Agenda of Planning and Development Committee

Planning and Development Committee 6 April 2021

2.1 Items Approved Under the Delegated Authority of Council

RECORD NUMBER: 2021/325

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 129/2018(2)	Determination Date	18 March 2021
PR Number	PR1164
Applicant/s:	Mr A and Mrs D Harvey
Owner/s:	Mr MF and Mrs JM Rangott
Location:	Lots 43 and 44 DP 608334 and Lot 42 DP 532439 – 1, 5 and 7 Barrett Street, Orange
Proposal:	Modification of development consent - demolition (existing former industrial building and trees), subdivision (boundary adjustment), subdivision (three lot Torrens) and dwelling houses (two dwellings). The modification involved: · altering the staging of the development to defer demolition of the former industrial building at the Racecourse Road frontage, via re-ordering of Conditions · reducing noise attenuation measures to the Rangott Mineral Exploration (RME) industrial shed at the site frontage, by amending Condition 20 · deleting requirements for a BCA compliance report relating to boundary setbacks for the RME industrial shed at the rear of the site, by deleting Condition 18.
Value:	$0

Reference:	DA 225/2019(2)	Determination Date	16 February 2021
PR Number	PR8324
Applicant/s:	AT & PL Swain Holdings Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	AT & PL Swain Holdings Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 50 DP 595199 - 25-27 McNamara Street, Orange
Proposal:	Modification of development consent - office premises (alterations and additions to existing building). The modification sought to regularise changes that have been undertaken within the building that did not reflect the original approval. The modification involved a revised lift location, minor changes to partitions on the ground and first floors of the building, altered toilet arrangements, and minor changes to the front entry door width and glazing.
Value:	$0

Reference:	DA 396/2019(2)	Determination Date	19 February 2021
PR Number	PR14629
Applicant/s:	Orange Pre-School Kindergarten Ltd
Owner/s:	Orange City Council (lessee Orange Preschool Kindergarten Ltd)
Location:	Lots 2 and 3 DP 237232 - 13 Moad Street, Orange
Proposal:	Modification of development consent -centre-based child care facility (alterations and additions to existing building). The modified proposal involved: · Internal reconfiguration of spaces and facilities; · Removal of enclosed verandah at rear and replacement with a new addition; and · Deletion of conditional development contributions as they relate to water and sewer ETs (Condition 8).
Value:	$0

Reference:	DA 14/2020(1)	Determination Date	16 February 2021
PR Number	PR11580
Applicant/s:	Alceon Group Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Alceon Group Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 564 DP 776383 - 212-220 Summer Street, Orange
Proposal:	Business premises (change of use and fit-out) and business identification signage
Value:	$120,000

Reference:	DA 224/2020(1)	Determination Date	4 February 2021
PR Number	PR25598
Applicant/s:	Mr T and Mrs C Carroll
Owner/s:	Mr TJ and Mrs CA Carroll
Location:	Lots 200 and 201 DP 1172126 – 55 and 57 Dalton Street, Orange
Proposal:	Centre-based child care facility (alterations and additions)
Value:	$655,000

Reference:	DA 324/2020(2)	Determination Date	3 March 2021
PR Number	PR11579
Applicant/s:	Helix Architects Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Australian Postal Corporation
Location:	Lot 11 Sec 40 DP 758817 – 222-224 Summer Street, Orange and Lot 22 Sec 40 DP 758817 - Colvin Lane, Orange
Proposal:	Modification of development consent - business premises (alterations and additions and upgrade of works). The land is identified as a Heritage Item under the Orange LEP and on the State Heritage Register, and under the original development application the development was classified as a nominated integrated development. As this application is for a Section 4.55 (1a), it is not integrated development.
Value:	$55,000

Reference:	DA 346/2020(1)	Determination Date	16 February 2021
PR Number	PR28492
Applicant/s:	Hibbards Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Hibbards Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 4 DP 1259318 - 11 Bluebell Way, Orange
Proposal:	Multi dwelling housing (three dwellings) and subdivision (three Strata lots and common property)
Value:	$750,000

Reference:	DA 403/2020(1)	Determination Date	25 February 2021
PR Number	PR9700
Applicant/s:	Golder Associates Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Golder Associates Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 10 DP 18989, Lots 8 and 9 DP 18703, Lot 12 Sec 42 DP 758817 – 273‑285 Peisley Street and 155 March Street, Orange
Proposal:	Demolition (all buildings) and site remediation
Value:	$880,000

Reference:	DA 415/2020(1)	Determination Date	25 February 2021
PR Number	PR25746
Applicant/s:	The Anglican Schools Corporation
Owner/s:	Anglican Schools Corporation
Location:	Lot 100 DP 1174806 - 7 Murphy Lane, Orange
Proposal:	School (alterations to existing school building and conversion to new prep facility)
Value:	$477,000

Reference:	DA 419/2020(1)	Determination Date	20 January 2021
PR Number	PR28592 and PR28593
Applicant/s:	Contemporary Homes Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Divlist Pty Limited and Mikell Investments Pty Limited
Location:	Lots 135 and 136 DP1260733 - 128 and 130 Shiralee Road, Orange
Proposal:	Exhibition village (change of use of two dwellings to exhibition homes) and business identification signage
Value:	$15,000

Reference:	DA 432/2020(1)	Determination Date	10 March 2021
PR Number	PR12273
Applicant/s:	Mr S Kidd
Owner/s:	Mr SB Kidd and Ms AJ Newsom
Location:	Lot 11 Sec 2 DP 2986 - 37 Wakeford Street, Orange
Proposal:	Dual occupancy and subdivision (two lot residential)
Value:	$270,000

Reference:	DA 446/2020(1)	Determination Date	9 March 2021
PR Number	PR11517 and PR11518
Applicant/s:	Mr N Kelly
Owner/s:	Ms V Kourtis and Mrs M Pertsoulis
Location:	Lot 10 DP 203590, Lot 351 DP 625439 249 Summer Street and 251-257 Summer Street, Orange
Proposal:	Pub (alterations and additions to existing building)
Value:	$650,000

Reference:	DA 457/2020(1)	Determination Date	5 March 2020
PR Number	PR11368
Applicant/s:	Mr JA Granger
Owner/s:	Mrs JM Granger
Location:	Lot 1 DP 199569 - 56-58 Spring Street, Orange
Proposal:	Subdivision (two lot Torrens), subdivision (five lot Community), demolition (outbuilding) and dwelling houses (four dwellings)
Value:	$1,300,000.00

Reference:	DA 465/2020(1)	Determination Date	16 February 2021
PR Number	PR22176
Applicant/s:	Source Architects
Owner/s:	Mrs JM Granger
Location:	Lot 42 DP 1109880 - 22 Hale Street, Orange
Proposal:	Subdivision (two lot residential) and two dwellings (one per lot)
Value:	$460,000

Reference:	DA 469/2020(1)	Determination Date	25 February 2021
PR Number	PR6929
Applicant/s:	Benedict Design
Owner/s:	Formdell Pty Limited
Location:	Lot 59 DP 736583 - 173 Lords Place, Orange
Proposal:	Office premises (fitout of first floor)
Value:	$250,000

Reference:	DA 476/2020(1)	Determination Date	4 March 2021
PR Number	PR18521
Applicant/s:	PW Studio
Owner/s:	Fitz’s Land Co Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 100 DP 1040962 – 234 Canobolas Road, Canobolas
Proposal:	Farm stay accommodation (x 2 buildings) and associated services
Value:	$500,000

Reference:	DA 477/2020(1)	Determination Date	9 March 2021
PR Number	PR11547
Applicant/s:	Mr A Nguyen
Owner/s:	Anandmahi Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 4 DP 576169 - 312-324 Summer Street, Orange
Proposal:	Electricity generating works (roof-top solar panels)
Value:	$29,662

Reference:	DA 480/2020(1)	Determination Date	11 March 2021
PR Number	PR10533
Applicant/s:	Byng Administration Services Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Byng Administration Services Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 2 Sec E DP18064, Lot 16 DP 1120534 – 23 Rowan Street and Woodward Street, Orange
Proposal:	Subdivision (two lot boundary adjustment)
Value:	$0

Reference:	DA 483/2020(1)	Determination Date	12 March 2021
PR Number	PR10266
Applicant/s:	Mr MA McClure
Owner/s:	Mr MA McClure
Location:	Lot A DP 153201, 22 Prince Street, Orange
Proposal:	Demolition (existing carport, garden sheds and tree removal), garage (new construction) and subdivision (two lot residential)
Value:	$10,000

Reference:	DA 509/2020(1)	Determination Date	10 March 2021
PR Number	PR21017
Applicant/s:	The Hub Orange Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	The Hub Orange Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 50 DP 1099901 - 2-10 McNeilly Avenue, Orange
Proposal:	Subdivision (four lot industrial)
Value:	$0

Reference:	DA 5/2021(1)	Determination Date	8 March 2021
PR Number	PR17508
Applicant/s:	David G Evans Architect
Owner/s:	Orange Vision Pty Ltd
Location:	Lot 1 DP 1010563 - 59 Lords Place, Orange
Proposal:	General industry (alterations and additions to existing building)
Value:	$625,000

Reference:	DA 23/2021(1)	Determination Date	18 February 2021
PR Number	PR9460
Applicant/s:	Orange Aboriginal Medical Service
Owner/s:	NSW Land and Housing Corporation
Location:	Lot 13 DP 807799 - 8 Oxley Place, Orange
Proposal:	Community facility (alterations and additions to existing building)
Value:	$60,000

Reference:	DA 30/2021	Determination Date	11 March 2021
PR Number	PR27990
Applicant/s:	Stay Upright
Owner/s:	Orange City Council
Location:	Lot 807 DP 1240445 - 16 Elwin Drive, Orange
Proposal:	Rider training facility, site works and business identification signage (INNOMINATE USE)
Value:	$580,000

Reference:	DA 33/2021(1)	Determination Date	18 February 2021
PR Number	PR11580
Applicant/s:	CPRAM Investments Pty Ltd
Owner/s:	Alceon Group Pty Limited
Location:	Lot 564 DP 776383 - Tenancy 36 - 212 220 Summer Street, Orange
Proposal:	Business premises (first use, shop front, internal fit-out and internal signage) (Tenancy 36)
Value:	$70,000

Reference:	DA 38/2021(1)	Determination Date	11 March 2021
PR Number	PR4193
Applicant/s:	Mr TS Figuero
Owner/s:	Mr TS and Mrs IL Figuero
Location:	Lot A DP 371431 - 25 Franklin Road, Orange
Proposal:	Dwelling alterations and additions, secondary dwelling and attached garage and shed (detached)
Value:	$400,000

Reference:	DA 43/2021(1)	Determination Date	11 March 2021
PR Number	PR11630
Applicant/s:	Food Week Committee
Owner/s:	Orange City Council
Location:	Sampson Street, between Summer and Byng Streets, Orange
Proposal:	Temporary use of land (FOOD week luncheon) (Sampson Street)
Value:	$0

TOTAL NET* VALUE OF DEVELOPMENTS APPROVED BY THE CEO UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY IN THIS PERIOD: $8,156,662.00

* 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 March 2021 meeting report periods (19 February to 24 March 2021), another 13 development applications were determined under delegated authority by other Council staff with a combined value of $1,702,021.

Planning and Development Committee 6 April 2021

2.4 Development Application DA 10/2021(1) - 298 Clergate Road

RECORD NUMBER: 2021/553

AUTHOR: Rishelle Kent, Senior Planner

EXECUTIVE Summary

Application lodged	11 January 2021
Applicant/s	Orange City Council
Owner/s	Orange City Council
Land description	Lot 1 DP 1085646 - 298 Clergate Road, Orange
Proposed land use	Subdivision (46 lots – comprising 43 industrial lots, two lots for stormwater management and one public reserve lot)
Value of proposed development	Not applicable

Council's consent is sought for a 46 lot industrial subdivision of land at 298 Clergate Road, Orange, described as Lot 1 DP 1085646 (refer to Figure 1).

The proposal comprises 43 industrial allotments, two lots for stormwater, and a reserve for vegetation. The lots will be created with a minimum lot size of 4,000m² as required by Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011. The industrial lots will have access to a public road, reticulated sewer and water.

The site contains approximately 4.29ha of native vegetation with the dominant species identified as Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland (Plant Community Type 1330). The PCT 1330 community is listed as a Critically Endangered Ecological Community under Schedule 2 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016. The subdivision will result in the loss of 2.93ha of native vegetation for the construction of roads, provision of services and allowance for future industrial development on each new lot. The loss of native vegetation carries an offset obligation under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and NSW Biodiversity Offset scheme. The proponent (OCC) will be required to discharge the credit liability via the mechanisms provided by the NSW Biodiversity Offset scheme. The subdivision layout does, however, set aside one lot of 2.21ha as a reserve to protect a 1.36ha patch of remnant vegetation PCT 1330. In addition, all isolated native trees that are outside of the disturbance footprint for roads, services or earthworks will remain.

The application has been accompanied by a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) pursuant to the requirements of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016. In the case of threatened species development, the application was required to be advertised for a period of 28 days. No submissions were received.

Conditions of consent have been specifically recommended to alleviate potential noise conflicts with residential receivers to the west.

The proposal is consistent with the zone objectives and controls in Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011. Further, Council’s Declaration of Planning Procedures and Protocols requires the determination of the application to be made by Council for ‘any significant Council development where Council will be financial beneficiary’.

Approval of the application is recommended subject to conditions of consent in the attached Notice of Determination.

Figure 1 – Locality and Site Context Plan

DECISION FRAMEWORK

Development in Orange is governed by two key documents Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 and Orange Development Control Plan 2004.

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.

DIRECTOR’S COMMENT

The proposed development involves an industrial subdivision comprising 43 lots having a minimum area of 4,000m², two drainage lots and one lot that will be set aside as a reserve. Careful consideration has been given in the design and assessment of the application to ensure that future industrial development can occur in a manner that will not adversely impact upon the EEC. The proposed industrial development is in accordance with local and regional planning objectives. The recommendation that Council approves the development application is supported.

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 DA10/2021(1) for Subdivision (46 lots – comprising 43 industrial lots, two lots for stormwater management and one public reserve lot) at Lot 1 DP 1085646 - 298 Clergate Road, Orange pursuant to the conditions of consent in the attached Notice of Determination.

further considerations

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The proposal involves the creation of 43 industrial lots in three stages, together with two lots for stormwater management and one lot for vegetation preservation. Reticulated services will be provided to all industrial lots. All lots will be accessed via a new, internal road (excepting a temporary access for Lot 1). Staging is to be carried out as follows:

· Stage 1A – Lot 1 with an area of 1.874ha including servicing.

· Stage 1B – Lots 33 – 42 (10 lots) with roads and servicing as required.

· Stage 3 – Lots 2 to 32, and 43 (33 lots) with roads and servicing as required, and stormwater detention basins.

The proposed staging is shown in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2 – Subdivision Staging Plan

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING ASSESSMENT

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

Section 1.7 of the EP&A Act identifies that Part 7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act) and Part 7A of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 have effect in connection with terrestrial and aquatic environments.

Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Regulation 2017

The Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016, together with the Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2017, outlines the framework for addressing impacts on biodiversity from development and clearing. It establishes a framework to avoid, minimise and offset impacts on biodiversity from development through the Biodiversity Offsets Scheme.

There are four thresholds known to insert a development into the Biodiversity Offset Scheme (ie the need for a BDAR to be submitted with a DA). If any of these thresholds are exceeded, the Biodiversity Offset Scheme applies to the proposed development, including biodiversity impacts prescribed by clause 6.1 of the Biodiversity Regulation 2017.

· Threshold 1: development occurs in land mapped on the Biodiversity Values Map (OEH) (clause 7.1 of BC Regulation 2017); or

· Threshold 2: development involves clearing/disturbance of native vegetation above a certain area threshold (clauses 7.1 and 7.2 of BC Regulation 2017); or

· Threshold 3: development is otherwise likely to significantly affect threatened species (clauses 7.2 and 7.3 of BC Act 2016).

The fourth threshold (development proposed to occur in an Area of Outstanding Biodiversity Value (clause 7.2 of BC Act 2016) is generally not applicable to the Orange LGA as no such areas are known to occur in the LGA. No further comments will be made against the fourth threshold.

Threshold 1 (Vegetation Mapping)

The site is not mapped on the Biodiversity Value (BV) Map published by the Office of Environment and Heritage. However, it must be noted that the BV map is not a comprehensive vegetation mapping tool and does not map all native vegetation in NSW. Where an area of impact occurs with no vegetation mapping available published by the Environment Agency Head, Council’s vegetation mapping should be used in conjunction with site surveys. In this regard, the site is mapped as containing ‘High Sensitivity’ Terrestrial Biodiversity under Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011, and flora surveys undertaken by Premise Pty Ltd confirm that the site contains 4.29ha of native vegetation comprising pockets of remnant Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland ( PCT 1330) along with isolated native paddock trees and derived grassland (Figure 3). The PCT 1330 community is listed as a Critically Endangered Ecological Community under Schedule 2 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016. In addition, targeted fauna surveys undertaken by Premise Pty Ltd recorded twenty (20) native bird species (including one threatened species), eight (8) native bat species (including one threatened species) and one (1) native frog species and associated faunal habitat at the site.

Figure 3 – Vegetation Mapping (Premise)

Threshold 2 (Clearing Thresholds)

The site is zoned IN1 General Industrial and carries a minimum lot size of 4,000m² under Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011. Pursuant to Clause 7.2 of the Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2017, the prescribed native vegetation clearing threshold for lot sizes less than 1ha is 0.25ha:

Figure 4 – Clearing thresholds (C7.2 BC Reg 2017)

The proposed subdivision will result in the clearing of 23.98ha of vegetation, including 2.93ha of native vegetation which exceeds the area clearing threshold established under the Biodiversity Conservation Regulations 2017 and triggers the entry of the proposal into the Biodiversity Offset Scheme (BOS). In this regard, a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) has been prepared by Premise Pty Ltd (accredited assessor Dr Colin Bower BAAS18048) to identify the biodiversity value of the site, means to minimise and or manage impacts of the proposal, and to outline biodiversity offset liability for those impacts.

The BDAR specifically identifies that the clearing will involve the removal of 1.16ha of good quality PCT 1330, 1.77ha of poor quality PCT 1330, eight (8) isolated paddock trees and numerous Blakely’s Red Gum saplings. The Biodiversity Assessment Method Calculator (BAMC) values the vegetation loss at 43 credits ($396,001.76). A breakdown of the biodiversity credits is provided below. The proponent (Orange City Council) will be required to discharge the credit liability via the mechanisms provided by the NSW Biodiversity Offset scheme; ie contribution to the Biodiversity Trust Fund, purchase of existing credits on the market, funding biodiversity conservation action or retirement of biodiversity credits. This matter has been addressed via a condition of development consent.

Threshold 3 (Threatened Species)

If a BDAR has been triggered under any of the foregoing tests, impact assessments for threatened species must also be undertaken in accordance with the Biodiversity Assessment Method (BAM).

Database/literature searches were used to determine threatened flora and fauna that may potentially occur on the subject site, and targeted onsite flora and fauna surveys were undertaken to verify the presence of any threatened species. The BDAR prepared by Premise Pty Ltd confirms that 22 threatened fauna species and two threatened flora were identified as potentially occurring on the site and were considered in the assessment.

No flora species from database/literature searches were identified/recorded during vegetation surveys (18 August and 17 November 2020) and considered absent based on habitat degradation.

In terms of threatened fauna species, the Superb Parrot and Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat were confirmed on the study area during fauna surveys undertaken by Premise between 2‑5 and 16-19 November 2020. No other threatened fauna species were identified during the targeted surveys and considered absent based on habitat constraints. The Superb Parrot was observed flying over the study area and was considered likely to utilise native grassland for foraging. The Superb Parrot is hollow dependent for breeding. Vegetation surveys confirmed that the site contained only one hollow bearing tree which will be retained, and therefore there is no offset obligation. The Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat was included in the BAMC as an ecosystem species (ie included in vegetation loss offset obligation).

Other BDAR Considerations

The biodiversity assessment method also outlines other key matters which need to be considered in a BDAR including:

(a) assessment against the prescribed biodiversity impacts, direct and indirect impacts and cumulative impacts (c6.1 BC Regulation 2017);

(b) effect of serious and irreversible impacts on biodiversity values (c6.7 BC Regulation 2017); and

In consideration of these matters, the BDAR provides the following:

Prescribed Biodiversity Impacts

No significant geological features or rocky areas occur within the study area. The only scattered rocks occur in the woodland area which is to be retained as part of a native vegetation reserve. There are two man made dams that will be removed and replaced by two larger stormwater detention areas to manage drainage from the created lots. Most of the study area is exotic dominated grassland which provides foraging habitat for birds, reptiles and mammals. There were two threatened species identified on the study area which have been accounted for in the Biodiversity Offset Scheme. The loss of 21.89ha of exotic dominated grassland is not significant in the context of the surrounding landscape, which includes over 500 ha of agricultural land, industrial and residential subdivisions and major infrastructure corridors such as Clergate Road and the Main Western Railway line.

Direct Impacts

The direct impacts of the subdivision include the removal of 1.16ha of good quality and 1.77 ha of low quality native grassland derived from PCT 1330 and 21.89ha of exotic dominated grassland, as well as eight individual paddock trees. The loss of native vegetation has been accounted for with an offset obligation using the BAM Calculator.

Indirect Impacts

Indirect impacts of the subdivision include the temporary disruption to species in the remnant vegetation preserved on the study area during construction. Impacts include increased noise, dust and light spill. There may be increased competition for habitat resources with the loss of the eight paddock trees, however some of the material will be relocated to the woodland area to reduce this possibility.

Cumulative Impacts

The cumulative impact of native vegetation loss in an already highly cleared landscape is potentially significant, however the loss represents 0.0096% of the total vegetation in the Mullion Slopes Landscape, and the loss will be offset in accordance with the Biodiversity Offset Scheme.

Measures to Avoid and Minimise Impacts

The subdivision layout has been modified during the planning phase of the project to exclude the 2.21ha remnant of native vegetation and to avoid scattered paddock trees having to be cleared in the lot design. Management during construction will avoid and minimise impacts during site development.

Serious and Irreversible Impacts

No threatened ecological communities, populations, flora or fauna species meet the criteria for Serious and Irreversible Impacts as a result of the subdivision. No threatened ecological communities, populations, flora or fauna species meet the criteria for Serious and Irreversible Impacts as a result of the subdivision proposal (DPIE, 2019) (Sections 2.2 and 2.3).

Summary

The Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland recorded within the survey area occur as disjunct remnant patches of highly modified vegetation scattered across a fragmented landscape and of varying quality. The community including faunal habitat has been degraded through ongoing agricultural land use practices and historical land clearing. Given the fragmented and degraded nature of the native vegetation and faunal habitat on the site, the use of biodiversity offsets is a suitable mitigation strategy to minimise impacts to acceptable levels. The offset obligation for the proposal is as follows:

· 37 Ecosystem Credits ($340,745.70) for 2.93ha of PCT 1330; and

· Six Ecosystem Credits ($55,256.06) for five Blakely's Red Gum and two Yellow Box trees from PCT 1330 (note eight isolated trees will be removed but only trees with DBH of 20cm are considered in the tree module BAMC for PCT 1330); and

· Zero Species Credits for Superb Parrot (based on zero breeding habitat loss).

Conditions of consent will be imposed to ensure ecosystems credits are offset in accordance with the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 requirements.

Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Section 4.15 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 s4.15(1)(a)(i)

Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

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,

The application is considered to be consistent with the aims of the LEP as addressed in the following report. The proposal will provide additional industrial land to complement Orange as a regional centre and to contribute to economic sustainability. The environmental resources of the site will be protected to allow for ecologically sustainable development of the site.

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 1.7 - Mapping

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

Land Zoning Map:	Land zoned IN1 General Industry
Lot Size Map:	Minimum Lot Size 4000m²
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:	High biodiversity sensitivity on the site
Groundwater Vulnerability Map:	Groundwater 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
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

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:

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

(b) to any relevant instrument under Section 13.4 of the Crown Land Management Act 2016, or

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

(d) to any Trust agreement under the Nature Conservation Trust Act 2001, or

(e) to any property vegetation plan under the Native Vegetation Act 2003, or

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

(g) to any planning agreement under Subdivision 2 of Division 7.1 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.

Part 2 - Permitted or Prohibited Development

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

The subject site is located within the IN1 General Industry zone. Pursuant to Clause 6.2 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the development is defined as:

· Subdivision which means the division of land into two or more parts that, after the division, would be obviously adapted for separate occupation, use or disposition.

The development also includes the construction of roads, defined as:

· Road means a public road or a private road within the meaning of the Roads Act 1993, and includes a classified road.

The proposed development is permitted with consent in this zone.

1 - Objectives of the IN1 General Industrial Zone

· To provide a wide range of industrial and warehouse land uses.

· To encourage employment opportunities.

· To minimise any adverse effect of industry on other land uses.

· To support and protect industrial land for industrial uses.

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

The development is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the IN1 General Industrial Zone. In this regard:

· The subdivision will create 43 industrial lots for future industrial and warehouse land uses.

· The future development of the lots will allow for future employment opportunities.

· Consideration has been given to noise upon residential receivers as a result of the proposed development (discussed later in the report).

· The land is zoned for industrial use, and thus can be used for that purpose.

· The development has nil impact upon the Southern Link Road.

Clause 2.6 - Subdivision - Consent Requirements

This clause triggers the need for development consent for the subdivision of land. Development consent is sought by this application.

Clause 4.1 - Minimum Subdivision Lot Size

This clause requires the subdivision of land to be equal to or greater than the size nominated for the land under the Minimum Lot Size Map.

In relation to this site, the map nominates a minimum lot size of 4,000m². The smallest lot proposed by the application is 4,000m² (Lot 43).

Clause 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).

The earthworks proposed in the application are limited to the extent of construction of roads, stormwater management and installation of services. The extent of disruption to the drainage of the site is considered to be minor and will not detrimentally affect adjoining properties or receiving waterways.

The extent of the earthworks will not materially affect the potential future use or redevelopment of the site that may occur at the end of the proposed development's lifespan.

The site is not known to be contaminated and conditions may be imposed requiring the use of verified clean fill only. Excavated materials will be reused onsite as far as possible and conditions may be imposed to require that surplus materials will disposed of to an appropriate destination.

The earthworks will be appropriately supported onsite and the change in ground level is not substantial. Therefore, the effect on the amenity of adjoining properties is considered to be minor.

Investigations with respect to heritage have not identified any likelihood of the site containing any items of Aboriginal or non-Aboriginal heritage.

The site is not in proximity to any waterway, drinking water catchment or sensitive area. Conditions may be imposed to require a sediment control plan, including silt traps and other protective measures, to ensure that loose dirt and sediment does not escape the site boundaries.

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.

Stormwater design is to include stormwater detention within the development, with stormwater from the detention basins to be piped to the adjacent natural watercourse/overland flow path. The proposed design is to replicate the existing natural drainage system in terms of outflow volumes and broadly dispersed flow. Two lots for stormwater detention have been identified.

Clause 7.4 - Terrestrial Biodiversity

This clause seeks to maintain terrestrial biodiversity and requires that consent must not be issued unless the application demonstrates whether or not the proposal:

(a) is likely to have any adverse impact on the condition, ecological value and significance of the fauna and flora on the land

(b) is likely to have any adverse impact on the importance of the vegetation on the land to the habitat and survival of native fauna

(c) has any potential to fragment, disturb or diminish the biodiversity structure, function and composition of the land, and

(d) is likely to have any adverse impact on the habitat elements providing connectivity on the land.

Additionally, this clause prevents consent being 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, or

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

The proposal is located on land that has been identified on the Terrestrial Biodiversity Map as partially comprising “High Biodiversity Sensitivity” land containing Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland (Figure 5). This community is listed as a Critically Endangered Ecological Community under Schedule 2 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.

The subdivision layout has been designed to avoid the woodland and some isolated paddock trees where possible; however, the derived grasslands and eight isolated paddock trees will require removal to facilitate the proposal. The vegetation community including faunal habitat has been degraded through ongoing agricultural land use practices and historical land clearing.

The proposed clearing has been supported by a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report and the removal of native vegetation is considered acceptable in the context of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 subject to discharging the identified credit liability. Management of the proposal can be conditioned to further protect the environmental functions and values of the land.

Figure 5 – LEP Biodiversity Map Extract

Figure 6 – Subdivision Layout (note native vegetation reserve in green)

Clause 7.6 - Groundwater Vulnerability

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 of the proposal avoids impacts on groundwater and is therefore considered acceptable.

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, all utility services will be provided to the site and adequate for the proposal. Conditions of consent are recommended in this regard.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICIES

State Environmental Planning Policy 55 Remediation of Land

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

A Preliminary Contamination Investigation prepared by Premise Pty Ltd dated 23 December 2020 was submitted in support of the proposed development. The report provides the following conclusions and recommendations:

1. The area comprising the site, consisting of Lot 1 in DP 1085646 appears to have predominantly been historically utilised for rural/ agricultural purposes.

2. Based on known activities at or in the vicinity of the site, and observations during the inspection in August 2020, no significant routes of exposure by receptors (current or future) to potential contamination sources have been identified, due to negligible impacts present. The potential risk of any residual contamination impacts, if present, would be minor in scale and may be adequately managed by conducting works in accordance with appropriate construction industry standards.

3. Based on the findings of this preliminary site investigation, Premise considers that required remediation at the site is limited to removal of wastes placed at the site, which includes tyres, scrap metals, abandoned vehicles and soil stockpiles.

An assessment by Council’s Environmental Health Officer concurs with the report, and advises that no further investigation is warranted at this stage.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Clause 86(2) of the SEPP requires the consent authority to give written notice to the rail authority where excavation occurs within 25m of a rail corridor. As such, referral was provided to Transport for NSW (TfNSW). TfNSW have responded and there requirements have been included in the attached Notice of Determination accordingly.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017

SEPP (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 is applicable to the proposal.

Pursuant to Clause 7(1):

A person must not clear vegetation in any non-rural area of the State… without the authority conferred by a permit granted by the council…

Clause 9(2) further requires that:

A development control plan may make the declaration in any manner, including by reference to any of the following:

(a) the species of vegetation,

(b) the size of vegetation,

(c) the location of vegetation (including by reference to any vegetation in an area shown on a map or in any specified zone),

(d) the presence of vegetation in an ecological community or in the habitat of a threatened species.

In consideration of the requirements of the SEPP, the proposal involves removal of a number of trees/tree groups from the subject land. Pursuant to Orange DCP 2004-0.4-2 Interim Planning Outcomes- Tree Preservation, Council’s approval is required for removal of trees of a certain prescribed species and size.

The site contains approximately 4.29ha of native vegetation with the dominant species identified as Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland (Plant Community Type 1330). The application was supported by a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report. The PCT 1330 community is listed as a Critically Endangered Ecological Community under Schedule 2 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016. The subdivision will result in the loss of 2.93ha of native vegetation (trees and grassland) for the construction of roads, provision of services and allowance for future industrial development on each new lot. The loss of native vegetation carries an offset obligation under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and NSW Biodiversity Offset scheme. The proponent (OCC) will be required to discharge the credit liability via the mechanisms provided by the NSW Biodiversity Offset scheme. The subdivision layout does, however, set aside one lot of 2.21ha as a reserve to protect a 1.36ha patch of remnant vegetation PCT 1330. In addition, all isolated native trees that are outside of the disturbance footprint for roads, services or earthworks will remain. Tree removal has been further assessed in the proceeding parts of this report.

The proposal was also referred to Council’s Manager City Presentation (MCP) for review. MCP considers it is suitable to remove the identified tree/s. The land is zoned for industrial purposes. MCP conditions are included on the attached Notice of Approval in relation tree protection measures for retained trees across the site, management of trees to be removed from the site and enhancement of the proposed reserve area within the subdivision.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENT THAT HAS BEEN PLACED ON EXHIBITION 4.15(1)(a)(ii)

Not applicable.

DESIGNATED OR INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT

The proposed development is not designated or integrated development.

PROVISIONS OF ANY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN s4.15(1)(a)(iii)

Development Control Plan 2004

Development Control Plan 2004 (“the DCP”) applies to the subject land. The relevant chapters are:

· Part 0.2 (General Translation of Zones) establishes the interim provisions that link DCP 2004 to LEP 2011, and further establishes the equivalent zones of the new LEP.

· Part 0.4-2 (Interim Planning Outcomes – Tree Preservation) applies to the request for removal of four trees.

· Part 2 (Natural Resource Management) has relevance with regard to stormwater quality, soil resource management, vegetation management, and flora and fauna management.

· Part 3 (General Considerations) has relevance with respect to cumulative impacts and scenic landscape issues.

· Part 4 (Special Environmental Considerations) has relevance with regard to possible site contamination.

· Part 9 (Industrial Subdivision) is relevant as it establishes the urban design principles on which to assess the layout of the proposed subdivision.

The relevant Planning Outcomes requiring further comment are detailed below:

DCP 2004 - 0.4 Tree Preservation

Four gum trees are proposed to be removed as a result of the road design, as indicated in red on Plan C004 Rev G. The removal of these trees is supported by Council’s Manager City Presentation. Specific conditions of consent have been included to require the relocation of the tree barrel, crown and exposed rock formation to the “reserve for native vegetation”; among other requirements.

DCP 2004 - Part 2 Natural Resource Management

Stormwater disposal and onsite detention will be conditioned to be carried out in accordance with Council’s Development and Subdivision Code.

PO 2.3 Vegetation and PO 2.4 Flora and Fauna, Biodiversity have been previously addressed within this report.

DCP 2004 - Part 3.1.1 Cumulative Impact

The DCP sets the following Planning Outcomes in regard to Cumulative Impact:

· Applications for development demonstrate how the development relates to the character and use of the land in the vicinity.

· The introduction of new development into a locality maintains environmental impacts within existing or community-accepted levels.

· Water conservation measures are implemented.

In this instance there is a mixed character for the locality. To the west there is industrial land which borders residential development 300m from the subject site. Land to the north and south is zoned industrial. Land to the east is zoned B7 Business Park. Rural land is the predominant land use to the north and east. To the south and west, the land is more fully urban.

With regard to the above Planning Outcomes, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the intended future land use of the zone and acts as a natural extension to the developed industrial land to the south and east, and to the Business Park to the west. The subdivision will not create any adverse environmental impacts that cannot be managed through conditions of consent.

Relevant Planning Outcomes also require that new development maintains environmental impacts within existing or community accepted levels, and lastly, that water conservation measures are implemented. It is considered that appropriate conditions can be imposed that will satisfactorily address these matters.

DCP 2004 - Part 4 Special Environmental Considerations

· Development within the urban area of Orange as defined above is connected to sewerage facilities

Sewer mains shall be constructed from Council’s existing sewer network to serve the proposed lots. A sewer pump station will be required for Stage 2 works.

· Development applications indicate measures proposed with development on land within the hatched area to minimise associated impacts.

The development is located to the south of the former Canobolas Wool Topmaking site and Orange Abattoir. As the proposed development is for industrial purposes, there is no land use conflict with the former industrial uses, or permissible future uses, of these sites.

Matters in relation to biodiversity, land shaping and contaminated land have been previously considered within the report.

DCP 2004 - Part 9 Industrial Subdivision

· The subdivision provides for a range of lot sizes consistent with the existing or proposed character of the industrial locality.

The DCP requires serviced lots with access via a road other than Clergate road to have a minimum area of 4000m². The DCP also permits 1ha lots with direct access to Clergate Road. Subdivision design comprises a range of allotment sizes ranging from 4,000m² to 1.874ha in compliance with the requirements of the DCP.

· Lots have a regular shape to facilitate the establishment of large, open industrial buildings.

All lots are generally of a shape and size to accommodate the needs of further industrial development. Smaller lots have been provided with adequate width and depth to facilitate a 10m front setback. The DCP controls will have setback requirements for both front and back on those lots that have dual frontages to both the proposed internal road and Clergate Road. The lot size and shape of these parcels are considered to be of sufficient size to ensure suitable design outcomes in the future.

· The subdivision is designed and constructed according to the Development and Subdivision Code.

· The land is adequately serviced for industrial development.

· New roads are constructed with kerb and gutter and associated drainage structures.

· Clergate Road is upgrades to a to a Rural Collector Road with a formed pavement width of 9 metres (sealed carriageway of 7 metres)

Council’s Technical Services Department have raised no objections to matters in relation to servicing. Attached are conditions of consent to address the servicing requirements of the development.

Section 64 Water and Sewer Headworks Charges

Pursuant to Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993, water and sewer headworks charges are applicable to the development, being 43 industrial lots.

Such charges are calculated at the time of release of a Subdivision Certificate. Relevant conditions have been included in the Notice of Approval, and may be subject to the proposed staging of the development.

PROVISIONS PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS s4.15(1)(a)(iv)

The Regulations have been considered and do not apply to the subject works.

THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT s4.15(1)(b)

Context and Setting

The site is subject to agricultural grazing landuse, with an industrial zoning pertaining to the land. Industrial zoning also extends over the land to the north, south and west, with Business Park zoning to the east. Residential urbanisation occurs 300m to the west, with established dwellings in Illamatta Way.

The development is consistent with the predominant development pattern that has occurred recently and is not incongruous with the expected context of the area.

It is not anticipated that the development will create any significant adverse impacts on the neighbourhood amenity of the area to the west due to the recommended conditions of consent relating to noise (discussed below). The proposed lots will all be of a size, shape and slope capable of providing a reasonable standard for future industrial development.

Traffic and Transport Impacts

Access to the proposed lots will be via the construction of four new roads, with two new roads intersecting with Clergate Road. The roads shall be constructed to full urban 22m industrial standard within the development site. Vehicular access is to be denied to Clergate Road for Lots 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12 via an 88B instrument.

The development will result in additional traffic in the locality; however, the surrounding street network will be capable of serving the additional traffic load. Concrete footpaths are to be constructed on both sides of all streets, to a minimum width of 1.2m. The development is considered satisfactory in regards to traffic impacts.

Flora and Fauna

The proposed subdivision involves the clearing of 2.93ha of native vegetation, including the abovementioned threatened species. A Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) has been prepared by Premise Pty Ltd, dated 16 December 2020 and submitted with the DA to address the requirements of Clause 7.4 Terrestrial Biodiversity of Orange Local Environmental 2011 and the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016. The information in support of the DA has identified threatened species of flora and fauna that will be impacted by the proposal. PCT 1330 consists throughout the subject site in both woodland and derived grassland formations. The Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 lists Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland as Critically Endangered Ecological Community.

The proposed clearing has also triggered the Biodiversity Offsets Scheme and will require offsetting a total of 43 credits as a result of clearing PCT 1330 species (Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland). Conditions of consent will be imposed to ensure ecosystems credits are offset in accordance with the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 requirements. Given the fragmented and degraded nature of the native vegetation on the site, the use of biodiversity offsets is a suitable mitigation strategy to minimise impacts to acceptable levels. It must also be noted that the subdivision layout has been designed to avoid a 1.36ha patch of PCT 1330 and some isolated paddock trees where possible.

Cumulative Impacts

There is an obvious cumulative impact arising from the ongoing urbanisation of the locality as the remaining stocks of rural land are subdivided and developed for urban purposes. For this site there are also issues relating to slope, tree retention and view lines that have been elsewhere assessed.

The proposed subdivision is considered to be largely consistent with the surrounding development pattern and acts as a natural continuation of industrial land. The cumulative impacts of the proposed development have been considered throughout the foregoing report and are considered to be acceptable, with measures to be augmented and perpetuated by the recommended conditions included in the attached Notice of Approval.

Noise Impacts

Residential receivers are located approximately 400m to the west of the subject site. The land immediately surrounding the subject land is zoned IN1 Industrial under the current provisions of the LEP. That land is largely undeveloped at this time. Initial consideration was given to whether or not a restriction should be placed on the title of each lot that requires the submission of a noise report to accompany any application for future development within each of the newly created lots to ensure that future development is compliant with the NSW EPA’s Noise Policy for Industry.

Given the separation distance between the subject land and the nearest anticipated dwelling permitted under the current provisions of the LEP and the fact that other industrial development will occur between this site and the residential receivers in the future (of which the buildings will provide shielding to residences) the requirement for this restriction is not recommended. This position has been discussed with the Director of Development Services who has indicated that a requirement for a Restriction of the type described above is not necessary.

THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE s4.15(1)(c)

The proposed development is located in the IN1 General Industrial zone and is permissible with the consent of Council. The suitability of the site has been addressed in the above sections of the report.

The subject land is considered to be suitable to undertake the proposed development due to the following:

· The development is permissible and compliant with the relevant provisions of the LEP.

· The development is considered to be satisfactory in regard to s4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

· The potential impacts of the development can be managed appropriately through the conditions of consent.

· The development of the site will not create significant adverse impacts on the context and setting of the area.

· The development of the site will not detrimentally affect adjoining land and is unlikely to lead to land use conflicts with the imposition of suitable conditions of consent.

· All utility services are or can be made available, including suitable road access.

ANY SUBMISSIONS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT s4.15(1)(d)

The proposed development is defined as "advertised development" under the provisions of the Act. The application was advertised for the prescribed period of 28 days and at the end of that period no submissions were received.

PUBLIC INTEREST s4.15(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

As discussed in the body of this report a key consideration for this application relates to the potential impact that the development will have on Native vegetation. The site contains approximately 4.29ha of native vegetation with the dominant species identified as Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum grassy woodland (Plant Community Type 1330) which is listed as a Critically Endangered Ecological Community under Schedule 2 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016. The subdivision will result in the loss of 2.93ha of native vegetation for the construction of roads, provision of services and allowance for future industrial development on each new lot. The loss of native vegetation carries an offset obligation under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and NSW Biodiversity Offset scheme.

The proposed industrial subdivision is permissible development subject to receiving the development consent of Council. The applicant has suitably demonstrated that the design of the development complies with the requirements of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016, the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, relevant SEPP’s, Orange LEP 2011 and Council’s DCP for this precinct.

A Section 4.15 evaluation of the proposed development has been undertaken which demonstrates that the proposal is acceptable. Attached is a Notice of Determination containing conditions that are considered appropriate for the development. It is recommended that Council supports the subject development.

COMMENTS

The requirements of the Environmental Health and Building Surveyor, Environmental Health Officer, Engineering Development Section and City Presentation Manager are included in the attached Notice of Approval.

Attachments

1 Notice of Approval, D21/16548 ⇩

2 Plans, D21/15472 ⇩

Planning and Development Committee 6 April 2021

2.5 Development Application DA 424/2020(1) - 14 Nyrang Road

RECORD NUMBER: 2021/554

AUTHOR: Kelly Walker, Senior Planner

EXECUTIVE Summary

Application lodged	04 November 2020
Applicant/s	Pinchgut Pty Limited
Owner/s	Pinchgut Pty Limited
Land description	Lot 131 Pce SC DP 241292 - 14 Nyrang Road, Orange
Proposed land use	Boarding House
Value of proposed development	$280,000

Council's consent is sought to construct a new six (6) room ‘boarding house’ at 14 Nyrang Road, Orange (see Figure 1). The site is currently vacant, where the previous dwelling was burnt down, and the land was subsequently cleared.

Figure 1 - locality plan

The proposed development involves the construction of a new building to contain six (6) self-contained boarding house rooms, each with its own kitchen and bathroom; as well as a communal room with kitchen facilities. External works include two (2) open car parking spaces (accessed from a new driveway off Leura Road), one (1) open accessible car parking space (via an enlarged driveway off Nyrang Road), motorcycle parking (two spaces) landscaping, waste storage area, bicycle parking (two spaces), drying area, and communal outdoor space. With regards to occupancy it is assumed the rooms could be doubles or singles, capable of being occupied by up to two persons each, being a total of twelve (12) residents.

The proposal comprises a ‘boarding house’ pursuant to the Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 (LEP). Boarding houses provide a form of low-cost rental accommodation for a wide range of tenants, typically singles, retirees, students, and young couples.

The boarding house development standards set out State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (hereafter referred to as the ‘ARHSEPP’) only apply within the R2 zone if the land is within close proximity to a local centre. The subject land does not meet this requirement, and as such, all matters in relation to character, appearance, amenity, parking, etc. in relation to the development, as well as impacts on surrounding residential dwellings, relies on the provisions of the Orange Development Control Plan 2004 (DCP).

Concerns have been raised by Council staff in relation to the proposed development, including:

- Building design and siting is inconsistent with the established neighbourhood character, which will adversely impact on the surrounds, streetscape, and neighbouring dwellings.

- Insufficient building setbacks and excessive bulk and scale which are out of keeping with the low-density setting, and will adversely impact on the streetscape, neighbourhood, and adjacent neighbours.

- Building over the sewer, sewer main, and stormwater overland flow areas will adversely impact on Council’s infrastructure and adjacent/downstream neighbouring properties.

- Insufficient number of car parking spaces on the site will adversely impact on the surrounding road network and amenity of neighbouring dwellings.

- Inadequate vehicle manoeuvring on and off the site will adversely impact on traffic and pedestrian safety.

- Possible overshadowing impacts to the adjacent southern neighbour.

- Likely adverse acoustic privacy impacts to neighbouring dwellings due to unacceptable site layout.

- Unacceptable level of amenity for future residents of the boarding house including lack of daylighting, open space, car parking, and security.

- Insufficient investigation as to the contamination status of the site, where Council cannot be satisfied that the land is suitable for the proposed use in its current state.

The proposal comprises advertised development pursuant to the Orange Community Participation Plan (CPP). At the completion of the exhibition period two (2) submissions were received from external agencies raising concerns about the proposal. Essential Energy notes that the new driveway is too close to existing electricity infrastructure; and the NSW Police have safety and siting concerns and do not support the proposal as submitted.

It is considered that the principle of a new boarding house on the site is supported in this location, and permitted with consent, however is not acceptable in its current proposed form. Council staff consider that the proposal could be significantly improved through better site layout and improved building design. Amendments to the development would improve the amenity of the site, streetscape, and neighbourhood; mitigate impacts on adjacent residential neighbours; as well as address the other concerns raised in relation to infrastructure, servicing, and security.

The proponent undertook pre-lodgement discussions in relation to this proposal, where Council’s senior staff indicated on many occasions that the proposal was not capable of support in this form and required amendments to overcome the identified issues.

In particular, the site layout and building design need reconsideration, and additional car parking would be required with adequate manoeuvring on the site to provide safe egress. This application has been lodged with all of the issues outstanding, as set out in brief above, and in detail in the main body of this report. Council staff have again recommended an amendment to the proposal to address the issues, however the proponent has declined, seeking an assessment of the proposal as submitted.

Overall, it is considered that the design and siting of the proposal will not harmonise with the low-density character of the local area, and will adversely impact on neighbourhood character, neighbouring amenity, traffic and pedestrian safety, and Council’s sewer and stormwater infrastructure. The proposal is thus contrary to Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and relevant provisions of the LEP and DCP as discussed in detail in the main body of this report.

As such, it is recommended that Council does not support the proposal in its current form, and refuses the application. Attached is a draft Notice of Refusal.

DECISION FRAMEWORK

Development in Orange is governed by two key documents Orange Local Environment Plan 2011 (LEP) and Orange Development Control Plan 2004 (DCP).

DIRECTOR’S COMMENT

It is considered that the boarding house would adversely impact on the Nyrang Road and Leura Road area due to the proposal’s poor design in terms of streetscape, character, car parking, infrastructure, scale, amenity and security.

The applicant has been requested to modify the proposal on a number of occasions. To date only minor changes were made that have not adequately minimised the impacts of the development.

Due to the likely impacts that would arise from this development and the applicant’s unwillingness to modify the proposal, staff have no choice but to recommend refusal.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

Financial Implications

Nil

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil

Recommendation

That Council refuses development application DA 424/2020(1) for Boarding House at Lot 131 Pce SC DP 241292 - 14 Nyrang Road, Orange pursuant to the reasons set out in the attached Notice of Refusal.

further considerations

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

The proposal involves the construction of a new building to contain six (6) self-contained boarding house rooms, each with its own kitchen and bathroom. A communal room with kitchen is also proposed, as well as a cleaner’s room with separate toilet and hand basin. It is unclear if any laundry facilities are to be provided on the site, such as within the rooms or communally (no details provided on plans or within the application). With regards to occupancy it is assumed the rooms could be doubles or singles, capable of being occupied by up to two persons each, being a total of twelve residents. Pedestrian access to the site and building is proposed from both frontages. The layout of the development is shown in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2 – proposed layout plan (from submitted drawing number DA-02)

The building is proposed to be in face brick, with Colorbond roofing, and aluminium framed windows (see Figure 3).

Figure 3 – artists impression (from submitted ‘Materials and Finishes’ drawing number DA-06)

Site works, set out in Figure 2, include:

- two (2) open car parking spaces accessed from a new driveway off Leura Road

- one (1) open accessible car parking space via an enlarged driveway off Nyrang Road

- two (2) motorcycle parking spaces off the main parking/entry area

- waste storage, bicycle parking (two spaces), drying area, and communal outdoor space to the Nyrang Road side the building, running along the southern boundary

- - landscaping to the site frontage and around the parking and waste storage areas.

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

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

There are four triggers known to insert a development into the ‘Biodiversity Offset Scheme’ (i.e. the need for a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report to be submitted with a DA):

· Trigger 1: development occurs in land mapped on the Biodiversity Values Map (OEH) (clause 7.1 of BC Regulation 2017).

· Trigger 2: development involves clearing/disturbance of native vegetation above a certain area threshold (clauses 7.1 and 7.2 of BC Regulation 2017).

· Trigger 3: development is otherwise likely to significantly affect threatened species (clauses 7.2 and 7.3 of BC Act 2016).

· Trigger 4: development proposed to occur in an Area of Outstanding Biodiversity Value (clause 7.2 of BC Act 2016).

In consideration of Triggers 1 and 4, the site is not within land mapped on the Biodiversity Values Map or LEP Biodiversity Map, or in an Area of Outstanding Biodiversity Value. In consideration of Trigger 2, the proposal does not involve the clearing of any vegetation, where the subject site is already clear of trees, and does not contain any native grasses. Overall, and in regards to Trigger 3, it is considered that the development is unlikely to significantly affect any threatened species or communities.

Section 4.15 - Evaluation

Section 4.15 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 s4.15(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,

(e) to provide a range of housing choices in planned urban and rural locations to meet population growth,

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

The application is considered to be relatively consistent with the relevant aims above, particularly as it provides for affordable housing choices. Notwithstanding this, the following assessment demonstrates that the site layout and built form of the proposed development are inconsistent with the character of the surrounding area, which are addressed in the body of 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 1.7 - 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:	Groundwater 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
Flood Planning Map:	Not within a flood planning area