ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

Planning and Development Committee

 

Agenda

 

6 June 2017

 

 

Notice is hereby given, in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 that a Planning and Development Committee meeting of ORANGE CITY COUNCIL will be held in the Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Byng Street, Orange on  Tuesday, 6 June 2017.

 

 

Garry Styles

General Manager

 

For apologies please contact David Waddell on 6393 8261.

    

 


Planning and Development Committee                                                      6 June 2017

Agenda

  

1                Introduction.. 3

1.1            Declaration of pecuniary interests, significant non-pecuniary interests and less than significant non-pecuniary interests. 3

2                General Reports. 4

2.1            Items Approved Under the Delegated Authority of Council 4

2.2            Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent 9

2.3            Development Application DA 245/2016(1) - 6/175 and 7/175 Dalton Street 114

2.4            Development Application DA 113/2017(1) - 38-44 Bathurst Road. 145

2.5            Development Application DA 123/2017(1) - 136 Aerodrome Road. 178

2.6            Planning Proposal Old Hospital Site. 207

2.7            Planning Proposal - Totally Local 226

 


Planning and Development Committee                                                      6 June 2017

 

1       Introduction

1.1     Declaration of pecuniary interests, significant non-pecuniary interests and less than significant non-pecuniary interests

The provisions of Chapter 14 of the Local Government Act, 1993 (the Act) regulate the way in which Councillors and designated staff of Council conduct themselves to ensure that there is no conflict between their private interests and their public role.

The Act prescribes that where a member of Council (or a Committee of Council) has a direct or indirect financial (pecuniary) interest in a matter to be considered at a meeting of the Council (or Committee), that interest must be disclosed as soon as practicable after the start of the meeting and the reasons given for declaring such interest.

As members are aware, the provisions of the Local Government Act restrict any member who has declared a pecuniary interest in any matter from participating in the discussion or voting on that matter, and requires that member to vacate the Chamber.

Council’s Code of Conduct provides that if members have a non-pecuniary conflict of interest, the nature of the conflict must be disclosed. The Code of Conduct also provides for a number of ways in which a member may manage non pecuniary conflicts of interest.

Recommendation

It is recommended that Committee Members now disclose any conflicts of interest in matters under consideration by the Planning and Development Committee at this meeting.

 


Planning and Development Committee                                                      6 June 2017

 

 

2       General Reports

2.1     Items Approved Under the Delegated Authority of Council

TRIM REFERENCE:        2017/917

AUTHOR:                       Paul Johnston, Manager Development Assessments    

 

 

EXECUTIVE Summary

Following is a list of development applications approved under the delegated authority of Council.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “13.4 Our Environment – Monitor and enforce regulations relating to City amenity”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

 

Recommendation

That the information provided in the report by the Acting Manager Development Assessments on Items Approved Under the Delegated Authority of Council be acknowledged.

 

further considerations

Consideration has been given to the recommendation’s impact on Council’s service delivery; image and reputation; political; environmental; health and safety; employees; stakeholders and project management; and no further implications or risks have been identified.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

 

Reference:

DA 122/2014(2)

Determination Date

9 May 2017

PR Number

PR23904

Applicant/s:

Eastern Developments (NSW) Pty Ltd

Owner/s:

Eastern Developments (NSW) Pty Ltd

Location:

Lot 101 DP 1147159 – 3 William Maker Drive, Orange

Proposal:

Modification of development consent – subdivision (41 lot residential). The modification involves amalgamating approved Lots 41, 42 and 43 into a single lot for a potential multi-dwelling housing development to occur on the land under a future development application.

Value:

$0

 


 

 

Reference:

DA 276/2015(2)

Determination Date

26 April 2017

PR Number

PR17373

Applicant/s:

MJ and LM Smith Pty Ltd and Orange City Council

Owner/s:

MJ and LM Smith Pty Ltd

Location:

Lot 101 DP 880908 – 155 Dalton Street, Orange

Lot 300 DP 883628 - McLachlan Street, Orange

Proposal:

Modification of development consent – subdivision (boundary adjustment), demolition (existing sheds) and construction of fire rated wall. The modification involves alterations to the boundary adjustment, the deletion of the blade wall, and construction of a fire rated wall within the existing warehouse on proposed Lot 3.

Value:

$0

 

Reference:

DA 339/2015(2)

Determination Date

1 May 2017

PR Number

PR10056

Applicant/s:

Mr W and Mrs KE Vardanega

Owner/s:

Mr D and Mrs JC Vardanega

Location:

Lot 11 DP 628747 - 610 Pinnacle Road, Orange

Proposal:

Modification of development consent - dwelling and attached garage, and secondary dwelling (change of use of existing dwelling to a secondary dwelling). The modification involves amendments to the approved site plan, minor amendments to the approved dwelling floor plan, amending some of the door and window types, dimensions and locations to accord with the revised floor plan; addition of a 5kW solar photovoltaic system and solar hot water unit to the north facing roof plane of the rumpus/garage building and change of roofing material for Stage 1 (garage wing) to Zincalume.

Value:

$500,000 (being the same value as the original development)

 

Reference:

DA 204/2016(1)

Determination Date

12 April 2017

PR Number

PR34

Applicant/s:

Mr M O’Carrigan

Owner/s:

Mr MV and Mrs PE O’Carrigan

Location:

Lot 1 DP 946330 – 4646 Mitchell Highway, Lucknow

Proposal:

Category 1 remediation, dwelling and rainwater tank

Value:

$240,000

 

Reference:

DA 330/2016(1)

Determination Date

28 April 2017

PR Number

PR22380

Applicant/s:

Caltex Australia Petroleum Pty Ltd

Owner/s:

Ampol Property (Holdings) Pty Ltd

Location:

Lot 234 DP 1112378 - 184 Byng Street, Orange

Proposal:

Service station (category 1 remediation - removal of infrastructure (canopy, fuel pumps, underground tanks and infrastructure, and associated earthworks)

Value:

$200,000


 

 

Reference:

DA 218/2016(2)

Determination Date

10 May 2017

PR Number

PR1178

Applicant/s:

Bassmann Drafting Services

Owner/s:

Canobolas Caravan Park Pty Limited

Location:

Lot 1 DP 218415 – 166-172 Bathurst Road, Orange

Proposal:

Modification of development consent – vehicle sales or hire premises and vehicle repair station (alterations and additions, including washbay). The modification involves increasing the size of the approved washbay from 43.8m² to 86.2m².

Value:

$100,000 (being the same value as the original development)

 

Reference:

DA 413/2016(1)

Determination Date

1 May 2017

PR Number

PR8807

Applicant/s:

Ms BL Shallvey

Owner/s:

Ms BL Shallvey

Location:

Lot 3 DP 37344 - 56 Moulder Street, Orange

Proposal:

Secondary dwelling

Value:

$53,000

 

Reference:

DA 21/2017(2)

Determination Date

12 April 2017

PR Number

PR809

Applicant/s:

Mrs JL Pottie

Owner/s:

Mrs JL Pottie

Location:

Lot 8 SP 17153 - 8/182 Anson Street, Orange

Proposal:

Modification of development consent – serviced apartment (change of use from commercial premises). The modification involves removing Conditions in relation to the proposed construction works.

Value:

$0

 

Reference:

DA 49/2017(1)

Determination Date

3 May 2017

PR Number

PR26657

Applicant/s:

Ms J Matthews

Owner/s:

Bruce Kerr Pty Limited

Location:

Lot 80 DP 1200262 – 36 Winter Street, Orange

Proposal:

Subdivision (two lot residential) and two dwellings (attached)

Value:

$350,000

 

Reference:

DA 57/2017(1)

Determination Date

28 April 2017

PR Number

PR19022

Applicant/s:

Ms J O'Gradey

Owner/s:

Mr MP and Mrs CM Bayada

Location:

Lot 52 DP 1063083 - 10 Elwin Drive, Orange

Proposal:

Recreation facility (indoor) (children’s play centre)

Value:

$5,000

 


 

 

Reference:

DA 67/2017(1)

Determination Date

4 May 2017

PR Number

PR27416

Applicant/s:

Crystal Waters (Australia) Pty Limited

Owner/s:

Crystal Waters (Australia) Pty Limited

Location:

Lot 7 DP 1221604 – 143 Diamond Drive, Orange

Proposal:

Dual occupancy and subdivision (two lot residential)

Value:

$470,000

 

Reference:

DA 79/2017(1)

Determination Date

8 May 2017

PR Number

PR27631

Applicant/s:

Hibbards Pty Ltd

Owner/s:

Hibbards Pty Ltd

Location:

Lot 121 DP 1225229 – 8 Stevenson Way, Orange

Proposal:

Dual occupancy (detached) and subdivision (two lot residential)

Value:

$378,000

 

Reference:

DA 85/2017(1)

Determination Date

11 May 2017

PR Number

PR18077

Applicant/s:

Fly Corporate

Owner/s:

Orange City Council

Location:

Lot 2 DP 1031236 – 5255 Mitchell Highway, Orange

Proposal:

Signage (temporary)

Value:

$1,000

 

Reference:

DA 86/2017(1)

Determination Date

10 May 2017

PR Number

PR19565

Applicant/s:

Mr DM Kent

Owner/s:

Mr DM and Mrs JM Kent

Location:

Lot 100 DP 1074829 – 45 Nile Street, Orange

Proposal:

Subdivision (eleven lot community title)

Value:

$0.00

 

Reference:

DA 103/2017(1)

Determination Date

3 May 2017

PR Number

PR27209

Applicant/s:

St Vincent de Paul

Owner/s:

Mr GE Gale

Location:

Lot 22 DP 1214297 - 161-165 Peisley Street, Orange

Proposal:

Shop (change of use) and advertising signage

Value:

$2,000

 


 

 

Reference:

DA 128/2017(1)

Determination Date

23 May 2017

PR Number

PR22576

Applicant/s:

Mr JT Marshall

Owner/s:

Mr WJ Marshall, Mr TW and Mrs SG Gentles and Mr JT Marshall

Location:

Lot 93 DP 1120242, Lot 80 DP 808637 and Lot 57 DP 816383 – 101-105 and 107 Burrendong Way and 45 Avondale Drive, Orange

Proposal:

Subdivision (boundary adjustment)

Value:

$0

 

Reference:

DA 135/2017(1)

Determination Date

8 May 2017

PR Number

PR26516

Applicant/s:

Vision Australia Limited

Owner/s:

Carewest Foundation Ltd

Location:

Lot 100 DP 1195304 – 107 Prince Street, Orange

Proposal:

Business identification signage

Value:

$3,894

 

Reference:

DA 151/2017(1)

Determination Date

15 May 2017

PR Number

PR6950

Applicant/s:

Mr RA Cummins

Owner/s:

Mr RA and Ms JA Cummins

Location:

Lot 1 DP 195511 - 259 Lords Place, Orange

Proposal:

Signage (free-standing)

Value:

$400

 

Reference:

DA 156/2017(1)

Determination Date

22 May 2017

PR Number

PR26464

Applicant/s:

Royal Flying Doctor Service

Owner/s:

Orange City Council

Location:

Lot 200 DP 1195298 – 136 Aerodrome Road, Huntley

Proposal:

Transport depot (associated with the Royal Flying Doctor Service)

Value:

$25,000

 

TOTAL NET* VALUE OF ALL DEVELOPMENTS APPROVED IN THIS PERIOD:          $1,728,294

* Net value relates to the value of modifications. If modifications are the same value as the original DA, then nil is added. If there is a plus/minus difference, this difference is added or taken out.

 

  


Planning and Development Committee                                                      6 June 2017

 

2.2     Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent

TRIM REFERENCE:        2017/1000

AUTHOR:                       Summer Commins, Town Planner    

 

 

EXECUTIVE Summary

Application lodged

6 March 2017 (additional information submitted 12 May 2017)

Applicant/s

Australian Childcare Solutions

Owner/s

Hanna Developments Group Pty Limited

Land description

Lot 194 DP 1007290 - 36-40 Turner Crescent, Orange

Proposed land use

Child Care Centre

Value of proposed development

$2,625,014.00

Council's consent is sought for a proposed child care centre at 36-40 Turner Crescent, Orange, on land described as Lot 194 DP 1007290. The proposal involves construction of a purpose-built facility for use as a long day child care centre; and associated site works including vehicle areas, external play space and landscaping. The facility will provide 124 child care places for children aged between 0-6 years, and operate between the hours of 7.00am to 6.00pm Monday to Friday.

The proposed development comprises "advertised development" pursuant to Orange Development Control Plan 2004-5.3. The application was advertised for the prescribed period of 14 days. At the conclusion of the exhibition period thirty-one (31) submissions had been received. The issues raised in the submissions generally relate to traffic generation and management, and impacts on residential amenity. The development application did not proceed to mediation as the issues raised in the submissions were considered unlikely to be reasonably capable of negotiation (pursuant to Council’s Declaration of Planning and Development Assessment Procedures and Protocols (May 2010)).

The development application was supported by architectural and engineering drawings and traffic and acoustic assessments. Council officers concur with the content and findings of the supporting documentation. Additional information was submitted during the assessment process based on negotiations with the applicant in relation to traffic arrangements for the development.

The proposal does not contravene the applicable planning regime applying to the land. Impacts of the development are considered to be within reasonable limit; consistent with applicable State and Local standards, and addressed by appropriate conditions of development consent. Approval of the application is recommended.

DECISION FRAMEWORK

Development in Orange is governed by two key documents Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 and Orange Development Control Plan 2004. In addition the Infill Guidelines are used to guide development, particularly in the heritage conservation areas and around heritage items.


 

Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 – the LEP should be considered by Council to be a definitive document. LEPs govern the types of development that are permissible or prohibited in different parts of the City and also provide some assessment criteria in specific circumstances. Uses are either permissible or not - there are no grey areas in terms of permissibility. The objectives of each zoning and indeed the aims of the LEP itself are, however, open to interpretation and can be used to guide decision making around appropriateness of development.

Orange Development Control Plan 2004 – the DCP guides development. In general it is a performance based document rather than prescriptive in nature - its purpose is to guide development. The Land and Environment Court tends to view it as such. In each area of interest there are often guidelines used. These guidelines indicate ways of achieving the planning outcomes. It is thus recognised that there may also be other solutions of merit. All design solutions are considered on merit by planning and building staff. Applications should clearly demonstrate how the planning outcomes are being met where alternative design solutions are proposed. So one can see that the DCP gives leeway for developers and architects to use design to achieve the outcome in other ways if they can. Stating that DCP guidelines are inflexible can be misleading.

This development is permissible within the zone and has been designed with the high visibility off Molong Road in mind. A significant number of submissions have been received from the neighbourhood, with concerns raised particularly around noise and traffic impacts. Council’s Development Engineering team have analysed the traffic reports provided with the application and are satisfied that the impacts arising are reasonable. Similarly, Council’s Manager Building and Environment is satisfied that the noise impacts will not be significant if the mitigation measures proposed, such as fencing, are implemented.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “13.4 Our Environment – Monitor and enforce regulations relating to City amenity”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

 

Recommendation

That Council consents to development application DA 63/2017(1) for Child Care Centre at Lot 194 DP 1007290 - 36-40 Turner Crescent, Orange pursuant to the conditions of consent in the attached Notice of Approval.

 

further considerations

Consideration has been given to the recommendation’s impact on Council’s service delivery; image and reputation; political; environmental; health and safety; employees; stakeholders and project management; and no further implications or risks have been identified.


 

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

THE PROPOSAL

The proposal involves construction of a purpose-built child care centre on the subject land.

The proposed building will comprise a single-storey structure of large, modern domestic scale and design. The child care centre building will be generally rectangular, with a footprint of some 63m x 20m, and total floor area of 971m2. Construction materials will comprise concrete slab on ground, face brick external walls, aluminium-framed openings of domestic proportions and 25 degree pitched Colorbond gable roof form.

Figure 1 - west (front) façade of proposed building and car park (view from Turner Crescent)

The proposed building will contain:

·    entry foyer with adjacent reception

·    seven (7) playrooms according to age bracket with adjacent bathrooms, stores and sleep rooms

·    kitchen, staff room, laundry and store rooms.

External play space will be located at the rear (east) of the building and in the south-western portion of the site at the Turner Crescent frontage. Onsite parking for 31 vehicles will be provided at the site frontage, with access via Turner Crescent. Extensive landscaping will be undertaken of the site perimeter, car park and external play spaces.


 

 

Figure 2 - proposed site plan

The proposed child care centre will provide 124 long day child care places for children aged between 0-6 years, and operate between the hours of 7.00am to 6.00pm Monday to Friday. The child care centre will employ 26 staff members (educators, administration, cleaners and cooks).

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

Section 5A Assessment

In the administration of sections 78A, 79B, 79C, 111 and 112, the provisions of Section 5A must be taken into account for every development application in deciding whether there is likely to be a significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats. This section includes a requirement to consider any adopted assessment guidelines, which means assessment guidelines issued and in force under section 94A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Assessment guidelines are in force (see DECC-W “Threatened Species Assessment Guidelines - The Assessment of Significance”) which requires consent authority to adopt the precautionary principle in its assessment.

In this instance, site inspection reveals that the subject property has no biodiversity or habitat value.


 

Section 79C

Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires Council to consider various matters, of which those pertaining to the application are listed below.

PROVISIONS OF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT s79C(1)(a)(i)

Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

Part 1 - Preliminary

Clause 1.2 - Aims of Plan

The broad aims of the LEP are set out under subclause 2. Those relevant to the application are as follows:

(a)     to encourage development which complements and enhances the unique character of Orange as a major regional centre boasting a diverse economy and offering an attractive regional lifestyle,

(b)     to provide for a range of development opportunities that contribute to the social, economic and environmental resources of Orange in a way that allows present and future generations to meet their needs by implementing the principles for ecologically sustainable development,

(f)      to recognise and manage valued environmental heritage, landscape and scenic features of Orange.

The application is considered to be consistent with the above objectives, as outlined in this report.

Clause 1.6 - Consent Authority

This clause establishes that, subject to the Act, Council is the consent authority for applications made under the LEP.

Clause 1.9A - Suspension of Covenants, Agreements and Instruments

This clause provides that covenants, agreements and other instruments which seek to restrict the carrying out of development do not apply with the following exceptions.

·    covenants imposed or required by Council

·    prescribed instruments under Section 183A of the Crown Lands Act 1989

·    any conservation agreement under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974

·    any trust agreement under the Nature Conservation Trust Act 2001

·    any property vegetation plan under the Native Vegetation Act 2003

·    any biobanking agreement under Part 7A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

·    any planning agreement under Division 6 of Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Council staff are not aware of the title of the subject property being affected by any of the above.


 

An easement to drain sewer traverses the front boundary of the subject land, adjacent to the Turner Crescent frontage. The proposed development is sited clear of and will not affect the operation of the easement.

As depicted below, the subject land comprises a landlocked triangular-shaped parcel situated on the southern side of the parcel directly to the south of the subject land (known as 159 Molong Road). The proposed development does not involve any works on this portion of land.

Figure 3 - the development site split by 159 Molong Road

Mapping

The subject site is identified on the LEP maps in the following manner:

Land Zoning Map:

Land zoned R2 Low Density Residential

Lot Size Map:

No minimum Lot Size

Heritage Map:

Not a heritage item or conservation area

Height of Buildings Map:

No building height limit

Floor Space Ratio Map:

No floor space limit

Terrestrial Biodiversity Map:

No biodiversity sensitivity on the site

Groundwater Vulnerability Map:

Ground water vulnerable

Drinking Water Catchment Map:

Not within the drinking water catchment

Watercourse Map:

Not within or affecting a defined watercourse

Urban Release Area Map:

Not within an urban release area

Obstacle Limitation Surface Map:

No restriction on building siting or construction

Additional Permitted Uses Map:

No additional permitted use applies

Those matters that are of relevance are addressed in detail in the body of this report.


 

Part 2 - Permitted or Prohibited Development

Land Use Zones

The subject site is located within the R2 Low Density Residential zone. The proposed development is defined as a child care centre under OLEP 2011 and is permitted with consent for this zone. This application is seeking consent.

Objectives

The objectives for land zoned R2 Residential are as follows:

·   To provide for the housing needs of the community.

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

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

·   To ensure development is ordered in such a way as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling in close proximity to settlement.

·   To ensure that development along the Southern Link Road has an alternative access.

The proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of the R2 zone. The proposal does not involve residential landuse. The proposed child care centre will provide a long-day child care service that will be utilised by local and wider residents. Child care centres are a permitted and complementary landuse in the R2 zone. The subject residential precinct is serviced by public transport (Orange Buslines Route 536). The land does not have frontage or access to the Southern Link Road.

Part 3 - Exempt and Complying Development

The application is not exempt or complying development.

Part 4 - Principal Development Standards

The Part 4 Principal Development Standards do not relate to the subject land or proposed development.

Part 5 - Miscellaneous Provisions

The Part 5 Miscellaneous Provisions are not applicable to the proposal.

Part 6 - Urban Release Area

The subject site is not located in an Urban Release Area and Part 6 does not apply.

Part 7 - Additional Local Provisions

7.3 - Stormwater Management

Clause 7.3 is applicable. This clause states in part:

(3)     Development consent must not be granted to development on land to which this clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that the development:


 

(a)     is designed to maximise the use of water permeable surfaces on the land having regard to the soil characteristics affecting on-site infiltration of water, and

(b)     includes, where practical, on-site stormwater retention for use as an alternative supply to mains water, groundwater or river water, and

(c)     avoids any significant impacts of stormwater runoff on adjoining downstream properties, native bushland and receiving waters, or if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided, minimises and mitigates the impact.

In consideration of Clause 7.3, conditions are recommended in relation to stormwater infrastructure associated with the proposed child care centre. Stormwater from the site will be connected to Council’s urban stormwater drainage system. Compliance with conditions will ensure that stormwater runoff will not adversely impact on adjoining properties.

7.6 - Groundwater Vulnerability

The subject land is identified as Groundwater Vulnerable on the Groundwater Vulnerability Map. Clause 7.6 applies. This clause states in part:

(3)     Before determining a development application for development on land to which this clause applies, the consent authority must consider:

(a)     whether or not the development (including any onsite storage or disposal of solid or liquid waste and chemicals) is likely to cause any groundwater contamination or have any adverse effect on groundwater dependent ecosystems, and

(b)     the cumulative impact (including the impact on nearby groundwater extraction for potable water supply or stock water supply) of the development and any other existing development on groundwater.

In consideration of Clause 7.6, the proposal is considered to be acceptable. The proposed child care centre does not involve processes or activities that would impact on groundwater resources. The centre will be connected to Council’s reticulated sewerage system.

Clause 7.11 - Essential Services

Clause 7.11 applies. This clause states:

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

(a)     the supply of water,

(b)     the supply of electricity,

(c)     the disposal and management of sewage,

(d)     stormwater drainage or on-site conservation,

(e)     suitable road access.


 

In consideration of this clause, all utility services are available to the site and adequate for the proposed child care centre, as follows:

·    The land is connected to reticulated water supply.

·    Electricity and telecommunications are available.

·    The land is serviced by Council’s reticulated sewerage system.

·    Stormwater from the development will be connected to Council’s urban stormwater drainage system.

·    The site has direct frontage and access to Turner Crescent.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICIES

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land

SEPP 55 - Remediation of Land applies. Pursuant to Clause 7:

(1)     A consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless:

(a)     it has considered whether the land is contaminated, and

(b)     if the land is contaminated, it is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable, after remediation) for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out, and

(c)     if the land requires remediation to be made suitable for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out, it is satisfied that the land will be remediated before the land is used for that purpose.

The subject residential neighbourhood was historically used for the purposes of agriculture and orcharding. Based on the current residential zoning and adjoining residential landuse, the development site is deemed suitable for the proposed child care centre. Preliminary contamination investigation as a precursor to site remediation is considered unnecessary for the proposal.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT THAT HAS BEEN PLACED ON EXHIBITION s79C(1)(a)(ii)

Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017

Draft SEPP (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017 has recently been exhibited (February-April 2017). The proposed SEPP will (in part) align physical environmental requirements from the National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and Care Facilities into the NSW planning system. In the interim, the proposed child care centre is subject to the National Quality Framework, and is not contrary to the provisions of the Draft SEPP.

DESIGNATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not designated development.


 

INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposal is not integrated development.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN s79C(1)(a)(iii)

Development Control Plan 2004 – Part 7 Development in Residential Zones

Part 7.5 Merit Based Appropriate to Residential Development in Orange 

The following Planning Outcomes are used as a guide in assessment of the proposed child care centre.

Neighbourhood Character

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Neighbourhood Character:

·     Site layout and building design enables the:

-    creation of attractive residential environments with clear character and identity

-    use of site features such as views, aspect, existing vegetation and landmarks

·     Buildings are designed to complement the relevant features and built form that are identified as part of the desired neighbourhood character.

·     The streetscape is designed to encourage pedestrian access and use.

The Turner Crescent residential precinct is defined by modern double fronted, single-storey brick veneer dwellings circa 1990, on separate allotments. The design and detailing of the proposed childcare centre are considered suitable within the subject residential setting and will complement the neighbourhood built form due to the following:

·    The narrow and curvilinear site frontage and partial battleaxe configuration of the allotment departs from neighbouring parcels. As such, the building will be removed from the built form on adjoining sites. The building will not contribute to a streetscape built form.

·    The building is provided with a generous setback of some 22m from the front boundary so as to not appear imposing in the Turner Crescent streetscape.

·    The building will be single storey and of consistent height with adjoining dwellings.

·    The hipped roof, wall height and window fenestration will be reflective of domestic architectural forms in this streetscape.

·    The proposed external finishes will be compatible with adjoining dwellings.

The development will broaden the function of the neighbourhood by introducing a non-residential component. Indeed, the proposed child care centre comprises the only non-residential landuse in the Turner Crescent/Cianfrano Place residential neighbourhood. Notwithstanding, child care centres are a permitted use in the R2 zone, and the proposal is considered to be complementary in this setting.


 

Building Appearance

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Building Appearance:

·    The building design, detailing and finishes relate to the desired neighbourhood character, complement the residential scale of the area, and add visual interest to the street.

·    The frontages of buildings and their entries face the street.

·    Garages and car parks are sited and designed so that they do not dominate the street frontage.

As considered above, the design, detailing and finishes for the proposed child care centre are appropriate in this neighbourhood and will reasonably complement the built form in the residential setting.

The building footprint and massing is more extensive than adjoining dwellings, with a footprint of some 63m x 20m. It is considered that the proposed child care centre whilst large in dimension will not conflict with adjoining dwellings in terms of scale given the building design features proposed, the limited site frontage to Turner Crescent and setback from the front boundary. The building massing will be reduced via recesses in the hipped roof profile and mix of wall finishes.

The front building elevation will present to Turner Crescent (notwithstanding the small site frontage and large building setback). The main front façade will comprise building entrance, verandah treatment and numerous vertical and horizontal openings of domestic scale.

The proposed car park will be located at the site frontage, forward of the building. The proposed site layout is consistent with other child care centres on residential parcels in the City. An enclosed outdoor play space is also located in the front setback, in the southern portion of the parcel. Extensive landscaping of site perimeter and building entrance will provide screening and visual relief of vehicle areas.

Heritage

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Heritage:

·    Heritage buildings and structures are efficiently re-used.

·    New development complements and enhances the significance of a heritage item or place of heritage significance listed in the Orange Heritage Study.

·    Significant landscape features are retained including original period fences and period gardens.

The subject land does not contain or adjoin a heritage item and is not located within a heritage conservation area.


 

Setbacks

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Setbacks:

·    Street setbacks contribute to the desired neighbourhood character, assist with the integration of new development and make efficient use of the site.

·    Street setbacks create an appropriate scale for the street considering all other streetscape components.

The proposed building will be sited a minimum 22m from the front boundary to Turner Crescent. The proposed front setback is appropriate to reduce the visual encroachment of the building mass and footprint in the streetscape. Perimeter plantings to the carpark at the site frontage will provide softening and embellishment of vehicle areas in the front setback. Side and rear setbacks for the proposed building will comply with the Building Code of Australia.

Front Fences and Walls

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Fences and Walls:

·    Front fences and walls:

–   assist in highlighting entrances and creating a sense of identity within the streetscape.

–   are constructed of materials compatible with associated housing and with fences visible from the site that positively contribute to the streetscape

–   provide for facilities in the street frontage area such as mail boxes.

A fence will be erected on the part-front boundary to Turner Crescent in order to enclose the outdoor play area in the southern portion of the site. Fencing treatment will comprise a stepped part timber and part blockwork fence atop a retaining wall.

Front fencing does not feature in this streetscape. Notwithstanding, the form and materials are typical to the residential setting and considered to be appropriate. Plantings adjacent the front boundary and access driveway will provide an entry statement to the site and a sense of identity for the child care centre within the Turner Crescent streetscape.

The northern and eastern boundaries of the site present to the Northern Distributor Road and Molong Road respectively. These boundaries will incorporate masonry stepped retaining walls with 1.5m timber fence and extensive infill landscaping, as depicted below. Fencing and landscaping treatment is of a high standard, and commensurate with the site’s gateway location. Attached is a condition of consent requiring the applicant to submit final details of fencing, landscaping and retaining walls for these boundaries prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.


 

 

Figure 4 - fencing and landscaping treatment to Northern Distributor Road and Mitchell Highway

Visual Bulk

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Visual Bulk:

·    Built form accords with the desired neighbourhood character of the area with:

-   side and rear setbacks progressively increased to reduce bulk and overshadowing

-   site coverage that retains the relatively low density landscaped character of residential areas

-   building form and siting that relates to landform, with minimal land shaping (cut and fill)

-   building height at the street frontage that maintains a comparable scale with the predominant adjacent development form

-   building to the boundary where appropriate.

The proposed child care centre will be single-storey and of consistent height with adjoining dwellings in Turner Crescent.

The building footprint and massing will be larger than adjoining dwellings, with overall dimensions of some 63m x 20m. Notwithstanding, the site has limited frontage to Turner Crescent and will not contribute to nor detract from the streetscape built form. As considered above, the proposed front setback of 22m will reduce the visual encroachment of the building mass in the streetscape.

The proposed building will be contained within the DCP prescribed visual bulk envelope plane. The building will comprise a total building footprint of 1,183m2. Based on a site area of 3,373m2, the development will have site coverage of 35.1%, in compliance with the maximum 50% prescribed in the DCP.

Earthworks will be required in conjunction with the proposal. Substantial site filling will be undertaken to provide level surfaces, with retention along the part site perimeter. Retaining walls will be terraced and landscaped to minimise the bulk of the walls.


 

In order to avoid visual bulk encroachment impacts for the adjoining western dwelling at 42 Turner Crescent associated with the car park, a condition is recommended that finished levels in the car park reflect natural ground level; further, that retaining walls not be erected on the western site boundary.

The child care centre building will be reasonably removed from site boundaries to prevent visual encroachment on the adjoining dwellings at 42 Turner Crescent and 159 Molong Road.

Walls and Boundaries

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Walls and Boundaries:

·    Building to the boundary is undertaken to provide for efficient use of the site taking into account:

-   the privacy of neighbouring dwellings and private open space

-   the access to daylight reaching adjoining properties

-   the impact of boundary walls on neighbours.

The proposal does not involve the construction of buildings on the boundary. As outlined in this report, the site layout and building design will not adversely impact on adjoining dwellings in respect of privacy, solar access or visual bulk.

Daylight and Sunlight

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Daylight and Sunlight:

·    Buildings are sited and designed to ensure:

-   daylight to habitable rooms in adjacent dwellings is not significantly reduced

-   overshadowing of neighbouring secluded open spaces or main living area windows is not significantly increased

-   consideration of Council’s Energy Efficiency Code.

Assessment of shadow impacts by Council staff demonstrates that the proposal will not unreasonably overshadow the nearest affected dwellings to the west (42 Turner Crescent) and south (159 Molong Road). Based on the height and siting of the proposed building and the siting of the adjoining dwellings, internal and external solar access will be maintained for those dwellings, consistent with the DCP guidelines.

The proposed site layout and building design will provide solar access to internal play rooms and outdoor play spaces associated with the proposed child care centre.

Views

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Views:

·    Building form and design allow for residents from adjacent properties to share prominent views where possible.

·    Views including vistas of heritage items or landmarks are not substantially affected by the bulk and scale of the new development.


 

Design and detailing for the proposed building and site works are of a high standard, and commensurate with the site’s gateway location within the Mitchell Highway and Northern Distributor Road (NDR) view corridor. The proposed building will not unreasonably diminish views for other properties in the vicinity.

Visual Privacy

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Visual Privacy:

·    Direct overlooking of principal living areas and private open spaces of other dwellings is minimised firstly by:

-   building siting and layout

-   location of windows and balconies

and secondly by:

-   design of windows or use of screening devices and landscaping.

The proposed site layout and building design will provide acceptable visual privacy for adjoining dwellings:

·    Perimeter fencing of varying heights will be erected on the side boundaries. Fencing adjacent to the residential properties will be 2.1m in height. Whilst the normal height of fencing in a residential environment is ordinarily 1.8m, 2.1m high fencing to mitigate noise impacts is not considered to be unreasonable

·    Extensive landscaping will be provided to the site perimeters.

·    South-facing openings in the proposed child care centre will comprise two windows in nominated “sleep” rooms. The openings will be located some 4m from the southern boundary of the site. This separation and use of rooms is considered suitable to prevent overlooking of the adjoining south dwelling at 159 Molong Road.

·    The proposed building will be sufficiently removed from the western side boundary to prevent overlooking from within the building of the adjoining western dwelling at 42 Turner Crescent.

·    Conditions are recommended that car park finished levels reflect existing natural ground level in order to reduce overlooking from the car park towards the adjoining western dwelling at 42 Turner Crescent.

Acoustic Privacy

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Acoustic Privacy:

·    Site layout and building design:

-   protect habitable rooms from excessively high levels of external noise

-   minimise the entry of external noise to private open space for dwellings close to major noise sources

-   minimise transmission of sound through a building to affect other dwellings.


 

A noise assessment has been submitted in support of the proposed child care centre (Renzo Tonin & Associates February 2017).

Noise associated with the proposal will be generated by outdoor play, mechanical plant, traffic noise in the carpark, and traffic noise in local streets generated by vehicles associated with the child care centre. Furthermore and conversely, the operation of the centre will be affected by traffic noise from Molong Road and the Northern Distributor Road.

The noise assessment concludes:

Operational noise from the proposed childcare centre was assessed against the relevant criteria and was predicted to exceed the applicable criteria at the nearest affected residential receivers. Thus, physical mitigation and management measures were recommended to ensure that operational noise would comply with the criteria at the nearest affected receivers.

Traffic noise from Molong Road and the Northern Distributor Road impacting on the outdoor play areas of the proposed child care centre was predicted to exceed the relevant criterion. As a result, in-principle noise mitigation measures were recommended to reduce traffic noise impacting on the outdoor play areas to acceptable levels.

The noise assessment recommends installation of solid noise screens/fencing to the eastern, south-eastern and northern boundaries.

Council's Manager Building and Environment concurs with the findings and recommendations of the noise assessment. Conditions are recommended to address the requirements of Council and the submitted noise assessment in respect of physical and operational mitigation measures.

Security

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Security:

·    The site layout enhances personal safety and minimises the potential for crime, vandalism and fear.

·    The design of dwellings enables residents to survey streets, communal areas and approaches to dwelling entrances.

The proposal is considered acceptable in regard to safety and security as follows:

·    The front facade to Turner Crescent has numerous windows which will address the onsite car park and street. The building design will provide reasonable opportunities for natural surveillance.

·    Internal and external CCTV cameras will be provided.

·    Internal and external motion-activated security sensor lighting will be installed.

·    The site has acceptable access control due to perimeter fencing and fully enclosed outdoor play spaces.

·    Outdoor play spaces will only be accessible from within the building.

·    The proposed landscape design will not restrict sightlines.


 

Circulation and Design

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Circulation and Design:

·    Accessways and parking areas are designed to manage stormwater.

·    Accessways, driveways and open parking areas are suitably landscaped to enhance amenity while providing security and accessibility to residents and visitors.

·    The site layout allows people with a disability to travel to and within the site between car parks, buildings and communal open space.

The subject land has direct frontage and access to Turner Crescent. A 6m vehicle crossing and driveway will be constructed to service the site. In order that adequate sight distances are provided for vehicles turning right into the site (ie when travelling north along Turner Crescent), a raised median and line marking will be provided along Turner Crescent.

The median will be broken to allow entry into the site when adequate sightlines are achieved. As an additional traffic safety measure, the intersection area of the carpark entrance with Turner Crescent will be resealed (as required by condition). The median, line marking and intersection resealing will reduce the speed of vehicles entering the site, provide adequate reaction times and improve traffic amenity generally. The proposed access arrangements were reached in conjunction with Council’s Development Engineer and are considered suitable to achieve safe access to the development site. Relevant conditions are recommended in relation to the required works.

Car Parking

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Car Parking:

·    Parking facilities are provided, designed and located to:

-   enable the efficient and convenient use of car spaces and accessways within the site

-   reduce the visual dominance of car parking areas and accessways.

·    Car parking is provided with regard to the:

-   the number and size of proposed dwellings

-   requirements of people with limited mobility or disabilities.

Pursuant to DCP 2004, onsite parking is required for child care centres at a rate of 1 space for every 4 children in attendance. The proposed child care centre will provide 124 child care places, with 31 parking spaces required. The onsite car park will provide 31 parking spaces, including 1 space for disabled drivers, in compliance with the DCP.

Onsite car parking for the development is also consistent with parking requirements pursuant to the Guide to Traffic Generating Developments (Roads and Traffic Authority 2002) (the RMS Guide). The RMS Guide also requires 1 space for every 4 children in attendance.


 

The submitted Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment (McLaren Traffic Engineering May 2017) provides additional details in respect of RMS parking requirements as follows:

“RMS commissioned updated surveys and analysis of child care centres in 2015. While the findings of this update have not been officially adopted, the following car parking rates were found, with particular reference given to the centre size:

·   Centres with 70-100 children – 1 space per 6 children.

Based upon application of the above parking rates, 124 children would result in 21 car parking spaces in total (based upon a rate of 1 space per 6 children). Hence the provision of 31 car parking spaces for the child care centre is a surplus of 10 spaces above the minimum requirement.”

The onsite car parking resources are considered suitable for the proposed child care centre.

In order to improve the functioning of the onsite carpark, Council’s Development Engineer has recommended that the car park design be amended (dimensions, aisle widths and turn bay) to the highest user standard under Australian Standard AS 2890.1:2004 Off-street car parking. It is considered that there is sufficient space within the subject land to accommodate the design changes required. Attached is a draft condition of consent addressing this requirement.

Private Open Space

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Private Open Space:

·    Private open space is clearly defined for private use.

·    Private open space areas are of a size, shape and slope to suit the reasonable requirements of residents including some outdoor recreational needs and service functions.

·    Private open space is:

–   capable of being an extension of the dwelling for outdoor living, entertainment and recreation

–   accessible from a living area of the dwelling

–   located to take advantage of outlooks; and to reduce adverse impacts of overshadowing or privacy from adjoining buildings

–   Orientated to optimise year round use.

The Planning Outcomes are not applicable to the proposed child care centre.

Open Space and Landscaping

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Open Space and Landscaping:

·    The site layout provides open space and landscaped areas which:

–   contribute to the character of the development by providing buildings in a landscaped setting

–   provide for a range of uses and activities including stormwater management

–   allow cost effective management.


 

·    The landscape design specifies landscape themes consistent with the desired neighbourhood character; vegetation types and location, paving and lighting provided for access and security.

·    Major existing trees are retained and protected in a viable condition whenever practicable through appropriate siting of buildings, accessways and parking areas.

·    Paving is applied sparingly and integrated in the landscape design.

A Landscape Design Intent has been submitted in support of the proposal (Larc Collective Landscape Architects). The plan incorporates extensive plantings to the car park perimeter, outdoor play spaces and public road frontages.

The landscape plan was referred to Council’s Manager City Presentation for consideration and comment. He advised as follows:

The suggested list of trees, palms and shrubs requires review and alternative species selected as many of the species nominated will either fail or struggle with the Orange climatic conditions; particularly the cold winters and severe frosts. Many of the species selected are naturally occurring in temperate rainforests or closed forests and as such will have little success in Orange. A revised and appropriate selection of trees, palms and shrubs shall be submitted for approval.

Conditions are recommended requiring submission and approval of a revised and locale-specific landscape plan prior to issue of a Construction Certificate, and installation and ongoing maintenance of the approved landscaping works.

Stormwater

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Stormwater:

·    On-site drainage systems are designed to consider:

–   downstream capacity and need for on-site retention, detention and re-use

–   scope for on-site infiltration of water

–   safety and convenience of pedestrians and vehicles

–   overland flow paths.

·    Provision is made for on-site drainage which does not cause damage or nuisance flows to adjoining properties.

In order to achieve compliance with the Planning Outcomes, conditions are recommended in relation to stormwater management of the site.

Erosion and Sedimentation

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcome in regard to Erosion and Sedimentation:

·    Measures implemented during construction to ensure that the landform is stabilised and erosion is controlled.

In order to achieve compliance with the Planning Outcomes, conditions are recommended in relation to erosion and sediment control.


 

Part 7.9 - Shops and Business in the Urban Residential Zone

The DCP prescribes the following Planning Outcomes for Shops and Business in the Urban Residential Zone:

·    Development complements the scale of residential development in the area and the predominant heights and form of residential development in the vicinity.

·    Business premises are located in neighbourhood business areas existing prior to Orange LEP 2000.

·    Development applications satisfactorily demonstrate that the development will not adversely affect the amenity of the residential locality as a consequence of the nature of the business, loading or unloading requirements, on-street parking, hours of operation.

·    Neighbourhood business premises are small scale to serve the needs of the residents of the locality.

·    Onsite parking is provided according to Section 15.4 of this plan.

·    Advertising signage is limited to exempt development for home businesses or businesses in converted dwelling houses.

·    Advertising signage in neighbourhood centres is not intrusive to the character of the residential locality.

In consideration of the Planning Outcomes, the proposed child care centre is satisfactory, as outlined below:

·    As considered earlier in this report, the design, detailing and finishes for the proposed child care centre are appropriate for this site and neighbourhood. The building will take a large, modern domestic scale and design, and will reasonably integrate with adjoining dwellings and the built form in this setting.

·    The proposal does not comprise a business premises or neighbourhood business premises.

·    As outlined in this report, the proposed child care centre will not unreasonably impact on amenity for adjoining dwellings in respect of visual bulk, solar access, privacy, noise or traffic congestion. Relevant conditions are recommended to maintain amenity for adjoining dwellings.

·    As considered earlier in this report, the proposed child care centre will generate demand for 31 onsite parking spaces. Thirty-one (31) onsite car parking spaces will be provided, including 1 space for disabled drivers, in compliance with DCP 2004 and the RMS Guide.

·    An indicative sign is provided on the retaining wall at the Mitchell Highway/NRD intersection. A condition is recommended requiring further consent be obtained for advertising that is not exempt development.


 

Development Control Plan 2004 - Part 15 Car Parking

The DCP prescribes the following Planning Outcomes for Off-Street Car Parking:

·    Adequate off-street car parking is provided in accordance with the table, or alternatively, according to an assessment that demonstrates peak parking demand based on recognised research.

·    Car parking areas are designed according to Australian Standard.

·    Car parking areas include adequate lighting and landscaping which provides for the personal security of users.

·    Bicycle parking facilities are provided according to the relevant Australian Standard.

·    Facilities for loading and unloading of commercial vehicles are provided according to the relevant Australian Standard.

In consideration of the Planning Outcomes, the proposed child care centre is satisfactory, as outlined below:

·    As outlined earlier in this report, onsite car parking will be provided for the proposed child care centre consistent with DCP 2004 and the RMS Guide.

·    Conditions are recommended requiring the submission of engineering plans for the proposed car park, demonstrating compliance with AS 2890.1-2004 Off-street car parking (highest user standard) and AS 2890.6:2009 Off-street car parking for people with disabilities.

·    Landscaping (as amended by conditions to be locale-specific) will be provided to the perimeter of the proposed car park. The landscaping will provide site beautification and visual and acoustic relief to vehicle areas.

·    Based on the long-day operation of the proposed child care centre, car park lighting will be required. A condition is recommended requiring outdoor lighting comply with AS 4282:1997 Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.

·    The nature of the landuse is unlikely to necessitate bicycle parking facilities.

·    The submitted Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment (McLaren Traffic Engineering May 2017) provides the following comments in respect of service/commercial vehicles:

“A B99 utility / courier van (ie. a Toyata Hiace) is the typical sized vehicle used for deliveries to child care centres… B99 vehicles can access normal sized car spaces, and the site will be easily able to accommodate a delivery vehicle on site between 9am and 4pm outside of peak visitor times, when spare visitor parking will be in abundance…. A B99 will have sufficient manoeuvring area on site and shall be easily managed due to the small natural of deliveries and low frequency.”

A condition is recommended that service vehicles to the site shall not exceed a B99 utility or courier van.


 

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS

Development contributions for water, sewer and drainage works are applicable to the proposed development. The contributions are based on 6.44 ETs for water supply headworks and 11.4 ETs for sewerage headworks. A condition is recommended requiring payment of the applicable contributions.

PROVISIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS s79C(1)(a)(iv)

Demolition of a Building (clause 92)

The proposal does not involve the demolition of a building.

Fire Safety Considerations (clause 93)

Fire protection measures will be required appropriate to the building class. Fire safety considerations will be addressed at Construction Certificate stage.

Buildings to be Upgraded (clause 94)

This matter is not relevant as the subject land is vacant.

BASIX Commitments (clause 97A)

BASIX is not applicable to the proposal. A Section J Energy Efficiency statement will be required at Construction Certificate stage.

THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT s79C(1)(b)

Visual Impacts

As considered earlier in this report, the design, detailing and finishes for the proposed child care centre are appropriate for this site and neighbourhood. The building will take a large, modern domestic scale and design, and will reasonably integrate with adjoining dwellings and the built form in this setting. The narrow and curvilinear site frontage and partial battleaxe configuration of the allotment departs from neighbouring parcels. As such, the building will be removed from the built form on adjoining sites. The building will not contribute to a streetscape built form.

Traffic Impacts

Traffic Generation and Impact

Pursuant to the submitted Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment (McLaren Traffic Engineering May 2017), traffic generation associated with the proposed child care centre is summarised as follows:

Time

Rate

Traffic Generation

Direction

7.00-9.00am

0.8 / child

99 trips

50 in – 49 out

2.30-4.00pm

0.3 / child

37 trips

19 in – 18 out

4.00 – 6.00pm

0.7 / child

87 trips

44 in – 43 out

*based on traffic generation rates for child care centres contained in the RMS Guide

As shown above, traffic generation associated with the development is in the order of 99 vehicle trips in the morning peak (7am-9am) and 87 vehicle trips in the evening peak (4pm‑6pm).

It is acknowledged that traffic generation associated with the child care centre will be substantially greater than that pertaining to residential landuse. Notwithstanding this, the centre has the potential to generate less than two (2) vehicle trips per minute either approaching or departing the site (not both) in the peak morning and evening period.

The Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment (McLaren Traffic Engineering May 2017) considers the impact of traffic volumes associated with the child care centre on the surrounding road network. In summary:

·    All traffic will enter and exit the site via the intersection of Mitchell Highway/ Mastronardi Way.

·    The intersection currently operates at a Level of Service “A.” The increased traffic load associated with the child care centre will not alter the existing Level of Service, with minimal additional delays and capacity maintained.

·    Existing and additional two-way peak traffic along Turner Crescent will be well below the environmental goal of 200 vehicles per hour for local streets, and the maximum threshold of 300 vehicles per hour for local streets (pursuant to the RTA Guide).

Council’s Development Engineer concurs with the McLaren assessment that Turner Crescent and the intersection of Mitchell Highway/Mastronardi Way are of sufficient capacity to accommodate additional traffic volumes associated with the child care centre.

Access and Manoeuvring

The subject land has direct frontage and access to Turner Crescent. A 6m vehicle crossing and driveway will be constructed to service the site. In order that adequate sight distances are provided for vehicles turning right into the site (ie when travelling north along Turner Crescent), a raised median and line marking will be provided along Turner Crescent.

The median will be broken to allow entry into the site when adequate sightlines are achieved. As an additional traffic safety measure, the intersection area of the car park entrance with Turner Crescent will be resealed (as required by condition). The median, line marking and intersection resealing will reduce the speed of vehicles entering the site, provide adequate reaction times, and improve traffic amenity generally. The proposed access arrangements were reached in conjunction with Council’s Development Engineer and are considered suitable to achieve safe access to the development site. Relevant conditions are recommended in relation to the required works.

Car Parking

As outlined in this report, the proposed development incorporates a total of 31 off-street car parking spaces, consistent with the requirements of DCP 2004 and the RMS Guide. Due to this compliance, overflow on-street car parking is not anticipated.

Neighbourhood Amenity

Noise

Noise associated with operation of the proposed child care centre will exceed that pertaining to normal residential landuse. Noise will be generated by outdoor play, mechanical plant, traffic noise in the carpark, and traffic noise in local streets generated by vehicles associated with the child care centre.

Furthermore and conversely, the operation of the centre will be affected by traffic noise from Molong Road and the Northern Distributor Road.

As outlined earlier in this report, an acoustic assessment was submitted in support of the proposal (Renzo Tonin & Associates February 2017). The acoustic assessment confirms that subject to implementation of mitigation measures (ie solid screens attached to perimeter fencing), noise emissions from the proposed child care centre will comply with the relevant criteria. Further, the operation of the child care centre will not be affected by traffic noise from Molong Road and the Northern Distributor Road.

Conditions are recommended to address the requirements of Council and the submitted acoustic assessment in respect of physical and operational mitigation measures. On this basis, noise impacts are considered to be within reasonable limit.

Light

Based on the long-day operation of the proposed child care centre, car park lighting and other external lighting will be required. In order that external lighting will not cause nuisance glare for adjoining dwellings, a condition is recommended requiring exterior lighting to be sited and designed to comply with AS 4282-1997 Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.

Privacy

Perimeter fencing of varying heights will be erected on the side boundaries. Fencing treatment and perimeter landscaping will prevent overlooking of adjoining dwellings from internal and external play spaces and the car park. Conditions are recommended that car park finished levels reflect existing natural ground level in order to reduce overlooking from the car park ‘deck’ towards the adjoining western dwelling at 42 Turner Crescent. The proposal will not adversely impact on privacy for adjoining dwellings.

Odour

An enclosed waste storage facility is located adjacent to the front boundary/access driveway. As the bins will be walked to the footpath on collection day, it is unnecessary that the bin bay be located at the site frontage. A condition is recommended that the bin bay be located adjacent to the nominated ‘service area’ adjacent to the northern building façade. Relocation of the bin bay will overcome potential odour impacts for the nearest affected dwelling at 42 Turner Crescent. Furthermore, resiting of the bin bay will provide for additional landscaping at the site entry, with positive visual impacts on the streetscape.

Visual Bulk

The child care centre building will be reasonably removed from site boundaries to prevent visual encroachment on the adjoining dwellings at 42 Turner Crescent and 159 Molong Road. As outlined in this report, conditions are recommended that finished levels in the car park reflect natural ground level, in order to avoid visual bulk encroachment impacts for the adjoining western dwelling at 42 Turner Crescent.


 

Environmental Impacts

The subject land is contained within an established residential precinct and comprises vacant, cleared land. Significant vegetation, threatened species or ecological endangered communities or their habitats are unlikely to be present. The site is not in proximity to any waterway, drinking water catchment or sensitive area. Sediment control measures, as required by conditions, will prevent loose dirt and sediment escaping the site and polluting downstream waterways.

The proposed child care centre will not involve processes or activities that would impact on air or water quality in the locality. Where applicable, the applicant shall enter into a Trade Waste Contract with Council. Other wastes will be disposed of via Council's waste collection or recycling services. Adverse environmental impacts are not anticipated as a result of the proposal.

Social and Economic Impacts

The proposed development is unlikely to generate a negative social or economic impact within the locality. The proposal will provide additional child care places within the community, with potential for greater workforce participation. The development will also generate employment opportunities.

THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE s79C(1)(c)

The subject land is suitable for the proposed child care centre due to the following:

·    The proposed development is a permitted use in the R2 Low Density Residential zone, being the zoning of the subject land.

·    Urban utility services are available and suitable subject to augmentation.

·    The site has direct frontage and access to Turner Crescent.

·    The local road network adjacent to the site is of sufficient capacity to accommodate traffic volumes.

·    The site is not subject to known technological or natural hazards.

·    The parcel is vacant cleared land with no known biodiversity value

ANY SUBMISSIONS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT s79C(1)(d)

The proposed development comprises "advertised development" pursuant to DCP 2004‑5.3. The application was advertised for the prescribed period of 14 days. At the conclusion of the exhibition period thirty-one (31) submissions had been received.

The development application did not proceed to mediation as the issues raised in the submissions were considered unlikely to be reasonably capable of negotiation (pursuant to Council’s Declaration of Planning and Development Assessment Procedures and Protocols (May 2010)).

The applicant (and consultants) have responded to the submissions, as considered below where relevant. The issues raised in the submissions include:


 

Traffic Matters

·    The submitted traffic assessment contains anomalies

Comment: A Traffic and Parking Statement (Traffic Solutions Pty Ltd February 2017) was submitted in support of the development application. In response to issues raised in the submissions and Council’s concerns, the applicant was requested to provide additional traffic details. An alternative traffic consultant was subsequently engaged by the applicant, namely McLaren Traffic Engineering. The following documents were submitted by McLaren Traffic Engineering in support of the proposal:

1        Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment of Child Care Centre at 36-40 Turner Crescent (12 May 2017); and

2        Response to Resident Submissions with respect to Proposed Child Care Centre (18 May 2017).

Council’s Development Engineer is satisfied and concurs with the content and findings of the traffic details submitted by McLaren Traffic Engineering, subject to conditions of consent.

·    The proposal will result in traffic congestion in surrounding residential streets

Comment: McLaren Traffic Engineering advises as follows in respect of this matter:

“When the estimated AM and PM peak period generations [associated with the child care centre] are added to the current local traffic conditions of Turner Crescent and Mastronardi Way, the traffic congestion was found to be minimal, with the existing Level of Service “A” being retained for the worst turning movements of the intersection of the Mitchell Highway / Mastronardi Way, with minimal additional details and capacity being maintained. This represents “GOOD” performance being maintained.

The existing traffic flows along Turner Crescent in conjunction with the additional traffic generated from the child care centre provides two-way traffic movements that are below the environmental goal of 200 vehicles per hour and a maximum 300 vehicles per hour for local streets as specified in the RMS Guide to Traffic Generating Developments (2002), as a measure of impact on Residential Amenity.

Hence, the traffic generated will not have a significant impact on residential amenity and congestion in surrounding residential streets.”

Council’s Development Engineer concurs with McLaren’s findings.

·    Traffic congestion will impact on safety for pedestrians (including school children) in surrounding residential streets

Comment: McLaren Traffic Engineering advises as follows in respect of this matter:

“The increase of 99 and 87 vehicle trips (equating to less than 2 cars per minute) during the morning and afternoon peak periods respectively does not considerably increase the traffic congestion along the local streets and as a result does not increase the risk to pedestrians that what is already occurring.”


 

Council’s Development Engineer concurs with McLaren’s findings and advises:

“The anticipated traffic volume increase is well within the existing road capacity and will not impact on pedestrian safety. Existing speed humps are considered adequate traffic calming devices.”

·    The capacity of Turner Crescent is inadequate to cater for additional traffic volumes

Comment: As outlined above, McLaren Traffic Engineering advises as follows in respect of this matter:

“The existing traffic flows along Turner Crescent in conjunction with the additional traffic generated from the child care centre provides two-way traffic movements that are below the environmental goal of 200 vehicles per hour and a maximum 300 vehicles per hour for local streets as specified in the RMS Guide to Traffic Generating Developments (2002), as a measure of impact on Residential Amenity.”

Council’s Development Engineer concurs with McLaren’s findings.

·    The onsite carpark is inadequate to meet the parking demands of the child care centre, with subsequent overflow on-street parking

Comment: As outlined in this report, the proposed development incorporates a total of 31 off-street car parking spaces, consistent with the requirements of DCP 2004 and the RMS Guide. Due to this compliance, overflow on-street car parking is not anticipated.

Council’s Development Engineer advises:

“The required parking spaces calculated under Orange DCP 2004 (31) have been supplied. The required spaces calculated under RMS guidelines (21) have been exceeded. [On this basis] there is not expected to be any overflow on-street parking.”

·    There is insufficient onsite manoeuvring area to accommodate service vehicles

Comment: McLaren Traffic Engineering advises as follows in respect of this matter:

“A B99 utility / courier van (ie. a Toyata Hiace) is the typical sized vehicle used for deliveries to child care centres… B99 vehicles can access normal sized car spaces, and the site will be easily able to accommodate a delivery vehicle on site between 9am and 4pm outside of peak visitor times, when spare visitor parking will be in abundance…. A B99 will have sufficient manoeuvring area on site and shall be easily managed due to the small natural of deliveries and low frequency.”

Council’s Development Engineer concurs with McLaren’s findings, subject to conditions of consent requiring that the car park design be amended (dimensions, aisle widths and turn bay) to the highest user standard under Australian Standard AS 2890.1:2004 Off-street car parking; and the maximum service vehicle to enter the site being a B99 utility/courier van.

·    No Standing signs are inappropriate to prevent onstreet congestion and will inconvenience residents

Comment: The proposal does not involve installation of ‘No Standing’ signs along Turner Crescent.


 

·    There are inadequate sight distances to permit safe ingress to the site for vehicles entering the site from the south

Comment: As outlined earlier in this report, in order that adequate sight distances are provided for vehicles turning right into the site (ie when travelling north along Turner Crescent), a raised median and line marking will be provided along Turner Crescent.

The median will be broken to allow entry into the site when adequate sightlines are achieved. As an additional traffic safety measure, the intersection area of the carpark entrance with Turner Crescent will be resealed (as required by condition). The median, line marking and intersection resealing will reduce the speed of vehicles entering the site, provide adequate reaction times and improve traffic amenity generally. The proposed access arrangements were reached in conjunction with Council’s Development Engineer and are considered suitable to achieve safe access to the development site. Relevant conditions are recommended in relation to the required works.

·    There is potential for traffic accidents at the Mitchell Highway/Northern Distributor Road (NDR) intersection to enter the site

Comment: McLaren Traffic Engineering provided the following comments in relation to this matter:

“The child care centre will have no vehicle access from Mitchell Highway and the Northern Distribution Road, all access will be from Turner Crescent.”

The applicant’s planning consultant further advises as follows in this regard:

“The likelihood of vehicles involved in any traffic accident at the intersection of the Mitchell Highway and Northern Distributor Road entering the site is considered low for the following reasons:

v The intersection of the Mitchell Highway and NDR is a roundabout intersection at which vehicles would be anticipated to enter and exit at a relatively low speed (maximum 30km/hr).

v The boundaries of the subject site are setback substantially from the two intersection roads and roundabout intersection. A 10m wide public reserve is positioned beside the site’s eastern side boundary and the Mitchell Highway, with the edge of the carriageway located some 13m from the site boundary. The edge of the carriageway of the NDR is located some 26m from the site’s northern boundary.

v A terraced and landscaped retaining wall with a total height of 2.4m is to be erected along the northern boundary of the site and partially returning along the eastern side boundary."

Council officers concur that the likelihood of a traffic accident entering the site via Mitchell Highway/NDR is low based on vehicle speeds at the intersection, separation of the site from the formed carriageway and finished levels for the development site. In respect of the Turner Crescent frontage and access, the median, line marking and intersection resealing as required by conditions of consent will reduce the speed of vehicles entering the site and provide adequate reaction times.


 

·    Traffic noise will adversely impact on residential amenity

Comment: McLaren Traffic Engineering provided the following comments in relation to this matter:

“The total future two-way traffic along Turner Crescent is calculated to be 142 and 133 vehicles during the AM and PM period peaks respectively. These two-way flows are below the environmental goal of 200 vehicles per hour and the maximum threshold of 300 vehicles per hour for local streets as specified in the RMS Guide.”

Furthermore, the applicant’s planning consultant advised as follows:

“The Noise Assessment undertaken by Renzo Tonin & Associates specifically addressed this matter in section 5.1 of their report and established that based on the proposed 99 vehicle movements during the morning peak period, road traffic noise level on Turner Crescent due to traffic generated by the child care centre would comply with the noise criterion of the NSW Road Noise Policy at the most affected residences along Turner Crescent.”

As such, while the proposed child care centre will alter the neighbourhood acoustic environment, traffic noise is considered to be within reasonable limit and in accordance with relevant standards.

·    Pedestrian infrastructure should be provided in the vicinity of the site, including formed footpaths and a pedestrian crossing

Comment: Council’s Development Engineer advises as follows in this regard:

“The development does not meet the warrants for a marked pedestrian crossing. All drop offs are planning to occur within the site. A concrete footpath is to be constructed for the full frontage of the development to Turner Crescent [as required by a condition of consent] to cater for any local residents who may walk to the centre. Any additional footpaths will be subject to consideration under Council’s residential footpath construction program.”

·    The proposal will exacerbate the poor condition of the Turner Crescent road surface

Comment: Council’s Development Engineer provided the following comments in relation to this matter:

Any maintenance issues identified with the Turner Crescent road surface will be addressed by Council under the local roads maintenance program.

In order to improve road safety adjacent to the site, a condition is recommended requiring resealing of the intersection of the car park entrance with Turner Crescent.

·    The proposed arrangements for waste management (size of bins, frequency of collection, location of bin storage) are inadequate / unsuitable

Comment: The applicant’s planning consultant advised as follows in this regard:

“The size of the [waste] storage facility has been determined based on other similar sized child care centres and waste generation rates. If the facility requires an additional regular collection service by Council, this can be arranged by centre management.”


 

Council’s Development Engineer raised no objection to the proposed waste management arrangements. Bins will be placed kerbside on collection days and returned to the storage area. As outlined in this report, a condition is recommended requiring relocation of the enclosed waste storage facility to the service area adjacent to the northern facade of the child care centre. Relocation will limit potential odour and visual impacts for the nearest adjoining dwelling at 42 Turner Crescent.

Noise Impacts Associated with the Child Care Centre

Comment: As outlined earlier in this report, an acoustic assessment was submitted in support of the proposal (Renzo Tonin & Associates February 2017). The acoustic assessment confirms that subject to implementation of mitigation measures (ie perimeter fencing), noise emissions from the proposed child care centre will comply with the relevant criteria. Council's Manager Building and Environment concurs with the findings and recommendations of the noise assessment. Conditions are recommended to address the requirements of the noise assessment.

The Social Demographics of the Surrounding Residential Area Do Not Warrant a Child Care Centre

Comment: The applicant’s planning consultant advised as follows in this regard:

“The applicant has undertaken appropriate research and determined that there is sufficient existing and future demand for additional child care places within the locality.”

This matter is not a relevant consideration in the assessment of a development application pursuant to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

PUBLIC INTEREST s79C(1)(e)

The proposal is not inconsistent with any relevant policy statements, planning studies, guidelines, etc that have not been considered in this assessment.

SUMMARY

The proposed development is permissible with the consent of Council. The development does not contravene the applicable planning regime applying to the land. Impacts of the development are considered to be within reasonable limit; consistent with applicable State and Local standards; and addressed by appropriate conditions of development consent. Approval of the application is recommended.

COMMENTS

The requirements of the Environmental Health and Building Surveyor, Development Engineer, Manager Building and Environment and Manager Development Assessment are included in the attached Notice of Approval.

 

Attachments

1          Notice of Approval, D17/31921

2          Plans, D17/31599

3          Submissions, D17/31684

  OrangeCityCouncilNEW#45524E (2)

ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

 

Development Application No DA 63/2017(1)

 

NA17/                                                                                             Container PR17415

 

 

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION

OF A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

issued under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Section 81(1)

 

Development Application

 

  Applicant Name:

Australian Childcare Solutions

  Applicant Address:

C/- Compass Planning Pty Ltd

PO Box 11

LAMBTON  NSW  2299

  Owner’s Name:

Hanna Developments Group Pty Limited

  Land to Be Developed:

Lot 194 DP 1007290 - 36-40 Turner Crescent, Orange

  Proposed Development:

Child Care Centre

 

 

Building Code of Australia

 building classification:

 

As determined by Certifier

 

 

Determination

 

  Made On:

6 June 2017

  Determination:

CONSENT GRANTED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS DESCRIBED BELOW:

 

 

Consent to Operate From:

7 June 2017

Consent to Lapse On:

7 June 2022

 

Terms of Approval

 

The reasons for the imposition of conditions are:

 

(1)      To ensure a quality urban design for the development which complements the surrounding environment.

(2)      To maintain neighbourhood amenity and character.

(3)      To ensure compliance with relevant statutory requirements.

(4)      To provide adequate public health and safety measures.

(5)      Because the development will require the provision of, or increase the demand for, public amenities and services.

(6)      To ensure the utility services are available to the site and adequate for the development.

(7)      To prevent the proposed development having a detrimental effect on adjoining land uses.

(8)      To minimise the impact of development on the environment.

 

 

 

 

Conditions

 

(1)      The development must be carried out in accordance with:

 

(a)      Plan/s numbered APMS-16004 - DA-000_G; DA-001_G; DA-100_H; DA-101_H; DA-200_G; DA-201_G; DA-300_G; DA-400_G; DA-500_G


 

(b)      statements of environmental effects or other similar associated documents that form part of the approval

 

as amended in accordance with any conditions of this consent.

 

 

PRESCRIBED CONDITIONS

 

(2)      All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

(3)      A sign is to be erected in a prominent position on any site on which building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out:

(a)      showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work, and

(b)      showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and

(c)      stating that unauthorised entry to the site is prohibited.

Any such sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out.

 

(4)      Where any excavation work on the site extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on adjoining land, the person having the benefit of the development consent must, at the person’s own expense:

(a)      protect and support the adjoining premises from possible damage from the excavation, and

(b)      where necessary, underpin the adjoining premises to prevent any such damage.

Note:  This condition does not apply if the person having the benefit of the development consent owns the adjoining land or the owner of the adjoining land has given consent in writing to this condition not applying.

 

 

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

 

(5)      Finished levels in the car park shall match existing natural surface levels. Retaining walls to the northern and western site boundaries shall be deleted / amended, as required to achieve natural surface levels.

 

(6)      The enclosed refuse facility shall be relocated adjacent to the ‘service’ zone along the northern building façade.

 

(7)      Prior to the issue of a construction certificate an amended landscape plan shall be submitted for approval of Council’s Director of Development Services. The landscape plan shall incorporate details of all retaining walls and fencing proposed along the boundaries fronting the Northern Distributor Road and the Mitchell Highway together with a revised and appropriate selection of trees, palms and shrubs suited to the Orange climatic conditions, with particular emphasis to the west and south site boundaries and site frontage to Turner Crescent. The applicant shall liaise with Council’s Manager City Presentation regarding species selection.

 

(8)      An approval under Section 68 of the Local Government Act is to be sought from Orange City Council, as the Water and Sewer Authority, for water, sewer and stormwater connection. No plumbing and drainage is to commence until approval is granted.


 

(9)      Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, an acoustic report is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority and to Council confirming the type and location of any mechanical plant proposed to be installed.  The report shall confirm that the Leq15min noise level emitted from the cumulative noise impact of children playing indoors, mechanical plant and traffic on the site will not exceed the background noise by more than 5 dB(A) at the assessment location.  Where mitigation measures are required in order to achieve this noise goal, details of these measures are also to be provided within this report.

 

(10)    A 2.1m high treated timber paling fence of lapped and capped construction (minimum 35mm overlap of planks), with three horizontal support rails and no gaps so that it can perform as an effective noise screen shall be constructed along the southern and western boundary of the site, adjoining 42 Turner Crescent and 159 Molong Road.  The fence may as an alternative be constructed of masonry, or a combination of masonry and lapped and capped timber fencing.

 

The fence must reduce in height above existing ground level to not more than 1.0m in front of the existing curved building line created in in Turner Crescent between the front of the house at 42 Turner Crescent and the garage of 159 Molong Road. 

 

Plans shall be amended to provide details of the fence prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

(11)    Engineering plans providing complete details of the proposed Turner Crescent traffic island, line marking and pavement resurfacing, Mastronardi Way line marking, childcare centre driveway and car-parking areas is to be submitted to Orange City Council upon application for a Construction Certificate. These plans are to provide details of levels, cross falls of all pavements, proposed sealing materials and proposed drainage works and be in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code. The plans shall also include the following details:

·    Turner Crescent raised traffic island as per McLaren Traffic Engineering plan 2017-25A-03A from report 17254.01FA dated 12 May 2017 including construction details, line marking and signage;

·    Mastronardi Way line marking details as per McLaren Traffic Engineering plan 2017-25A-05A from report 17254.01FA dated 12 May 2017;

·    Carpark driveway entry / exit raised central splitter island as per McLaren Traffic Engineering plan 2017-25A-03A from report 17254.01FA dated 12 May 2017 including construction details, line marking and signage;

·    A full width reseal in 30mm AC10 asphalt of Turner Crescent for the frontage of the development, as defined by the kerb tangent points located on the inside of the bend;

·    Carpark layout generally as per drawing number DA-100-G with the following amendments:

o Parking spaces numbered 1 to 11 to be clearly identified by signage or line marking as ‘staff parking only’;

o Turning bay to be clearly identified by signage or line marking as ‘turning bay’;

o Turning bay to be widened to 3.6m by including 1.0m central aisle extension;

o Central aisle and parking spaces 17 to 30 to be widened to dimensions specified for User Class 3A in figure 2.2 of AS 2890.1.

 

(12)    A water and soil erosion control plan is to be submitted to Orange City Council or an Accredited Certifier (Categories B1, C3, C4, C6) for approval prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate. The control plan is to be in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code and the Landcom, Managing Urban Stormwater; Soils and Construction Handbook.

 

(13)    The development’s stormwater design is to include stormwater detention within the development, designed to limit peak outflows from the land to the pre-existing natural outflows up to the 100 year ARI frequency, with sufficient allowance in overflow spillway design capacity to safely pass flows of lower frequency (that is, a rarer event) without damage to downstream developments. Where appropriate, the spillway design capacity is to be determined in accordance with the requirements of the Dam Safety Committee.


 

The design of the detention storage is to be undertaken using the ILSAX/DRAINS rainfall-runoff hydrologic model or an approved equivalent capable of assessing runoff volumes and their temporal distribution as well as peak flow rates. The model is to be used to calculate the flow rates for the existing and post-development conditions. The developed flows are to be routed through the proposed storage within the model so that the outflows obtained are no greater than the flows obtained for the pre-existing natural flows.

 

A report detailing the results of the analysis, which includes:

·    catchment plan showing sub-catchments under existing and developed conditions;

·    schematic diagram of the catchment model showing sub areas and linkages;

·    tabulation detailing the elevation, storage volume and discharge relationships; and

·    tabulation for the range of frequencies analysed, the inflows, outflows and peak storage levels for both existing and developed conditions;

 

together with copies of the data files for the model and engineering design plans of the required drainage system are to be submitted to Orange City Council upon application for a Construction Certificate.

 

(14)    The existing sewer manhole on the northern boundary is to be raised to the design finished surface level. Prior to a Construction Certificate being issued engineering plans for this work are to be submitted to and approved by Orange City Council.

 

(15)    A Liquid Trade Waste Application is to be submitted to Orange City Council prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate.  The application is to be in accordance with Orange City Council’s Liquid Trade Waste Policy.  Engineering plans submitted as part of the application are to show details of all proposed liquid trade waste pre-treatment systems and their connection to sewer.

 

Where applicable, the applicant is to enter into a Liquid Trade Waste Service Agreement with Orange City Council in accordance with the Orange City Council Liquid Trade Waste Policy.

 

(16)    Payment of contributions for water, sewer and drainage works is required to be made at the contribution rate applicable at the time that the payment is made.  The contributions are based on 6.44 ETs for water supply headworks and 11.4 ETs for sewerage headworks.  A Certificate of Compliance, from Orange City Council in accordance with the Water Management Act 2000, will be issued upon payment of the contributions.

 

This Certificate of Compliance is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate.

 

 

PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING

 

(17)    Where any existing fencing at the perimeter of the site needs to be removed, or is of a type which does not ensure the occupants of any adjoining residence adequate privacy, new fencing of the type shown on the approved development application plans, or as referred to elsewhere in this Notice, shall be erected prior to any building or construction work being carried out upon this development.

 

(18)    A Construction Certificate application is required to be submitted to, and issued by Council/Accredited Certifier prior to any excavation or building works being carried out onsite.

 

(19)    A temporary onsite toilet is to be provided and must remain throughout the project or until an alternative facility meeting Council’s requirements is available onsite.

 

(20)    The location and depth of the sewer junction/connection to Council’s sewerage system is to be determined to ensure that adequate fall to the sewer is available.

 

(21)    Soil erosion control measures shall be implemented on the site.


 

DURING CONSTRUCTION/SITEWORKS

 

(22)    All construction/demolition work on the site is to be carried out between the hours of 7.00 am and 6.00 pm Monday to Friday inclusive, 7.00 am to 5.00 pm Saturdays and 8.00 am to 5.00 pm Sundays and Public Holidays. Written approval must be obtained from the General Manager of Orange City Council to vary these hours.

 

(23)    A Registered Surveyor’s certificate identifying the location of the building on the site must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

(24)    All materials onsite or being delivered to the site are to be contained within the site. The requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 are to be complied with when placing/stockpiling loose material or when disposing of waste products or during any other activities likely to pollute drains or watercourses.

 

(25)    No portion of the building - including footings, eaves, overhang and service pipes - shall encroach into any easement.

 

(26)    Any adjustments to existing utility services that are made necessary by this development proceeding are to be at the full cost of the developer.

 

(27)    The provisions and requirements of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code are to be applied to this application and all work constructed within the development is to be in accordance with that Code.

 

The developer is to be entirely responsible for the provision of water, sewerage and drainage facilities capable of servicing the development from Council’s existing infrastructure. The developer is to be responsible for gaining access over adjoining land for services where necessary and easements are to be created about all water, sewer and drainage mains within and outside the lots they serve.

 

(28)    All driveway and parking areas are to be sealed with bitumen, hot mix or concrete and are to be designed for all expected loading conditions (provided however that the minimum pavement depth for gravel and flush seal roadways is 200mm) and be in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

 

(29)    A heavy-duty concrete kerb and gutter layback and footpath crossing is to be constructed in the position shown on the plan submitted with the Construction Certificate application. The works are to be carried out to the requirements of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

 

(30)    A 1.2m wide concrete footpath is to be constructed for the full frontage of the development to Turner Crescent. The footpath is to be located and constructed in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code.

 

 

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

 

(31)    Landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved amended landscape design and shall be permanently maintained to the satisfaction of Council's Manager Development Assessments. Fencing along the boundaries fronting the Northern Distributor Road and the Mitchell Highway shall be in accordance with the approved landscape design.

 

(32)    A total of 31 off-street car parking spaces shall be provided upon the site in accordance with the approved plans, the provisions of Development Control Plan 2004, and be constructed in accordance with the requirements of Council's Development and Subdivision Code prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

(33)    No person is to use or occupy the building or alteration that is the subject of this approval without the prior issuing of an Occupation Certificate.


 

(34)    Finished ground levels are to be graded away from the buildings and adjoining properties and must achieve natural drainage. The concentrated flows are to be dispersed down slope or collected and discharged to the stormwater drainage system.

 

(35)    The owner of the building/s must cause the Council to be given a Final Fire Safety Certificate on completion of the building in relation to essential fire or other safety measures included in the schedule attached to this approval.

 

(36)    Where Orange City Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority, a final inspection of water connection, sewer and stormwater drainage shall be undertaken by Orange City Council and a Final Notice of Inspection issued, prior to the issue of either an interim or a final Occupation Certificate.

 

(37)    The cut and fill is to be retained and/or adequately battered and stabilised (within the allotment) prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

(38)    The applicant shall provide Council with an Operational Management Plan (or a Plan of Management), to be submitted and approved by Council’s Manager of Development Assessment, relating to the childcare operations. The Operational Management Plan shall include measures to mitigate odours and fumes that could be emitted from the waste storage area. The Operational Management Plan must also include the frequency of service vehicle types to the site (excluding waste management services) and should also address the following matters:

(a)   hours of operation.

(b)   management of early/late arrivals.

(c)   delivery times for various components of the operation.

(d)   general client rules.

(e)   management issues such as external lighting, maintenance of the site and the like.

(f)    complaints handling procedures and contact person.

 

          The Operational Management Plan approved by Orange City Council under this condition must be complied with at all times. Any proposed amendments to the Operational Management Plan should be notified to and approved by Orange City Council.

 

          The Operational Management Plan must include a Noise Management Plan (NMP) in accordance with the Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants Technical Guideline – Childcare Centre Noise Assessment, detailing how the childcare centre will manage noise from children, vehicles on site and out of hours drop off/collections. The NMP must demonstrate how operational noise (including noise from plant; parents and children entering/leaving the site; waste collection, deliveries and general access is to be managed. The NMP must detail how acoustic restrictions will be enforced as part of the development. The NMP approved under this Condition is to be complied with at all times. Any proposed amendments to the NMP are to be notified to and approved by Orange City Council.

 

(39)    A Certificate of Compliance, from a Qualified Engineer, stating that the stormwater detention basin complies with the approved engineering plans is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate.

 

(40)    Certification from Orange City Council is required to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate stating that all works relating to connection of the development to Council assets, works on public land, works on public roads, stormwater, sewer and water reticulation mains and footpaths have been carried out in accordance with the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code and the foregoing conditions, and that Council will take ownership of the infrastructure assets.

 

(41)    All of the foregoing conditions are to be at the full cost of the developer and to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code, unless specifically stated otherwise. All work required by the foregoing conditions is to be completed prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, unless stated otherwise.

 


 

MATTERS FOR THE ONGOING PERFORMANCE AND OPERATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT

 

(42)    A separate development application shall be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the erection of any advertising structures or signs of a type that do not meet the exempt development provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008.

 

(43)    External lighting of the site and building shall be designed and installed to comply with Australian Standard 4282:1997 Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.

 

(44)    Commercial/service vehicles shall not exceed a B99 utility or courier van. Service vehicle un/loading activities shall be wholly contained within the subject land.

 

(45)    Emitted noise shall not exceed 5dB(A) above background sound level measured at the nearest affected residence.

 

(46)    Any ancillary light fittings fitted to the exterior of the building are to be shielded or mounted in a position to minimise glare to adjoining properties.

 

(47)    The owner is required to provide to Council and to the NSW Fire Commissioner an Annual Fire Safety Statement in respect of the fire-safety measures, as required by Clause 177 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

(48)    Hours of operation of the childcare centre shall be between the hours of 7.00am and 6.00pm, Monday to Friday.

 

(49)    The physical noise mitigation measures and operational management plans for the childcare centre shall be maintained for the duration of the development.

 

(50)    The operation of the development shall be fully in accordance with the approved Operational Management Plan, Noise Management Plan and the recommendations of the Renzo Tonin and Associates’ Noise assessment report dated 23 February 2017 and the additional acoustic report developed relating to the installation of mechanical plant required by this consent.

 

(51)    The Leq,15min noise level emitted from the cumulative noise impact of mechanical plant and traffic on the site shall not exceed the background noise level by more than 5bB(A) at the assessment location.

 

(52)    The number of children that may be in the outdoor play area must not exceed 124 at any one time.

 

(53)    Where the cumulative outdoor play time of children at the centre does not exceed more than two hours per day, the Leq,15min noise level emitted from the outdoor play area(s) shall not exceed the background noise level by more than 10dB(A) at the assessment location.

 

(54)    Where the cumulative outdoor play time of children at the centre exceeds two hours per day, the Leq,15min noise level emitted from the outdoor play area(s) shall not exceed the background noise level by more than 5dB(A) at the assessment location.

 

(55)    All windows and doors shall be closed during the use of indoor areas of the centre.

 

(56)    Signage shall be erected at appropriate, prominent locations, to advise the following:

(i)    That staff and parents converse at a very low volume;

(ii)    That parents not call out to their children when delivering or collecting their children; and

(iii)   That gates not be slammed.

 

(57)    The performance of the development in terms of noise, shall be verified through testing at nearby receivers (including future receivers on adjoining vacant residential land) within six (6) months of the occupation of the building.  The applicant shall provide Council with a copy of the Verification Report and also certification that any additional mitigation works identified in the report have been completed.


 

 

 

Other Approvals

 

(1)      Local Government Act 1993 approvals granted under section 68.

 

          Nil

 

(2)      General terms of other approvals integrated as part of this consent.

 

          Nil

 

 

 

 

Right of Appeal

 

If you are dissatisfied with this decision, section 97 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 gives you the right to appeal to the Land and Environment Court within 6 months after the date on which you receive this notice.

* Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 does not apply to the determination of a development application for State significant development or local designated development that has been the subject of a Commission of Inquiry.

 

 

  Disability Discrimination Act 1992:

This application has been assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. No guarantee is given that the proposal complies with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992.

 

The applicant/owner is responsible to ensure compliance with this and other anti-discrimination legislation.

 

The Disability Discrimination Act covers disabilities not catered for in the minimum standards called up in the Building Code of Australia which references AS1428.1 - "Design for Access and Mobility". AS1428 Parts 2, 3 and 4 provides the most comprehensive technical guidance under the Disability Discrimination Act currently available in Australia.

 

 

  Disclaimer - S88B Restrictions on the Use of Land:

The applicant should note that there could be covenants in favour of persons other than Council restricting what may be built or done upon the subject land. The applicant is advised to check the position before commencing any work.

 

 

Signed:

On behalf of the consent authority ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

 

 

Signature:

 

 

Name:

 

DAVID WADDELL - DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

 

Date:

 

7 June 2017

 



Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.2                       Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.2                       Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.2                       Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.2                       Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.2                       Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.2                       Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.2                       Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.2                       Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.2                       Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator



Planning and Development Committee                                                         6 June 2017

2.2                       Development Application DA 63/2017(1) - 36-40 Turner Crescent

Attachment 3      Submissions

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                      6 June 2017

 

 

2.3     Development Application DA 245/2016(1) - 6/175 and 7/175 Dalton Street

TRIM REFERENCE:        2017/999

AUTHOR:                       Daniel Drum, Town Planner    

 

 

EXECUTIVE Summary

Application lodged

20/07/2016

Applicant/s

Mr P Patel

Owner/s

Orange Alpine Investments Pty Ltd

Land description

Lots 6 and 7 SP 33395 - 6/175 and 7/175 Dalton Street, Orange

Proposed land use

Neighbourhood Shop (internal alterations) and Advertising Sign

Value of proposed development

$30,000

Council's consent is sought for the use of a neighbourhood shop at Tenancy 7 of the neighbourhood shopping complex at 175–181 Dalton Street, Orange. The neighbourhood shopping complex is known as the Alpine Stores.

In order to facilitate the use of the neighbourhood shop, Council’s consent is also sought for minor internal building works within Tenancy 7 and the adjoining Tenancy 6, currently Foodworks Supermarket. The works would provide for internal customer access between each tenancy and a modified floor layout and re-arrangement of retail counters. Council’s consent is also sought for signage.

The key issue for consideration is whether the proposed neighbourhood shop and sale of packaged liquor will have an acceptable social impact in the locality.

In summary, it is considered that while the subject property is generally suitable for the use of a neighbourhood shop, the sale of packaged liquor will likely have a significant and detrimental social impact, given that the subject property is located within close proximity of a low socio-economic area of Orange, and that the increased availability of packaged liquor within easy walking distance of residents will likely result in an increase in alcohol related crime. On this basis, it is recommended that Council refuses the development application.

These matters are addressed in further detail in the body of this report.

DECISION FRAMEWORK

Development in Orange is governed by two key documents Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 and Orange Development Control Plan 2004. In addition the Infill Guidelines are used to guide development, particularly in the heritage conservation areas and around heritage items.


 

Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 – the LEP should be considered by Council to be a definitive document. LEPs govern the types of development that are permissible or prohibited in different parts of the City and also provide some assessment criteria in specific circumstances. Uses are either permissible or not - there are no grey areas in terms of permissibility. The objectives of each zoning and indeed the aims of the LEP itself are, however, open to interpretation and can be used to guide decision making around appropriateness of development.

Orange Development Control Plan 2004 – the DCP guides development. In general it is a performance based document rather than prescriptive in nature - its purpose is to guide development. The Land and Environment Court tends to view it as such. In each area of interest there are often guidelines used. These guidelines indicate ways of achieving the planning outcomes. It is thus recognised that there may also be other solutions of merit. All design solutions are considered on merit by planning and building staff. Applications should clearly demonstrate how the planning outcomes are being met where alternative design solutions are proposed. So one can see that the DCP gives leeway for developers and architects to use design to achieve the outcome in other ways if they can. Stating that DCP guidelines are inflexible can be misleading.

This development is recommended for refusal by Council staff. The basis for refusal is centred on the potential negative social impact arising from the sale of alcohol in this location. Under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, Council is obliged to assess the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “13.4 Our Environment – Monitor and enforce regulations relating to City amenity”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

 

Recommendation

That Council refuses DA 245/2016(1) for Neighbourhood Shop (internal alterations) and Advertising Sign at Lots 6 and 7 SP 33395 – 6 and 7/175-181 Dalton Street, Orange.

 

further considerations

Consideration has been given to the recommendation’s impact on Council’s service delivery; image and reputation; political; environmental; health and safety; employees; stakeholders and project management; and no further implications or risks have been identified.


 

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

THE APPLICATION/PROPOSAL

Council's consent is sought for the use of a neighbourhood shop at Tenancy 7 of the neighbourhood shopping complex at 175–181 Dalton Street, Orange. The neighbourhood shopping complex is known as the Alpine Stores.

In order to facilitate the use of the neighbourhood shop, Council’s consent is also sought for minor internal building works within Tenancy 7 and the adjoining Tenancy 6, currently Foodworks Supermarket. The works would provide for internal customer access between each tenancy and a modified floor layout re-arrangement of retail counters. Council’s consent is also sought for signage.

Use

The proposed neighbourhood shop is intended to be used for the sale of packaged liquor in association with the existing Foodworks Supermarket which occupies the adjoining Tenancy 6.

Supporting information submitted with the development application indicates that the proposed neighbourhood shop is intended to sell a variety of types of liquor; including beer, wine, cider and spirits.

The proposed hours of operation are Monday to Saturday 9am to7pm and Sunday 10am to 6.30pm.

Supporting information submitted with the development application indicates that customers would not be able to enter the neighbourhood shop outside of the normal operating hours of the adjoining supermarket. The neighbourhood shop has however been designed to operate separate to the Foodworks Supermarket so as to satisfy the requirements of Council’s LEP for neighbourhood shops in the B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone and the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Minor Building Alterations and Signage

Minor building works would involve the removal of the existing offices and staircase within the existing Foodworks Supermarket at Tenancy 6, and creation of a small opening between the supermarket and the proposed neighbourhood shop at Tenancy 7 to provide for internal customer access.

The proposed signage includes:

-     two fascia/above awning signs

-     two wall signs, incorporating changeable promotional content.

The existing conditions of the subject property are demonstrated in Figures 1–2, below.


 

 

IMG_2249

Figure 1 - the subject property - Tenancy 6 shown to the left

and Tenancy 7 shown to the right

IMG_2248

Figure 2 - other tenancies within the

Alpine Stores neighbourhood shopping complex

Surrounding Use and Development

Properties immediately adjoining and proximate to the subject property can generally be characterised as residential to the east of McLachlan Street and industrial/commercial to the west of McLachlan Street. However, it is noted that the land to the immediate south west of the intersection of Dalton and McLachlan Streets, diagonally opposite the subject property, has recently been developed for the purpose of a childcare centre.


 

The land use pattern surrounding the subject property is illustrated in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3 - land use pattern proximate to the subject property

(Subject property identified by heavy red line)

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

Section 5A Assessment

In the administration of sections 78A, 79B, 79C, 111 and 112, the provisions of Section 5A must be taken into account for every development application in deciding whether there is likely to be a significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats. This section includes a requirement to consider any adopted assessment guidelines, which means assessment guidelines issued and in force under section 94A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Assessment guidelines are in force (see DECC-W “Threatened Species Assessment Guidelines - The Assessment of Significance”) which requires consent authority to adopt the precautionary principle in its assessment.

In this instance, site inspection reveals that the subject property has no biodiversity or habitat value.

Section 79C - Evaluation

Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires Council to consider various matters, of which those pertaining to the application are listed below.


 

PROVISIONS OF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT s79C(1)(a)(i)

Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

Part 1 - Preliminary

Clause 1.2 - Aims of Plan

The aims of the Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 relevant to the application include:

(a)     to encourage development which complements and enhances the unique character of Orange as a major regional centre boasting a diverse economy and offering an attractive regional lifestyle

(b)     to provide for a range of development opportunities that contribute to the social, economic and environmental resources of Orange in a way that allows present and future generations to meet their needs by implementing the principles for ecologically sustainable development.

In general, it is considered that the proposed use of a Neighbourhood Shop would be consistent with the foregoing aims of the Orange LEP 2011.

In particular, a neighbourhood shop would generally complement and enhance Orange as a major regional centre boasting a diverse economy and offering an attractive regional lifestyle; and provide for a development opportunity that contribute to the social, economic and environmental resources of Orange in a way that allows present and future generations to meet their needs.

However, while the general use of a neighbourhood shop is considered to be consistent with the relevant aims of the Orange LEP 2011, it is considered that the sale of packaged liquor from the proposed neighbourhood shop is not. In particular, it is considered that the location of the neighbourhood shop and increased sale of packaged liquor would have an unacceptable social impact. These matters are discussed in detail in the body of this report.

Accordingly, it is considered that the proposed development is not consistent with the aims of the Orange LEP 2011.

Clause 1.6 - Consent Authority

This clause establishes that, subject to the Act, Council is the consent authority for applications made under the LEP.

Clause 1.9A - Suspension of Covenants, Agreements and Instruments

This clause provides that covenants, agreements and other instruments which seek to restrict the carrying out of development do not apply with the following exceptions.

·    covenants imposed or required by Council

·    prescribed instruments under Section 183A of the Crown Lands Act 1989

·    any conservation agreement under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974

·    any trust agreement under the Nature Conservation Trust Act 2001

·    any property vegetation plan under the Native Vegetation Act 2003


 

·    any biobanking agreement under Part 7A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

·    any planning agreement under Division 6 of Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Council staff are not aware of the title of the subject property being affected by any of the above. However, it is noted that Council does not hold a Section 88B Instrument for the subject property.

Clause 1.7 - Mapping

The subject site is identified on the LEP maps in the following manner:

Land Zoning Map:

Land zoned B1 Neighbourhood Centre

Lot Size Map:

No Minimum Lot Size

Heritage Map:

Not a heritage item or conservation area

Height of Buildings Map:

No building height limit

Floor Space Ratio Map:

No floor space limit

Terrestrial Biodiversity Map:

No biodiversity sensitivity on the site

Groundwater Vulnerability Map:

Ground water vulnerable

Drinking Water Catchment Map:

Not within the drinking water catchment

Watercourse Map:

Not within or affecting a defined watercourse

Urban Release Area Map:

Not within an urban release area

Obstacle Limitation Surface Map:

No restriction on building siting or construction

Additional Permitted Uses Map:

No additional permitted use applies

The relevant matters are addressed in detail in the body of this report.

Part 2 - Permitted or Prohibited Development

Clause 2.1 - Land Use Zones and Clause 2.3 - Zone Objectives and Land Use Table

The subject property is zoned B1 Neighbourhood Centre (Figure 4).

Figure 4 -zone context plan (subject property identified by heavy red line)


 

The proposed use and development is defined as neighbourhood shop under the Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011, which means:

“…premises used for the purposes of selling general merchandise such as foodstuffs, personal care products, newspapers and the like to provide for the day-to-day needs of people who live or work in the local area, and may include ancillary services such as a post office, bank or dry cleaning, but does not include restricted premises.”

It is to be noted that during the course of the assessment process, Council staff queried whether the proposed use involving sale of packaged liquor was correctly characterised as a neighbourhood shop.

In seeking to clarify whether the sale of packaged liquor was correctly characterised as a neighbourhood shop, Council staff referred to Altz Pty Limited v Shellharbour City Council [2014] NSWLEC 1228 (Altz), which included discussion on how a neighbourhood shop should be characterised. Notably, that decision identified that the general approach to characterisation for planning purposes is best set out in Chamwell Pty Limited v Strathfield Council (2007) 151 LGERA (Chamwell). Altz summarises Chamwell succinctly:

“The general thrust of the findings in Chamwell is that the characterisation must focus on the purpose of the land. This must be done at a level of generality and in a common sense and practical way that is sufficient to include the individual uses that make up the purpose. While there may be a number of different uses, these different uses may still serve the same purpose.”

Taking into consideration the approach adopted in Altz and Chamwell, it is considered that the proposed development is correctly characterised as a neighbourhood shop. In particular, it is considered that that the sale of packaged liquor from a relatively small floor space within an existing neighbourhood shopping complex would fall within the ambit of ‘general merchandise’ which would ‘provide for the day to day needs of people who live or work in the local area’.

The objectives of the B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone are:

·    to provide a range of small-scale retail, business and community uses that serve the needs of people who live or work in the surrounding neighbourhood

·    to encourage local employment opportunities in accessible locations

·    to ensure development is ordered in such a way as to maximise public transport patronage, and encourage walking and cycling, in close proximity to settlement

·    to promote development of a scale that is conducive to the role of the Orange CBD as the primary retail and business centre in the region

·    to ensure development in the Northern Leeds Parade area is appropriately serviced, of a scale consistent with the needs of the area and will not detract from the role of the CBD as the primary business centre within the City.

It is considered that the proposed development is generally consistent with the objectives of the B1 Neighbourhood Centre Zone.


 

In particular, it is considered that the proposed development would contribute to the existing range of small-scale retail and business uses within the existing neighbourhood shopping centre, and which serve the needs of people who live and work in the surrounding neighbourhood.

Part 5 - Miscellaneous Provisions

Clause 5.4 - Controls Relating to Miscellaneous Permissible Uses

This clause contains various development standards that apply to specific types of development. Relevantly the clause requires:

·    neighbourhood shops to be limited to 140 square metres of gross floor area

In this regard, it is noted that the floor area of the proposed neighbourhood shop is in the order of 106m2 and is consistent with this requirement.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICIES

State Environmental Planning Policy 64 - Advertising and Signage (SEPP 64)

State Environmental Planning Policy 64 - Advertising and Signage (SEPP 64) requires that a consent authority must not grant development consent to an application to display signage unless the consent authority is satisfied:

·    that the signage is consistent with the objectives of this policy as set out in Clause (1) (a)

·    that the signage the subject of the application satisfies the assessment criteria specified in Schedule 1

·    satisfies other relevant requirements of this policy.

The relevant matters requiring assessment are addressed below.

Objectives of the Policy

Section 3 identifies that SEPP 64 seeks to ensure that signage is compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area; provides effective communication in suitable locations and is of high quality design and finish.

In its totality, it is considered that the proposed signage is not consistent with the objectives of SEPP 64 as it is inconsistent with a desirable amenity and visual character, and is excessive given the subject property is only one tenancy within a larger neighbourhood shopping complex.

However, it is considered that if Council were of a view to approve the proposed development, a condition of consent could be applied to restrict the extent of advertising and ensure that it is consistent with the objectives of SEPP 64.

Wall Advertisements

Section 22 identifies that only one wall advertisement may be displayed per building elevation; that the advertisement does not extend over a window or other opening; and a business identification sign is not displayed on the building elevation.


 

Given these requirements, it is considered that the proposed wall advertisement could not be approved. However, it is noted that if the applicant did not wish to proceed with the above awning signing, Council would have the ability to approve one wall sign which did not extend over an existing window.

If Council were of a view to approve the proposed development, Council staff would liaise with the applicant to determine whether it would prefer the above awning sign or one wall sign and apply a condition of consent accordingly.

Further to this, it is noted that NSW Police have advised it would oppose the external advertisement or promotion of liquor products. This recommendation would be taken into consideration in the event that Council staff were required to liaise with the applicant regarding the design of a wall sign.

Schedule 1 Assessment Criteria

Character of the Area

·    Is the proposal compatible with the existing or desired future character of the area or locality in which it is proposed to be located?

·    Is the proposal consistent with a particular theme for outdoor advertising in the area or locality?

While advertising signage is a common feature within the existing neighbourhood shopping complex, it is considered that the extent of advertising signage proposed is excessive by comparison.

In particular, it is noted that each tenancy is generally identified by both an above awning sign and fascia sign. The size of the signs generally correlate with the size of the tenancy (ie the smaller tenancies are identified by relatively small signs, while the large supermarket tenancy is identified by a much larger sign (refer Figures 1 and 2, above).

In this regard, it is considered that the existing character and theme of signage within the neighbourhood shopping complex requires that the proposed above awning sign be reduced in scale to match that of the other small tenancies.

In the event that Council were of a view to approve the proposed development, Council staff would recommend a condition of consent requiring that the above awning sign be reduced in size.

Further, as previously noted, Section 22 of SEPP 64 identifies that only one wall advertisement may be displayed per building elevation; that the advertisement does not extend over a window or other opening; and a business identification sign is not displayed on the building elevation.

Given these requirements, it is considered that the proposed wall advertisement could not be approved. However, it is noted that if the applicant did not wish to proceed with the above awning signing, Council would have the ability to approve one wall sign.


 

Special Areas

·    Does the proposal detract from the amenity or visual quality of any environmentally sensitive areas, heritage areas, natural or other conservation areas, open spaces areas, waterways, rural landscapes or residential areas?

The subject property is not located within any environmentally sensitive area, heritage area, natural or other conservation area, open spaces area, waterway or rural landscape.

While the subject property is located adjacent to a residential area, it is not considered that the proposed signage would detract from its amenity or visual quality.

Views and Vistas

·    Does the proposal obscure or compromise important views?

·    Does the proposal dominate the skyline and reduce the quality of vistas?

·    Does the proposal respect the viewing rights of other advertisers?

The proposed signage would not obscure or compromise important views; dominate the skyline or reduce the quality of a vista.

However given the extent of advertising signage proposed, it is considered that the proposed signage would be overbearing and detract from the effectiveness of other advertising signs within the neighbourhood shopping complex. This issue could be overcome by applying a condition of consent requiring that the proposed above awning sign be reduced in size and/or the removal of the proposed wall signs.

Streetscape, Setting or Landscape

·    Is the scale, proportion and form of the proposal appropriate for the streetscape, setting or landscape?

·    Does the proposal contribute to the visual interest of the streetscape, setting or landscape?

·    Does the proposal reduce clutter by rationalising and simplifying existing advertising?

·    Does the proposal screen unsightliness?

·    Does the proposal protrude above buildings, structures or tree canopies in the area or locality?

·    Does the proposal require ongoing vegetation management.

The scale of the proposed advertising signage is inappropriate for the streetscape insofar as it is inconsistent with the existing character and theme of signage within the neighbourhood shopping complex.

The proposed advertising signage has a neutral impact in terms of reducing clutter or screening unsightliness.

The proposed advertising signage will not protrude above a building, structure or tree canopy. The proposed advertising signage will not require ongoing vegetation management.


 

Site and Building

·    Is the proposal compatible with the scale, proportion and other characteristics of the site or building, or both, on which the proposed signage is to be located?

·    Does the proposal respect important features of the site or building, or both?

·    Does the proposal show innovation and imagination in its relationship to the site or building, or both?

As previously discussed, the scale of the proposed advertising signage is insofar as it is inconsistent with the existing character and theme of signage within the neighbourhood shopping complex.

Associated Devices and Logos with Advertisements and Advertising Structures

·   Have any safety devices, platforms, lighting devices or logos been designed as an integral part of the signage or structure on which it is to be displayed?

The “Bottle-O” logo forms an integral part of the proposed advertising signage.

Illumination

·    Would illumination result in unacceptable glare?

·    Would illumination affect safety for pedestrians, vehicles or aircraft?

·    Would illumination detract from the amenity of any residence or other form of accommodation?

·    Can the intensity of the illumination be adjusted, if necessary?

·    Is the illumination subject to a curfew?

No illumination is proposed.

Safety

·    Would the proposal reduce the safety for any public road?

·    Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians or bicyclists?

·    Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians, particularly children, by obscuring sightlines from public areas?

The proposed advertising signage is unlikely to reduce the safety of any public road.

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) requires that a consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of development of land unless it has considered whether the land is contaminated, is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state for which the development is proposed, if the land requires remediation to be made suitable for the proposed development, and it is satisfied that the land will be remediated before the land is used for that purpose.


 

Furthermore, SEPP 55 requires that before determining an application to carry out development that would involve a change of use of land (specified in subclause 4), the consent authority must consider a preliminary investigation of the land concerned.

Given that the subject property has historically been used for a commercial purpose and that no substantial works are proposed, it is considered unlikely that the subject property would be in a contaminated state unsuitable for the proposed use.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT THAT HAS BEEN PLACED ON EXHIBITION s79C(1)(a)(ii)

There are no draft environmental planning instruments that apply to the subject land or proposed development.

DESIGNATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not designated development.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN s79C(1)(a)(iii)

Development Control Plan 2004

Development Control Plan 2004 (“the DCP”) applies to the subject land. Chapters of the DCP relevant to the proposed use include:

·    Chapter 0 - Transitional Provisions

·    Chapter 3 - General Considerations

·    Chapter 5 - General Considerations for Zones and Development

·    Chapter 7 - Development in Residential Areas

·    Chapter 8 - Development in Business Zones

·    Chapter 15 - Car parking.

CHAPTER 0 -TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS

Section 0.2 - General Translation of Zones

Section 0.2 - General Translation of Zones, provides that any reference to a zone under Orange Local Environmental Plan 2000 is to be a reference to the corresponding zones in the zone conversion table.

The table identifies that the B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone corresponds with the 2a Urban Residential and 3b Business Service zone for the purposes of the DCP.

CHAPTER 3 - GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Section 3.1 - Cumulative Impacts

Section 3.1 - Cumulative Impacts identifies that Council will consider not only the direct impacts of a particular development but also whether the development, when carried out in conjunction with other development in the locality, has a more significant environmental impact.


 

Given the proposed use is consistent with the objectives of the B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone and existing uses within the immediate locality of the subject property, it is considered that there would be no significant cumulative impact associated with the use of a neighbourhood shop.

CHAPTER 5 - GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Section 5.3 - Advertised Development

Section 5.3 - Advertised Development identifies that Council will give written and published notice of applications for advertised development as required by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations.

While the proposed development is not categorised as advertised development, Council’s Development Services Division determined to advertise the development application in the public interest given the nature of the proposed use.

Accordingly, the development application was advertised on Saturday, 18 March 2017 and exhibited between Monday, 20 March 2017 and Monday, 3 April 2017. At the end of that period one written submission was received. An assessment of the issues raised by the submitters is provided under the heading “Any Submissions Made in Accordance with the Act”.

CHAPTER 7 - GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Section 7.9 - 1 - Shops and Businesses in the Urban Residential Zone

Section 7.9-1 - Shops and Businesses in the Urban Residential Zone outlines planning outcomes for the use of shops and businesses in the former Urban Residential Zone, with an emphasis on ensuring that neighbourhood shopping centres complement predominately residential character.

·    Development complements the scale of residential development in the area and the predominant heights and form of residential development in the vicinity.

Not applicable. No new building works are proposed.

·    Business premises are located in neighbourhood business areas, existing prior to Orange LEP 2000.

The existing neighbourhood shopping complex was approved in 1981.

·    Development applications satisfactorily demonstrate that the development will not adversely affect the amenity of the residential locality as a consequence of the nature of the business, loading or unloading requirements, on-street parking, hours of operation etc.

In summary, it is considered that while the subject property is generally suitable for the use of a neighbourhood shop, the location of the Neighbourhood shop and increased sale of packaged liquor would have an unacceptable social impact. This is discussed in further detail below.


 

·    Neighbourhood-business centres are small scale to serve the needs of the residents of the locality. Neighbourhood-business centres have a maximum commercial floor space of 1,000m2 for the combined area of adjoining or adjacent shops and businesses, whether or not the premises are on the same land or adjacent to or in close proximity to each other.

Not applicable. The neighbourhood shopping complex is existing.

·    New neighbourhood business centres are located at or near collector intersections, with the buildings addressing the street frontage and rear parking to provide quality urban design.

Not applicable. The neighbourhood shopping complex is existing.

·    On-site parking is provided according to Section 15.4 of this Plan.

Car parking requirements are addressed in detail below, under Section 15.4 - Car parking requirements.

·    Advertising signage is limited to exempt development (ie, sign with a maximum area of 1 square metre) for home businesses or businesses in converted dwelling houses.

The proposed advertising signage is addressed in detail under State Environmental Planning Policy 64 – Advertising and Signage.

·    Advertising signage in neighbourhood centres is not intrusive to the character of the residential locality. No more than 15% of the street façade elevation area of premises in a neighbourhood centre involves signage.

The proposed advertising signage is addressed in detail under State Environmental Planning Policy 64 - Advertising and Signage.

CHAPTER 8 - DEVELOPMENT IN BUSINESS ZONES

Section 8.1 - Orange CBD

Section 8.1 - Orange CBD outlines planning outcomes for the Orange Central Business District with an emphasis on design, character, parking and loading. The relevant planning outcomes are addressed below:

·    Applications clearly demonstrate that the development will not detract from the role of the CBD as a regional centre.

The proposed development is not located within the CBD. Given the relatively small scale of the neighbourhood shop, it is considered that its location within an existing neighbourhood shopping complex will not detract from the role of the CBD as the regional centre for commerce and service.

·    Provision of adequate fire-safety measures and facilities for disabled persons (according to the BCA) is addressed at the application stage (relevant for all development but particularly important where converting residential buildings for business use).

Council’s Building Surveyor has commented that a fire safety certificate has been provided.


 

·    Heritage streetscapes are conserved and enhanced through adaptive reuse of heritage buildings, restrained advertising and landscaped gardens.

Not applicable. The subject property is not located within a heritage conservation area and does not adjoin a heritage item.

·    Areas on the main roads into and out of Orange (such as Molong Road and Bathurst Road) provide a high level of architectural design to enhance the visual character of the City entrances.

Not applicable.

·    Car parking is provided to meet demand either as onsite parking areas or through contributions towards public parking in and adjacent to the CBD.

Car parking is dealt with under Section 15.4 – Car parking requirements.

·    All sites contain an element of landscaping. Landscaping provided is of a bulk, scale and height relative to buildings nearest the front property boundary so as to provide beautification and visual relief to the built form proposed or existing on the site. The depth of the landscape bed at the site frontage is sufficient to accommodate the spread of plantings that meet the abovementioned outcomes but, where practicable, a minimum depth of 3m is provided. Plantings are designed to provide shade for parking areas, to break up large areas of bitumen, to enhance building preservation and to screen against noise.

Not applicable.

CHAPTER 15 - CAR PARKING

Section 15.1 - Background, Section 15.2 - Objectives and Section 15.3 - Relationship Between On-street and Off-street Car Parking

Sections 15.1-15.3 of Chapter 15 - Car Parking set out the background, objectives and relationship between on street and off street car parking in Orange. In particular, these sections highlight the importance of making provision for car parking in order that the demand for parking in the City is met, and ensuring that the design and layout of car parking facilitates the safe and effective use of off-street parking.

The appropriate assessment of car parking requirements is addressed under the following Sections.

Section 15.4 - Parking Requirements

Section 15.4 - Parking Requirements sets out the minimum parking requirements for specific land uses.

Given that the development application fundamentally seeks to reuse the subject property for a use for which it was originally approved, it is considered that car parking is in equilibrium. No further consideration of car parking requirements is required.


 

PROVISIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS s79C(1)(a)(iv)

Demolition of a Building (clause 92)

The proposal does not involve the demolition of a building.

Fire Safety Considerations (clause 93)

If Council is of a view to approve the proposed development, it is noted that Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor has recommended a condition of consent requiring that Council be provided with a Final Fire Safety Certificate in relation to essential fire or other applicable measures prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

Buildings to be Upgraded (clause 94)

The proposal does not involve the rebuilding, alteration, enlargement or extension of an existing building.

BASIX Commitments (clause 97A)

Not applicable.

THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT s79C(1)(b)

The key likely impact of the proposed development has been identified as a detrimental social impact on residents within the immediate locality/convenience shopping catchment of the proposed neighbourhood shop. The likely social impact is addressed below.

Social Impact

During the course of the assessment process, Council’s Development Services Department identified that the sale of packaged liquor had the potential to have a detrimental social impact on residents within the immediate locality (or convenience shopping catchment) of the Alpine Stores neighbourhood shopping complex.

In addition Council’s Community, Recreation and Cultural Services Department had previously objected to the issue of a liquor licence on the basis of negative social impact (see attached).

In particular, the objection identified that the subject property is located within close proximity of a low socio‑economic residential area, a day care centre, primary secondary schools and social housing. Further, the objection highlighted there is strong evidence that the density, proximity and availability of packaged liquor has a strong nexus with negative social impact, particularly domestic violence and long term negative health. The objection also noted that the availability of packaged liquor within the Orange LGA is signficant.

In the absence of any specific Council planning policy addressing social impact or the appropriate location of packaged liquor outlets, Council’s Development Services Department requested that the applicant provide a copy of the Community Impact Statement prepared to support the application for a liquor licence. The applicant subsequently provided a Social Impact Assessment (SIA) prepared specifically to support the development application.


 

The SIA was subsequently referred internally to Council’s Community, Recreation and Cultural Services Department for review. The Community, Recreation and Cultural Services Department advised that:

“The Community Impact Statement has relied on an assessment of Orange City as a whole but fails to account for the specific location of the proposed Liquor outlet.

The proposed outlet is located adjacent to residential housing.

There is a strong nexus between Alcohol and Alcohol related crime. For this reason the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research introduced four measures to monitor the impact of Alcohol in the community. These are:

·    Non Domestic related Violence (i.e. violence related to alcohol which is not DV – e.g. at a party, event etc.). The rate in Orange  is 277 per 100,000 people almost twice the state average of 144 per 100,000 – or 1.9 times state average

·    Alcohol Related Domestic Violence: The  rate in Orange is 188 per 100,000 against state average of 122 per 100,000 – or 1.5 times state average

·    Alcohol related Offensive behaviour. The rate in Orange is 188 per 100,000 against a state average of 88 per 100,000 – or 2.1 times state average

·    Alcohol Related Assault police. The rate in Orange is 43 per 100,000 against a state average of 18 – or 2.4 times state average

It is also worth noting that the most frequent venue for reported assaults in NSW is on residential premises accounting for 43% of all incidents.

The primary issue with the proposal is that it seeks to increase the availability of alcohol in a residential setting as clearly the applicant considers it will sell alcohol to the immediate community.

The Community Impact Statement also acknowledges Orange is already well serviced with liquor outlets.

Following further discussion with Council’s Community, Recreation and Cultural Services Department, a supplementary response was provided stating:

The proposed introduction of increased packaged Alcohol within easy walking distance of residences increases its availability and likely increased consumption.

There is a strong relationship between alcohol and crime. Articles and research on this subject can be found at http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/BB/AB01.pdf.

As detailed in this paper one of the important findings from this study was that the offences of assault, malicious damage to property and offensive behaviour were found to be more common in postcodes that had a higher alcohol sales volume. Furthermore, all four alcohol types investigated (beer, low-alcohol beer, wine and spirits) were found to be equally good predictors of crime rates.

This research also indicated that there was a significant positive correlation between alcohol sales through off-licences (purchases through liquor stores) and both malicious damage to property and offensive behaviour incidents. “Stevenson, R.J. 1996, The Impact of Alcohol Sales on Violent Crime, Property Destruction and Public Disorder”

Given the proposed location of the Liquor store and the likely negative impact from increased Liquor sales I am unable to support the application.”

Based on the foregoing, it is understood that it is likely that the proposed development, specifically the sale of packaged liquor, will have a significant and detrimental social impact. In particular, it is noted that the subject property is located within close proximity of a low socio-economic area of Orange and that the increased availability of packaged liquor within easy walking distance of residents will likely result in an increase in alcohol related crime.

On the basis that Council’s Community, Recreation and Cultural Services Department has advised that it cannot support the development, it is considered that the proposed development should be refused.

THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE s79C(1)(c)

Based on the foregoing assessment of social impact, it is considered that while a Neighbourhood shop is likely to be a suitable use of the subject property, the sale of packaged liquor is likely to have a significant detrimental impact. Accordingly, it is considered that the subject property is not suitable for the proposed development.

ANY SUBMISSIONS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT s79C(1)(d)

While the proposed development is not defined as advertised development under the provisions of the LEP, Council’s Development Services Division determined to advertise the development application in the public interest, given the nature of the proposed use (ie sale of packaged liquor) and its proximity to residential properties.

 

Accordingly, the development application was advertised on Saturday, 18 March 2017 and exhibited between Monday, 20 March 2017 and Monday, 3 April 2017. At the end of that period one written submission was received. The submission was accompanied by a petition.

The issues raised in the submission include the following:

·    the proximity of the proposed Neighbourhood shop to a child care facility is unacceptable

·    the sale of packaged liquor would have a detrimental impact on nearby residential areas where assaults, ‘break-ins’ and other anti-social behaviour is prevalent

·    the sale of liquor would result in an increased likelihood of ‘break-ins’ within the subject property and surrounding areas

·    local residents would purchase cheap packaged liquor, such as cask wine, rather than providing food for their family

·    the sale of liquor would result in increased pollution due to people drinking within the surrounding street network and disposing bottles within house yards and the street

·    the sale of liquor would result in increased risk of damage to property and assaults due to people drinking within the local street network, including detrimental impacts on residents and the local childcare centre.

Notably, a number of issues raised in the submission are similar, or related, to those outlined by Council’s Community, Recreation and Cultural Services Department. As the Community, Recreation and Cultural Services Department has indicated that it cannot support the proposed development, it is considered that no further detailed discussion is required. Notwithstanding, this is not to suggest that those other issues raised in the submission are not legitimate.

Other - NSW Police

Given that the proposed development involves the sale of packaged liquor, the development application was referred to the NSW Police for comment in accordance with Council’s requirements to consider the likely impacts of the proposed development. Comments received are generally taken to address the principles for minimising crime.

The comments received from the NSW Police included:

“Police attached to the Canobolas Local Area Command have no objection to the application however would make the following submission on two aspects.

1        In relation to external signage - Police would oppose the external advertisement or promotion of liquor products.  As such police would request that Council consider not approving the Proposed External Signage relating to promoting products or 'lifestyle' images, limiting external signage to 'Bottle O' Branding only as per Figure 2 and 3, pages 10 of 32 and 11 of 32 respectively.

2        In relation to access - Police would request Council consider restricting access to the premises to 'One entry/exit point' to reduce the risk of theft and supply of liquor to minors.”

 

In relation to proposed signage, it is noted that an amended plan submitted to Council removed the originally proposed ‘lifestyle’ signage. The proposed signage still has five separate spaces for promotional content. This recommendation would be taken into consideration in the event that Council staff were required to liaise with the applicant regarding the design of a wall sign.

In relation to access, it is considered if Council were of a view to approve the proposed development, a condition of consent could be applied restricting customer access to the car park only. In this regard, Council staff note that if access to the proposed Neighbourhood shop was restricted to internal access from the existing Foodworks Supermarket it would be necessary to reassess whether the proposed use could still be characterised as a Neighbourhood shop. If the use was no longer able to be characterised as a Neighbourhood shop, it may potentially be a prohibited use.

PUBLIC INTEREST s79C(1)(e)

As discussed in the body of this report, it is considered that the proposed development is not in the public interest, on the basis that it is likely to have a significant and detrimental impact.


 

SUMMARY

Council's consent is sought for the use of a Neighbourhood Shop at Tenancy 7 of the neighbourhood shopping complex at 175–181 Dalton Street, Orange. The proposed development is permissible with the consent of Council. A Section 79C assessment of the development indicates that the development is likely to a significant and detrimental social impact.

The foregoing assessment identifies that the proposed development should be refused on the following grounds:

1        Unacceptable social impact and not in the public interest.

1.1     Unacceptable social impact by reason of the subject property being located in close proximity to residential housing.

1.2     The sale of packaged liquor within walking distance of residents likely resulting in an increase in alcohol related crime.

 

Attachments

1          Notice of Refusal, D17/31821

2          Plans, D17/31051

3          Submission, D17/31053

  


Planning and Development Committee                                                               6 June 2017

2.3                       Development Application DA 245/2016(1) - 6/175 and 7/175 Dalton Street

Attachment 1      Notice of Refusal

 

OrangeCityCouncilNEW#45524E (2)

ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

 

Development Application No DA 245/2016(1)

 

NA17/                                                                                               Container PR3426

 

 

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION

OF A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

issued under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Section 81(1)

 

Development Application

 

 Applicant Name:

Mr P Patel

 Applicant Address:

C/- Anthony Daintith Town Planning

PO Box 1975

ORANGE  NSW  2800

 Land to Be Developed:

Lots 6 and 7 SP 33395 - 6/175 and 7/175 Dalton Street, Orange

 Proposed Development:

Neighbourhood Shop (internal alterations) and Advertising Sign

 

 

Building Code of Australia

 Building Classification:

 

Not applicable

 

 

Determination

 

 Made On:

6 June 2017

 Determination:

APPLICATION REFUSED

 

 

Reason(s) for Refusal:

1      Unacceptable social impact which is not in the public interest.

1.1   Unacceptable social impact by reason of the subject property being located in close proximity of a low socio-economic area of Orange.

1.2   The sale of packaged liquor within walking distance of residents likely resulting in an increase in alcohol related crime.

 

 

Right of Appeal:

Applicant:

If you are dissatisfied with this decision, Section 97 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 gives you the right to appeal to the Land and Environment Court within 6 months after the date on which you receive this notice.

* Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 does not apply to the determination of a development application for State significant development or local designated development that has been the subject of a Commission of Inquiry.

Objector:

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 does not give a right of appeal against this determination to an objector.

 

 

Signed:

On behalf of the consent authority:

 

 

Signature:

 

 

Name:

 

DAVID WADDELL - DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

 

Date:

 

7 June 2017

 



Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.3                       Development Application DA 245/2016(1) - 6/175 and 7/175 Dalton Street

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator



Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.3                       Development Application DA 245/2016(1) - 6/175 and 7/175 Dalton Street

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                         6 June 2017

2.3                       Development Application DA 245/2016(1) - 6/175 and 7/175 Dalton Street

Attachment 3      Submission

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                      6 June 2017

 

 

2.4     Development Application DA 113/2017(1) - 38-44 Bathurst Road

TRIM REFERENCE:        2017/1001

AUTHOR:                       Kelly Walker, Town Planner    

 

 

EXECUTIVE Summary

Application lodged

11 April 2017

Applicant/s

John Davis Motors

Owner/s

John Davis Superannuation Fund Pty Ltd

Land description

Lot 1 DP 507837 - 38-44 Bathurst Road, Orange

Proposed land use

Vehicle Sales or Hire Premises (alterations and additions to existing building) and Signage

Value of proposed development

$300,000

Council's consent is sought to refurbish the existing Volvo Showroom at John Davis Motors, at Lot 1 DP 507837, known as 38-44 Bathurst Road, Orange. The proposal involves upgrading the external appearance of the existing showroom building, and replacing the Volvo signs on the building and the pylon sign at the site frontage.

The proposal does not alter any other aspects of the existing operation of John Davis Motors, such as the site layout, display areas, access and car parking arrangements, operational arrangements etc.

Concerns were initially raised with the applicant in regards to the proposed 7.14m high pylon sign, which overhung the site boundary above the footpath, and exceeded the height of other signage on the site and within the surrounding area. The applicant was requested to consider amending the plans to address these issues. Revised plans have been submitted which sets the pylon sign back within the site, and reduces its height to 6.5m. These amendments ensure that the proposal will not adversely impact on heritage values of the nearby listed buildings and conservation area, the streetscape, and visual amenity of the surrounding area. It is recommended that Council supports the application.

The application comes to the Planning and Development Committee as the premises is owned by a Councillor.

DECISION FRAMEWORK

Development in Orange is governed by two key documents Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 and Orange Development Control Plan 2004. In addition the Infill Guidelines are used to guide development, particularly in the heritage conservation areas and around heritage items.

Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 – the LEP should be considered by Council to be a definitive document. LEPs govern the types of development that are permissible or prohibited in different parts of the City and also provide some assessment criteria in specific circumstances. Uses are either permissible or not - there are no grey areas in terms of permissibility. The objectives of each zoning and indeed the aims of the LEP itself are, however, open to interpretation and can be used to guide decision making around appropriateness of development.


 

Orange Development Control Plan 2004 – the DCP guides development. In general it is a performance based document rather than prescriptive in nature - its purpose is to guide development. The Land and Environment Court tends to view it as such. In each area of interest there are often guidelines used. These guidelines indicate ways of achieving the planning outcomes. It is thus recognised that there may also be other solutions of merit. All design solutions are considered on merit by planning and building staff. Applications should clearly demonstrate how the planning outcomes are being met where alternative design solutions are proposed. So one can see that the DCP gives leeway for developers and architects to use design to achieve the outcome in other ways if they can. Stating that DCP guidelines are inflexible can be misleading.

In the case of DA 113/2017(1) there are considered to be no significant issues. Staff consider the renovations to be an improvement to the current buildings and that they do not present an impact of significance to any nearby heritage items. In the case of signage the applicant has amended their signage in accordance with the recommendations of staff during the process, and the resultant signage height is considered acceptable.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “13.4 Our Environment – Monitor and enforce regulations relating to City amenity”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

 

Recommendation

That Council consents to development application DA 113/2017(1) for Vehicle Sales or Hire Premises (alterations and additions to existing building) and Signage at Lot 1 DP 507837 - 38-44 Bathurst Road, Orange pursuant to the conditions of consent in the attached Notice of Approval.

 

 

further considerations

Consideration has been given to the recommendation’s impact on Council’s service delivery; image and reputation; political; environmental; health and safety; employees; stakeholders and project management; and no further implications or risks have been identified.


 

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

THE APPLICATION

Council's consent is sought to refurbish the existing Volvo Showroom at John Davis Motors, at Lot 1 DP 507837, known as 38-44 Bathurst Road, Orange.

THE PROPOSAL

The proposal involves upgrading the external appearance of the Volvo showroom building and signage as follows:

·   application of translucent cladding (polycarbonate by ‘Danpalon’) to the external walls of the building, including setting the cladding forward of the front wall of the office wing to enclose the existing path between the offices and showroom, and extend the parapet level of the office wing by 0.785m, and the showroom wing by 2.685m

·   application of timber cladding around the entry portals

·   remove some internal walls to provide a more open plan layout

·   replacement of four fascia signs, including three ‘Volvo’ signs and one ‘Suzuki’ sign, all internally illuminated

·   replacement pylon sign along site frontage with ‘Volvo’ wordmark/logo and internally illuminated.

The proposal does not alter any other aspects of the existing operation of John Davis Motors, such as the site layout, display areas, access and car parking and operational arrangements etc.

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

Section 5A Assessment

In the administration of Sections 78A, 79B, 79C, 111 and 112, the provisions of Section 5A must be taken into account for every development application in deciding whether there is likely to be a significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats. This section includes a requirement to consider any adopted assessment guidelines, which means assessment guidelines issued and in force under section 94A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Assessment guidelines are in force (see DECC-W “Threatened Species Assessment Guidelines - The Assessment of Significance”) which requires consent authority to adopt the precautionary principle in its assessment.

In this instance, site inspection reveals that the subject property has no biodiversity or habitat value.

Section 79C

Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires Council to consider various matters, of which those pertaining to the application are listed below.


 

PROVISIONS OF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT s79C(1)(a)(i)

Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

Part 1 - Preliminary

Clause 1.2 - Aims of Plan

The broad aims of the LEP are set out under subclause 2. Those relevant to the application are as follows:

(a)     to encourage development which complements and enhances the unique character of Orange as a major regional centre boasting a diverse economy and offering an attractive regional lifestyle

(b)     to provide for a range of development opportunities that contribute to the social, economic and environmental resources of Orange in a way that allows present and future generations to meet their needs by implementing the principles for ecologically sustainable development

(f)      to recognise and manage valued environmental heritage, landscape and scenic features of Orange.

The application is considered to be consistent with these aims, in particular the proposal seeks to improve the visual appearance of an existing business that will not adversely impact on the nearby heritage conservation area.

Clause 1.6 - Consent Authority

This clause establishes that, subject to the Act, Council is the consent authority for applications made under the LEP.

Clause 1.9A - Suspension of Covenants, Agreements and Instruments

This clause provides that covenants, agreements and other instruments which seek to restrict the carrying out of development do not apply with the following exceptions.

·    covenants imposed or required by Council

·    prescribed instruments under Section 183A of the Crown Lands Act 1989

·    any conservation agreement under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974

·    any trust agreement under the Nature Conservation Trust Act 2001

·    any property vegetation plan under the Native Vegetation Act 2003

·    any biobanking agreement under Part 7A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

·    any planning agreement under Division 6 of Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Council staff are not aware of the title of the subject property being affected by any of the above.


 

Mapping

The subject site is identified on the LEP maps in the following manner:

Land Zoning Map:

Land zoned Zone B6 Enterprise Corridor

Lot Size Map:

No Minimum Lot Size

Heritage Map:

Not a heritage item or conservation area, but opposite heritage conservation area, and near listed buildings

Height of Buildings Map:

Building height limit 12m

Floor Space Ratio Map:

Floor space limit 1.5:1

Terrestrial Biodiversity Map:

No biodiversity sensitivity on the site

Groundwater Vulnerability Map:

Ground water vulnerable

Drinking Water Catchment Map:

Not within the drinking water catchment

Watercourse Map:

Not within or affecting a defined watercourse

Urban Release Area Map:

Not within an urban release area

Obstacle Limitation Surface Map:

No restriction on building siting or construction

Additional Permitted Uses Map:

No additional permitted use applies

Those matters that are of relevance are addressed in detail in the body of this report.

Part 2 - Permitted or Prohibited Development

Land Use Zones

The subject site is located within the B6 Enterprise Corridor zone. The proposed development is defined as a ‘vehicle sales or hire premises’ under LEP 2011, which is defined as follows:

vehicle sales or hire premises means a building or place used for the display, sale or hire of motor vehicles, caravans, boats, trailers, agricultural machinery and the like, whether or not accessories are sold or displayed there.

A ‘vehicle sales or hire premises’ and a ‘vehicle repair station’ are permitted with consent in the B6 Enterprise Corridor zone.

Clause 2.3 of LEP 2011 references the Land Use Table and Objectives for each zone in LEP 2011. These objectives for land zoned B6 Enterprise Corridor are as follows:

·    to promote businesses along main roads and to encourage a mix of compatible uses

·    to provide a range of employment uses (including business, office, retail and light industrial uses)

·    to maintain the economic strength of centres by limiting retailing activity

·    to provide for residential uses, but only as part of a mixed use development.

The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the objectives set out for the zone, in particular the proposal seeks to improve the function of an existing business adjacent to the main road, and does not detract from the main retail centres in the City, where the Enterprise Corridor is the ideal location for this type of activity.


 

Part 3 - Exempt and Complying Development

The application is not exempt or complying development.

Part 4 - Principal Development Standards

Clause 4.3 - Height of Buildings

This clause limits the height of buildings (HoB) on land identified on the Height of Buildings Map. The subject land is identified on the Map as having a HoB limit of 12m. The maximum height of the proposed parapet at its highest point is 6.625m2, and is therefore consistent with the established height limit.

Clause 4.4 - Floor Space Ratio

This clause limits the floor space ratio (FSR) permitted on land identified on the Floor Space Ratio Map. The subject land is identified on the Map as having an FSR of 1.5:1. The site area has been calculated under clause 4.5 as 1,080m2, meaning the site may have up to 1,620m2 of floor space. The proposal does not seek to increase the floor area of the building on site, where the existing walkway already consists of slab and roof, and an exterior wall will be added to the eastern side to enclose it. The proposal is therefore consistent with the FSR requirements.

Part 5 - Miscellaneous Provisions

5.10 - Heritage Conservation

This clause states in part:

(4)     Effect of Proposed Development on Heritage Significance

          The consent authority must, before granting consent under this clause in respect of a heritage item or heritage conservation area, consider the effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the item or area concerned. This subclause applies regardless of whether a heritage management document is prepared under subclause (5) or a heritage conservation management plan is submitted under subclause (6).

The subject site is within the setting of buildings and a park which are listed heritage items described in Schedule 5 of the LEP. The site is also opposite a heritage conservation area, as shown on the LEP Heritage Map. Council’s Heritage Inventory states the following about the listed buildings and park:

Memory Park – Bathurst Road, corner Icely Road

“Created by Council out of left over flood affected lands between two subdivided areas of the City. An important visual and historic landscape on the main road and one of the key entry points to the City, the park includes mature tree planting, a watercourse and a range of civic improvements valued by the local community but poorly managed due to ad hoc planning and a lack of an overall design”.


 

Bowen Terrace – numbers 3-25 Bathurst Road

“A substantial rendered brick terrace building and one of the largest in regional NSW when completed in 1876, the group of 12 terraces by local Architect John Hale for Thomas Bowen, are a landmark on the Highway entering the City of Orange. The Italianate style building retains the distinctive features and character, complements the streetscape and contributes to the Conservation Area as a Heritage item of State significance. The creation of such a large speculative housing scheme indicates the wealth and prosperity which supported Orange circa 1900”. Bowen Terrace is also on the State Heritage Register.

Five Ways Uniting Church – Bathurst Rd, corner Summer Street East

“The former Congregational Church is believed to be site of first protestant combined service in Orange, held by a visiting minister from Carcoar. Later addition of steeple added as soldiers' memorial and currently the building retains an appropriate appearance, complements the landmark location and contributes to the Conservation Area as a Heritage Item. The Church marks the consolidation of the Congregational denomination at one of the most prominent sites on the Eastern approach to Orange”.

The proposal involves an upgrade of the building and signs to provide a more modern appearance to match the other showroom buildings in the John Davis Motors precinct, and to include recently updated ‘Volvo’ branding. It is considered that the colours and materials proposed will improve the visual appearance existing showroom building, and its modern design is considered appropriate in this setting, where it will not detract from the conservation area, or the nearby listed buildings.

The proposed fascia signage are considered to be consistent with the signs which they are to replace, as well as the theme of business identification signage in the locality. The replacement pylon sign with an originally proposed height of 7.14m was considerably higher than the existing Volvo pylon sign it would replace, and higher than other signage in the surrounding area. To ensure that the proposed sign would not adversely impact on heritage values of the nearby listed buildings and conservation area, the streetscape, and visual amenity of the surrounding area, the applicant has reduced the height of the pylon sign to 6.5m. This matches the highest sign in the John Davis Motors precinct, and surrounding area, being the Renault sign. The reduction in height also ensures that the view corridor of the nearby listed buildings is protected, being Bowen Terrace, which are State significant listed buildings, and the Five Ways Uniting Church at the end of the terrace. Overall, the signs will not detract from the amenity and visual quality of the heritage setting. A full assessment of the signs is discussed later in this report under the ‘State Environmental Planning Policy 64 - Advertising and Signage’ Schedule 1 Assessment.

Part 6 - Urban Release Area

Not relevant to the application. The subject site is not located in an Urban Release Area.


 

Part 7 - Additional Local Provisions

7.3 - Stormwater Management

This clause applies to all industrial, commercial and residential zones and requires that Council be satisfied that the proposal:

(a)     is designed to maximise the use of water permeable surfaces on the land having regard to the soil characteristics affecting onsite infiltration of water

(b)     includes, where practical, onsite stormwater retention for use as an alternative supply to mains water, groundwater or river water; and

(c)     avoids any significant impacts of stormwater runoff on adjoining downstream properties, native bushland and receiving waters, or if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided, minimises and mitigates the impact.

The proposal does not involve any increase in impermeable areas on the site, where the total roof area will remain unchanged. It is therefore considered that the post development runoff levels will not exceed the predevelopment levels, and the proposal will not adversely impact on stormwater.

7.6 - Groundwater Vulnerability

This clause seeks to protect hydrological functions of groundwater systems and protect resources from both depletion and contamination. Orange has a high water table and large areas of the LGA, including the subject site, are identified with “Groundwater Vulnerability” on the Groundwater Vulnerability Map. This requires that Council consider:

(a)     whether or not the development (including any onsite storage or disposal of solid or liquid waste and chemicals) is likely to cause any groundwater contamination or have any adverse effect on groundwater dependent ecosystems, and

(b)     the cumulative impact (including the impact on nearby groundwater extraction for potable water supply or stock water supply) of the development and any other existing development on groundwater.

Furthermore consent may not be granted unless Council is satisfied that:

(a)     the development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid any significant adverse environmental impact, or

(b)     if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided - the development is designed, sited and will be managed to minimise that impact,

(c)     if that impact cannot be minimised - the development will be managed to mitigate that impact.

The proposal is not anticipated to involve the discharge of toxic or noxious substances and is therefore unlikely to contaminate the groundwater or related ecosystems. The proposal does not involve extraction of groundwater and will therefore not contribute to groundwater depletion. The design and siting of the proposal avoids impacts on groundwater and is therefore considered acceptable.


 

Clause 7.11 - Essential Services

Clause 7.11 applies to this application. This clause states:

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

(a)     the supply of water,

(b)     the supply of electricity,

(c)     the disposal and management of sewage,

(d)     storm water drainage or on-site conservation,

(e)     suitable road access.

In consideration of this clause, all utility services are available to the site and adequate for the proposed alterations.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICIES

State Environmental Planning Policy Infrastructure 2007 – Clause 101 Development with frontage to classified road

Given that the subject land has frontage to a classified road (Mitchell Highway), Clause 101 of State Environmental Planning Policy Infrastructure 2007 (the SEPP) is applicable and provides as follows:

(1)     The objectives of this clause are:

(a)     to ensure that new development does not compromise the effective and ongoing operation and function of classified roads, and

(b)     to prevent or reduce the potential impact of traffic noise and vehicle emission on development adjacent to classified roads.

(2)     The consent authority must not grant consent to development on land that has a frontage to a classified road unless it is satisfied that:

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

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

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

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

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

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

The proposal does not alter the exiting access arrangements that serve the site, nor will it alter the anticipated traffic movements to and from the site, and as such, it consistent with the requirements of the SEPP.

It is also noted that the proposal is not considered ‘traffic generating development’ as set out in Schedule 3 of the SEPP, as it does not involve a motor showroom with capacity for more than 50 cars, and does not alter the overall John Davis Motors sites in regards to capacity. As such, the application does not need to be referred to the RMS (Roads and Maritime). Traffic and parking requirements were assessed under previous consents to establish the original showrooms (in 1982 and 1983), and carry out subsequent additions, alterations, and subdivisions. It is not considered necessary to undertake further traffic and car parking assessments as part of this application, as the proposal does not seek to alter existing arrangements, nor intensify the use or increase the demand for car parking. The proposal is consistent with requirements set out in previous consents.

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land is applicable. Pursuant to Clause 7, Council must consider whether the land is contaminated and if remediation is required to enable the proposed development to be carried out. Given the nature of the proposal involving only cosmetic changes to the existing building and replacement signage, the land is considered to be suitable in its current state for the proposed development. Contamination investigation and site remediation are not required for the proposal.

It is noted that the site contains two decommissioned underground storage tanks. A Validation Assessment was carried out by Envirowest Consulting (dated August 2010), which was reviewed by Council’s Manger Building and Environment, and Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). It was concluded that there was no records to demonstrate that the tanks were causing environmental harm; the radar study by Envirowest Consulting suggested that decommissioning had previously been undertaken to the standards appropriate at the time; and that it was not necessary to require removal of the tanks, or carry out any further action.

State Environmental Planning Policy 64 - Advertising and Signage

State Environmental Planning Policy 64 - Advertising and Signage applies to the subject land. The applicant is seeking consent for replacement signs as follows:

-    replacement of two ‘Volvo’ building signs on road and south facing fascia, using blue translucent cladding (Danpalon, tinted blue) with ‘Volvo’ wordmark/logo, each measuring 3.6m by 4.0m (see Figure 1 below)

-    replacement pylon sign along site frontage with ‘Volvo’ wordmark/logo, where the ‘Volvo’ projecting part measures 4.78m by 1.2m, and the pylon measures 2.65m wide by 6.5m in height (see Figure 1 below)

-    replacement of ‘John Davis’ lettering on road facing fascia with ‘Orange Volvo’ lettering, measuring 3.24m by 0.38m

-    replacement of ‘Suzuki’ sign on north facing fascia, measuring 3.6m by 0.9m.

Figure 1 - proposed pylon and fascia signs (Source Architects, drawing DA03)

All signs will be internally illuminated.

3 - Aims, objectives etc

(1)     This Policy aims:

(a)     to ensure that signage (including advertising):

(i)      is compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area, and

(ii)     provides effective communication in suitable locations, and

(iii)    is of high quality design and finish, and

(b)     to regulate signage (but not content) under Part 4 of the Act, and

(c)     to provide time-limited consents for the display of certain advertisements, and

(d)     to regulate the display of advertisements in transport corridors, and

(e)     to ensure that public benefits may be derived from advertising in and adjacent to transport corridors.

(2)     This Policy does not regulate the content of signage and does not require consent for a change in the content of signage.

The development is consistent with the aims, objectives etc of the plan.

4 - Definitions

Pursuant to clause 4 the proposed signage is defined as business identification signage under LEP 2011.

8 - Granting of Consent to Signage

A consent authority must not grant development consent to an application to display signage unless the consent authority is satisfied:

(a)     that the signage is consistent with the objectives of this Policy as set out in clause 3(1)(a), and

(b)     that the signage the subject of the application satisfies the assessment criteria specified in Schedule 1.

The signage is consistent with the aims, objectives, etc of the plan and a Schedule 1 assessment is undertaken below.

Schedule 1 Assessment

Character of the Area

·    Is the proposal compatible with the existing or desired future character of the area or locality in which it is proposed to be located?

·    Is the proposal consistent with a particular theme for outdoor advertising in the area or locality?

The area is characterised through the existing development within the vicinity of the subject land, which contains a mix of uses including the John Davis Motors showrooms, residential dwellings, the Department of Primary Industries offices, food and drink premises, and a few commercial premises.

Most of the outdoor advertising in the area is contained within the John Davis Motors site, including freestanding pylon signs, flush wall signs and window signs. Pizza Hut to the north and Interrelate to the southeast each have a modest freestanding sign.

The proposed fascia signage are considered to be consistent with the signs which they are to replace, as well as the theme of business identification signage in the locality. A condition of consent is recommended that all other signage within the subject ‘Volvo’ site are removed to ensure there is no proliferation of signage.

The replacement pylon sign with an originally proposed height of 7.14m was considered to be inconsistent with the theme of signage in the area, being considerably higher than the existing Volvo pylon sign it is to replace (previously approved and built at 6.2m), higher than other John Davis Motors pylon signage (being Suzuki at 6.38m, Mazda at 6.0m, and Renault at 6.5m), and higher than other signage in the surrounding area. To ensure that the proposed sign would not adversely impact on heritage values of the nearby listed buildings and conservation area, the streetscape, and visual amenity of the surrounding area, which includes residential dwellings, the applicant has reduced the height of the pylon sign to 6.5m, which matches the highest sign in the John Davis Motors precinct, and surrounding area, being the Renault sign.

Special Areas

·    Does the proposal detract from the amenity or visual quality of any environmentally sensitive areas, heritage areas, natural or other conservation areas, open space areas, waterways, rural landscapes or residential areas?

The subject land is considered to be a special area as it within the setting of listed heritage items of local and State significance, as well as directly opposite a heritage conservation area and residential dwellings. The proposed replacement fascia signs and reduced height pylon sign are considered appropriate within this setting. The reduction in height of the pylon sign ensures that the view corridor of the nearby listed buildings is protected, being Bowen Terrace, which are State significant listed buildings, and the Five Ways Uniting Church at the end of the terrace. Overall, the signs will not detract from the amenity and visual quality of the area, and are typical of other signage on the subject site.

Views and Vistas

·    Does the proposal obscure or compromise important views?

·    Does the proposal dominate the skyline and reduce the quality of vistas?

·    Does the proposal respect the viewing rights of other advertisers?

The proposed fascia signs will sit adjacent or flush to the external walls of the refurbished/reclad showroom, and therefore will not impact upon any views or vistas within the locality, and will respect the viewing rights of other signage. As mentioned above, the reduced height pylon sign will not compromise the view corridor towards heritage significant buildings, and at a similar height to other signage in the area, will not dominate the skyline or impact on the viewing rights of other advertisers.

Streetscape, Setting or Landscape

·    Is the scale, proportion and form of the proposal appropriate for the streetscape, setting or landscape?

·    Does the proposal contribute to the visual interest of the streetscape, setting or landscape?

·    Does the proposal reduce clutter by rationalising and simplifying existing advertising?

·    Does the proposal screen unsightliness?

·    Does the proposal protrude above buildings, structures or tree canopies in the area or locality?

·    Does the proposal require ongoing vegetation management?

The proposed signs will replace signs of similar scale and design, and are considered to be appropriate within the streetscape and wider landscape. This signage will appropriately identify the businesses, and update existing signage to match the recently updated ‘Volvo’ branding. The proposed signs will not protrude above any buildings, structures or tree canopies, and will not interfere with any vegetation management required on the site.

Site and Building

·    Is the proposal compatible with the scale, proportion and other characteristics of the site or building, or both, on which the proposed signage is to be located?

·    Does the proposal respect important features of the site or building, or both?

·    Does the proposal show innovation and imagination in its relationship to the site or building, or both?

The fascia signs are considered to be appropriate in terms of scale and proportions in relation to the existing building, as well as other buildings and signage on the site. Two of these signs have been designed to be integral to the design of the proposed refurbishment of the showroom building, where the ‘Volvo’ lettering will sit on a background using the same cladding as the rest of the building, but tinted blue to create a feature (as shown previously in Figure 1). The ‘Orange Volvo’ lettering and replacement ‘Suzuki’ signs can be placed on the new cladding in a way that it will not impact upon any architectural features of the building.

The reduced height of the proposed pylon sign is considered to be appropriate in scale and proportion in comparison to the existing buildings on the site, as well as the proposed refurbished ‘Volvo’ showroom, which will increase the parapet height of the building by approximately 500mm than existing. Overall, the revised signage will be commensurate with other John Davis Motors showroom signs across the site.

Associated Devices and Logos with Advertisements and Advertising Structures

·    Have any safety devices, platforms, lighting devices or logos been designed as an integral part of the signage or structure on which it is to be displayed?

The proposed signage does not include any safety devices, platforms, or lighting devices.

Illumination

·    Would illumination result in unacceptable glare?

·    Would illumination affect safety for pedestrians, vehicles or aircraft?

·    Would illumination detract from the amenity of any residence or other form of accommodation?

·    Can the intensity of the illumination be adjusted, if necessary?

·    Is the illumination subject to a curfew?

The applicant states that all of the proposed signage will be internally illuminated. The John Davis Motors sites already have a high ambient light level due to existing lighting on the site, existing illuminated signs and street lighting on Bathurst Road, and as such impacts from lighting from the proposed signage will be negligible. A condition of consent is recommended to ensure all lighting complies with the relevant standards for outdoor lighting.

Safety

·    Would the proposal reduce the safety for any public road?

·    Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians or bicyclists?

·    Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians, particularly children, by obscuring sightlines from public areas?

The proposed signs have been amended to be set back from the road and footpath, and therefore will not impact upon the safety of traffic, cyclists or pedestrians.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT THAT HAS BEEN PLACED ON EXHIBITION s79C(1)(a)(ii)

There are no draft environmental planning instruments that apply to the subject land or proposed development.

DESIGNATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not designated development.


 

PROVISIONS OF ANY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN s79C(1)(a)(iii)

Development Control Plan 2004

Development Control Plan 2004 (“the DCP”) applies to the subject land. An assessment of the proposed development against the relevant Planning Outcomes will be undertaken below.

Chapter 8 - Development in Business Zones

·    Applications clearly demonstrate that the development will not detract from the role of the CBD as a regional centre.

The proposed development relates to a well-established commercial operation. The proposal to refurbish the existing showroom and signage will not detract from the role of the CBD as the primary business centre in the City, and will improve the visual amenity of the main entrance corridor to the CBD.

·    Provision of adequate fire safety measures and facilities for disabled persons (according to the BCA) is addressed at the application stage (relevant for all development but particularly important where converting residential buildings for business use).

Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor notes that the proposed building additions can be facilitated within the existing fire safety measures, and that the specification of the new cladding and spread of flames will need to be determined at the Construction Certificate stage. This is discussed in greater detail later in this report.

·    Heritage streetscapes are conserved and enhanced through adaptive reuse of heritage buildings, restrained advertising and landscaped gardens.

·    Areas on the main roads into and out of Orange (such as Molong Road, Bathurst Road provide a high level of architectural design to enhance the visual character of the City entrances.

The proposal seeks to improve the visual appearance of the subject site by carrying out cosmetic changes to the external façade of the existing ‘Volvo’ showroom. Changes include replacement signage, the application of timber cladding around the entry portals, and the application of translucent cladding (polycarbonate by ‘Danpalon’) to the external walls of the building (see Figure 2). This also involves setting the cladding forward of the front wall of the office wing to enclose the existing path between the offices and showroom, as well as extend the parapet level of the office wing by 0.785m, and the showroom wing by 2.685m.

Figure 2 - 3D view of proposed cladding and signs (Source Architects, drawing DA00)

It is considered that the proposed refurbishment will improve the visual appearance of the existing building and site in a way that will not adversely affect the heritage setting or the wider streetscape, which is the main entrance into the CBD. Visual and heritage impacts of the proposed signage have been assessed previously in this report, and the pylon sign has been reduced in scale to ensure an appropriate visual appearance.

In particular, the modern design of showroom and signs are considered appropriate in this setting, and the translucent nature and colours of the proposed materials will ensure that the building is visually recessive and will not detract from the conservation area or the nearby listed buildings.

·    All sites contain an element of landscaping. Landscaping provided is of a bulk, scale and height relative to buildings nearest the front property boundary so as to provide beautification and visual relief to the built form proposed or existing on the site… Plantings are designed to provide shade for parking areas, to break of bitumen, to enhance building preservation and to screen against noise.

No changes are proposed to the existing landscaping on the site, which is considered to be scarce. However, it is not considered reasonable to require additional landscaping as part of this application, and there is little opportunity to provide for additional landscaping given the existing business occupies the majority of the site area.

Chapter 0 Interim Provisions - Planning Outcome 0.4-11 Transport Routes

·    The development provides a high standard of visual appeal to motorists, cyclists and pedestrians as well as adjoining property owners.

·    The visual appearance of the development, including any signage, lighting or other ancillary element, must not generate a distraction to motorists.

·    Any signage must not be animated whether by movement or flashing lights.

·    Where land has more than one street frontage the street with the lower volume of traffic is to provide the principal access to the development, subject to safety considerations.

·    Where access is provided onto an arterial road, distributor road or major collector road, the access point must have appropriate safe sight distances for the prevailing speed limit and clear and unimpeded entrance/exit signage must be displayed.

·    Where on-site customer parking is provided that is not immediately visible from a public road clear and unimpeded directional signage must be displayed.

·    Where the proposal is residential, or another noise sensitive form, appropriate noise mitigation measures to limit the development from traffic noise must be demonstrated.

The subject site has frontage to Bathurst Road. The visual impact of the proposed alterations and signage is appropriate within the view corridor formed by Bathurst Road as discussed in the LEP and SEPP 64 assessments above. No changes are proposed to the existing car parking and access arrangements. The siting and design of the proposed signs, as amended by the applicant, will ensure the safety, efficiency and function of the road is maintained.

Chapter 10 Special Uses and Roads Zones - Planning Outcome 10.3 Development Near Major Roads

·    Development on land fronting and visible from a major road or distributor road provides for quality design on the highway and/or distributor road through landscaping, building setbacks, façade design, external colours and materials and siting.

·    Direct access to major roads is limited and is constructed to the requirements of the relevant roads authority.

·    Commercial buildings adjoining a distributor road are setback from the property boundary by at least 10m.

·    Lighting and signage visible from a distributor road is not animated and is designed so as not to distract motorists beyond glance recognition.

These outcomes generally reiterate those discussed in the previous assessments above. It is noted that the proposed additions and alterations do not alter the existing building setbacks on the site.

Chapter 15 - Car Parking

According to Chapter 15 of DCP 2004, the minimum parking requirement is applicable to the net increase in parking demand generated by the development. Pursuant to the DCP, onsite parking is to be provided for motor showrooms at a rate of one space per 100m2 of site area, plus three spaces per work bay for vehicle servicing. Having regard to the DCP requirement, the submitted plans show that there is no increase in display or site area, and it is considered that the enclosure of the walkway does not constitute additional floor area. As such, the proposed development will not result in a net increase in parking demand. Furthermore, the proposal is consistent with requirements set out in previous consents.


 

Development Control Plan 2004 - Infill Guidelines

Development in a heritage setting needs to be assessed against Council’s Infill Guidelines. This policy is relevant to this application as the subject site is within a heritage setting, being adjacent to the heritage conservation area, as well as within the view corridor of State and locally listed buildings. The proposed additions, alterations, and signage are considered to be consistent with the guidelines in terms of character, human scale, form, siting, materials, colours and retaining existing landscaping, as discussed in the LEP, DCP, and SEPP 64 assessments above.

PROVISIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS s79C(1)(a)(iv)

Demolition of a Building (clause 92)

The proposal involves the demolition of internal walls within the existing building. Relevant conditions of consent in relation to demolition have been included in the attached draft Notice of Approval.

Fire Safety Considerations (clause 93)

The proposal does not involve a change of building use for an existing building, which currently complies with the Building Code of Australia (BCA). Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor notes that the proposed building additions can be facilitated within the existing fire safety measures, and that the specification of the new cladding and spread of flames will need to be determined at the Construction Certificate stage. Relevant conditions are attached.

Buildings to be Upgraded (clause 94)

The proposal involves the rebuilding, alteration, enlargement or extension of an existing building. Fire safety and access will need to be determined at the Construction Certificate stage.

THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT s79C(1)(b)

Visual Impacts

As previously addressed, the proposed refurbishment of the existing ‘Volvo’ building will not dominate nor detract from the heritage setting of listed buildings, parks and conservation areas, and will improve the visual appearance of Bathurst Road as the main entrance to the CBD. The reduction of the proposed pylon sign to 6.5m ensures that the proposed replacement signage will be similar in design and scale to those that they replace, as well as other signage on the John Davis Motors sites and wider area. The proposal has an acceptable level of design to achieve suitable presentation to the streetscape. The existing motor showroom buildings are a well-established component in this view corridor, with the proposed refurbished building satisfactorily integrating with the existing built form of John Davis Motors.


 

Traffic Impacts

The existing use of the site for vehicle sales represents a well-established component of the local traffic regime. The proposed refurbishment of the existing ‘Volvo’ showroom and signage is unlikely to alter traffic and car parking demand, as it seeks only to improve the visual appearance of the building and site. The proposal retains the existing access and car parking arrangements that serve the site, and will not conflict with existing vehicle parking, manoeuvring areas and travel paths through the site. Furthermore, the proposal is consistent with parking and access requirements set out in previous development consents for the sites. Therefore, traffic impacts associated with the development are considered to be acceptable.

Environmental Impacts

The subject land is highly modified and well established, with no significant vegetation, threatened species or ecological endangered communities or their habitats. The proposal does not involve processes that would impact on air or water quality in the locality. Adverse environmental impacts as a result of the proposal are therefore unlikely.

THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE s79C(1)(c)

There are no physical aspects relating to the site that would unreasonably constrain the proposed development. All utility services are available to the site and adequate for the proposed development. Any adjustment of utility services will be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the relevant supply authority, and a relevant condition of consent is attached.

ANY SUBMISSIONS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT s79C(1)(d)

The proposed development is not defined as advertised development under the provisions of the LEP and, as such, no formal exhibition of the application was required. No submissions have been received in relation to this application.

PUBLIC INTEREST s79C(1)(e)

The proposed development is considered to be of minor interest to the wider public due to the relatively localised nature of potential impacts. The proposal is not inconsistent with any relevant policy statements, planning studies, guidelines, etc that have not been considered in this assessment.

SUMMARY

The proposed development is permissible with the consent of Council. The proposed development complies with the relevant aims, objectives and provisions of the LEP. A Section 79C assessment of the development indicates that the development is acceptable in this instance. Attached is a draft Notice of Approval outlining a range of conditions considered appropriate to ensure that the development proceeds in an acceptable manner.


 

COMMENTS

The requirements of the Environmental Health and Building Surveyor and the Engineering Development Section are included in the attached Notice of Approval.

 

 

Attachments

1          Notice of Approval, D17/31446

2          Plans, D17/31098

 


Planning and Development Committee                                                               6 June 2017

2.4                       Development Application DA 113/2017(1) - 38-44 Bathurst Road

Attachment 1      Notice of Approval

 

OrangeCityCouncilNEW#45524E (2)

ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

 

Development Application No DA 113/2017(1)

 

NA17/                                                                                               Container PR1211

 

 

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION

OF A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

issued under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Section 81(1)

 

Development Application

 

  Applicant Name:

John Davis Motors

  Applicant Address:

C/- Peter Basha Planning and Development

PO Box 1827

ORANGE  NSW  2800

  Owner’s Name:

John Davis Superannuation Fund Pty Ltd

  Land to Be Developed:

Lot 1 DP 507837 - 38-44 Bathurst Road, Orange

  Proposed Development:

Vehicle Sales or Hire Premises (alterations and additions to existing building) and Signage

 

 

Building Code of Australia

 building classification:

 

As determined by certifier

 

 

Determination

 

  Made On:

6 June 2017

  Determination:

CONSENT GRANTED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS DESCRIBED BELOW:

 

 

Consent to Operate From:

6 June 2017

Consent to Lapse On:

6 June 2022

 

Terms of Approval

 

The reasons for the imposition of conditions are:

 

(1)      To ensure a quality urban design for the development which complements the surrounding environment.

(2)      To maintain neighbourhood amenity and character.

(3)      To ensure compliance with relevant statutory requirements.

(4)      To prevent the proposed development having a detrimental effect on adjoining land uses.

(5)      To ensure the utility services are available to the site and adequate for the development.

 

 

 

 

Conditions

 

(1)      The development must be carried out in accordance with:

 

(a)      Plan/s numbered DA00 Rev 4 dated 03.04.17; DA01-02 Rev 6 dated 26.04.17; DA03 Rev 6, DA04 Rev 4, and DA05 Rev 5 dated 16.05.17, prepared by Source Architects (6 sheets); and  Drawing numbers 17001DA, sheets 1-3, dated 30.03.2017, prepared by Peter Basha Planning and Development (3 sheets)


 

(b)      statements of environmental effects or other similar associated documents that form part of the approval

 

as amended in accordance with any conditions of this consent.

 

 

PRESCRIBED CONDITIONS

 

(2)      All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

(3)      A sign is to be erected in a prominent position on any site on which building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out:

(a)      showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work, and

(b)      showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and

(c)      stating that unauthorised entry to the site is prohibited.

Any such sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out.

 

 

PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING

 

(4)      A Construction Certificate application is required to be submitted to, and issued by Council/Accredited Certifier prior to any excavation or building works being carried out onsite.

 

 

DURING CONSTRUCTION/SITEWORKS

 

(5)      All construction/demolition work on the site is to be carried out between the hours of 7am and 6pm Monday to Friday inclusive, 7am to 5pm Saturdays and 8am to 5pm Sundays and Public Holidays. Written approval must be obtained from the General Manager of Orange City Council to vary these hours.

 

(6)      All materials on site or being delivered to the site are to be contained within the site. The requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 are to be complied with when placing/stockpiling loose material or when disposing of waste products or during any other activities likely to pollute drains or watercourses.

 

(7)      Building demolition is to be carried out in accordance with Australian Standard 2601:2001 - The Demolition of Structures and the requirements of the NSW WorkCover Authority.

 

(8)      Any adjustments to existing utility services that are made necessary by this development proceeding are to be at the full cost of the developer.

 

 

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

 

(9)      No person is to use or occupy the building or alteration that is the subject of this approval without the prior issuing of an Occupation Certificate.

 

(10)    The owner of the building/s must cause the Council to be given a Final Fire Safety Certificate on completion of the building in relation to essential fire or other safety measures included in the schedule attached to this approval.

 

(11)    Prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, all existing signage on the site must be removed (having been replaced with the signage hereby approved).


 

(12)    All of the foregoing conditions are to be at the full cost of the developer and to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code, unless specifically stated otherwise. All work required by the foregoing conditions is to be completed prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, unless stated otherwise.

 

 

MATTERS FOR THE ONGOING PERFORMANCE AND OPERATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT

 

(13)    Outdoor lighting, including illumination of signage, must be in accordance with the Australian Standard 4282-1997 Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.

 

(14)    The owner is required to provide to Council and to the NSW Fire Commissioner an Annual Fire Safety Statement in respect of the fire-safety measures, as required by Clause 177 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

 

 

 

Other Approvals

 

(1)      Local Government Act 1993 approvals granted under Section 68.

 

          Alterations to stormwater

 

(2)      General terms of other approvals integrated as part of this consent.

 

          (1)      All stormwater is to be disposed of in a manner suitable to the site.

 

 

 

Right of Appeal

 

If you are dissatisfied with this decision, Section 97 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 gives you the right to appeal to the Land and Environment Court within 6 months after the date on which you receive this notice.

* Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 does not apply to the determination of a development application for State significant development or local designated development that has been the subject of a Commission of Inquiry.

 

 

  Disability Discrimination Act 1992:

This application has been assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. No guarantee is given that the proposal complies with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992.

 

The applicant/owner is responsible to ensure compliance with this and other anti-discrimination legislation.

 

The Disability Discrimination Act covers disabilities not catered for in the minimum standards called up in the Building Code of Australia which references AS1428.1 - "Design for Access and Mobility". AS1428 Parts 2, 3 and 4 provides the most comprehensive technical guidance under the Disability Discrimination Act currently available in Australia.

 

 

  Disclaimer - S88B Restrictions on the Use of Land:

The applicant should note that there could be covenants in favour of persons other than Council restricting what may be built or done upon the subject land. The applicant is advised to check the position before commencing any work.


 

 

 

Signed:

On behalf of the consent authority ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

 

 

Signature:

 

 

Name:

 

DAVID WADDELL - DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

 

Date:

 

6 June 2017

 


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.4                       Development Application DA 113/2017(1) - 38-44 Bathurst Road

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                      6 June 2017

 

 

2.5     Development Application DA 123/2017(1) - 136 Aerodrome Road

TRIM REFERENCE:        2017/1003

AUTHOR:                       Daniel Drum, Town Planner    

 

 

EXECUTIVE Summary

Application lodged

18 April 2017

Applicant/s

Tubb & Associates

Owner/s

Orange City Council

Land description

Lot 200 DP 1195298 - 136 Aerodrome Road, Huntley

Proposed land use

Air Transport Facility (bulk fuel tank and refuelling facility)

Value of proposed development

$212,344

Council's consent is sought to establish a refuelling facility in association with the existing NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility located at 136 Aerodrome Road, Huntley, being Lot 200 DP 1195298 (the ‘subject property’).

The NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility forms one section of the orange regional airport, which is contained within the subject property.

It is considered that the proposed refuelling facility is consistent with the relevant aims and objectives of Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 and Orange Development Control Plan 2004. The following assessment identifies that the proposal could be supported.

DECISION FRAMEWORK

Development in Orange is governed by two key documents Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 and Orange Development Control Plan 2004. In addition the Infill Guidelines are used to guide development, particularly in the heritage conservation areas and around heritage items.

Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 – the LEP should be considered by Council to be a definitive document. LEPs govern the types of development that are permissible or prohibited in different parts of the City and also provide some assessment criteria in specific circumstances. Uses are either permissible or not - there are no grey areas in terms of permissibility. The objectives of each zoning and indeed the aims of the LEP itself are, however, open to interpretation and can be used to guide decision making around appropriateness of development.

Orange Development Control Plan 2004 – the DCP guides development. In general it is a performance based document rather than prescriptive in nature - its purpose is to guide development. The Land and Environment Court tends to view it as such. In each area of interest there are often guidelines used. These guidelines indicate ways of achieving the planning outcomes. It is thus recognised that there may also be other solutions of merit. All design solutions are considered on merit by planning and building staff. Applications should clearly demonstrate how the planning outcomes are being met where alternative design solutions are proposed. So one can see that the DCP gives leeway for developers and architects to use design to achieve the outcome in other ways if they can. Stating that DCP guidelines are inflexible can be misleading.

In the case of DA 127/2017(1) there are considered to be no significant issues. The development requires the consent of Council rather than the General Manager as it involves Council land and Council as a landlord. The key issue of risk associated with the fuel storage has been considered under SEPP 33 and found to be acceptable. Such a development is to be expected at an airport.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “13.4 Our Environment – Monitor and enforce regulations relating to City amenity”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

 

Recommendation

That Council consents to development application DA 123/2017(1) for Air Transport Facility (bulk fuel tank and refuelling facility) at Lot 200 DP 1195298 - 136 Aerodrome Road, Huntley pursuant to the conditions of consent in the attached Notice of Approval.

 

further considerations

Consideration has been given to the recommendation’s impact on Council’s service delivery; image and reputation; political; environmental; health and safety; employees; stakeholders and project management; and no further implications or risks have been identified.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

THE APPLICATION/PROPOSAL

Council's consent is sought to establish a refuelling facility in association with the existing NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility at the subject property.

The proposed refuelling facility predominately consists of a 22,845L Jet A-1 Fuel Tank which would be located to the east of the helicopter ramp, adjacent to the hangar.

Other proposed works associated with the refuelling facility include the installation of two x 200L Jet A-1 and solvent drums, one x 1000L Waste Jet A-1 storage container and two x 90kg LPG gas cylinders.

Supporting information submitted with the development application indicates that refuelling will occur via a hydrant cart connected to the fuel tank which can be wheeled into a position adjacent to the aircraft.

The recent condition of the subject property, which includes construction of the NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility, is demonstrated in Figure 1, below. It is noted that the facility is now substantially complete.


 

 

Figure 1: site context plan

(the NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility (under construction) is shown in the centre of the picture - the approximate location of the proposed 22,845L Jet A-1 Fuel Tank is indicated by the red star)

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

Section 5A Assessment

In the administration of sections 78A, 79B, 79C, 111 and 112, the provisions of Section 5A must be taken into account for every development application in deciding whether there is likely to be a significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats. This section includes a requirement to consider any adopted assessment guidelines, which means assessment guidelines issued and in force under section 94A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Assessment guidelines are in force (see DECC-W “Threatened Species Assessment Guidelines - The Assessment of Significance”) which requires consent authority to adopt the precautionary principle in its assessment.

In this instance, site inspection reveals that the subject property has no biodiversity or habitat value.

Section 79C - Evaluation

Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires Council to consider various matters, of which those pertaining to the application are listed below.


 

PROVISIONS OF ANY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT s79C(1)(a)(i)

Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

Part 1 - Preliminary

Clause 1.2 - Aims of Plan

The broad aims of the LEP are set out under subclause 2. Those relevant to the application are as follows:

(a)     to encourage development which complements and enhances the unique character of Orange as a major regional centre boasting a diverse economy and offering an attractive regional lifestyle,

(b)     to provide for a range of development opportunities that contribute to the social, economic and environmental resources of Orange in a way that allows present and future generations to meet their needs by implementing the principles for ecologically sustainable development,

(c)     to conserve and enhance the water resources on which Orange depends, particularly water supply catchments,

The application is considered to be consistent with the foregoing objectives.

Clause 1.6 - Consent Authority

This clause establishes that, subject to the Act, Council is the consent authority for applications made under the LEP.

Clause 1.9A - Suspension of Covenants, Agreements and Instruments

This clause provides that covenants, agreements and other instruments which seek to restrict the carrying out of development do not apply with the following exceptions.

·    covenants imposed or required by Council

·    prescribed instruments under Section 183A of the Crown Lands Act 1989

·    any conservation agreement under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974

·    any trust agreement under the Nature Conservation Trust Act 2001

·    any property vegetation plan under the Native Vegetation Act 2003

·    any biobanking agreement under Part 7A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

·    any planning agreement under Division 6 of Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

DP 1195298 indicates that the subject property is affected by a right-of-way 6.86m and 7.7.315m wide, which is to the benefit of an area of land designated as X (Figure 2). The area designated as X generally corresponds with the location of the existing NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility.


 

 

Figure 2: extract from DP 1195298 showing right-of-way (A) and the benefitted area (X)

Notably, Council’s internal mapping system indicates that the right-of-way shown on DP 1195298 is more extensive. However, this would not affect the location of the proposed refuelling facility.

Council does not hold a Section 88 B Instrument for the subject property. Council staff are not aware of the title of the subject property being affected by any of the above.

Mapping

The subject site is identified on the LEP maps in the following manner:

Land Zoning Map:

Land zoned SP2 Infrastructure

Lot Size Map:

No Minimum Lot Size

Heritage Map:

Not a heritage item or conservation area

Height of Buildings Map:

No building height limit

Floor Space Ratio Map:

No floor space limit

Terrestrial Biodiversity Map:

No biodiversity sensitivity on the site

Groundwater Vulnerability Map:

Ground water vulnerable

Drinking Water Catchment Map:

Within the drinking water catchment

Watercourse Map:

Not within or affecting a defined watercourse

Urban Release Area Map:

Not within an urban release area

Obstacle Limitation Surface Map:

Restriction on building siting or construction

Additional Permitted Uses Map:

No additional permitted use applies

Those matters that are of relevance are addressed in detail in the body of this report.


 

Part 2 - Permitted or Prohibited Development

Land Use Zones

The subject site is located within the SP2 Infrastructure zone (Figure 3). The proposed development is defined as an air transport facility under OLEP 2011.

The existing air transport facility was approved subject to DA 362/2013(1) in November 2013, pursuant to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) and the SP2 Infrastructure zone. The officer report accompanying DA 362/2013(1) provided a detailed overview of the complexity associated with the permissibility of the NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility in the SP2 Infrastructure zone.

For the sake of brevity, the discussion provided in the officer report has not been reproduced. However, consistent with the approach adopted in the officer report, it is considered that the proposed refuelling facility is legitimately ancillary to the approved air transport facility.

Figure 3: zone context plan

(subject property identified by heavy red line (SP2 Infrastructure))

Clause 2.3 of LEP 2011 references the Land Use Table and Objectives for each zone in LEP 2011. These objectives for land zoned SP2 Infrastructure are as follows:

1 - Objectives of the SP2 Infrastructure Zone

·    To provide for infrastructure and related uses.

·    To prevent development that is not compatible with or that may detract from the provision of infrastructure.

The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the foregoing objectives.


 

Part 7 - Additional Local Provisions

7.1 - Earthworks

This clause establishes a range of matters that must be considered prior to granting development consent for any application involving earthworks, such as:

(a)     the likely disruption of, or any detrimental effect on, existing drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality of the development

(b)     the effect of the development on the likely future use or redevelopment of the land

(c)     the quality of the fill or the soil to be excavated, or both

(d)     the effect of the development on the existing and likely amenity of adjoining properties

(e)     the source of any fill material and the destination of any excavated material

(f)     the likelihood of disturbing relics

(g)     the proximity to and potential for adverse impacts on any waterway, drinking water catchment or environmentally sensitive area

(h)     any measures proposed to minimise or mitigate the impacts referred to in paragraph (g).

Given that the proposed fuel tank is to be located aboveground on an existing area of hardstand, it is considered that only minor earthworks would be required. No further consideration of earthworks is required.

7.6 - Groundwater Vulnerability

This clause seeks to protect hydrological functions of groundwater systems and protect resources from both depletion and contamination. Orange has a high water table and large areas of the LGA, including the subject site, are identified with “Groundwater Vulnerability” on the Groundwater Vulnerability Map. This requires that Council consider:

(a)     whether or not the development (including any onsite storage or disposal of solid or liquid waste and chemicals) is likely to cause any groundwater contamination or have any adverse effect on groundwater dependent ecosystems, and

(b)     the cumulative impact (including the impact on nearby groundwater extraction for potable water supply or stock water supply) of the development and any other existing development on groundwater.

Furthermore consent may not be granted unless Council is satisfied that:

(a)     the development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid any significant adverse environmental impact, or

(b)     if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided - the development is designed, sited and will be managed to minimise that impact,

(c)     if that impact cannot be minimised - the development will be managed to mitigate that impact.


 

While the proposed fuel tank presents an inherent risk of groundwater contamination (ie risk of spill during refuelling or complete tank failure), it is considered unlikely. In particular, it is noted that the proposed tank is described as self-bunding (ie dual wall), effectively eliminating the need for any further containment.

It is noted that the supporting information submitted with the application indicates that any minor spill which may occur during refuelling, particularly when hoses are connected and disconnected, will be contained by a fall within the helicopter ramp area and treated by the trade waste system. In this regard it is noted that Council’s Trade Waste Officer has advised that fuel from refuelling areas must not be discharged to trade waste.

In this regard, Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor has advised that a condition of consent should be applied requiring that prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the applicant shall provide details of compliance with AS1940-2004 The storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids.

The Environmental Health and Building Surveyor has advised that by ensuring compliance with AS1940-2004, the likelihood of a fuel spill will be minimal and that any spill would likely to be able to be contained without causing any significant environmental impact.

7.7 - Drinking Water Catchments

(1)     The objective of this clause is to protect drinking water catchments by minimising the adverse impacts of development on the quality and quantity of water entering drinking water storages.

(2)     This clause applies to land identified as “Drinking water” on the Drinking Water Catchment Map.

(3)     Before determining a development application for development on land to which this clause applies, the consent authority must consider whether or not the development is likely to have any adverse impact on the quality and quantity of water entering the drinking water storage, having regard to:

(a)     the distance between the development and any waterway that feeds into the drinking water storage, and

(b)     the onsite use, storage and disposal of any chemicals on the land, and

(c)     the treatment, storage and disposal of waste water and solid waste generated or used by the development.

(4)     Development consent must not be granted to development on land to which this clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that:

(a)     the development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid any significant adverse impact on water quality and flows, or

(b)     if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided - the development is designed, sited and will be managed to minimise that impact, or

(c)     if that impact cannot be minimised - the development will be managed to mitigate that impact.


 

Consistent with the foregoing assessment addressing ground water, it considered that compliance with AS1940-2004 The storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids would ensure that the likelihood of a fuel spill will be minimal and that any spill would likely be able to be contained without causing any significant environmental impact.

7.9 - Airspace Operations

(1)     The objectives of this clause are as follows:

(a)     to provide for the effective and ongoing operation of the Orange Airport by ensuring that such operation is not compromised by proposed development that penetrates the Limitation or Operations Surface for that airport,

(b)     to protect the community from undue risk from that operation.

(2)     If a development application is received and the consent authority is satisfied that the proposed development will penetrate the Limitation or Operations Surface, the consent authority must not grant development consent unless it has consulted with the relevant Commonwealth body about the application.

(3)     The consent authority may grant development consent for the development if the relevant Commonwealth body advises that:

(a)     the development will penetrate the Limitation or Operations Surface but it has no objection to its construction, or

(b)     the development will not penetrate the Limitation or Operations Surface.

(4)     The consent authority must not grant development consent for the development if the relevant Commonwealth body advises that the development will penetrate the Limitation or Operations Surface and should not be constructed.

In the absence of Council’s Commercial and Emergency Services Manager, Council’s Transport Asset Engineer has advised that the proposed fuel tank will not penetrate the Limitation or Operations Surface.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICIES

State Planning Policy 33 - Hazardous and Offensive Development

State Environmental Planning Policy 33 - Hazardous and Offensive Development (SEPP 33) identifies that in determining whether a development is a hazardous storage establishment, hazardous industry or other potentially hazardous industry; or an offensive storage establishment, offensive industry or other potentially offensive industry, consideration must be given to current circulars or guidelines published by the Department of Planning relating to hazardous or offensive development. The applicable guideline is the Hazardous and Offensive Development Application Guidelines Applying SEPP 33 (SEPP 33 Guidelines).

The SEPP 33 Guidelines set out a risk screening method for potentially hazardous industry which principally requires consideration of all hazardous materials on the site; classification of each material; mode of storage; distance of the stored material from the site boundary; and the average number of annual and weekly road movements of hazardous material to and from the facility, including typical quantities of each load.


 

The development application indicates that the proposed refuelling facility will comprise a22,845L Jet A-1 fuel tank, two x 200L Jet A-1 and solvent drums, and one x 1000L Waste Jet A-1 storage container, being Class 3 Packing Group 3 and Class 3 Packing Group 2 goods respectively. The proposal also includes two x 90kg LPG gas cylinders, being Packing Group 2.1.

Notably, the supporting information indicates that the operator of the site has advised that no other hazardous materials are stored within adjacent locations within the maintenance and refuelling facility.

Supporting information submitted with the development application provides a detailed assessment against the applicable provisions of the SEPP 33 Guidelines. That assessment identifies that the total expected quantity of Class 3 Packing Group 3 materials (ie 24,245L = 20.4 tonne) is required to be 6m from the property boundary or 8m from a sensitive use. Plans submitted with the development application indicate that all proposed Packing Group 2 and 3 materials would be located well in excess of 6m from the property boundary.

In addition, the supporting information submitted with the development application identifies that the proposed 22,845L fuel tank will generate a requirement for one delivery per week (two vehicle movements); the 1000L waste storage container will generate a requirement for 0.5 deliveries per week (one vehicle movement); the 200L drums will generate a requirement for 0.5 vehicle movements per week (one vehicle movement); and the LPG gas cylinders would generate a requirement for 0.33 deliveries per week (0.66 vehicle movements). The anticipated number of vehicle movements is well below the threshold for potential hazards associated with transportation.

Based on this assessment it is considered that the proposed development is not potentially hazardous. Notwithstanding, it is recommended that a condition of consent be applied requiring that that the operator of the facility not alter the types or quantities of potentially hazardous materials onsite without preparing a revised assessment against the SEPP 33 Guidelines and consulting with Council.

State Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) requires that a consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of development of land unless it has considered whether the land is contaminated; if the land is contaminated, it is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable, after remediation) for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out; and if the land requires remediation to be made suitable for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out, it is satisfied that the land will be remediated before the land is used for that purpose.

While SEPP 55 is a relevant consideration, it is noted that the proposed refuelling facility will operate in association with the recently constructed NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility.


 

PROVISIONS OF ANY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT THAT HAS BEEN PLACED ON EXHIBITION s79C(1)(a)(ii)

There are no draft environmental planning instruments that apply to the subject land or proposed development.

DESIGNATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed refuelling facility is not identified as designated development.

Notwithstanding, it is noted that the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (the ‘Regulations’) identify that the types of development generally identified as designated development are not designated development if they are ancillary to other development and are not proposed to be carried out independently of that other development.

It is considered that the proposed development is ancillary to the existing NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility and the broader Orange Regional Airport.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN s79C(1)(a)(iii)

Development Control Plan 2004

Development Control Plan 2004 (“the DCP”) applies to the subject property. Specific planning controls relating to the Orange Airport are contained within Chapter 0 - Transitional Provisions, Section 0.4-12 Interim Planning Outcomes - Airport.

Chapter 0 - Transitional Provisions

Section 0.4-12 Interim Planning Outcomes - Airport

·    Proposals must demonstrate that adequate utility services are available to provide for the development.

The proposed refuelling facility does not require any utility services.

·    Proposals must not compromise the current or future operations of the Airport, including establishment or expansion of public facilities such as the terminal building and car parking.

The proposed refuelling facility will complement the recently constructed NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility.

·    Water run off must be managed and treated to predevelopment quality or better and pre development quantities or less.

The operator of recently constructed NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility has indicated that all minor fuel spills will be captured within the helicopter ramp area and treated by the trade waste system. However, Council’s Trade Waste Officer has advised that the Trade Waste Regulation Guidelines preclude fuel from refuelling areas entering a trade waste system.


 

In this regard, Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor has advised that a condition of consent should be applied requiring that prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the applicant shall provide details of compliance with AS1940-2004 The storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids.

The Environmental Health and Building Surveyor has advised that by ensuring compliance with AS1940-2004, the likelihood of a fuel spill will be minimal and that any spill would be likely to be able to be contained without causing any significant environmental impact.

PROVISIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS s79C(1)(a)(iv)

Demolition of a Building (clause 92)

The proposal does not involve the demolition of a building.

Fire Safety Considerations (clause 93)

Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor has advised that a 9kg dry powder and a 9kg foam fire extinguisher will be provided on the refuelling cart and that the proposed refuelling facility will be located far enough away from the existing adjacent building to not require any fire separation.

Buildings to be Upgraded (clause 94)

The proposal does not involve the rebuilding, alteration, enlargement or extension of an existing building.

BASIX Commitments (clause 97A)

Not applicable.

THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT s79C(1)(b)

The likely impacts of the proposed development have been addressed in the body of this report. In particular, emphasis has been placed on possible hazards associated with the storage of fuel, solvents and LPG, and possible impacts of fuel spills on the drinking water catchment.

In both instances, the foregoing assessment identifies that it is unlikely that the proposed refuelling facility would have a significant or detrimental impact.

THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE s79C(1)(c)

The foregoing assessment demonstrates that the subject property is suitable for the use of a refuelling facility is association with the recently constructed NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility.

ANY SUBMISSIONS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT s79C(1)(d)

The proposed development is not defined as advertised development under the provisions of the LEP, and as such no formal exhibition of the application was required. No submissions have been received in relation to this application.


 

PUBLIC INTEREST s79C(1)(e)

The proposed development is considered to be of minor interest to the wider public due to the relatively localised nature of potential impacts. The proposal is not inconsistent with any relevant policy statements, planning studies, guidelines etc that have not been considered in this assessment.

SUMMARY

The proposed development is permissible with the consent of Council. The proposed development complies with the relevant aims, objectives and provisions of the LEP. A section 79C assessment of the development indicates that the development is acceptable in this instance. Attached is a draft Notice of Approval outlining a range of conditions considered appropriate to ensure that the development proceeds in an acceptable manner.

COMMENTS

The requirements of the Environmental Health and Building Surveyor and the Engineering Development Section are included in the attached Notice of Approval.

 

Attachments

1          Notice of Approval, D17/31395

2          Plans, D17/31101

 


Planning and Development Committee                                                               6 June 2017

2.5                       Development Application DA 123/2017(1) - 136 Aerodrome Road

Attachment 1      Notice of Approval

 

OrangeCityCouncilNEW#45524E (2)

ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

 

Development Application No DA 123/2017(1)

 

NA17/                                                                                             Container PR26464

 

 

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION

OF A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

issued under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Section 81(1)

 

Development Application

 

  Applicant Name:

Tubb & Associates

  Applicant Address:

22 The High Road

BLAXLAND  NSW  2744

  Owner’s Name:

Orange City Council

  Land to Be Developed:

Lot 200 DP 1195298 - 136 Aerodrome Road, Huntley

  Proposed Development:

Air Transport Facility (bulk fuel tank and refuelling facility)

 

 

Building Code of Australia

 building classification:

 

To be determined by the PCA

 

 

Determination

 

  Made On:

22 May 2017

  Determination:

CONSENT GRANTED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS DESCRIBED BELOW:

 

 

Consent to Operate From:

22 May 2017

Consent to Lapse On:

22 May 2022

 

Terms of Approval

 

The reasons for the imposition of conditions are:

(1)      To ensure compliance with relevant statutory requirements.

(2)      To provide adequate public health and safety measures.

(3)      To ensure the utility services are available to the site and adequate for the development.

(4)      To prevent the proposed development having a detrimental effect on adjoining land uses.

(5)      To minimise the impact of development on the environment.

 

 

 

 

Conditions

 

(1)      The development must be carried out in accordance with:

 

(a)      Plan/s numbered: one unnumbered plan, plan numbered WD01 E Revision E dated 10/4/15, plan numbered 000921GA Revision B dated 11/12/13, plan numbered 001203GA(B) Revision A dated 7/2/17, plan numbered 001203GA(B) Revision A dated 7/2/17, plan numbered 001203GA(B) Revision A dated 7/2/17 (6 sheets)

 

 

(b)      statements of environmental effects or other similar associated documents that form part of the approval

 

as amended in accordance with any conditions of this consent.

PRESCRIBED CONDITIONS

 

(2)      All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

(3)      A sign is to be erected in a prominent position on any site on which building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out:

(a)      showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work, and

(b)      showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and

(c)      stating that unauthorised entry to the site is prohibited.

Any such sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out.

 

 

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

 

(4)      Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, details showing how compliance will be achieved with the Australian Standard AS1940-2004 “The storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids”, including the provision of bunding, containing spills and fire protection to the proposed tanks, are to be submitted to Council/accredited certifier for assessment.

 

 

PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING

 

(5)      A Construction Certificate application is required to be submitted to, and issued by Council/Accredited Certifier prior to any excavation or building works being carried out onsite.

 

(6)      Soil erosion control measures shall be implemented on the site.

 

 

DURING CONSTRUCTION/SITEWORKS

 

(7)      All construction/demolition work on the site is to be carried out between the hours of 7.00 am and 6.00 pm Monday to Friday inclusive, 7.00 am to 5.00 pm Saturdays and 8.00 am to 5.00 pm Sundays and Public Holidays. Written approval must be obtained from the General Manager of Orange City Council to vary these hours.

 

(8)      All materials onsite or being delivered to the site are to be contained within the site. The requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 are to be complied with when placing/stockpiling loose material or when disposing of waste products or during any other activities likely to pollute drains or watercourses.

 

(9)      Any adjustments to existing utility services that are made necessary by this development proceeding are to be at the full cost of the developer.

 

 

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

 

(10)    No person is to use or occupy the building or alteration that is the subject of this approval without the prior issuing of an Occupation Certificate.

 

(11)    The owner of the building/s must cause the Council to be given a Final Fire Safety Certificate on completion of the building in relation to essential fire or other safety measures included in the schedule attached to this approval.


 

(12)    All of the foregoing conditions are to be at the full cost of the developer and to the requirements and standards of the Orange City Council Development and Subdivision Code, unless specifically stated otherwise. All work required by the foregoing conditions is to be completed prior to the issuing of an Occupation Certificate, unless stated otherwise.

 

 

MATTERS FOR THE ONGOING PERFORMANCE AND OPERATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT

 

(13)    The types and quantities of potentially hazardous materials stored as part of the NSW Ambulance aeromedical air transport facility must not be altered or increased without the preparation of a revised assessment against the Hazardous and Offensive Development Application Guidelines and the written agreement of Council’s Manager of Development Assessments.

 

(14)    The owner is required to provide to Council and to the NSW Fire Commissioner an Annual Fire Safety Statement in respect of the fire-safety measures, as required by Clause 177 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

(15)    The ongoing operation of the proposed fuel facility shall be in compliance with the requirements of the Work, Health and Safety Regulation 2011 at all times.

 

 

 

 

Other Approvals

 

(1)      Local Government Act 1993 approvals granted under section 68.

 

          Nil

 

(2)      General terms of other approvals integrated as part of this consent.

 

          Nil

 

 

 

 

Right of Appeal

 

If you are dissatisfied with this decision, section 97 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 gives you the right to appeal to the Land and Environment Court within 6 months after the date on which you receive this notice.

* Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 does not apply to the determination of a development application for State significant development or local designated development that has been the subject of a Commission of Inquiry.

 

  Disability Discrimination Act 1992:

This application has been assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. No guarantee is given that the proposal complies with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992.

 

The applicant/owner is responsible to ensure compliance with this and other anti-discrimination legislation.

 

The Disability Discrimination Act covers disabilities not catered for in the minimum standards called up in the Building Code of Australia which references AS1428.1 - "Design for Access and Mobility". AS1428 Parts 2, 3 and 4 provides the most comprehensive technical guidance under the Disability Discrimination Act currently available in Australia.


 

 

 

  Disclaimer - S88B Restrictions on the Use of Land:

The applicant should note that there could be covenants in favour of persons other than Council restricting what may be built or done upon the subject land. The applicant is advised to check the position before commencing any work.

 

 

Signed:

On behalf of the consent authority ORANGE CITY COUNCIL

 

 

Signature:

 

 

Name:

 

DAVID WADDELL - DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

 

Date:

 

22 May 2017

 


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.5                       Development Application DA 123/2017(1) - 136 Aerodrome Road

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.5                       Development Application DA 123/2017(1) - 136 Aerodrome Road

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.5                       Development Application DA 123/2017(1) - 136 Aerodrome Road

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.5                       Development Application DA 123/2017(1) - 136 Aerodrome Road

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.5                       Development Application DA 123/2017(1) - 136 Aerodrome Road

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.5                       Development Application DA 123/2017(1) - 136 Aerodrome Road

Attachment 2      Plans

PDF Creator



Planning and Development Committee                                                      6 June 2017

 

 

2.6     Planning Proposal Old Hospital Site

TRIM REFERENCE:        2017/1063

AUTHOR:                       Craig Mortell, Senior Planner    

 

 

EXECUTIVE Summary

The former Orange Base Hospital site (bounded by Anson Street, Dalton Street, Sale Street and Prince Street) was zoned under the LEP as R3 Medium Density Residential, with building height limits and floor space controls intended to facilitate a successful redevelopment of the site.

Subsequently, a master planning exercise was conducted in 2012/13 to explore the potential of the site and articulate appropriate urban design outcomes. The preferred option of the master plan was a mix of adaptive re-use, residential, mixed use and recreation.

A number of master plan concepts were assessed, with the preferred option from the Health Infrastructure/Allen Jack+Cottier Architects (AJ+C) plan recommending splitting the zoning of the site into three areas. The western Sale Street end was recommended to provide a strip of RE1 Public Recreation zone to facilitate a park, the central area to remain R3 Medium Density Residential, and the eastern Anson Street end was recommended to become B4 Mixed Use to encourage the clustering of commercial activity into a coherent precinct.

Another master planning exercise was undertaken in 2016 by John Andrews, TAD Design and LADesign as part of packaging the prospectus of the site to prepare to go to Expression of Interest. This version considered placing an east-west corridor of open space through the middle of the site rather than a north-south strip. It augmented and built on the AJ+C masterplan completed by Health Infrastructure.

To meet the master plan requirements, an adjustment to the zoning is required.

More recently, the State government has announced that they are seeking an appropriate location within Orange to provide approximately 8,500m2 of office space for the Department of Primary Industries. Property NSW called for Expressions of Interest outlining a range of criteria that any successful site would need to provide. It is understood that a number of bids were lodged and are being evaluated by the State government.

One of the bids is from a developer that had made an unsolicited offer to Council, and upon which the parties have agreed to enter into an option agreement for a portion of the former base hospital site. To satisfy the Property NSW requirements, the site would require an adjustment to the current zones and height limits, the configuration of which differs from the Health Infrastructure/AJ+C plan – noting that retention of the main hospital building is no longer intended.

In order to proceed, a draft planning proposal has been prepared that seeks to rezone part of the site and amend building height limits to enable the master plan principles to be maintained toward the western end of the block, with the requirements of the bid to provide office premises for the DPI toward the eastern end of the block. Parkland is retained in a range of potential locations under the rezoning.


 

Due to both the capital investment value (CIV) of the possible DPI development being likely to well exceed $20m and the level of Council involvement, being current owners of the land, it is assumed that the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) will not delegate the final decision to Council. Alternatively, Council could request determination by DPE in the event that DPE did not voluntarily decide to determine the rezoning. Furthermore, any subsequent DA for the DPI development would be determined by the Joint Regional Planning Panel, not Orange City Council, given the CIV level.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “1.2 Our City - Information and advice provided for the decision-making process will be succinct, reasoned, accurate, timely and balanced”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

 

Recommendation

1        That staff prepare a planning proposal comprising draft height of building and land use zone maps that would zone the eastern side of the site as B4 Mixed Use.

2        That the draft planning proposal retain the western side of the site as R3 Medium Density Residential and RE1 Public Recreation zone.

3        That Council forward the planning proposal to the Department of Planning and Environment to seek a Gateway determination.

4        That subject to any conditions of a Gateway determination, the matter be placed on public exhibition for a period of 28 days.

 

further considerations

Consideration has been given to the recommendation’s impact on Council’s service delivery; image and reputation; political; environmental; health and safety; employees; stakeholders and project management; and no further implications or risks have been identified.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Following the opening of the new Health Service on Forest Road, the former Orange Base Hospital site bounded by Dalton Street, Anson Street, Prince Street and Sale Street was closed and has remained vacant pending its demolition and ultimate redevelopment.

With an area of approximately 2 hectares and full street frontages to all sides, the site presents a unique opportunity in central Orange – further enhanced by the relationship to various surrounding land uses, such as the TAFE campus to the south and a variety of adjoining mixed uses including a number of medical and ancillary consulting rooms and community health uses.


 

Recognising the significance of the site Council acquired it from the State Government to facilitate redevelopment and ensure the community would have an influence over the future of this site. A master plan was developed by Health Infrastructure to showcase the potential of the site for a range of uses, showcasing a number of development options.

The master plan was presented to Council as part of the acquisition. Council was briefed on the matter on several occasions, with the consultancy who prepared the master plan giving a full presentation to Council to inform Council’s decision for the acquisition. Councillors have been provided with a masterplan summary document (given the size of the full document) and this document has been publicly available, provided to members of the public and has appeared in numerous media articles.

The conceptual vision in the master plan was not linked to a firm proposal, but instead intended to demonstrate the potential of the site. The master plan requires an amendment to the Local Environmental Plan to confirm the uses, height limits and floor space ratio.

Council’s promotion of its activities on the site, including the recent site demolition development application, has attracted early interest in the site.

The purpose of this report is to initiate the investigation and preparatory documents so that Council can progress a partial mixed use zone for the site as well as other appropriate zonings including medium density residential and recreation/open space. The conditional unsolicited offer warrants exploration in the opinion of the author of this report.

The objectives of this planning proposal are:

·    To provide for a mixed range of education, administration, office and business premises with supporting retail and open space areas in addition to residential accommodation.

·    To amend the land zoning map to provide for mixed use development on the site of the former base hospital.

·    To amend the height of buildings map to provide flexibility in the placement of building forms and densities on the site of the former base hospital.

·    To amend the floor space ratio map to provide flexibility in the location and siting of built form on the site of the former base hospital.

The following images provide an overview of the current and proposed height limits and land use zones, and illustrate the potential relationship between a public administration building with medium density residential development. These are conceptual designs only that have been explored to ensure that height limits and zone boundaries are established that can allow sufficient flexibility at the Development Application stage while seeking to retain the mix of uses and densities established under the master plan.


 

 

The current height limits and land use zone for the old hospital site

 


 

 

 

The Proposed height limits and land use zones for the hospital site

Zoning pattern consistent with a modified version of the Health Infrastructure KJC master plan

 


 

An alternative zoning pattern consistent with a modified version of the master plan

to enhance the development of the site

Due to the desire to provide flexibility in responding to the Property NSW EOI process, the areas shown are approximations only, intended to illustrate the concept for the site and gauge community reaction. Final dimensions and areas will be confirmed following public exhibition. This will enable community consultation and development needs to be evaluated in tandem. The intent is to balance R3 (Medium Density Residential) land use and enable a successful B4 (Mixed Use) land use (including car park, retention of ambulance station and use of a public park).

The concept from the Health Infrastructure/AJ+C master planning exercise of 2012/13


 

 

An enhancement of the master plan as commissioned by Council

 


 

 

A conceptual model approximating the main structural elements of a public administration

building and multi-deck car park consistent with the State Government requirements for

new DPI headquarters.

(note retention of the heritage listed Ambulance building on the Prince and

Anson Streets intersection.

 


 

 

Conceptual models illustrating options to combine the master plan and DPI headquarters

 

 

 

Attachments

1          Preliminary draft planning proposal to rezone and amend height limts, D17/32051

 


Planning and Development Committee                                                     6 June 2017

2.6                       Planning Proposal Old Hospital Site

Attachment 1      Preliminary draft planning proposal to rezone and amend height limts

PUBLIC EXHIBITION

Saturday, XX Month to Monday, XX Month YEAR

 

 

 

 

 

Optional emblematic photo or concept drawing

 

 

 

 

 

Proposal to Amend Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

Amendment 22 “Former Hospital Site”


 

WHAT IS ON EXHIBITION?

Council has placed on exhibition a proposal to amend Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 in respect of the former base hospital site, being land bounded by Sale Street, Anson Street, Dalton Street and Prince Street. The proposed changes include adjustments to the Height of Buildings Map and the Land Zoning Map. The intention is to facilitate potential redevelopment of the site upon demolition and site clearance of the old hospital and associated buildings.

Council previously undertook a conceptual master planning exercise to investigate appropriate urban design outcomes for the site. At the time this was predicated on a belief that the main building could potentially be adaptively re-used. Subsequent testing of the market and site conditions has altered this view.

Additionally, in April 2017, Property NSW issued a ‘call for expressions of interest’ to provide suburban A-Grade office accommodation to house the Department of Primary Industries in Orange. A developer has approached Council to purchase part of the old hospital site in order to meet Property NSW’s requirements.

This planning proposal outlines how the LEP may be amended to accommodate the requirements of Property NSW and retain the overall vision of the previous masterplan.

EXHIBITION MATERIALS

The planning proposal is also comprised of the following supplemental documents:

Gateway Determination

Draft Height of Buildings Map

Draft Land Zone Map

Property NSW EOI

‘Old’ Orange Base Hospital masterplan

WHERE CAN I SEE IT?

The exhibition materials can be inspected by any interested person during business hours at Orange City Council Civic Centre, ground floor, 135 Byng Street (Cnr of Lords Place), Orange. All materials are also available on Councils website www.orange.nsw.gov.au under the “Planning & Development” section.

SUBMISSIONS

Written comments on the draft amendments are welcome. All submissions received by Council will be considered before final decisions are made. Any submission received may be made publicly available and may include the name(s), address, signature and contact details provided.

All submissions are to be received by close of business Monday XX Month YEAR.

Submissions on the proposal can be sent to:

General Manager

Orange City Council

P.O. Box 35

Orange NSW 2800

Attention: Craig Mortell – Senior Planner

Alternatively submissions may also be emailed to Council@orange.nsw.gov.au

 

For further information please contact Council on (02) 6393 8000

The following pages contain information required by the Department of Planning’s Guide to Preparing a Planning Proposal. The information is unavoidably technical, as it seeks to address a range of legislative requirements. Clarification may be sought from Councils planning staff during the exhibition period.


Planning and Development Committee                                                     6 June 2017

2.6                       Planning Proposal Old Hospital Site

Attachment 1      Preliminary draft planning proposal to rezone and amend height limts

Planning Proposal – Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 – Amendment 22

Introduction

The purpose of this document is to describe a planning proposal for an amendment of the Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011, to be known as amendment 22. The preparation of a planning proposal is the first step in preparing an LEP (or an amendment to an LEP).

Note: Throughout the course of preparing the proposed LEP, the planning proposal evolves. This is particularly the case for complex proposals in which the initial gateway determination will confirm the technical studies and consultation required to justify the proposal.

As the studies and consultation are undertaken, relevant parts of the planning proposal will be updated, amended and embellished. Therefore, particularly when viewed at an early stage, the level of detail in a planning proposal may appear to be limited in one or more respects.

This planning proposal has been prepared in accordance with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s document A guide to preparing planning proposals and is comprised of four parts;

Part 1 Objectives and Intended Outcomes

This part comprises a brief statement outlining the objectives and intended outcomes of the proposed amendment.

Part 2 Explanation of the Provisions

This part comprises a plain English explanation of the provisions and changes that are to be included in the amendment.

Part 3 Justification

This part establishes the justification for the objectives, outcomes and provisions and the process for their implementation.

Part 4 Community Consultation

This part details the level and methods of community consultation that is to be undertaken on the planning proposal.

Part 5 Project Timeline

This part consists of a table that sets out the key project milestones and anticipated commencement and completion dates for each milestone. The dates shown are indicative only and subject to review as the project progresses.


 

 

Part 1 Objectives and Intended Outcomes

The objectives of this planning proposal are:

To provide for public administration buildings, recognising the significant role and value of such developments to the local community and economy, while also responding to recommendations contained within a master plan previously prepared for the site, and

To amend the Height of Buildings map to allow the site to accommodate appropriately dimensioned built form in relevant parts of the site, and

To amend the Land Zone map to enable part of the site to be developed for Public Administration Buildings as well as Restaurant or Café Premises and a mix of other non-residential uses and to guide where such developments are to be focussed, and

Part 2 Explanation of the Provisions

Item No.

Description

Proposed Change

1

Plain English

Amendment of the Height of Buildings Map in accordance with the proposed Draft Height of Buildings Map shown at attachment 1

2

Plain English

 

Amendment of the Land Zone Map in accordance with the proposed Draft Land Zone Map shown at attachment 2

 

Part 3 Justification

Section A – Need for the planning proposal

1.    Is the planning proposal a result of any strategic study or report?

Yes. The Orange City Council previously undertook a master plan of the old base hospital site in 2012/13. This ‘preferred option’ of the master plan was predicated on the view then held that the main building could be retained and adaptively re-used. A range of factors including the buildings condition, presence of asbestos materials and testing of market interest in retaining the building has indicated that this aspect of the plan is not viable – however the overall vision of the master plan remains appropriate with some adaptation.

 

2.    Is the planning proposal the best means of achieving the objectives or intended outcomes, or is there a better way?

The planning proposal is the best known means of achieving the intended outcomes. In reaching this conclusion the following alternative approach was considered:

·    Amending Schedule 1 to provide additional permitted uses on the site, for public administration buildings however this would unduly limit the long term future occupancy of such buildings to public authorities only. This would also leave building height limits at the current levels resulting in a broader physical footprint with a corresponding reduction in site area able to be kept for the master plan concept.

 

3.    Is there a net community benefit?

Yes.

·      The result of the planning proposal will assist in retaining an important source of employment in Orange.

·      Proximity of the site to the Orange CBD ensures the continued economic and trading stimulus to established commercial precincts

·      The potential relocation of Department of Primary Industries will alleviate localised parking and traffic issues in Kite Street / Endsleigh Avenue / Edward Street. Provision of substantial on-site parking minimises the potential for such issues to be repeated at the subject site.

 

Section B – Relationship to strategic planning framework

4.    Is the planning proposal consistent with the objectives and actions contained within the applicable regional or sub-regional strategy?

Not relevant.

 

 

5.    Is the planning proposal consistent with the local council’s Community Strategic Plan, or other local strategic plan?

Yes. The Orange Community Strategic Plan promotes the provision of employment opportunities, quality urban design and seeks to maintain the trading performance of the CBD.

 

6.    Is the planning proposal consistent with applicable state environmental planning policies?

Yes. A review of relevant SEPPs is attached.

 

7.    Is the planning proposal consistent with applicable Ministerial Directions (s.117 directions)?

Yes.

Direction 1.1 Business and Industrial Zones objectives include:

(a) encourage employment growth in suitable locations,

(b) protect employment land in business and industrial zones, and

(c) support the viability of identified strategic centres.

The direction requires that planning proposals must give effect to the objectives, retain existing business and industrial zones, not reduce total potential floor space for employment and related public services in business zones and industrial uses in industrial zones and ensure that proposed new employment areas are in accordance with a strategy that is approved by the Director General of the Department of Planning.

 

Relevantly the proposal will support the viability of the Orange CBD, which is identified in the Central West and Orange Regional Plan as a strategic centre. The proposal does not reduce floor space potential and the additional commercial potential generated by adopting a B4 zone over part of the site further enhances the CBD.

 

Direction 3.1 Residential Zones objectives include:

(a) to encourage a variety and choice of housing types to provide for existing and future

housing needs,

(b) to make efficient use of existing infrastructure and services and ensure that new housing

has appropriate access to infrastructure and services, and

(c) to minimise the impact of residential development on the environment and resource lands.

The direction requires that a planning proposal must encourage the provision of housing that will:

(a) broaden the choice of building types and locations available in the housing market, and

(b) make more efficient use of existing infrastructure and services, and

(c) reduce the consumption of land for housing and associated urban development on the

urban fringe, and

(d) be of good design.

             Additionally the direction requires that a planning proposal must:

(a) contain a requirement that residential development is not permitted until land is adequately serviced (or arrangements satisfactory to the council, or other appropriate authority, have

been made to service it), and

(b) not contain provisions which will reduce the permissible residential density of land.

 

The R3 portion of the site will continue to provide additional choice in terms of building types and forms to the local housing market. The density permitted ensures an efficient use of land, infrastructure and services. The master plan demonstrates how good design can ensure development maintains and positively contributes to the public realm and streetscapes of the area. The LEP already contains provisions in relation to adequate services.

Section C – Environmental, social and economic impact

8.    Is there any likelihood that critical habitat or threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats, will be adversely affected as a result of the proposal?

No. The site is within the existing urban area and past development and landscaping has essentially removed any ecological values

 

9.    Are there any other likely environmental effects as a result of the planning proposal and how are they proposed to be managed?

None envisaged.

 

10.  How has the planning proposal adequately addressed any social and economic effects?

The proposal is anticipated to provide positive social and economic effects. Providing local employment opportunities and economic stimulus to the surrounding area and CBD. Provision of substantial off-street parking minimised disruption to surrounding areas.

 


 

 

Section D – State and Commonwealth interests

11.  Is there adequate public infrastructure for the planning proposal?

 

Yes. The site was previously developed and used as the Orange Base Hospital. Utility services in the area were therefore sized accordingly and local road network adaptations already implemented. Further consideration of infrastructure requirements would be evaluated at the DA stage.

 

 

12.  What are the views of State and Commonwealth public authorities consulted in accordance with the gateway determination?

 

Not applicable, the planning proposal is at the pre-gateway stage.

 

Part 4 Community Consultation

Community consultation will be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the gateway determination. It is anticipated that this proposal will not be deemed to be a low impact proposal. Accordingly an exhibition period of 28 days is expected.

This will commence by giving notice of the public exhibition of the planning proposal via:

·    an advertisement in the Central Western Daily;

·    a notification on the Orange City Council website www.orange.nsw.gov.au; and

·    written advice direct to adjoining landowners.

All forms of the notice shall include:

·    a brief description of the objectives and intended outcomes of the planning proposal;

·    an indication of the land affected by the planning proposal;

·    the location and dates where the planning proposal may be inspected;

·    the contact name and address at Orange City Council where submissions may be directed; and

·    the closing date of the submission process.


 

 

During the exhibition period, the following materials will be made freely available for public inspection:

·    The planning proposal, in the form approved for community consultation by the Director-General of Planning;

·    The gateway determination; and

·    All studies and supporting material relied upon by the planning proposal.

Following the exhibition period, a report will be prepared analysing any submissions received and making recommendations as to any appropriate changes or adjustments to the planning proposal, for the consideration of Orange City Council.

Where contact details have been provided all persons and organisations making a submission will be advised of the date and time of the relevant council (or committee) meeting where the report is to be considered, and subsequently advised of the determination.


Planning and Development Committee                                                     6 June 2017

2.6                       Planning Proposal Old Hospital Site

Attachment 1      Preliminary draft planning proposal to rezone and amend height limts

Part 5 Project Timeline

The following table provides an overview of the intended project timeline for this Planning Proposal.

Project stage

Commencement

Completion

Gateway Determination

Late June 2017

Government Agency consultation

July 2017

Late July 2017

Public Exhibition Period

Mid July 2017

Mid August 2017

Public Hearing

Not anticipated to be required

Consideration of Submissions

Late August 2017

Mid September 2017

Consideration of post exhibition proposals

(Report to Council)

September 2017

Seeking and obtaining legal opinion from Parliamentary Counsels Office

October 2017

Late October 2017

Submission to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure to finalise

Dependent on PCO

Anticipated date the plan will be forwarded to the Department for notification

Dependent on PCO

 


Planning and Development Committee                                                      6 June 2017

 

 

2.7     Planning Proposal - Totally Local

TRIM REFERENCE:        2017/1075

AUTHOR:                       Craig Mortell, Senior Planner    

 

 

EXECUTIVE Summary

Council has received a draft planning proposal to amend Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 in relation to land at 426 Mitchell Highway (Lot 209 DP 1018862) commonly known as the Totally Local site.

The proposal seeks to confirm the site as a local food and produce hub complemented by a modest amount of tourist accommodation. The site is currently zoned R5 Large Lot Residential and was previously granted an Additional Permitted Use (APU) listing in Schedule 1 of Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011.

The APU listing contained a sunset clause that expired in 2014. The proponent states that the lapsing of the APU limited their ability to develop a comprehensive vision for the site, which has evolved over time. The proposal in effect seeks to ‘reactivate’ the former APU and include some additional uses to complement and support the overall function of the site.

Totally Local is an established local food and produce focused complex that provides a significant opportunity and outlet for local fare and assists with building Orange’s food and wine reputation to visiting tourists. The flow-on benefit to the local economy from the operation is therefore likely to be somewhat greater than a conventional retail centre.

The proposal seeks to further enhance the site in the proponent's words:

‘so as to create a hub that showcases locally grown or produced food, wines and beverages, as well as associated items such as arts and crafts. The aim is to support and promote local farmers and food and drink producers and provide an outlet for local fare, essentially as an “everyday farmers market”.’

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “1.2 Our City - Information and advice provided for the decision-making process will be succinct, reasoned, accurate, timely and balanced”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil


 

 

 

Recommendation

1        That Council notes the attached planning proposal and resolves to support amending the Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 to enable the additional uses being sought on the land.

2        That Council forwards the planning proposal to the Department of Planning and Environment to seek a Gateway determination.

3       That, subject to any Gateway determination conditions, Council proceed to place the planning proposal on public exhibition for a period of 28 days.

 

further considerations

Consideration has been given to the recommendation’s impact on Council’s service delivery; image and reputation; political; environmental; health and safety; employees; stakeholders and project management; and no further implications or risks have been identified.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Council has received a draft planning proposal to amend Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 in relation to land at 426 Mitchell Highway (Lot 209 DP 1018862) commonly known as the Totally Local site.

The proposal would enable, by way of an Additional Permitted Use (APU) listing in Schedule 1 of the LEP, consideration of a development application for several forms of development not currently allowed under the R5 Large Lot Residential zone.

The additional uses being sought include:

·    Food and Drink Premises,

·    Agricultural Produce Industries,

·    Light Industry,

·    Function Centres, and

·    Hotel or Motel Accommodation.

The proposal is backed by a conceptual design that seeks to create a local food and produce hub complemented by a modest amount of tourist accommodation.

Both Food and Drink Premises and Agricultural Produce Industries were previously enabled on the site under an APU listing that expired due to a sunset clause on 24 February 2014. That APU enabled the site to develop into a local food and produce complex comprising a produce shop, wine cellar, café, cheesemaker, craft brewery and food transport business.

The proposal states that the overall vision for the site was still evolving during the time of the original APU, which limited the ability to secure potential participants in the complex. The owners have since refined the vision and intended theme for the site and are now confident with regard to the long term mix of uses considered appropriate to the project.


 

Reactivating the food and drink premises and agricultural produce industry uses would ensure that current operators will be able to evolve and grow over time and also ensure that any closures can be replaced with similar operations.

Introduction of the light industry use would enable a smallgoods manufacturer, commercial bakery, expansion of the brewery and other food related light industrial operations.

The function centre use would enable the site to cater for larger groups, conferences and weddings, that would coincidentally promote local food, wines and produce to attendees by virtue of being on the same site as the other uses.

The hotel or motel accommodation would enable a number of cabins in one section of the site to provide accommodation to both general visitors and attendees of the various functions. This again would passively expose guests to the local food and produce of the other uses on the site, further boosting awareness and brand recognition of local produce.

Traffic

The site has direct access onto the Mitchell Highway. While traffic volumes for individual aspects of the proposal are likely to be minor, the overall combination may warrant referral to Roads and Maritime Services for comment on appropriate access arrangements - notably the current northern access is not wholly aligned with the Murphy Lane T intersection on the other side of the highway. It is likely that any gateway determination will require referral to the RMS for consideration. This would also be likely for any subsequent Development Application.

Impact on Residential Land Supply

The site is currently zoned R5 Large Lot Residential. However the minimum lot size for subdivision is 2ha and this is the approximate site area, meaning that no further subdivision is currently permissible. As such, the reduction of residentially zoned land arising from this proposal is at most one lot, however even this is negated by the current developments on the site.

Zone Interface

Land to the north, east and south of the site is also zoned R5 Large Lot Residential. Land on the other side of Ploughmans Creek is zoned R2 Low Density Residential and has recently been the subject of another planning proposal seeking to increase the density of the site. On the western side of the highway land is zoned R5 south of Murphy Lane and RU1 Primary Production north of Murphy Lane.

There is some potential that intensification of this site may raise or contribute to the expectations of surrounding landowners for rezoning and development potential of their own sites.

In this regard the concept plan illustrates a design that seeks to keep activities centred within the block and afford opportunity for boundary landscaping buffers to help screen visually and audibly neighbouring lands. Frontage to the highway also argues against further fragmentation of surrounding lands, at least to the extent of minimising the number of access points.


 

Relationship to Central Business District

A core element of Orange’s Business Centres Strategy is to maintain and protect the trading performance of the CBD. In this regard, out-of-centre commercial districts have been limited in scale and/or the range of commercial activities. In this regard the proposal does seek to allow additional commercial uses on the site.

However, the nature and scale of the main components are generally unlikely to emerge in the CBD due to operational requirements and not relying upon passing foot traffic. Other supportive uses such as bakeries and motel accommodation are considered to be an appropriate adjunct to the site as they will essentially reduce vehicle trip generation from visitors to the other components.

Easements

The site is subject to three easements, two for electricity and one for access to the otherwise landlocked eastern neighbour. The concept plans confirm that ongoing access to the eastern neighbour can be maintained. There is ample space on the site to design around the electricity easements, and thus a future DA will be expected to respond to them.

Floor Space Ratio

The site is not currently subject to any floor space limitations. Given the overall scope of the project relative to the site area, it is considered that the overall bulk and scale of built form is likely to remain within a visually acceptable level. However, given the issues of traffic access onto the Mitchell Highway and concern to limit out-of-centre competition with the CBD, it may be appropriate to establish a floor space ratio (FSR) limit over the site. It is considered that any FSR should only be related to development forms enabled under an APU as this would more clearly address the CBD fragmentation issue.

Amenity Issues

Potential for noise, visual impacts, headlight glare and neighbour privacy conflicts is acknowledged. However, at 2ha in size the site area is sufficient to enable a wide range of adaptive measures to be incorporated at the DA stage. The concept plan illustrates how the main focus of activity can be centralised within the site, with ample setbacks to all boundaries (albeit with car parking in such setbacks).

Water Quality and Stormwater

Similar to the above, it is considered that the site area provides ample opportunity to address groundwater and stormwater management concerns. Any industrial or similar DA will need to demonstrate appropriate safeguards against pollution, while the overall site layout will be expected to incorporate appropriate stormwater management options, especially given the proximity of Ploughmans Creek. Again, the concept plan in the proposal retains generous setbacks to the creek line sufficient to include detention basins. Details of which would be required at the DA stage.


 

State Environmental Planning Policies and Section 117 Ministerial Directions

Annexures C and D of the planning proposal provide an overview of how the project relates to SEPPs and Ministerial Directions. The comments within the proposal have been reviewed and are generally supported. The Department of Planning and Environment will further review the responses when considering the matter for a Gateway determination.

 

 

Attachments

1          Planning Proposal, D17/31945

2          Planning Proposal - Annexure A - Land Plans, D17/31948

3          Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 01, D17/31949

4          Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 02, D17/31951

5          Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 03, D17/31952

6          Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 04, D17/31953

7          Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 05, D17/31954

8          Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 06, D17/31955

9          Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 07, D17/31956

10        Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 08, D17/31957

11        Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 09, D17/31958

12        Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 10, D17/31960

13        Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 11, D17/31961

14        Planning Proposal - Annexure C - SEPP Schedule, D17/31963

15        Planning Proposal - Annexure D - S117 Ministerial Directions, D17/31965

 


Planning and Development Committee                                                         6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 1      Planning Proposal

PDF CreatorPDF Creator


 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 2      Planning Proposal - Annexure A - Land Plans

PDF CreatorPDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 2      Planning Proposal - Annexure A - Land Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 2      Planning Proposal - Annexure A - Land Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 2      Planning Proposal - Annexure A - Land Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 2      Planning Proposal - Annexure A - Land Plans

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 3      Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 01

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 4      Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 02

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 5      Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 03

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 6      Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 04

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 7      Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 05

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 8      Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 06

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 9      Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 07

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 10    Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 08

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 11    Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 09

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 12    Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 10

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                                                6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 13    Planning Proposal - Annexure B - Concept Plans 11

PDF Creator



Planning and Development Committee                                                         6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 14    Planning Proposal - Annexure C - SEPP Schedule

PDF Creator


PDF Creator

 

PDF Creator


Planning and Development Committee                                                         6 June 2017

2.7                       Planning Proposal - Totally Local

Attachment 15    Planning Proposal - Annexure D - S117 Ministerial Directions

PDF CreatorPDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator