Agenda of Planning and Development Committee

Planning and Development Committee 6 October 2020

2.1 Item Approved Under the Delegated Authority of Council

RECORD NUMBER: 2020/1667

AUTHOR: Paul Johnston, Manager Development Assessments

EXECUTIVE Summary

Following is a list of more significant development applications approved by the Chief Executive Officer under the delegated authority of Council. Not included in this list are residential scale development applications that have also been determined by staff under the delegated authority of Council (see last paragraph of this report for those figures).

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “7.1 Preserve - Engage with the community to develop plans for growth and development that value the local environment”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

Recommendation

That Council resolves to acknowledge the information provided in the report by the Manager Development Assessments on Items Approved Under the Delegated Authority of Council.

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.

Reference:	DA 235/2017(2)	Determination Date	14 September 2020
PR Number	PR17724
Applicant/s:	Mr M Armstrong
Owner/s:	Apostolic Church Trust
Location:	Lots 17-21 Sec 7 DP 13315, and Lot 1 DP 436291 - 33-45 Glenroi Avenue, Orange
Proposal:	Modification of development consent - place of public worship (alterations to existing building). The modified proposal seeks to amend the originally approved alterations and summarised as follows: · rearrangement of toilet facilities, including deletion of the shower from the accessible toilet, · minor rearrangement of kitchen and servicing area, including making it slightly larger than originally approved, · adding an internal glass divider and double doors between the reception and main hall areas, and · adding an outdoor paved area with retaining wall and ramp adjacent to the building (eastern elevation fronting Glenroi Avenue), including the deletion of the ramp on the southern elevation.
Value:	$0
Reference:	DA 405/2017(4)	Determination Date	14 September 2020
PR Number	PR10141
Applicant/s:	Orange Evangelical (OEC) Church Incorporated
Owner/s:	Orange Evangelical (OEC) Church Incorporated
Location:	Lot 9 DP 746439 - 241 Ploughmans Lane, Orange
Proposal:	Modification of development consent - place of public worship and business identification sign. The modified proposal involved the following components: · an amended building design (roof profile) for the main church building; · a revised location for the temporary car park; · deletion of superfluous conditions relating to utility services (sewer connection); and · amendment of conditions to defer headworks contributions and Controlled Activity Approval to Occupation Certificate stage.
Value:	$0

Reference:	DA 206/2018(3)	Determination Date	17 September 2020
PR Number	PR12746
Applicant/s:	Landorange Partnership
Owner/s:	Mr KR and Mrs JA Kramer
Location:	Lots 101-141 DP 1260733 and Lots 50-51 DP 1256004 – Shiralee Road and Balmoral Drive, Orange (formerly known as Lots 92, 93 and 95 DP 750401 – 124, 136 And 148 Shiralee Road, Orange)
Proposal:	Modification of development consent - subdivision (102 lots - comprising 101 residential lots and one open space lot) and demolition (dwellings x two and outbuildings). The modified proposal involved deletion of Conditions 35 and 36. The subject conditions require registration of Restrictions-as-to-User on the proposed lots, which call for dwellings on the lots to comply with development standards contained in the Shiralee Development Control Plan (DCP).
Value:	$0

Reference:	DA 448/2018(2)	Determination Date	27 August 2020
PR Number	PR28696
Applicant/s:	Housing Plus
Owner/s:	Orange City Council
Location:	Lot 204 DP 1257565 - 4 Lady Peel Close, Orange
Proposal:	Modification of development consent - group home (transitional), community facility and hostel. The modification involved amendments to boundary and internal fencing, staging, accessibility, fire engineering and landscaping.
Value:	$700,000

Reference:	DA 29/2019(2)	Determination Date	20 August 2020
PR Number	PR20239
Applicant/s:	Canobolas Diesel and Turbo
Owner/s:	Mr CB and Mrs KM Naveau
Location:	Lot 71 DP 1077737 - 57 Astill Drive, Orange
Proposal:	Modification of development consent - vehicle repair station and business identification signage. The modification involved modification of the approved development by removing a condition of consent relating to a water and sewer contribution for the wash bay.
Value:	$0

Reference:	DA 8/2020(1)	Determination Date	16 July 2020
PR Number	PR28326
Applicant/s:	Mr IY Zhang
Owner/s:	IJ Zhang Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 50 DP1249530, 3 Camellia Place, Orange
Proposal:	Multi dwelling housing (four dwellings) and subdivision (four residential lots).
Value:	$720,000

Reference:	DA 151/2020(1)	Determination Date	9 September 2020
PR Number	PR28399
Applicant/s:	Allied Group Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Allied Group Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 8 DP 1255866- 5 Catherine Place, Orange
Proposal:	Subdivision of one lot into six lots (Community title) and construction of five dwelling houses
Value:	$800,000

Reference:	DA 161/2020(1)	Determination Date	8 September 2020
PR Number	PR20437
Applicant/s:	DCLD Investments Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	DCLD Investments Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 2 DP 1085646 - 260 Clergate Road, Orange
Proposal:	Depot and associated earthworks
Value:	$500,000

Reference:	DA 166/2020(1)	Determination Date	31 August 2020
PR Number	PR10625
Applicant/s:	Mr G Madafiglio
Owner/s:	Carwoola Family Pty Limited
Location:	Lot 10G, PCE CR, DP 4099 - 125 Sale Street, Orange
Proposal:	Serviced apartments (change of use)
Value:	$50,000

Reference:	DA 172/2020(1)	Determination Date	21 August 2020
PR Number	PR21275
Applicant/s:	Sainsbury and McAlpine Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Sainsbury and McAlpine Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 25 DP 270446- 16A Cameron Place, Orange
Proposal:	Vehicle sales or hire premises and vehicle repair station
Value:	$500,000

Reference:	DA 179/2020(2)	Determination Date	15 September 2020
PR Number	PR26464
Applicant/s:	BJM International Ferry Services Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Orange City Council
Location:	Lot 200 DP 1195298 - 136 Aerodrome Road, Huntley
Proposal:	Modification of development consent - airport (bulk fuel tank and refuelling facility). The proposed modification sought to remove Condition 6 from the notice of determination in regards to collection of stormwater from the refuelling area and piped to a stormwater treatment system.
Value:	$0

Reference:	DA 206/2020(1)	Determination Date	22 September 2020
PR Number	PR12990
Applicant/s:	Spring Hill Activities Group Incorporated
Owner/s:	Orange City Council
Location:	Lot 7004 DP 1020289 - Baker Street, Spring Hill
Proposal:	Recreation area (memorial wall)
Value:	$4,000

Reference:	DA 233/2020(1)	Determination Date	14 September 2020
PR Number	PR28571
Applicant/s:	Willowdene Constructions Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Willowdene Constructions Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 114 DP 1260733 - 26 Balmoral Drive, Orange
Proposal:	Subdivision (seven lot Community title) and dwelling houses (six)
Value:	$1,800,000.00

Reference:	DA 248/2020(1)	Determination Date	21 August 2020
PR Number	PR18963
Applicant/s:	Mr G Stevenson
Owner/s:	Mr GJ Stevenson
Location:	Lot 307 DP 1061640 – 234 Forest Road, Spring Hill
Proposal:	Recreation facility (equine shed cover)
Value:	$73,000

Reference:	DA 292/2020(1)	Determination Date	4 September 2020
PR Number	PR2225
Applicant/s:	Alkane Resources
Owner/s:	Mr MJ and Mrs FL Hallinan
Location:	Lot 401 DP 712625 – 22 Cameron Place, Orange
Proposal:	Light industry (change of use from warehouse)
Value:	$5,000

Reference:	DA 305/2020(1)	Determination Date	4 September 2020
PR Number	PR6918
Applicant/s:	Studio Seed Orange
Owner/s:	Ophir Tavern Land Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 50 DP 817766 - 133 Lords Place, Orange
Proposal:	Recreation facility (indoor) (health studio) and business identification signage
Value:	$50,000

Reference:	DA 318/2020(1)	Determination Date	22 September 2020
PR Number	PR26102
Applicant/s:	Akura Properties Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Akura Properties Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 6 DP 1183249 - 231 McLachlan Street, Orange
Proposal:	Subdivision (eight lot Strata)
Value:	$0

Reference:	DA 321/2020(1)	Determination Date	15 September 2020
PR Number	PR28373
Applicant/s:	Ms J Greening
Owner/s:	Mr ZJ and Mrs KL Stowers
Location:	Lot 2 SP 99592 - 12B Elwin Drive, Orange
Proposal:	Warehouse (alterations and additions)
Value:	$153,000

Reference:	DA 323/2020(1)	Determination Date	21 September 2020
PR Number	PR14898
Applicant/s:	Mrs O Heffernan
Owner/s:	Orange Arcade Pty Limited
Location:	Lot 1 DP 572210 – Sale Street, Orange
Proposal:	Takeaway food and drink premises (change of use and internal fitout) and business identification signage
Value:	$15,000

TOTAL NET* VALUE OF DEVELOPMENTS APPROVED BY THE CEO UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY IN THIS PERIOD: $5,370,000.00

* 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.

Additionally, since the September PDC meeting report periods (25 August to 24 September 2020), another 36 development applications were determined under delegated authority by other Council staff with a combined value of $4,106,426.

Planning and Development Committee 6 October 2020

2.6 Development Application DA 191/2020(1) - 4613 Mitchell Highway, Lucknow

RECORD NUMBER: 2020/1885

AUTHOR: Summer Commins, Senior Planner

EXECUTIVE Summary

Application lodged	22 May 2020
Applicant/s	Brothers Three Pty Ltd
Owner/s	Brothers Three Pty Ltd
Land description	Lot 101 DP 1053642 - 4613 Mitchell Highway, Lucknow
Proposed land use	Service Station (removal of existing fuel dispensers, fill points, underground fuel tanks and pipework; construction of a two dispenser covered vehicle fuelling area, new underground fuel tanks and forecourt pollution control system) and Business Identification Signage
Value of proposed development	$620,000

Council's consent is sought for service station upgrade at 4613 Mitchell Highway, Lucknow (see locality at Figure 1) after resolution for deferral was determined for a site visit.

The proposal involves removal and replacement of existing underground fuel storage tanks and fuel pumps; construction of a refuelling canopy; and upgraded forecourt works for stormwater treatment.

Notable planning matters for this application include the suitability of the local road network to accommodate traffic associated with the service station; the impacts on the proposal on nearby residential amenity; and the constraints imposed by the Village character and conservation setting.

The development application was referred to Transport for NSW (TfNSW) for consideration and comment. Service stations are traffic generating development pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007; and TfNSW concurrence is required for works within the road reserve at the site frontage under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993. TfNSW raised no objection to the proposal. Minor upgrading works within the road reserve have been recommended in conjunction with Council’s Development Engineers.

The proposal comprises Notified Development pursuant to Council’s Community Participation Plan 2019. At the completion of the notification period, two submissions had been received from one neighbour. The issues raised in the submissions relate to residential amenity (noise, light and odour); and traffic arrangements (site access and highway upgrade).

As outlined in this report, the proposed development is considered to satisfy the Local and State planning controls that apply to the subject land and particular landuse. Impacts of the development will be within reasonable limit subject to mitigation conditions. Approval of the application is recommended.

Figure 1 - locality plan

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 provisions of the LEP must be considered by the Council in determining the application. 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. The objectives of each zoning and indeed the aims of the LEP itself are also to be considered and can be used to guide decision making around appropriateness of development.

Orange Development Control Plan 2004 – the DCP provides guidelines for development. In general it is a performance based document rather than prescriptive in nature. For each planning element 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. The DCP enables developers and architects to use design to achieve the planning outcomes in alternative ways.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR’S COMMENT

The proposed service station upgrade is permitted with consent. This proposal ultimately involves an environmental upgrade of an existing Service Station. The key planning issues considered in this report include the suitability of the local road network to accommodate traffic associated with the development; the impacts on the proposal on nearby residential amenity; and the constraints associated with the Village character and conservation setting. It is recommended that Council supports the proposed development and the accompanying Notice of Determination.

TECHNICAL SERVICES DIRECTOR’S COMMENT

The key planning matters have been covered within the body of the report and the proposed service station development remains a renewal of existing infrastructure. I note that the bowser numbers remains unchanged from the existing two bowsers able to service a total of four vehicles at a time, however the variety of fuels and hence number of hoses has increased to 5 each side and a total of 20 to service a wider variety of customers. I note the adjoining neighbours’ concerns and have spoken to him previously onsite, a number of the concerns have been addressed within the condition of consent.

I have reviewed the correspondence between Council and Transport for NSW, and concur with their recommendations on the basis that the traffic generation could be validated and checked for safety against the Austroads warrants for intersection treatments. The developer’s traffic engineering consultant was asked to expand on his report to provide further detail and break down of turning traffic for the peak hour flows (see attached). On the basis of the low volume of right turning traffic (5 in) and the existing high volume of peak through traffic (817) during the evening peak hour, this does not exceed the Austroads warrants for a channelised right turn lane.

This was also discussed with the TfNSW Senior Manager. Their considered opinion was that TfNSW had made an independent determination referencing the Guide for Traffic Generating Developments and reconsidered the conditions of consent on that basis. A number of improvements were warranted but the CHR (Channelised Right) turn treatment was no longer warranted.

There are conditions of consent which include no stopping, entry and exit signage limiting access to vehicles under 12.5m long, replaced and formalised concrete footpath, kerb and gutter, drainage and access ramps that all improve the safety of the existing development. On this basis and the additional information provided by the applicant I support the recommendation to Council.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “10.1 Preserve - Engage with the community to ensure plans for growth and development are respectful of our heritage”.

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

Recommendation

That Council consents to development application DA 191/2020(1) for Service Station (removal of existing fuel dispensers, fill points, underground fuel tanks and pipework; construction of a two dispenser covered vehicle fuelling area, new underground fuel tanks and forecourt pollution control system) and Business Identification Signage at Lot 101 DP 1053642 - 4613 Mitchell Highway, Lucknow, pursuant to the conditions of consent in the attached Notice of Approval.

further considerations

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The site is the subject of recent development consent for a larger service station re‑development (DA 33/2018(1) approved 18 December 2018).

The approved development involves demolition/removal of all improvements on the site, and replacement with new underground tanks; fuel dispensing bowsers; three service channels (rows of pumps); and convenience store with floor area of 200m². An extract of the approved plans is shown below (see Figures 2 and 3).

Figure 2 – approved site plan DA 33/2018(1)

Figure 3 – approved sales building DA 33/2018(1)

The applicant has advised that the approved development will not proceed. Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval requiring DA 33/2018(1) be surrendered in accordance with Section 4.17(5) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, prior to issue of a Construction Certificate for the current proposal.

THE PROPOSAL

The new proposal involves upgrading of the existing service station on the subject land. Proposed works include:

· demolition of existing fuel dispensers, fill points, underground fuel tanks and associated pipe works

· installation of two x 70,000L underground fuel storage tanks

· installation of two fuel dispensers, each with ten hoses

· construction of a refuelling canopy of dimensions 11m x 15m, with height of 5.4m

· extension of concrete forecourt vehicle areas

· installation of pollution control requirements (puraceptor and bunding)

· removal of existing pylon sign on the footpath at the site frontage

· installation of brand signage, comprising fascia signage to canopy and 6m freestanding pylon sign.

The existing sales building will be retained in its current form. The location of existing site accesses via the Mitchell Highway will not be altered. Proposed hours of operation are 7am to 10pm, 7 days per week.

The proposed site layout, canopy design and pylon sign are depicted below (see Figures below).

Figure 4 – proposed site layout

Figure 5 – canopy (North Eastern elevation to Mitchell Highway)

Figure 6 – proposed pylon sign

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION UNDER THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT 1979

Section 1.7 - Application of Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994

Pursuant to Clause 1.7:

This Act has effect subject to the provisions of Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 that relate to the operation of this Act in connection with the terrestrial and aquatic environment.

In consideration of this section, the proposed development is not likely to significantly affect a threatened species:

· The subject and adjoining lands are not identified as biodiversity sensitive on the Orange LEP 2011 Terrestrial Biodiversity Map.

· The proposal does not involve clearing or disturbance of native vegetation; clearing thresholds prescribed by regulation do not apply.

· The site is contained within an established urban area and has been highly modified by the urban landuse pattern. The subject land does not contain known threatened species or ecological communities.

Based on the foregoing consideration, a Biodiversity Assessment Report is not required and the proposal suitably satisfies the relevant matters at Clause 1.7.

Section 4.15 Evaluation

Provisions of any Environmental Planning Instrument S4.15(1)(A)(I)

Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

Part 1 – Preliminary

Clause 2.1 Aims of Plan

The particular aims of Orange LEP 2011 relevant to the proposal 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,

(c) to conserve and enhance the water resources on which Orange depends, particularly water supply catchments,

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

The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the above-listed LEP Aims.

· The proposal involves upgrading of a derelict site, with positive impacts on village character and function, and flow-on effects for the local economy and regional centre status.

· The proposed development is not considered to be adverse to ESD principles. The proposal involves environmental upgrade of the existing facility, incorporating contemporary quality standards.

· As outlined in this report, the proposed service station upgrade will be sited, designed and managed to protect water resources.

· As outlined in the following sections of this report, the proposal will not adversely impact on the conservation values of the setting.

Clause 1.6 Consent Authority

Clause 1.6 is applicable and states:

The consent authority for the purposes of this Plan is (subject to the Act) the Council.

Clause 1.7 Mapping

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

Land Zoning Map:	Land zoned RU5 Village
Lot Size Map:	Minimum Lot Size 1,000m²
Heritage Map:	Within a heritage 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:	Groundwater 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:	No restriction on building siting or construction
Additional Permitted Uses Map:	No additional permitted use applies
Flood Planning Map:	Not within a flood planning area

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

Clause 1.9A Suspension of Covenants, Agreements and Instruments

Clause 1.9A is applicable and states in part:

(1) For the purpose of enabling development on land in any zone to be carried out in accordance with this Plan or with a consent granted under the Act, any agreement, covenant or other similar instrument that restricts the carrying out of that development does not apply to the extent necessary to serve that purpose.

(2) This clause does not apply:

(a) to a covenant imposed by the Council or that the Council requires to be imposed, or

(b) to any prescribed instrument within the meaning of section 183A of the Crown Lands Act 1989, or

(c) to any conservation agreement within the meaning of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, or

(d) to any Trust agreement within the meaning of the Nature Conservation Trust Act 2001, or

(e) to any property vegetation plan within the meaning of the Native Vegetation Act 2003, or

(f) to any biobanking agreement within the meaning of Part 7A of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, or

(g) to any planning agreement within the meaning of Division 6 of Part 4 of the Act.

In consideration of this clause, Council staff are not aware of the title of the subject property being affected by any of the above. Easements relating to the allocation of parking for adjacent development will remain in place.

Part 2 - Permitted or Prohibited Development

Clause 2.1 - Land Use Zones

The subject land is zoned RU5 Village.

The proposed development is defined as a ‘service station’, which means:

A building or place used for the sale by retail of fuels and lubricants for motor vehicles, whether or not the building or place is also used for any one or more of the following –

(a) the ancillary sale by retail of spare parts and accessories for motor vehicles,

(b) the cleaning of motor vehicles,

(c) installation of accessories,

(d) inspecting, repairing and servicing of motor vehicles (other than body building, panel beating, spray painting, or chassis restoration),

(e) the ancillary retail selling or hiring of general merchandise or services or both.

Service stations are permitted with consent in the RU5 Village zone.

Clause 2.3 Zone Objectives and Land Use Table

The objectives of the RU5 Village zone are:

· To provide for a range of land uses, services and facilities that are associated with a rural village.

· To enhance and maintain the unique village character of Lucknow and Spring Hill.

The proposal will not be adverse to the zone objectives. Services stations are a permitted and complementary land use in the RU5 zone. The use of the land as a service station is a longstanding and accepted component of the village. Upgrading of the site will have positive impacts on village character and function. Mitigation conditions will minimise offsite arising impacts for adjoining properties.

Clause 2.7 Demolition Requires Development Consent

Clause 2.7 is applicable and states:

‘The demolition of a building or work may be carried out only with development consent’

Consent is sought for demolition/removal of existing fuel dispensers, fill points, underground fuel tanks and infrastructure, and pylon sign in accordance with this clause.

Part 3 - Exempt and Complying Development

The application is not exempt or complying development.

Part 4 - Principal Development Standards

The Development Standards at Part 4 are not applicable to the subject land or proposed development.

Part 5 - Miscellaneous Provisions

Clause 5.10 Heritage Conservation

The subject site is located within the Lucknow Heritage Conservation Area. Clause 5.10 is applicable and states in part:

(4) 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…

In consideration of this clause, the proposed development was referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor for consideration and comment. He advises:

‘The use of standard structures and the corporate colour scheme is accepted on the condition that suitable mitigation is provided for the impact of the contemporary structure within the historic setting.

The condition of the existing service building is poor. There are elements of the structure and paint finish which appear to produce hazards and these include loose lead based paint, damaged structures and loose building fabric.

In addition the site management is poor with the placement of signs on public land, the placement of rubbish bins on the site frontage and an insecure site perimeter. These aspects of the site reflect poorly on the business operator, reflect poorly on the business brand and indirectly reflect poorly on the local Lucknow community and businesses. ‘

The Heritage Advisor has provided a number of recommendations to ensure that the visual impact of the works will be acceptable within the heritage setting. The recommendations and staff comments are tabulated below.

Heritage Advisor Recommendation	Staff Response
The steel-framed canopy structure shall be painted Dulux Shale Grey	A condition is included.
The fuel canopy soffit shall be painted / finished Dulux Shale Grey	A condition is included.
A lighting study shall be prepared to ensure glare and light spill from the canopy complies with relevant standards	Pre-construction and operational conditions are included.
Standard rural fencing shall be erected to site boundaries	This is considered to be unreasonable/unnecessary. The front (north) boundary is affected by extensive vehicle crossovers. Solid fencing is required to side and rear boundaries for noise attenuation.
A landscape plan shall be prepared, including hedge screen to side boundaries	A condition is included.
Existing signage shall be removed and replaced with proposed signage in the DA	A condition is included.
New concrete driveways shall be through-coloured using a charcoal oxide	A condition is included requiring a consistent concrete coloured finish over the site.
The acoustic screen to the side (east) boundary shall be approved prior to construction	A condition is included requiring the acoustic screen be constructed of lapped and capped timber palings and have a height of 1-.8m - 2.1m.

As noted above, the proposed development does not involve any works to the existing sales building. Site inspection indicates that the building is in a state of disrepair and renovation works will likely be required (see photo at Figure 7).

Figure 7 – existing sales building (Google maps)

Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval that further consent will be required for any works that are not exempt development pursuant to SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008.

Subject to compliance with the mitigation conditions above, it is considered that the proposal will not have adverse impact on the significance of the Lucknow Heritage Conservation Area, pursuant to Clause 5.10(4). Site upgrading will have positive impacts on the village character and may increase appreciation of the heritage setting.

Part 7 - Additional Local Provisions

Clause 7.3 Stormwater Management

Clause 7.3 is applicable and 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 onsite infiltration of water, and

(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.

Council’s Assistant Development Engineer has included conditions to satisfy the requirements of Clause 7.3. The design and construction of the conditional stormwater treatment system for the upgraded site shall ensure stormwater runoff achieves standardised and contemporary stormwater quality targets.

Clause 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, there are no aspects of the proposal that will impact on groundwater and related ecosystems. The design and construction of the underground fuel tanks and onsite pollution control and containment measures will be suitable to prevent any groundwater contamination.

Clause 7.7 Drinking Water Catchments

The subject land is identified as ‘drinking water’ on the Drinking Water Catchment Map. Clause 7.7 is applicable and states in part:

(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.

In consideration of this clause, the proposed service station upgrade is unlikely to impact on the quality and quantity of water entering the drinking water catchment. The conditional stormwater design will ensure runoff complies with standardised targets. Underground fuel tank storage will be designed and constructed in accordance with contemporary standards. Pollution control and containment measures will be installed onsite.

Clause 7.11 Essential Services

Clause 7.11 applies and 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 onsite conservation,

(e) suitable road access.

In consideration of this clause, the listed utility services are available and suitable subject to augmentation.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICIES

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 Remediation of Land

SEPP 55 Remediation of Land is applicable. Pursuant to Clause 7 Contamination and remediation to be considered in determining development application:

(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 land has longstanding use as a service station; indeed Council’s records suggest this use dates back to the 1940s. Service stations are a “Table 1” listed use in the Contaminated Land Planning Guidelines (DUAP & EPA 1998), ie. use of land that is likely to cause contamination.

Environmental Site Assessment was submitted in support of the proposal (NEO Consulting (November 2017). The NEO concluded:

Laboratory analysis of each soil sample taken at the site indicates the site is well within the acceptable contamination and had no evidence of reaching any health based investigation levels. Based on these results, the site is suitable to continue as its current landuse as a fuel service site.

NEO recommendations for ongoing monitoring for site contamination included:

· Installation of at least three onsite water monitoring wells consistent with the Protection of the Environment Operations (Underground Petroleum Storage Systems) Regulation 2019; and

· Monthly Statistical Inventory Reconciliation Analysis (SIRA) of deliveries, sales and dips of petroleum products, consistent with EPA Guidelines.

Council’s Environmental Health Officer concurs with the findings and recommendations of the Environmental Site Assessment. The recommendations listed above are included as conditions of consent on the attached Notice of Approval.

It is noted that the submitted Environmental Site Assessment does not include soil samples in the vicinity of /underneath the existing underground fuel storage tanks, as these are yet to be removed. Conditions are included requiring contamination testing and appropriate disposal of excavated material from the site; and contamination validation at the completion of excavation.

State Environmental Planning Policy No 33 Hazardous and Offensive Development

SEPP 33 is applicable where it is determined that the proposal is hazardous or offensive development. The relevant aims and objectives of the Policy at Clause 2 include:

(2) Aims, objectives etc

This Policy aims -

(d) to ensure that in determining whether a development is a hazardous or offensive industry, any measures proposed to be employed to reduce the impact of the development are taken into account, and

(e) to ensure that in considering any application to carry out potentially hazardous or offensive development, the consent authority has sufficient information to assess whether the development is hazardous or offensive and to impose conditions to reduce or minimise any adverse impact.

In order to determine whether the proposed development is potentially hazardous or offensive, a Risk Screening Test is applied, pursuant to Hazardous and Offensive Development Application Guidelines - Applying SEPP 33 (SEPP 33 Guidelines) (Department of Planning 2011).

The following details are required to inform the Risk Screening Test:

· Hazardous materials: motor spirit products - petrol, diesel.

· Dangerous goods classification: Class 3 PG II.

· Mode of storage: underground tanks.

· Maximum quantity stored: 140,000KL % 5 for underground storage = 28,000L or approx. 23 tonnes.

· Distance of filling/dispensing point to nearest boundary: 12.3m.

· Weekly and annual deliveries: three per week/150 per year.

With reference to the graph at Figure 9 of the SEPP 33 Guidelines, the proposed development will not exceed the volume and distance threshold (see graph below).

Figure 8 – screening graph – applying SEPP 33

Similarly, with reference to Table 2 of the SEPP 33 Guidelines, the proposed development will not exceed the maximum transportation threshold of 750 annual deliveries for Class 3 PG II hazardous materials. Conditions are included to ensure that development remains below this threshold in the future.

As the screening threshold tests were not exceeded, the proposal does not comprise potentially hazardous development and SEPP 33 is not applicable.

Notwithstanding, a preliminary hazard analysis (PHA) has been submitted in support of the proposed development as a matter of completeness (MCHP Architects May 2020). The qualitative risk analysis confirms that the societal risk associated with the proposed development will be negligible, subject to compliance with applicable standards and safeguards during design, construction and operation. Conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval to ensure same.

The proposed development will be acceptable in terms of the requirements of SEPP 33 requirements.

State Environmental Planning Policy Infrastructure 2007

Division 17 Roads and Traffic

Clause 101 Development with Frontage to a Classified Road

The subject land has frontage to a classified road (Mitchell Highway) and Clause 101 Development with Frontage to a Classified Road applies. This clause states in part:

(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.

In consideration of Clause 101:

· Existing dual access to the subject land via the Mitchell Highway will be retained in its current locations. The subject land does not have alternative site access via another road.

· The proposal will not adversely impact on the safety, efficiency and operation of the classified road due to the following:

- All vehicles will enter the site via the eastern crossover and driveway, and exit the site via the western crossover and driveway. Conditions are included requiring erection of signage to effect these arrangements.

- Site entrances will be upgraded. Conditions are included requiring reconstruction of both existing footpath crossings, suitable to accommodate the turn path of a 19m articulated vehicle.

- NO STOPPING signage shall be installed along both sides of the Mitchell Highway at the site frontage, and for a distance of at least 60m on approach and 60m on departure from the turning points into the site. Conditions are included to effect these arrangements.

- The existing concrete slab and pylon sign in the road reserve at the site frontage will be removed, and the area reinstated as public footpath.

- All un/loading activities shall be carried out within the subject land. Service deliveries shall be undertaken outside peak hours of patronage, as required by conditions.

- Site access will not be available for vehicles longer than 12.5m, excepting semi‑trailers for fuel resupply. Signage will be installed at the site entrances to limit vehicle size.

- The development does not involve emissions.

- The site has longstanding use as a service station, and traffic associated with this use is an accepted component of the local traffic network (notwithstanding that the site is presently non-operational).

The various formulae useful for estimating traffic demand in the RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Developments (2002) and the RMS Trip Generation Surveys – Service Stations (TEF, 2013) rely on parameters including site area, convenience store floor area, and number of service channels (rows of pumps). The proposal does not involve alteration to any of these components, and is therefore not considered to be an intensification of the existing use.

On this basis, it is the assessment of Council staff and Transport for NSW (TfNSW) that the proposal will not generate additional traffic volumes; nor result in a nexus for substantial highway intersection upgrades. The low-cost, contemporary safety and amenity improvements enquired by conditions above, will be suitable to maintain the safety, efficiency and operation of the classified road. Subsequent approval from TfNSW will be required for works within the road reserve under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993.

Traffic generation associated with the development will be imperceptible within the context of existing traffic volumes. The capacity of the local road network will be suitable to cater for additional volumes.

· The proposed development is not sensitive to traffic noise or vehicle emissions.

Clause 104 Traffic-generating Development

A service station is a listed traffic-generating development pursuant to Clause 104 and Schedule 3 of SEPP Infrastructure 2007. This clause states in part:

(3) Before determining a development application for development to which this clause applies, the consent authority must -

(a) give written notice of the application to RMS within 7 days after the application is made, and

(b) take into consideration -

(i) any submission that RMS provides in response to that notice within 21 days after the notice was given (unless, before the 21 days have passed, RMS advises that it will not be making a submission), and

(ii) the accessibility of the site concerned, including -

(A) the efficiency of movement of people and freight to and from the site and the extent of multi-purpose trips, and

(B) the potential to minimise the need for travel by car and to maximise movement of freight in containers or bulk freight by rail, and

(iii) any potential traffic safety, road congestion or parking implications of the development.

The proposed development was referred to TfNSW for consideration and comment. No objection was raised to the proposal, subject to conditions (referred to under Clause 101 above) which are included in the attached Notice of Approval.

As outlined in the foregoing section of this report, the proposed development will not adversely impact on traffic safety or road congestion.

State Environmental Planning Policy 64 Advertising and Signage

The proposal involves installation of brand signage to fascia canopy and a 6m high freestanding pylon sign adjacent to the existing sales building. SEPP 64 Advertising and Signage is applicable and states in part:

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

(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 following comments are provided in response to the relevant matters.

1 - 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?

Pylon signs are a typical advertising form in Lucknow, associated with ribbon commercial development along the highway. The proposed pylon sign will complement and reinforce this pattern. It is noted that a pylon sign associated with the service station is a longstanding visual element in the village. The existing sign will be removed and replaced with another smaller structure nearer to the sales building. The proposed fascia signage to the fuel canopy is a typical and expected form of signage associated with a service station.

2 - 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 located within a village and conservation setting and adjoins a dwelling house to the east. The site is located within the business core of the village near the intersection of Mitchell Highway/Phoenix Mine. The proposed signage will complement other signage nearby and will be generally suitable in this setting (see comments below in relation to height).

Council’s Heritage Advisor raised no objection to the proposed signage scheme, subject to removal of existing signs on the site. Conditions are included to this effect. It is considered that limited onsite advertising as proposed, will be suitable in the heritage setting.

In order to minimise the impacts of signage for the adjoining dwelling to the east, conditions are included requiring an illumination curfew consistent with service station trading hours.

3 - 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?

Other pylon signs in the Lucknow streetscape are lower in height, and generally relate to the height of improvements on the land. A condition is included limiting the overall height of the pylon sign to 5.4m, consistent with the height of the proposed fuel canopy. The proposed signage scheme will not impact on viewing rights of adjoining businesses along the highway. Views in the streetscape corridor will be maintained.

4 - 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 pylon sign will be consistent with the streetscape pattern for freestanding pylon signs. Conditional reduction in the height of the pylon sign will ensure the structure will not protrude above existing improvements on the land. The proposed signage scheme will have nil impact onsite vegetation. Removal of the existing concrete pad and pylon sign in road reserve at site frontage, and reinstatement of footpath will improve street presentation of the site.

5 - 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 proposed pylon sign will be located nearby to the existing sales building, and be visually associated with the commercial building group on this site and the adjoining western site (Lucknow Tavern). Signage will be removed from the adjoining dwelling to the east. The proposed fascia signage to canopy will be wholly located within the building envelope and will not dominate each fascia elevation. The overall signage scheme is considered to a minor and acceptable duplication of advertising content. Conditions are included requiring removal of existing onsite advertising; and further development consent be obtained for additional signage that is not exempt development.

6 - 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?

Not applicable.

7 - 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 proposed pylon sign will be internally illuminated. The precinct is already subject to high ambient illuminance associated with street lighting and external lighting to nearby commercial premises. In order to maintain amenity for the adjoining dwellings, conditions are included requiring an illumination curfew consistent with trading hours; no flashing or moving signage content; and signage lighting to comply with AS 4282-1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

8 - 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 signage will be wholly located within the subject land, and will not conflict with the movement of vehicles, pedestrians or cyclists. Conditions are included requiring no flashing or moving signage content; and compliance with Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines (DPE 2017).

Provisions of any Draft Environmental Planning Instrument that has been Placed on Exhibition 4.15(1)(A)(Ii)

State Environmental Planning Policy Draft Remediation of Land

Draft Remediation of Land SEPP is applicable. The Draft SEPP requires in part that consideration be given to potential contamination on nearby or neighbouring properties and groundwater.

The complete contamination status of adjoining lands is unknown, however, contamination is usually a relevant matter for consideration in the village of Lucknow. The proposed development is, of itself, a Table 1 purpose. The contamination status of the adjoining lands will not impact on the proposed development.

Draft Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 (Amendment 24)

Draft Amendment 24 is with the Department of Planning for finalisation. The Draft Plan involves various administrative amendments to the LEP including updated maps, and new and amended clauses. The proposed development is not contrary to any matter contained in the Draft Plan.

Draft Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 (Amendments 25 and 26)

Draft Orange LEP 2011 Amendments 25 and 26 are currently on public exhibition (August 2020). The Draft Plans relate to land at 1 Leewood Drive and 185 Leeds Parade respectively, and have no impact for the proposed development.

DESIGNATED DEVELOPMENT

‘Service stations’ are not listed as designated development pursuant to Part 1 Schedule 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation (EPAR) 2000.

The nearest listed landuse in Schedule 3 comprises ‘petroleum works.’ Neither the Standard Instrument nor EPAR 2000 define ‘petroleum works.’

‘Petroleum related works’ are defined in SEPP (Mining, Petroleum Production and Extractive Industries) 2007 as:

Any works, structures or equipment that are ancillary or incidental to petroleum production and includes all works, structures and equipment that a production lease under the Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991, or a production licence under the Petroleum (Submerged Lands) Act 1982, entitles the lease or licence holder to construct, maintain or execute.

The proposed development involves the storage and retail sale of liquid fuel products and is outside of the definition, scope and scale ‘petroleum works’/‘petroleum related works.’ The proposed development is not designated development.

INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not integrated development.

Provisions of any Development Control Plan S4.15(1)(A)(Iii)

Development Control Plan 2004

The following parts of DCP 2004 are applicable to the proposed development:

· Part 0 – Transitional Provisions – 0.4-11 Transport Routes

· Part 2 - Natural Resource Management

· Part 3 - General Considerations

· Part 4 - Special Environmental Considerations

· Part 7 – Development in Residential Area

· Part 13 – Heritage Development

· Part 15 – Car Parking

The relevant matters in Parts 0, 2, 3, 4 and Infill Guidelines were considered in the foregoing assessment under Orange LEP 2011 and SEPP Infrastructure 2007.

The relevant matters in Parts 7, 13 and 15 and are addressed below.

Part 0.4-7 Lucknow & Part 7.13 Development in the Village of Lucknow

The relevant Planning Outcomes at Parts 0.4-7 and 7.13 are considered below:

· A geotechnical report, prepared by a suitably quality consultant is provided to Council… addressing the suitability of the land for the development, taking into account the effect of the proposal upon mine shafts…

· Development proposals involving new buildings or works on or near land identified as being subject to former mine activity include sufficient information to demonstrate that the land is suitable for the development…

The subject land has longstanding use a service station and is not known to have been subject to former mine activity. Notwithstanding, a condition is including requiring preparation and submission of a geotechnical report, certifying the site is suitable for upgrading works, having regard to mine subsidence.

· A report identifying that the land is suitable for development after being investigated for potential land contamination…

As outlined in the foregoing sections of this report, Environmental Site Assessment was submitted in support of the proposal (NEO Consulting November 2017). The assessment concludes that the site is suitable for continued use as a fuel service site. It is noted that the submitted Environmental Site Assessment does not include soil samples in the vicinity of/underneath the existing underground fuel storage tanks, as these are yet to be removed. Conditions are included requiring contamination testing and appropriate disposal of excavated material from the site; and contamination validation at the completion of excavation.

· Commercial development is located with the established business core of the Village centred on the Mitchell Highway/Phoenix Mine intersection. Buildings and associated signage are designed to relate to the traditional mining character of the Village to reinforce the mining history of the Village.

The subject land is located within the established business core of the Village, nearby the intersection of the Mitchell Highway/Phoenix Mine Road. The proposed development does not relate to the existing sales building, which will be retained in its current form. Further consent will be required for upgrading of this building, excepting works that are exempt development. As outlined above, the proposed signage scheme is considered suitable subject to conditions in relation to height, content and illumination curfew.

As considered in the foregoing sections of this report, Council’s Heritage Advisor provides that ‘the use of standard structures [canopy] and the corporate colour scheme is accepted on the condition that suitable mitigation is provided for the impact of the contemporary structure within the historic setting.’ Mitigation conditions are included in relation to colours, signage and advertising.

· The development is serviced by the public sewerage and water reticulation system, taking into account the planned capacity of these systems.

The subject land is connected to Council’s reticulated sewer and water infrastructure. Council’s Assistant Development Engineer advises that sewer and water headworks charges are not applicable to the proposal, as there will be no increase in fuel bowsers.

Part 13.3 Heritage Consideration for Development

The relevant Planning Outcomes at Part 13.3 include:

· Development relates to significant features of heritage buildings on or near the site.

· Development conforms with recognised conservation principles.

The proposal is not adverse to the above Planning Outcomes. As outlined in the foregoing sections of this report, Council’s Heritage Advisor raised no objection to the proposal subject to mitigation conditions.

Part 15.6 Off-street Car Parking

The relevant Planning Outcomes at Part 15.6 include:

· Adequate off-street car parking is provided in accordance with the table...

· Car parking areas are designed according to Australian Standard.

The proposed development will satisfy the above Planning Outcomes. Pursuant to the DCP, onsite parking is required for service stations at a rate of three (3) spaces per workbay and one (1) space per 25m² of shop, convenience store or payment area.

The proposed service station does not involve workbays and the existing sales building comprises floor area of 103m². Therefore, 4.12 spaces will be required. Informal car parking is available on the land at the rear of the existing sales building, sufficient to accommodate the required number of spaces. Conditions are included requiring construction of the carpark consistent with Council’s Development and Subdivision Code. Sufficient manoeuvring area will be available within the carpark to allow a reverse manoeuvring from parking spaces; onsite manoeuvring; and forward direction egress through the site to the highway.

Provisions Prescribed By The Regulations S4.15(1)(A)(Iv)

Demolition of a Building (clause 92)

The proposal involves the removal of existing underground storage tanks. Conditions are included requiring the works to be carried out in accordance with applicable standards; and preparation and implementation of a waste management plan.

Fire Safety Considerations (clause 93)

The proposal does not involve a change of building use for an existing building. The proposed fuel canopy will be located more than 3m from buildings and boundaries.

Buildings to be Upgraded (clause 94)

The proposal does not involve the rebuilding, alteration, enlargement or extension of an existing building. Upgrading of the existing sales building is not required in conjunction with the proposed works.

BASIX Commitments (clause 97A)

Not applicable.

The Likely Impacts of the Development S4.15(1)(B)

The following likely impacts of the proposed development have been considered in the foregoing sections of this report and include:

· Setting, context and neighbourhood character.

· Visual impacts (streetscape presentation, landscaping, signage).

· Traffic matters (site access, onsite vehicle areas, car parking and manoeuvring, traffic generation and network capacity).

· Environmental impacts (biodiversity, groundwater, stormwater management, sediment control, waste management).

· Cultural significance (conservation setting, streetscape).

Other likely impacts are considered below.

Residential Amenity

Dwelling houses adjoin the site to the east and south, and are located opposite the site on the north side of the highway. The potential impacts on residential amenity associated with the proposal, and measures to mitigate those impacts are considered below.

Noise Impacts

An Operational Noise Assessment was submitted in support of the proposal (Rodney Stevens Acoustics May 2020). The assessment concludes that ‘noise emissions from the operation of the service station including the proposed mechanical plant comply with the Noise Policy for Industry (EPA 2017).’

The noise assessment provides a number of recommendations to maintain acoustic privacy for adjoining residential receivers including (but not limited to) solid fencing to the side and rear site boundaries; and screening of the air compressor enclosure.

Council’s Environmental Health Officer concurs with the findings and recommendations of the submitted noise assessment. Conditions are included to reflect the recommendations, together with additional conditions in relation to hours of operation (7am to 10pm); fuel delivery times (7am to 6pm); and noise emissions (5dB(A)).

Privacy

The proposed service station will not impact on privacy for the adjoining dwellings as follows:

· Perimeter fencing to side and rear boundaries will be upgraded.

· Conditional site landscaping to boundaries will provide additional screening and separation.

· The entrance to the existing sales building is removed from and will not oppose any adjoining dwelling.

Solar Access

The proposal will not alter internal or external solar access for any adjoining dwelling.

Air Quality

Tank fill points will be located beneath the canopy adjacent to the front bowser (circled in blue below); and the fuel vent stacks will be located in the south-east portion of the site, opposing the dwelling at 4609 Mitchell Highway (circled in red below) (see Figure 9).

Figure 9 – fill points and tank vents

Council’s Environmental Health Officer advises that the proposed development is unlikely to result in odour emissions. It is acknowledged that fuel odour emissions have likely been associated with historic service station use of the land. However, the proposed replacement tanks and infrastructure are of a contemporary design and specification, with internal odour containment measures including vapour recovery. Odour containment and monitoring will be consistent with the requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations (Clean Air) Amendment (Vapour Recovery) Regulation 2009.

Fencing and landscaping to the site perimeters and change in ground levels between the service station and opposing dwellings will also assist to limit other emissions (eg onsite vehicles) beyond the site.

Lighting

In order to limit light spill from the subject land to adjoining dwellings, conditions are included requiring a curfew for illuminated signage consistent with hours of operation (7am to 10pm); no flashing or moving signage content; and all external lighting of the site and building be designed and installed to comply with AS 4282-1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

Visual Amenity

The following proposed and conditional measures will improve the presentation of the site for opposing dwellings:

· New fencing to rear and side site boundaries.

· Implementation of site landscaping.

· Reconstructed footway crossings and new concrete driveways.

· Removal of concrete pad and pylon sign in the road reserve at the site frontage.

· Preparation and implementation of a Litter Patrol Management Plan.

Security

The proposed development was referred to NSW Police for consideration and comment. No objection was raised to the proposal subject to installation of CCTV, external lighting and duress alarm/panic button. Conditions are included to effect these requirements.

Social and Economic Effects

The proposed development is unlikely to generate a negative social or economic impact within the locality. The use of the land as a service station is a longstanding and accepted component of the village. The proposal involves upgrading of a derelict site, with positive impacts on village character and function, and flow-on effects for the local economy and regional centre status.

The Suitability of the Site S4.15(1)(C)

The subject land is suitable for the proposed development due to the following:

· The proposed development is permitted on the subject land zoning.

· The site is located within the business core of the Village.

· The proposal comprises an environmental upgrade of the longstanding service station use of the land.

· All utility services are available and adequate.

· Sufficient onsite car parking and manoeuvring area will be available.

· The local road network is suitable to support the proposal without upgrade.

· The contamination status of the land is suitable for the proposed development; further validation of excavated material will occur during works.

· The land may be affected by naturally occurring asbestos; suitable management will be required during construction works.

· The land may be affected by subsidence associated with former mining use in the village. Conditional geotechnical investigation will confirm suitability.

· The land is not subject to other known natural hazards.

· The site is contained within a conservation area, and sympathetic site upgrading is appropriate.

· The site has no particular environmental values.

Any Submissions Made In Accordance With The Act S4.15(1)(D)

The proposed development comprises "notified development" pursuant to Council’s Community Participation Plan 2019.

Written notice of the application was given for the prescribed period. At the end of that period, two submissions had been received from the adjoining owner to the east (at 4609 Mitchell Highway). The issues raised in those submissions are considered below.

The proposal will devalue the adjoining dwelling

This is not a valid consideration in the assessment of a development application pursuant to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Notwithstanding, there is no evidence to suggest that complementary non-residential uses will devalue nearby dwellings. Site and premises upgrading as proposed may result in favourable impacts on property values nearby to the site.

The proposal will have unreasonable noise impacts (vehicles, plant)

Various conditions are included to ensure noise emissions associated with the development will comply with the Noise Policy for Industry (EPA 2017). These conditions include:

· Trading hours of 7am to 10pm.

· Fuel delivery hours of 7am to 6pm.

· Physical screening of mechanical plant.

· Sound barrier solid fencing to side and rear boundaries.

· Noise emissions not to exceed 5dB(A).

Illumination of signage will cause nuisance glare

Various conditions are include to minimise light spill from signage and other external lighting. These conditions include:

· Signage illumination curfew consistent with trading hours (7am to 10pm).

· Signage content shall not include flashing or moving content.

· External lighting to comply with AS 4282-1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

Fumes from the tank vents cause air pollution

As outlined in the foregoing sections of this report, Council’s Environmental Health Officer considers that fuel odour emissions will be negligible. The proposed fuel tanks and associated infrastructure are a contemporary design and specification to the existing facility, with odour containment measures including vapour recovery.

Night-time refuelling of tanks is unreasonable

Conditions are included limiting fuel delivery hours to 7am to 6pm.

Turning lanes are required on the highway at the site frontage to access the site

As outlined in the foregoing sections of this report, it is the assessment of Council staff and TfNSW that the proposal does not involve an intensification of the existing use of the land. The proposal will not alter existing site area, convenience store floor area or service channels (rows of pumps). The development will not generate additional traffic volumes nor result in a nexus for substantial highway intersection upgrades.

The proposal does not consider the movement of pedestrians

Conditions are included requiring reinstatement of the public footpath at the site frontage.

Twenty-four hour operation is unreasonable in the Village

A condition is included limited trading hours to 7am to 10pm.

Access driveways should be designed Entry (eastern driveway) and Exit (western driveway)

The proposed access arrangements involve vehicle entry via the eastern driveway, and egress via the western driveway. TfNSW has included conditions requiring the provision of signage at the driveways to enforce these arrangements.

Measures are required to protect stormwater infrastructure at the site frontage of 4609 Mitchell Highway

A condition is included requiring reconstruction of the subject stormwater outlet clear of the driveway reconstruction works, and including a concrete end wall or enclosure to protect the outlet.

A dual centre turning lane is required to access the site when turning across the highway from Orange

As outlined, Council staff and TfNSW consider that highway intersection upgrades will not be required for the proposed development. Conflicts between vehicles turning into the site and travelling east will be reduced by new NO STOPPING zones at the site frontage (see Figure 10 below). NO STOPPING zones will enable standing vehicles to be safely passed in the road shoulder. Conditions are included to effect these arrangements.

over page/

Figure 10 – conditional NO STOPPING zones at the site frontage

Noise proof fencing, 2.1m in height should be erected on the common boundary

Conditions are included requiring erection of 2.1m high lapped and capped timber palings on the common boundary with 4609 Mitchell Highway. It is noted that the submitted noise assessment requires a 1.8m high solid fence on this boundary. It is considered to be a reasonable low-cost amenity improvement for the nearest adjoining dwelling to provide additional height for improved visual and acoustic outcomes.

PUBLIC INTEREST s4.15(1)(e)

The proposal is not inconsistent with any relevant policy statements, planning studies, guidelines etc that have not been considered in this assessment. Site upgrading, with improved environmental protection works, will have positive impacts on village character and function, and flow-on effects for the local economy and regional centre status. The proposal is considered to be in the public interest.

SUMMARY

The proposed service station upgrade is permitted with consent. Notable planning matters considered in this report include the suitability of the local road network to accommodate traffic associated with the development; the impacts on the proposal on nearby residential amenity; and the constraints associated with the Village character and conservation setting.

Two (2) public submissions were received, which raised concerns in relation to residential amenity (noise, light and odour); and traffic arrangements (site access and highway upgrade).

On balance, it is considered that the proposed development satisfies the Local and State planning provisions applicable to the site and particular landuse. Approval of the application is recommended. Conditions of consent are included in the attached Notice of Approval to mitigate and manage arising impacts associated with the development.

COMMENTS

The attached Notice of Approval includes conditions from:

· Environmental Health and Building Inspector

· Environmental Health Officer

· Assistant Development Engineer

· Heritage Advisor

· Transport for NSW

· Manager City Presentation

· NSW Police

Attachments

1 Notice of Approval, D20/60093 ⇩

2 Plans, D20/50803 ⇩

3 Submissions, D20/50802 ⇩

4 Letter from Transport and Traffic Planning Associates - 4613 Mitchell Highway, D20/60096 ⇩

Application lodged	4 July 2018
Applicant/s	Health Infrastructure on behalf of Health Administration Corporation
Owner/s	Health Administration Corporation
Land description	Lot 2 DP 1230592 - 129-133 Sale Street Orange
Proposed land use	Demolition of a Heritage Item (all buildings, structures and vegetation to be removed) and Category 1 Remediation (asbestos removal)
Value of proposed development	$1,800,000.00 (as originally submitted) $3,945,295.00 (revised application)