommendation. 

Implications: This is preferred as it will enable the outcomes of the 2019-2020 Grant Program to be received for information (via the Summary Project Report – Attachment 1) and this year’s program to be finalised so that Council can claim reimbursement of NSW Heritage Grant funding.  This Option also facilitates a new more efficient reporting arrangement and progression of the Grant Program for 2020-2021 onward which also offers the applicants more time to undertake the projects/works.

 

2.    Adopt an alternative recommendation.

Implications: Depending on the nature of any alternative recommendation, this may possibly prevent the finalisation of this year’s program and/or prevent Council making a claim for reimbursement under the NSW Heritage Grants funding. Such a recommendation may also see the retention of the existing reporting arrangement which is not as efficient as the proposed arrangement

 

Background

Council has continued its commitment to local heritage projects by supporting the NSW Heritage Grants. The grant funding provided by the NSW Government assists the Council to provide the services of a Heritage Advisor and to run an annual Local Heritage Assistance Fund to provide grants of up to $5,000 for a wide range of small heritage projects including general maintenance, adaptive reuse, or sympathetic alterations/additions to heritage items. 

The conservation of Shoalhaven’s cultural heritage by its owners is clearly beneficial to the broader community and visitors to the area. These grants, although small, show that Council and the NSW State Government are committed to helping owners to conserve and enhance their properties for future generations. These heritage projects contribute to heritage conservation management, promote cultural sustainability and encourage heritage tourism.

 

NSW Heritage Grants Program 2019-2020 and 2020-2021

NSW Heritage Grant funding was accepted under the following streams:

·    Local Heritage Places (Shoalhaven Local Heritage Assistance Fund) – Council has accepted a grant offer of up to $5,500 (ex GST) for the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 financial years, with a funding formula of $1:$1 (OEH: Council). The claim for reimbursement for the 2019-2020 financial year now needs to be made by 15 May 2020.

·    Local Government Heritage Advisors – Council has accepted a grant offer of up to $6,000 (ex GST) for the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 financial years towards providing a Heritage Advisory Service for Shoalhaven. It is noted that Council was not able to engage the services of a heritage advisor during the 2019-2020 financial year and this will be communicated to the NSW Government accordingly before 15 May 2020.

It is unclear whether a heritage advisor will be appointed during the 2020-2021 financial year (a separate budget bid has been submitted in this regard); however, the grant funding remains available if required.

 

Future Reporting Arrangements

During the Grant Program process, three separate reports are usually reported to Council:

·    Report 1: Details the NSW Heritage Grants funding offers received for the relevant financial years from the NSW Government and seeks endorsement to accept the offers.

·    Report 2: Seeks endorsement of the allocation of the grant funding and for reallocation of any declined offers amongst the remaining successful and eligible applicants, if required.

·    Report 3: Details the outcomes of the Shoalhaven Local Heritage Assistance Program for the relevant financial year prior to acquittal.

 

Report 1 is important as it seeks Council’s acceptance of the NSW Government’s Grant offers and to run the Shoalhaven Local Heritage Assistance Fund grants program. Report 2 provides Council with an opportunity to consider the allocation of grant funding for Shoalhaven’s Local Heritage Assistance Program, however historically, Council has not objected to the allocation which is based on a sound and publicly available assessment criteria.  Report 3 is generally for information only and is sometimes used as a mechanism to amend the Shoalhaven Heritage Strategy to meet to NSW Grant requirements.

Due to the advisory nature of reports 2 and 3 and the ongoing resources required to prepare the reports, it is now recommended that one Grant Program report be received by Council per year/Grant Program that seeks to:

·    Detail the NSW Heritage Grants funding offers received for the relevant financial years from the NSW Government and obtain endorsement to accept the offers, as required.

·    Commence the Shoalhaven Local Heritage Assistance Fund for the coming year and reallocate of any declined offers amongst the remaining successful and eligible applicants if required.

·    Undertake any amendments to the Shoalhaven Heritage Strategy to meeting NSW Grant requirements, as required.

This option is less resource intensive and will reduce administrative delays through the process which will ultimately provide applicants more time to complete their projects/works.

Further reports could be presented on an as needs basis and a copy of the grant funding allocation list and outcomes of the program at completion (i.e. final project report) can be emailed directly to Councillors for information as required.

This report finalises the 2019-2020 Grant Program and commences the 2020-2021 Grant Program.

 

Bush Fire Impact – Heritage Assistance

Several heritage items are located in the area affected by the devastating 2019-2020 bushfires. A number of these items have been damaged (minor to severe impact), with some items destroyed. Unfortunately, the cost of the restoration of heritage items can often exceed the insurance money received, which can act as a disincentive for the restoration/retention of these items. 

In response to the bushfire crisis, it is appropriate for the 2020-2021 Grant Program to have a bushfire relief theme, with a focus on the restoration of items impacted by the bushfires.  These items would be prioritised above grant applications in non-bushfire impacted areas, however any remaining funds after the consideration of bushfire affected items would be allocated as per the existing process.

 

Community Engagement

The 2019-2020 Shoalhaven Local Heritage Fund Program was advertised in local newspapers on 10 July 2019 and included a link to Council’s website for relevant information on eligibility and assessment criteria. Direct advice was also provided to persons who had previously expressed an interest in the program.

The 2020-2021 Shoalhaven Local Heritage Fund Program will also be advertised in local papers and correspondence will be sent to interested stakeholders and owners of heritage items within Shoalhaven’s bushfire affected areas.

 

Policy Implications  

As part of the funding agreement for the Local Government Heritage Advisors Grant and to enable a claim for reimbursement, Council is required to submit a four-year Heritage Strategy covering 2019-2020. Council amended the Shoalhaven Heritage Strategy on 7 May 2019 (MIN19.920) to cover the 2019-2022 period. The Heritage Strategy will need to be revised to cover the 2020-2023 period at some point during the 2020-2021 financial year, and as such, the review date of the Shoalhaven Heritage Strategy should be extended until 30 June 2021 to facilitate this.

The Shoalhaven Heritage Strategy notes that the Heritage Advisor is to inspect all completed projects to ensure compliance with the application details and sound conservation practice. In the current absence of a retained Heritage Advisor, this process has been undertaken by appropriate Council staff, with input from a Heritage Consultant (Council’s former Heritage Advisor) as required.

 

Financial Implications

Shoalhaven Local Heritage Assistance Fund (Local Heritage Places Grant)

The funding offer from the NSW Government for the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 financial years is up to $5,500 (ex GST) per annum, with a funding formula of $1:$1 (NSW Government: Council). Recurrent funding to match the Grant, plus additional funding continues to be provided in Council’s annual budget.

Local Government Heritage Advisors Grant

The funding offer from the NSW Government for the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 financial years is up to $6,000 (ex GST), with a funding formula of $1: 1 (NSW Government: Council). The NSW Government will be advised of the non-take-up for the 2019-2020 financial year by 15 May 2020. 

The grant funding remains available for the 2020-2021 financial year should a heritage advisor be appointed during that financial year.  Recurrent funding to match the Grant, plus additional funding continues to be provided in Council’s annual budget.

 


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page 1

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page 1

 

 

DE20.40     Proposed Policy Review - Nowra CBD Contributions Discount Subsidy

 

HPERM Ref:       D20/104502

 

Section:              Strategic Planning

Approver:           Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group  

Reason for Report

To potentially progress a review of the current

Nowra CBD Contributions Discount Subsidy Policy (Subsidy Policy) to clarify/improve its operation.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1.    Commence a review of the Nowra CBD Contributions Discount Subsidy Policy and the preparation of a draft revised Subsidy Policy, as appropriate.  

2.    Receive a further report on the review and draft revised Subsidy Policy.

3.    Consult with the Nowra CBD Revitalisation Committee, Nowra CBD Business Chamber, Shoalhaven Business Chamber and Development Industry representatives during the review process. 

4.    Consider a separate report on the status of Contributions Plan project 01CARP30010 – Nowra Car Parking and a possible review of it.

 

 

Options

1.    As recommended.

Implications: This is the preferred option, assuming that the Council wishes to retain the intent of the policy, as it will enable a full review of the existing Subsidy Policy which will consider the scope of the Subsidy Policy and several operational issues.

 

2.    Adopt an alternative recommendation, for example to discontinue the Subsidy Policy.

Implications: This will depend on the decision or the extent of any changes and could delay the implementation of updated and improved Subsidy Policy. The real impact of discontinuing the Policy is unknown.

 

3.    Not adopt the recommendation.

Implications:  The review would not be undertaken, and the current Subsidy Policy would effectively continue to be implemented in a way which was not envisaged, potentially resulting in significant unplanned financial implications to Council.

 

Background

The current Subsidy Policy seeks to subsidise contributions payable in relation to Contributions Plan 2019 car parking project 01CARP3001 Nowra Car Parking (Egans Lane, Lawrence Ave, Collins Way, Bridge Road, Lamonds Lane, 9 Haigh Avenue & 67 Kinghorne Street)

The contribution rate (Contributions Plan 2019) for one parking space under this project is currently $27,178. This rate is based on the costs of the project and its components (land acquisition, construction etc). The contribution is levied when development does not provide required carparking on site with the contribution used to provide such parking in an alternate, off site location.

CP project 01CARP3001 only applies to commercial development (or commercial components of a development). It is currently levied on a car parking space basis as follows (noting current review of DCP Chapter G21 underway):

•        Residential – 1 space per small dwelling (under 55m2), 1.5 spaces per medium dwelling (5685m2), 2 spaces per dwelling 86m2 or greater.

•        Commercial (GFA) – B3 zone, 1 space per 24m2 (ground level), 1 space per 40m2 above ground.

•           Retail (shop) (GLA) - 1 space per 24m2.

 

Development applications within Area 1 of the contributions project are charged contributions for parking at the above rate, noting that they do not have the option to provide onsite. Applications in the broader Area 2 are charged contributions for parking, only where it cannot be provided on site.

The Subsidy Policy aims to stimulate development in the Nowra CBD by lessening the impact of car parking contribution requirements and currently applies to land in the area of application shown in Figure 1 below.

The Subsidy Policy resulted from concerns raised by the development industry and others that the cost of current car parking contributions was/is inhibiting development in the Nowra CBD, particularly small to medium sized commercial/retail development, and was seen as an opportunity to ‘test’ in the short term whether this was actually the case.

Figure 1: Area of Subsidy Application

The Subsidy Policy currently:

·    Applies to small to medium development scenarios that generally have a net development area of less than 1,500m2.

·    Excludes supermarkets, clubs, hotel and motel developments.

·    Applies to applications that were lodged on or after 30 July 2014.

·    Requires that development cannot already be complete or have received an Occupation Certificate.

·    Requires the contributions to be paid in full, then a subsidy (of 50%) is applied.

 

If required, the discount subsidy is currently paid from Council’s General Revenue funds, not the Contributions Plan, to ensure that the money for the contribution project remains available for the purpose collected (i.e. car parking in the Nowra CBD).

Over the years, the take-up of the discount subsidy has been low and for relatively small amounts - this is reflected in the annual budget allocation of $20,000 per annum that exists to support the Subsidy Policy.  Since the adoption of the Subsidy Policy in 2014, only three discount subsidy requests have been received.

The first was for a development that had already been completed, and the subsidy was applied retrospectively.  The second was a more recent application for an expansion of an existing medical centre. The value associated with these two initial instances were of a relatively minor nature.

A third more recent discount subsidy request was received in relation to a four-storey mixed use commercial (670m2) and residential building (3 units) at 61 Kinghorne Street, Nowra (DA18/2325). A $31,663.40 discount subsidy was requested, and paid, however only $20,000 was specifically available in the 2019/2020 budget.  Note: Contributions were levied in this case for commercial related car parking that was not provided on site, the shortfall in spaces being 2.3 spaces.

It is advised that a further discount subsidy request will be received relating to a four-storey mixed use commercial (1185m2) and residential building (3 units) development at 2 Lawrence Avenue, Nowra (DA18/2326). The applicant could be eligible for a discount subsidy of approximately $265,000 which again relates to commercial car parking that was not provided on site, the shortfall being 19.5 spaces.  A discount of this scale has not been budgeted for and would need to be considered in the quarterly budget review process.

 

Proposed Review

As noted, the Subsidy Policy originally commenced in late 2014 and was trialled for an initial two (2) year period. Given limited use and take up, Council resolved in late 2016 to extend the initial trial period by twelve (12) months.

In September 2017 it was recommended that the Subsidy Policy be rescinded given its low take up to that point – was used twice at a cost of $37,397. It was noted in the report that the Subsidy Policy had possibly not had the desired outcome of encouraging new development in the CBD. It was also noted that the amount needed to support the Subsidy Policy was difficult to accurately predict.

The Council subsequently resolved in March 2018 to continue the operation of the Subsidy Policy and consider an annual budget allocation to support its operation. The current Subsidy Policy is due for review in December 2020.

Following the recent and likely future discount subsidy requests relating to DA18/2325 ($31,663.40 – paid) and DA18/2326 ($265,000 – possible), it would be appropriate to again review the Subsidy Policy for the following reasons:

·    Generally, the Subsidy Policy has not had the desired outcome of encouraging new development within the CBD, particularly retail and commercial.

·    The Subsidy Policy was originally not intended for applications of this nature (mixed use residential) in this location (i.e. outside the CBD Core).

·    The Subsidy Policy was initially prepared to provide relief for smaller development scenarios (small to medium retail businesses) where they had no other option but to pay a contribution that may have been too much for them; not necessarily for developments with substantial car parking that has not been accommodated on site.

·    To consider the implications of the related recent policy change which has resulted in no additional parking provision being required for ‘change of use’ development applications via the Car Parking Waiver – Change of Use in Traditional Retail Centres Policy.

·    Assess the impact of the above in achieving the stated outcomes of 01CARP3001 Nowra Car Parking (Egans Lane, Lawrence Ave, Collins Way, Bridge Road, Lamonds Lane, 9 Haigh Avenue & 67 Kinghorne Street)

 

The Review if supported could:

·    Clarify what a “development scenario” is (i.e. non-residential only, or any development) and how it is to be possibly considered or applied in the context of a mixed-use development.

·    Consider the application area of the Subsidy Policy – for example, the broader ‘area of subsidy application’ shown above or the smaller more defined core area (Area 1) in Contributions Plan 2019 car parking project 01CARP3001 where the only option is generally the payment of contributions for car parking.

·    Consider cumulative developments on effectively the one site (with separate DA’s) or interrelated developments.

·    Investigate the funding sources identified in the Subsidy Policy and amended or clarify as required.

·    Consider other relevant matters that arise during the review.

 

Conclusion

Given the potential emerging implications arising from recent applications and enquires it is appropriate to clarify the operation of the Subsidy Policy if it continues to operate. There is a need to potentially tighten its wording to ensure its use and operation is clear. It is also important to ensure that budget implications are considered and managed appropriately.

 

Community Engagement

Consultation opportunities with the Nowra CBD Revitalisation Committee, Nowra CBD Business Chamber, Shoalhaven Business Chamber and Development Industry representatives can be facilitated during the review. 

 

Policy Implications

Considering the recent development applications which have or will soon potentially request a discount subsidy refund, and the financial implications discussed within this report, it is timely to again consider a full review of the Subsidy Policy. This review will look to ensure the Policy is operating as intended and will consider the current criteria and other operational issues.

 

Financial and Risk Implications

This policy operates separately and in isolation to Council’s Contributions Plan. This is to ensure the integrity of the Plan and the funding for the projects within it. Therefore, any discount subsidy is paid from Council’s General Revenue funds and not from the contribution projects funds. This means that all contributions funds are retained for the purpose that they were collected.

The current annual budget allocation ($20,000) for the discount subsidy is not enough to cover potentially sizeable requests if the Subsidy Policy continues in its current form. Of the $31,663.40 discount subsidy requested for DA18/2325; only $20,000 was available in the relevant budget with the remainder required to be sourced elsewhere.  

Funding for the likely potential future subsidy request relating to DA18/2326 needs to be considered as part of Council’s quarterly budget review process, with an anticipated value of approximately $265,000. It is noted that a formal request has not yet been received in this regard but has been suggested by the applicant in the development application documentation.

Ongoing funding for discount subsidies will need to be considered in conjunction with the proposed review. It is important that any subsidy is drawn from a different budget to the Contribution Plan to ensure that the money for the contribution project remains available for the purpose collected (i.e. car parking in the Nowra CBD).

Any review of the Subsidy Policy will be resourced from within the existing Strategic Planning budget.

 


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page 1

 

 

DE20.41     Exhibition Outcomes and Proposed Finalisation - Planning Proposal - Ulladulla CBD (Southern part) Building Height and Zoning Amendment

 

HPERM Ref:       D20/128043

 

Section:              Strategic Planning

Approver:           Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group 

Attachments:     1.  Copy of Submissions - Report - Exhibition Outcomes and Proposed Finalisation - Ulladulla CBD(Southern Part) Building Height & Zoning Amendment Planning Proposal (councillors information folder)   

Reason for Report

·    Present the outcomes of the public exhibition of the Ulladulla CBD (Southern part) Building Height and Zoning Amendment Planning Proposal (the PP); and

·    Enable the resultant amendment to Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014 to proceed to finalisation

 

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1.    Adopt and finalise the Planning Proposal (PP030): Ulladulla CBD (Southern part) Building Height and Zoning Amendment as exhibited.

2.    Forward PP030 to NSW Parliamentary Counsel’s Office to draft the required amendment to Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014.

3.    Make the resulting amendment to the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014 using Council’s delegation.

4.    Advise key stakeholders, including owners of the subject land, adjoining land owners, the Ulladulla and Districts Community Forum, relevant industry representatives and those who made a submission, of this decision, and when the LEP amendment will be made effective.

5.    Commence the preparation of a draft amendment to Chapter S8: Ulladulla Town Centre of Shoalhaven DCP 2014 to reflect the building height and zoning changes and address resulting matters such as general context, built form and character, views and vistas, setbacks and height references in the subject area, with the amendment to be reported to Council prior to placing it on public exhibition.

 

 

Options

1.    As recommended.

Implications: This is the preferred option as it will enable the amendments to Shoalhaven LEP 2014 to be finalised and the related update to Shoalhaven DCP 2014 to be produced.

This will implement a general increase in building heights over the southern part of the Ulladulla CBD in accordance with the recommendations of the Ulladulla Building Height Review Report commissioned by Council and adopted in June 2017. It will also rezone the St Vincent–Deering Street site to B4 Mixed Use and increase building height for this site to 14m. These changes will encourage the continued development of the Ulladulla CBD as a vibrant, mixed-use centre with a diversity of shops and businesses and quality residential and holiday apartments. Chapter S8 of Shoalhaven DCP 2014 will be updated to reflect the building height and zoning changes and guide good design and development outcomes in the subject area.

 

2.    Make an alternate resolution.

Implications: Subject to the nature of any alternative, this may delay or prevent the finalisation of the amendment to Shoalhaven LEP 2014. The proposed changes to building height and zoning are sound and supported by a number of technical studies. Any alternative changes may require a revised Gateway determination, additional technical studies and re-exhibition of the PP. If Chapter S8 of Shoalhaven DCP 2014 is not updated to also reflect the building height and zoning changes it may cause difficulties for landholders, developers and the community and result in undesirable outcomes from future developments.

 

3.    Not proceed with the amendments to Shoalhaven LEP 2014 or Chapter S8 of Shoalhaven DCP 2014.

Implications: This is not the preferred option as the existing building height and zoning controls for the southern part of Ulladulla CBD in Shoalhaven LEP 2014 will remain unchanged. This would be contrary to the recommendations of the Ulladulla Building Height Review and the supporting studies prepared for the St Vincent–Deering Street site. It may limit  redevelopment of the Ulladulla CBD as a vibrant, mixed-use centre with a diversity of shops and businesses and quality residential and holiday apartments. If Chapter S8 of Shoalhaven DCP 2014 is not updated to also reflect the building height and zoning changes it may cause difficulties for landholders, developers and the community and result in undesirable outcomes from future developments.

Background

Council has been progressing the proposed amendment to Shoalhaven LEP 2014 to:

1.   Increase the maximum permissible building height in the southern part of Ulladulla CBD in the LEP from 7.5 metres (2 storeys) to 11 metres (3/4 storeys) and, for some selected sites, 14 metres (4/5 storeys). Note: the reference to ‘storeys’ is not part of the LEP and is only provided in this report as an indication of the nature of development that could result.

2.   Rezone the nine (9) properties at 116-126 St Vincent Street and 37-41 Deering Street from B5 Business Development to B4 Mixed Use and increase the maximum permissible building height from 7.5 metres to 14 metres.

The PP applies to approximately ninety (90) properties in the southern part of the CBD, being the area generally bounded by St Vincent Street, Parson Street, Burrill Street South, Jubilee Avenue, Deering Street and the Princes Highway. The land is occupied by a range of commercial, industrial, and residential development including dwellings, offices, shops, steel fabrication, and mechanics. The area proposed to be rezoned at 116-126 St Vincent Street and 37-41 Deering Street has been developed with a range of light industrial uses, including some storage premises.

Figure 1 shows the area covered by this PP. Figure 2 and Figure 3 show the existing and proposed height of buildings and land zoning respectively.

Figure 1: Land in the southern part of Ulladulla CBD included in the PP.

Figure 2: LEP height of buildings

Existing and Proposed

Figure 3: LEP land zoning

Existing and Proposed

The proposed general changes to building height implement the recommendations of the Ulladulla Building Height Review, that were adopted by Council in 2017. The specific change in zone and building height for the site on the St Vincent–Deering Street corner responds to a PP request made by the affected owners. The proposed changes for this site are supported by additional supplied work, including a visual impact assessment, preliminary land contamination investigation and an analysis of development feasibility.

The proposed changes will assist with the continued development and redevelopment of the southern part of the CBD and ensure that planning controls are appropriate/soundly based. New development will contribute to economic activity, helping to support local businesses. It also provides opportunities to provide a range of housing close to the CBD, activate local streets and improve the pedestrian environment.

Council has considered the changes covered by this PP on a number of occasions between 2017 and 2019, the most recent being the 3 September 2019 Development & Environment Committee when it was resolved to publicly exhibit the PP.

Council also previously resolved on 14 November 2017 to amend Chapter S8: Ulladulla Town Centre of Shoalhaven Development Control Plan (DCP) 2014 to reflect the proposed building height and zoning modifications and facilitate good design and built form outcomes. This has been on hold until the public exhibition of the PP is completed and the changes to LEP building heights and zoning are settled. Should Council resolve to finalise the LEP amendment, the preparation of the draft amendment to the DCP will be advanced addressing (not exclusively) the general context, built form and character, views and vistas, setbacks and height references in the subject area.

 

Community Engagement

The PP package was formally exhibited from 27 November 2019 to 28 February 2020 inclusive (94 days), in accordance with the Gateway determination. The initial exhibition period was extended from 31 January to 28 February 2020 as a result of the bushfire crisis.

The exhibition included:

·    Advertisements in local newspapers;

·    Exhibition/availability of the PP package at the Nowra and Ulladulla Administrative Buildings, the Ulladulla Civic Centre and on Council’s website;

·    Notification to all affected and adjoining landholders;

·    Notification to Development Industry Representatives and the Ulladulla and Districts Community Forum.

The package of information exhibited with the PP is still available for viewing on Council’s exhibitions webpage and includes:

·    Explanatory Statement

·    The Planning Proposal

·    Ulladulla Building Heights Review (2017)

·    Economic Feasibility Analysis

·    Visual Impact Assessment

·    Preliminary Land Contamination Investigation

·    Initial Gateway Determination dated 29 August 2017

·    Alteration to Gateway Determination dated 14 May 2018

·    Newspaper advertisement

As a result of the exhibition, three (3) submissions were received in total – two (2) in support of the PP and one (1) opposed. These submissions were received from landowners outside of the subject land.

Whilst not a submission, the Ulladulla and Districts Community Forum also provided notification that its members voted to oppose the PP.

A summary of the issues raised in submissions and staff comments on them is provided below. Copies of the actual submissions will be made available to Councillors prior to the meeting or in association with this report. As a result of the submissions received, no changes are recommended to the exhibited PP.

 

Table 1: Summary of Submissions and Staff Comment

Submitter

Issues raised

Staff comment

Individual – Landowner (x2)

In full support of the PP.

Suggest that Council go further and set building height at 14m across all of the subject land.

 

 

Support acknowledged.

The detailed Ulladulla Building Heights Review only considered 14m to be appropriate in certain locations (generally B4 zoned land close to the Town Centre and Princes Highway) based on factors such as land use, slope/topography, views, visual impact, overshadowing, continuity with building heights on adjacent land and feedback from community workshops.

Any change of this nature would be inconsistent with the adopted review, require an altered Gateway determination, additional supporting studies and also re-exhibition of the PP.

The requested change is not supported.

Council should reinstate the provisions of DCP 56 Amendment 4 to facilitate quality development of our foreshores.

This is well outside the scope of this PP and associated proposed DCP amendment. 

The former DCP 56 Ulladulla Town Centre was repealed and replaced by the current DCP Chapter S8: Ulladulla Town Centre in 2014.

It is noted that Amendment 4 to DCP 56 existed from August 2008 until March 2011. The following Amendment 5 was prepared with considerable community input resulting from concerns regarding the content of Amendment 4.

The requested change is not supported.

Individual – Landowner

Opposed to any increase in building heights over the subject land.

Objection noted.

 

There are empty shops in Ulladulla. Additional buildings do not mean that new businesses will move in, especially with the growing trend to work from home.

 

Comment noted. The proposed changes to building height provide additional flexibility/opportunity and a general incentive for redevelopment in the southern part of the CBD. The ability to secure tenants is generally considered as part of a more detailed feasibility analysis in the early stages of a development proposal.

The economic feasibility assessment prepared for the St Vincent Street / Deering Street site indicates that there is demand to support the proposed changes to zoning and building height for this site.

Multi-story apartments will significantly increase vehicle movements and car parking issues.

Comment noted. The local road network has sufficient capacity to support the additional development potential created by the proposed changes to building height and zoning. New development will need to provide a certain amount of onsite car parking in accordance with the DCP. Detailed traffic and parking issues will be considered as part of any subsequent development applications.

 

Conclusion

It is now appropriate to finalise this long running PP and proceed to amend the LEP accordingly. The recommended amendment to DCP Chapter S8 will also assist with managing future impacts and achieving desired outcomes arising from the change to the LEP.

 

Policy Implications

The proposed general increase in building heights implements the recommendations of the Ulladulla Building Height Review Report commissioned by Council and completed in June 2017. This report identified the changes necessary to encourage the continued development of the Ulladulla CBD as a vibrant, mixed-use centre with a diversity of shops and businesses and quality residential and holiday apartments.

The proposed rezoning of the St Vincent-Deering Street site responds to a request from the owners of this site to change its zoning and increase the maximum permissible building height beyond what was proposed for the site in the 2017 building height review report. The owners are seeking these changes to enable the site to be redeveloped for a mixed-use development of shops and businesses on the ground floor with apartments above.

Chapter S8: Ulladulla Town Centre of Shoalhaven DCP 2014 will need to be adjusted and updated to reflect the proposed building height and zoning changes and facilitate good design and built form outcomes. The amendment should address (not exclusively) the general context, built form and character, views and vistas, setbacks and height references in the subject area. Any proposed amendment to the DCP will be reported back to Council for endorsement prior to public exhibition/finalisation.

 

Financial Implications

Finalisation of the amendments to the Shoalhaven LEP 2014 resulting from this PP and preparation of the proposed amendment to Shoalhaven DCP 2014 will continue to be resourced within the existing Strategic Planning budget.

 

 


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page 1

 

 

DE20.42     Proposed Heritage Bushfire Planning Proposal - Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014 (PP053)

 

HPERM Ref:       D20/130549

 

Section:              Strategic Planning

Approver:           Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group 

Attachments:     1.  Proposed Heritage Bushfire Planning Proposal (Pre-Gateway) (under separate cover)   

Reason for Report

Obtain the necessary resolution to progress the Heritage Bushfire Amendment Planning Proposal (PP) which seeks to remove Item No. 535 (“Currawar” – Victorian Georgian style farmhouse at E435 Princes Highway, Yatte Yattah) from Schedule 5 Environmental Heritage of Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2014 following its destruction during the recent Currowan Bushfire.

 

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1.    Submit the Heritage Bushfire Amendment Planning Proposal (PP053) provided as Attachment 1 to the report to the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for an initial Gateway determination.

2.    Include the removal or adjustment of any other additional bushfire affected heritage items in PP053, if appropriate or relevant, that may be identified or confirmed prior to it being submitted to Gateway.

3.    If the Gateway Determination requires formal public exhibition, proceed to public exhibition in accordance with the terms of the determination and legislative requirements and receive a further report on PP053 following the conclusion of the public exhibition period.

4.    If the Gateway Determination does not require formal public exhibition or any other requirements, proceed to finalisation on the Planning Proposal and subsequent Amendment to the LEP without receiving any further reports.

5.    Advise the landowner of this resolution, of the exhibition arrangements (if exhibition is required) and when the Plan is finalised.

 

 

Options

1.    As recommended.

Implications: This is the preferred option as the heritage item has been destroyed and the property no longer holds the same heritage significance. The PP seeks to remove any hurdles imposed by the heritage significance and to ensure the accuracy of Shoalhaven LEP 2014 following the loss of the item.

2.    Adopt an alternative recommendation.

Implications: This will depend on the extent of any changes and could delay the removal of the heritage item from LEP, which may affect demolition and rebuilding efforts.

 

3.    Not proceed with the PP.

Implications: This is not favoured as the hurdles imposed by the heritage significance will remain which may restrict the landowner from being able to demolish utilising NSW Government assistance and rebuild via NSW Government approval pathways.

 

Background

Lot 30 DP 792994, E435 Princes Highway, Yatte Yattah (Figure 1) is currently identified as an item of local heritage (Item 535) in Shoalhaven LEP 2014 known as “Currawar” – Victorian Georgian style farmhouse.

Figure 1: Aerial Photo of the Site (prior to Currowan Bushfire)

 

The item is described as a modest Victorian Georgian style weatherboard cottage built c.1875 which is part of the dairying cultural landscape established by the Kendall family north of Croobyar Creek. The building illustrated the subdivision of large estates and was a low key element on the pastoral landscape of the Milton district which extends northwards towards Yatte Yattah.

NSW Public Works has confirmed that “Currawar” (Figure 2) was unfortunately destroyed by the Currowan Bushfire. A number of associated outbuildings were also destroyed by the bushfire; however, they did not form part of the heritage listing.

Figure 2: “Currawar” prior to Currowan Bushfire

 

Intent of the Planning Proposal

The Planning Proposal (Attachment 1) intends to amend Shoalhaven LEP 2014 as follows:

·   Remove Lot 30 DP 792994, E435 Princes Highway, Yatte Yattah (Item 535) from Schedule 5 Environmental Heritage. 

·   Amend Map Sheet HER_015 to reflect the removal of item 535 from the Shoalhaven LEP 2014 instrument.

As the heritage item has been destroyed and the property no longer holds the same heritage significance, the PP seeks to remove the hurdles imposed by the heritage significance and to ensure that Shoalhaven LEP 2014 is amended to reflect the loss.

The removal of the heritage item from Shoalhaven LEP 2014 may enable the landowner to demolish utilising NSW Government assistance in a timelier manner and assist the rebuilding process without unnecessary impediments.  The amendment to Shoalhaven LEP 2014 may also enable the landowner to rebuild via NSW Government approval pathways rather than a development application being the only available option.

Bega Valley Shire Council is pursuing a similar PP to remove ten (10) LEP heritage listed items that were lost in their area during the 2019/2020 bushfires. The Gateway determination for the Bega PP does not require any consultation with Government agencies or community consultation, thus assisting with a quicker process.

There are likely to be other heritage listed items in Shoalhaven that have been significantly damaged or destroyed by the bushfires and this detail is starting to come through as the clean-up process advances. As such in addition to the subject property, there may be other items that need to be removed from the LEP, or the description of the items amended. To ensure this can happen in a timely manner, this is also generally recognised in the recommendation. 

 

Conclusion/Next steps

The draft PP (Attachment 1) seeks to remove the hurdles imposed by the heritage significance of the now destroyed item which may assist the landowner in the demolition, approval and rebuild process. There is merit in enabling the PP to proceed to Gateway to support and continue the recovery effort. 

Following initial endorsement by Council, the PP will be submitted to the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment for a Gateway determination once an image of the destroyed item (or items) is provided by the NSW Rural Fire Service or others and included in the PP.

 

Community Engagement

Due to the nature of the PP, it is likely that no formal public exhibition will be required which is consistent with the Gateway determinations of similar planning proposals in bushfire affected NSW Local Government Areas. If, however, public exhibition is required, the PP will be exhibited for comment in accordance with Council’s Community Participation Plan, and in accordance with the relevant legislative requirements.

The Gateway determination will specify the minimum exhibition period and any government agencies who should be consulted (e.g. Heritage NSW).

 

Financial Implications

There are no immediate financial implications for Council. This PP is being resourced within the Strategic Planning budget.

 

Policy Implications

Updating Schedule 5 of Shoalhaven LEP 2014 following the loss of Item No. 535 will ensure that the Plan remains accurate. 

A number of other heritage items are located in the area burnt by the Currowan Bushfire.  At this point in time, the impact of the bushfire on these items is unknown. As more information becomes available, a further PP may be required to make subsequent amendments to Schedule 5 of Shoalhaven LEP 2014.

 

 


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page 1

 

 

DE20.43     Quarterly Review for Compliance Matters

 

HPERM Ref:       D20/118840

 

Section:              Building & Compliance Services

Approver:           Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group 

Attachments:     1.  List of penalties issued from 1 January 2020 to 31 March 2020 via offence Code   

Reason for Report

At Council’s Ordinary meeting held on 13 November 2018 it was resolved to receive a detailed quarterly report on compliance activities (MIN18.907).

This report provides information on the period from 1 January to 31 March 2020 (third quarter 2019/2020).

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That the Quarterly Review for Compliance Matters report be received for information.

 

 

Options

1.   Council receive the report for information.

Implications: Nil

2.   Council receives the report and provides additional direction for future reports.

Implications: Any changes or additional matters can be added to future reports.

 

Report

Compliance activities are completed by the following Teams within the Planning, Environment and Development Group:

(a)   Compliance Team: Development compliance matters including unauthorised development, development not in accordance with development consent, land and water pollution incidents (including building sites), land use management issues, fire safety and swimming pool safety issues.

(b)   Environmental Health: Pollution incidents (noise and water), environmental incidents, food shops and the operation of on-site sewage waste management facilities.

(c)   Parking: All parking offences.

(d)   Rangers: Animal control, littering, unauthorised camping, rubbish dumping and other environmental offences.

This report provides Councillors with an update on the penalties issued (number, type and ticket value), penalty reviews dealt with by the Review Panel and any Local or Land and Environment Court matters determined or progressing. 

This report relates to compliance actions from 1 January to 31 March 2020 (third quarter).

Penalties issued during the period

A combined total of 1452 penalty notices were issued by the Teams during the period. These penalties have a face value of $336,688. Historically Council stands to receive approximately 70% of this ticketed figure. A total of 333 cautions were also issued during the period. Attachment 1 to this report provides a breakdown of the penalties and cautions issued.

The following is a summary of the penalties issued for each team:

Jan – March 2020

Number Issued

Total Amount

% of total amount

Cautions issued

Compliance

39

$77,650

23.0%

79

Compliance - Fire Safety

4

$800

0.23%

0

Compliance - Pools

3

$1,210

0.36%

9

Environmental Health

4

$2,640

0.78%

0

Rangers – Animal issues

107

$36,760

10.9%

88

Rangers – Environmental issues

73

$22,078

6.6%

9

Parking

1,222

$195,550

58.1%

148

Sewer Management Facility

0

0

0

0

Total

1452

$336,688

100%

333

 

Penalties related to Compliance issues

The following details are provided in relation to the 39 compliance penalty notices issued in this quarter:

(a)   Woollamia ($6,000): One penalty notice issued to the owner for failure to comply with the terms of development control order (Corporation - $6,000). The order directed the owner to stop using the property for the unauthorised use as a campground. The use continued.

(b)   Milton ($6,200): Three penalty notices issued. Two notices relate to development not in accordance with the consent conditions relating to noise and excess numbers (Individual - $3,000 each notice) and one penalty notice for failure to ensure smoke alarms have been fitted.

This matter came to Council’s attention following concerns raised by local residents in relation to excessive numbers and noise concerns following a wedding function.

The investigation revealed the owners failed to ensure smoke alarms were fitted within the dwelling and a further penalty notice was issued (Individual - $200).

(c)   Milton ($4,500): Three penalty notices issued to one owner for offences relating to development without development consent (Individual - $1,500 each notice).

One notice issued for the unauthorised alteration to an approved shed to support habitable occupation and a second notice issued for the construction of a detached studio. This shed did not form part of the Complying Development Certificate application which illustrated a garden shed.  A third notice was issued for the occupation of the machinery shed for short term rental accommodation.

(d)   Kangaroo Valley ($2,200): Three penalty notices issued to the owner, in relation to offences under the Plumbing and Drainage Act (1 x $1,100 and 2 x $550). The offences committed were part of a larger investigation into unauthorised development of a number of structures located on the premises.

(e)   Woodhill ($3,000):- One penalty notice issued to a contractor for carrying out development without development consent ($3,000). The contractor constructed a timber viewing platform and deck without prior approval.

(f)    Budgong ($9,850): Eight penalty notices were issued to one owner relating to the unauthorised construction of a shipping container house. The structure comprised 5 shipping containers and they were modified for habitable use. The structure is located within a bush fire prone area.

Four penalty notices were issued for breaches against the EP&A Act (4 x $1,500 = $6,000) and four penalty notices for breaches against the Plumbing and Drainage Act (3 x $1,100 and 1 x $550 = $3,850).

(g)   Barrengarry ($18,000): Three penalty notices issued to the owner for vegetation clearing and other unauthorised development prior to the issue of Development Consent (Corporation - $6,000 each). A number of trees have been removed and earthworks undertaken in preparation for waste-water treatment work.

(h)   Various locations ($10,500): In collaboration with NSW Department of Fair Trading, Council investigated a matter in relation to a builder conducting work without the required Home Builders Compensation Cover.  This relates to seven properties from Currarong to Ulladulla. Seven penalty notices were issued for development not in accordance with consent (7 x $1,500 = $10,500).

(i)    Sanctuary Point ($11,100): This matter initially related to the non-payment of developer contributions in accordance with the development consent.  Further investigations revealed the conversion of a carport to a second bedroom and bathroom (including unauthorised plumbing). Significant internal alterations had been undertaken without prior development consent or a construction certificate being issued.

Eight penalty notices were issued for breaches of the EP&A Act. Five notices issued to the owner for development without development consent (5 x $1,500 = $7,500), three notices issued for not ensuring smoke alarms fitted (3 x $200 = $600) and further notice issued for fail to comply with a development control order ($3,000).

(j)    Tomerong ($3,000): One penalty notice issued to the owner for failure to comply with the development control order ($3,000).  Council had ordered the removal of an unauthorised structure.  Even though Council had granted an extension on two occasions,  the owner failed to comply with the order and the penalty was issued.

(k)   Sanctuary Point ($1,500): One penalty notice issued to the contractor for the unauthorised demolition of a fire damaged house. This did not relate to bush fire activity.  In collaboration with Workcover NSW, Council’s Officers observed the structure had been demolished whilst under a Stop Work Order (prohibition order issued by Workcover). Penalty notice issued for development without development consent ($1500).

Warnings related to Compliance issues

A total of 79 warning notices were issued for compliance matters in the period. These warnings equate to $181,740 in penalty notice face value. The caution rate for the Compliance actions in this period is 67%.

 

 

 

 

Penalty infringement panel reviews

During the period, the review panel met on 2 occasions; 7 January and 4 March 2020. A total of three (3) penalty infringement appeals were considered at these meetings. 

(a)   Fail to comply with prevention notice – class 1 officer – individual – (2 x $4,000)

The penalty notices the subject of this review related to a direction to take Emergency Preventative Action under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act. The direction was issued to the owners requiring them to make safe dilapidated fire damaged buildings located in Nowra. Due to the fire it was determined the premises contained friable asbestos.

The direction required the immediate securing of the site and maintaining the site fencing until such time the property was made safe (i.e. the removal of friable asbestos). The owner failed to comply with the direction. 

The owner requested a review even though it was evident the works were not completed in accordance with the direction.

The panel did not consider this reasonable and directed the penalty to stand. 

(b)   Development not in accordance with consent - class 1 or 10 building – Individual - $1,500

The penalty notice subject to review related to unauthorised construction works undertaken on a Sunday contrary to the development consent conditions. The owner builder requested a review due to personal circumstances and a lack of understanding of the requirements of the approved development consent.

The panel convened on 5 March 2020 and determined that a formal caution would be issued in this case.

Local Court matters

(a)   St Georges Basin - this matter relates to breaches of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act which occurred at St Georges Basin in 2017. Council alleged the owner had unlawfully removed 24 trees on land that was subject to a Development Consent.

The matter was heard in the Local Court on 24/1/2020. The Court found in Council’s favour and the owner was found guilty of the offence.  The owner was fined $30,000 for the offence and he was also ordered to pay Council $85,000 in cost.

Activities by Ranger Services

a)    Dog Attacks - Fatal Incident: On 29 March 2020, the Shoalhaven experienced the worst dog attack on record. These attacks occurred on Collingwood Beach, Vincentia and unfortunately, they resulted in the death of a 91 year old lady and injuries to four other residents. There were three (3) attacking dogs involved in the incident.

Rangers assisted emergency services personnel and secured all three dogs. The dogs were all bullmastiff cross type breeds. The bullmastiff is not a restricted breed in accordance with the Companion Animals Act and aggression is not typical of this breed. 

All dogs were conveyed by Rangers to the Animal Shelter and destroyed the same day of the attack.

Police are currently investigating and preparing a report for the Coroner. As this is a Police matter, Council will not have any further input apart from assisting the Police in their investigation. Council will not be issuing penalties to the owners of the dogs unless directed otherwise by the Police.

b)    Beach Patrols: Rangers have completed 1,152 beach patrols during this quarter. A total of 174 dog owners have been spoken to with 380 dogs sighted. A total of 33 penalty notices have been issued with 40 official warnings and 174 verbal cautions given.

c)    Yalwal Patrols: Rangers have continued to have a strong presence in the Yalwal Campgrounds at Danjera Dam in this reporting period. The campgrounds had been closed due the damage caused by the 2020 bushfires to roads, bridges and infrastructure. All roads leading to the area had been closed with barriers and signage erected indicating “Road Closed”. 

During the Rangers routine patrols 25 offenders had been located in the Yalwal campgrounds disobeying the closure. All 25 offenders have been issued penalty notices for ‘wilfully contravene/disregard notice/barrier’ (25 x $114 = $2,850).

d)    Illegal Dumping: One penalty notice for $2,000 was issued for the dumping of 6m3 of household waste on Braidwood Road and along a gas easement approximately 18 km from Turpentine Road. The offender was ordered to clean up the waste and disposed of it to the Nowra Waste Facility.

e)    Illegal Dumping: One penalty notice for $2,000 was issued for the dumping 2m3 of household waste in John Purcell Way, Nowra. The offender was ordered to clean up the waste and disposed of it to the Nowra Waste Facility.

f)     Clean Up Australia Day: Rangers participated in Clean Up Australia Day on Sunday 1st March. Rangers provided assistance to the local environmental community group ‘Visionary Mermaids’ at Shoalhaven Heads. Five Rangers assisted in the clean up around the foreshore and surrounding walking tracks. Rangers provided a trailer and assisted with the transportation of waste to the West Nowra Waste Facility. Rangers also distributed bags, gloves and clean up packs for volunteers. Education talks along with promotional information were also handed out on the day.

 


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page 1

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

  


 

 Development & Environment Committee – Tuesday 05 May 2020

Page 1

 

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.

(c)     Councils should consider the long term and cumulative effects of actions on future generations.

(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.

(c)   Councils should develop activities, and prioritise actions, to work towards the strategic goals.

(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.