council development assessment panel meeting 2 …...jun 02, 2015 · the applicant or their...

COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL MEETING2 June 2015

AGENDABUSINESS ITEM – 8.1

Applicant: Woolcock Construction Pty Ltd Landowner: Balcos Pty Ltd

Agent: Eric Lampard Ward: Onkaparinga ValleyDevelopment Application: 15/258/473 Originating Officer: Vanessa Nixon

Application Description: Change of use to Stage 2 tenancies from service tradepremises to bulky goods tenancies

Subject Land: Lots:11, 12, 13, 14, 15 &16Sec: P4013 DP:91829 CT:6123/945Subject Land: Lot:502 Sec: P4013DP:91829 CT:6123/952Subject Land: Lot:55 Sec: P4013DP:91829 CT:6123/947

General Location: 37 Onkaparinga ValleyRoad Balhannah

(Refer to Locality Plan Attachment 1)

Development Plan Consolidated : 9January 2014Maps AdHi/20 and 61

Zone/Policy Area: Country Township(Balhannah And Oakbank) Zone -Balhannah West Policy Area

Form of Development:Merit

Site Area: 1.8 hectares

Public Notice Category: Category 3Merit

Notice published in The Advertiser on 24April 2015

Representations Received: 9

Representations to be Heard: 3

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe purpose of this application is to change the use of a section of the building fromservice trade premises to bulky goods tenancies.

The subject land is located within the Country Township (Balhannah & Oakbank) Zone -Balhannah West Policy Area and is a merit form of development. Six representations inopposition and three representations in support of the proposal were received during theCategory 3 public notification period.Council has allowed some small-scale retail on the subject site but considers a bulkygoods outlet an inappropriate extension and intensification of approved developmentwhich would negatively impact on the existing retail centre of this small township.

As per the CDAP delegations, the CDAP is the relevant authority for Category 3development where representors wish to be heard.

The main issues relating to the proposal are inappropriate land use in the zone as well asconcerns raised by representors regarding noise and traffic.

In consideration of all the information presented, and following an assessment against therelevant zone and Council Wide provisions within the Development Plan, staff arerecommending that the proposal be REFUSED Development Plan Consent.

Council Development Assessment Panel Meeting – 2 June 2015Woolcock Construction15/258/473

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSALThe proposal is to change the approved use of stage two from service trade premises tobulky goods.

The proposed plans and details are included in Attachment 2.

3. HISTORY

January 13, 2015 Variation to 11/1091/473 and 14/239 - change to car park layout,signage and internal layout (tenancy 5, 6 and 7)

December 2, 2014 CDAP Refused the change in use of Approved Stage 2 - ServiceTrade Premises to shop (Retail Supermarket) with additionalassociated car parking areas, fencing & retaining walls (including acombined fence & retaining wall structure 3.9m high)

November 4, 2014 Variation to Development Authorisation 11/1091/473: internalworks to relocated building 6 (lunchroom, office and facilities),removal of sliding door to building 2, amendment to rear fencing(2.4m high), relocation of Balhannah Kitchens tenancy andalteration to floor areas of north eastern retail tenancies 3 and 4

November 3, 2014 Variation to development authorisation 11/1091/473 to add aservice door to tenancy 5 in Building 8 and construction of averandah addition to tenancy 4

September 18, 2013 CDAP Approved Staged redevelopment of existing service tradepremises & cold store facility to create 3 service trade premisesand 5 retail tenancies, associated car parking & altered access,associated landscaping, new signage, and to relocate existingsand & metal depot and fencing, timber & rural supplies and toupgrade Pugh Road.Stage 1: Redevelopment of service trade premises to create 2service trade premises (for existing hardware and garden storeand kitchen showroom) and 5 new retail tenancies, associated carparking and signage, reduction in cold storage to 950m2, relocationof existing sand and metal depot & fencing, timber and ruralsupplies, relocation of storage building (building 6), removal of gasbullet, Colorbond® fence 2.4m high and upgrade of Pugh Road(from Onkaparinga Valley Road to Trade Centre crossover).Stage 2: Construction of additional service trade premises (1125m2

floor area)September 21, 2011 Demolition of various structures (including office and verandah on

southern side of Pugh Road)June 16, 2002 Replacement Cool room building (building 2)February 12, 2002 Deck (garden centre)March 5, 1998 Storage building additionSeptember 13, 1996 Storage Building (Building 6)October 11, 1995 Class 8 Freezer Room (further northern extension to previous

application)June 8, 1990 Verandah (over garden shop)February 27, 1987 Gable over main entry and verandah (front of building 8)March 29, 1985 Coldstore (northern extension to previous application)


September 26, 1983 Meat examination room (lean to on south side of building 1)June 22, 1981 New cold store & freezer rooms (building 5)March 23, 1981 Garage1978 Amenities Block

4. REFERRAL RESPONSES

No referrals were required for this application.

5. CONSULTATIONThe application was categorised as a Category 3 form of development in accordancewith Section 38(2)(c) of the Development Act 1993 requiring formal public notificationand a public notice. Nine (9) representations were received. Of these, six (6)representations are opposing the proposal, and three (3) are in support of the proposal.Some were from adjacent and nearby properties.

The following representors wish to be heard:

Name of Representor Representor’s PropertyAddress

Nominated Speaker

Joma Real Estate (JohnVass)

Balhannah JunctionShopping Centre

TBA

R & G Foale 10 Sunningdale Ct TBAP & S Brokensha 9 Sunningdale Ct Sandy & Paul

The applicant or their representative – Eric Lampard may be in attendance.

The issues contained in the representations can be briefly summarised as follows: zoning adverse impacts on Balhannah Junction shopping centre noise character of country township heritage listing traffic pollution truck movements extended trading hours signage loading bay

These issues are discussed in detail in the following sections of the report.

Copies of the submissions are included as Attachment 3 and the applicant’s responseto these is provided in Attachment 4.

6. PLANNING & TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONSThis application has been evaluated in accordance with the following matters:


i. The Site’s Physical CharacteristicsThe subject land is 1.8 hectares in area and is currently being extensivelyredeveloped. The land is on the western or low side of Onkaparinga Valley Roadand slopes away to the west towards the Onkaparinga River. The rear (western)portion of the land is in the Onkaparinga River flood zone. The land is boundedto the south by Pugh Road which is currently being developed as a residentialland division for eight allotments and is currently owned by Balcos. The site hashad cold storage and hardware sales activities for many years. Theredevelopment has created a central car park surrounded by built form whichenvisaged a number of retail activities fronting Onkaparinga Valley Road. Thetwo largest tenancies in this configuration have been approved as service tradepremises. The remaining tenancies are small scale retail (132m2 & 135m2), one at150m2 (post office), one at 260m2 and one at 320m2 and one smaller tenancy(250m2) being also classified as service trade premises (Balhannah Kitchens).There is an internal service road through the rear of the site ensuring continuedaccess to the remaining cold storage activities on site amongst other functions.

ii. The Surrounding AreaTo the west of the site on the other side of the Onkaparinga River is rural primaryproduction land. The north, east and south are residential land uses. TheBalhannah Junction Shopping Centre is 500m along Onkaparinga Valley Road ina northerly direction.

iii. Development Plan Policy considerationsa) Policy Area/Zone Provisions

The subject land lies within the Balhannah West Policy Area of the CountryTownship Balhannah & Oakbank Zone and these provisions seek:

Balhannah West Policy Area- development of the policy area for low density residential use- An attractive approach from the west by establishing large gardens and

trees along Onkaparinga Valley Road.

The following are considered to be the relevant Policy Area provisions:

Objectives: 1, 2PDCs: 1, 2, 3, 7

The subject land has existed as a commercial site supporting local producerssince at least the 1970s. Mitre 10 and the Balhannah Coldstores until recentlyoperated on 14 allotments on the northern and southern side of Pugh Road whichis on the western side of Onkaparinga Valley Road.

The southern side of Pugh Road (6 allotments) operated as rural supplies and asand and metal depot. One of the allotments had a dwelling frontingOnkaparinga Valley Road.


The northern side of Pugh Road until recently operated as coldstores and Mitre10 (northern site). The Mitre 10 showroom was operating out of convertedcoldstore buildings. Many of the other buildings on this site (1, 8 and 9) were builtas cold stores but were not operating as such due to declining demand.Application 11/1091/473 addressed matters of long term confusion on the sitewith regards to parking and vehicle access. This resulted in less built formacross the two sites and more seamless commercial and customer traffic to andfrom the site and an improved streetscape on Onkaparinga Valley Road. All ofthe commercial activities until recently conducted across 14 allotments will beconsolidated onto the 10 allotments on the north side of Pugh Road. Some ofthose commercial activities have been downscaled (cold storage) and replacedwith new commercial opportunities complementary to activities already on site.The balance of the land on the southern side of Pugh Road has been approvedfor residential development.

The proposal does not contain low density residential development, howeverneither does the .approved use, therefore whilst Objective 1 is not met in thisproposal, neither is it met by the approved use.

PDCs 3 and 7 were used to maximise the potential of the site during assessmentof 11/1091/473 in allowing an improvement to a site operating with commercialand retail elements directly fronting Onkaparinga Valley Road. Theaforementioned application removed a parking hazard from Onkaparinga ValleyRoad, intensified, consolidated and formalised uses on the site that previouslyexisted and was deemed by Council to be a reasonable fit in accordance withPDCs 3 and 7.

The existing approval for service trade premises allows for the following types oftransactions:

Primarily the sale, rental or display of—(a) basic plant, equipment or machinery used in agriculture or industry; or(b) boats; or(c) caravans; or(d) domestic garages; or(e) sheds; or(f) outbuildings; or(g) motor vehicles; or(h) marquees; or(i) trailers; or(j) swimming pools, equipment and accessories; or(k) building materials; or(l) landscaping materials; or(m) garden plants (primarily in an indoor setting),or similar articles or merchandise.

A change of use to bulky goods would allow the following types of transactions:

Bulky goods outlet or retail showroom means premises used primarily forthe sale, rental, display or offer by retail of goods, other than foodstuffs,clothing, footwear or personal effects goods, unless the sale, rental,display or offer by retail of the foodstuffs, clothing, footwear or personaleffects goods is incidental to the sale, rental, display or offer by retail ofother goods;


Examples—The following are examples of goods that may be available or on displayat bulky goods outlets orretail showrooms:(a) automotive parts and accessories;(b) furniture;(c) floor coverings;(d) window coverings;(e) appliances or electronic equipment;(f) home entertainment goods;(g) lighting and electric light fittings;(h) curtains and fabric;(i) bedding and manchester;(j) party supplies;(k) animal and pet supplies;(l) camping and outdoor recreation supplies;(m) hardware;(n) garden plants (primarily in an indoor setting);(o) office equipment and stationery supplies;(p) baby equipment and accessories;(q) sporting, fitness and recreational equipment and accessories;(r) homewares;(s) children's play equipment.

Whilst the existing approvals provide for commercial and retail development onthe site, the change of use to bulky goods is considered to be of an intensity toogreat for the site, providing too much retail floor space outside the businesscentre. Service trade premises are a different classification to bulky goods in theDevelopment legislation. Bulky goods are considered to be a retail/shop, whereasservice trade premises are listed separately and not considered a shop.

This proposal would further intensify the previously approved retail element of thesite and in Council’s opinion is not in accordance with the intent of PDC3.

The Country Township Balhannah & Oakbank Zone- Retention of the separate identity of each town- Promotion of the business and shopping centre in Balhannah as the

future business and retail centre- Protection of rural landscape, separation and the Onkaparinga River and

its environs.

The following are considered to be the relevant Zone provisions:

Objectives: 1, 3, 4, 7PDC: 1

The proposal is to use a recently constructed building for retail use and as suchdoes not impact on the rural separation between each town, however thestructure is outside the envisaged use as detailed in the Balhannah/OakbankStructure Plan and is therefore at odds with PDC1.


Objective 3 seeks the promotion of the business and shopping centre inBalhannah as the future business and retail centre. The site is located outside theBusiness Centre Policy area and application 11/1091/473 detailed service tradepremises and 5 small retail areas on this site in order to minimise the conflict withObjective 3. To now convert an approved 1350m2 floor area from service tradepremises to bulky goods/retail is directly at odds with Zone Objective 3.

b) Council Wide provisionsThe Council Wide provisions of relevance to this proposal seek (in summary):

- Orderly and economic development- Centres developed in accordance with the desired character for each

centre and integrated to incorporate a range of functions and in a mannercommensurate with their place in a hierarchy of centre zones and areas.

The following are considered to be the relevant Council Wide provisions:

Objectives: 1, 7, 8, 9, 22, 23, 35, 36, 37, 38, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 48, 51, 55, 56,119, 121, 122, 123, 124, 126,

PDCs: 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 64, 65, 66, 103, 104, 107, 109, 114,115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 124, 125, 128, 129, 130, 138, 142, 196,201, 232, 350, 351, 359, 367 & 375

The proposal is not considered orderly and economic being an extension ofthe previously approved small retail activities on a site that is in an area clearlymarked on structure plans for ‘living’. Council previously considered theconsolidation and intensification of uses on the site as orderly and economicand a reasonable balance of activities. Council consider further intensificationof bulky goods/retail activities on the site is not orderly or economic and asland in other zones has been identified for commercial, retail and officedevelopment. The proposal is not in accordance with Objective 7.

The proposal is considered to interfere with the operations of the BusinessCentre Policy area, in that bulky goods are more appropriately located in thatpolicy area and not the proposed area. In this way, the ability for the BusinessCentre to accommodate such uses will be diminished by allowing bulky goodsin the proposed location. It is therefore considered the proposal is at odds withPDC 9.

Whilst the proposal is not likely to accord with PDCs 13 & 15, it can be arguedthat neither does the approved use.

As discussed above, Balhannah already has a centre described as theBusiness Centre Policy area. This proposal is outside that policy area. Thecreation of an additional centre policy area is not currently being considered byCouncil nor is extending the current policy area. The proposal is therefore atodds with Objective 35 and PDC 103.


Objectives 41 to 46 describe shopping in local centres to meet conveniencetype needs and go further to suggest the gross leasable area of a shop shouldnot exceed 450m2. These objectives also discuss large scale retail showroomstrading in furniture, floor coverings and other bulky merchandise should not belocated in centres within the district. The proposal is therefore contrary toObjectives 42, 45, 46, 48 and 51 as well as PDCs 105 and 107.

PDC 107 specifically states a shop or group of shops located outside a Centrezone should not hinder the development or function of any Centre Zone.Council believes the existing approvals for the subject site support thisobjective and to approve further large retail uses on the subject site, asopposed to service trade premises, would not be in accordance with desiredcharacter statements for the zone (PDC 112). By approving the subject site aslargely service trade premises, Council ensures the range of services availablelocally is extended in accordance with PDC 109. Employment opportunities areconsidered no greater than those already provided by the service tradepremises and therefore do not contribute to satisfying PDC 109.

Further by approving the site as largely service trade premises Council hastaken note of the degree to which existing centres satisfy the centre and shopobjectives in the Development Plan by approving a new building, which intheory should attract a new type of service and thereby offer new facilities tolocal residents as the types of activities described as service trade premises inthe Development Regulations are not available elsewhere in the Adelaide HillsCouncil.

Car ParkingThe previous approval created 114 carparks on site, with two extra carparksprovided via several variations during construction. An additional 4 spaceshave been provided as part of this application. It should be noted the previousapproval accepted a significant deficit of car parks on the basis it was animprovement on the previous inadequate parking. The calculations for theprevious application are included below for reference and as a reminder of theprevious acceptance of a short fall of some 110 carparks.

“At present, there are 16 customer carparks for Mitre 10 on OnkaparingaValley Road and another 11 other parking spaces around the site.

Based on current uses for the site, the table below represents the parkingrequirements for the site using the current Development Plan guidelines.

Previous Uses and ParkingBuilding and use Floor area Table 4 requirements Number of spacesMitre 10 & BalhannahKitchens

1200 5.5 per 100m2 66

Cold Stores 4755 +1720 =6475

1 per 50m2 or one per 2employees whichever islarger

129.5

Timber store 574 1 per 50m2 or one per 2employees whichever is

11.48


largerOffices 192 1 per 35m2 with

minimum of 25.5

Sand & Metal andRural

3000 +1680 =4680

Commercial & Lightindustrial 2 per 100m2

93.6

Total parks required - 306Carparks provided 27Previous carpark deficit 279

Based on proposed uses for the site, the table below represents the parkingrequirements for the site using the current Development Plan guidelines.

Current approved uses and ParkingBuilding and use Floor area Table 4 requirements Number of spacesShop Mitre 10Retail Tenancies

14801247 =2727m2

5.5 per 100m2 150

Garden Centre 325 1 per 150m2 or equal10% of site, whicheveris larger

2

Store Building 1Trade CentreBuilding 2 Cold StoreBuilding 3 Goods InBuilding 6 Bin Store

860950245290 =2345m2


47

Office Building 4 45 1 per 35m2 withminimum of 2

2

Stage 2 ServiceTrade Premises

1125 2 per 100m2 or one forevery 2 employees,must use higher whereused for retail

22.5

Total carparks required 223.5 parks.Carparks proposed 114Proposed carpark deficit 110

The proposal suggests a deficit of 110 parking spaces. The site currentlyoperates on a parking deficit of 279 parking spaces and the proposal reducesthe carparking deficit by 60%.”

Minor alterations to the plans now result in 116 spaces being available.


Proposed Use and ParkingBuilding and use Floor area Table 4 requirements Number of spacesShop Mitre 10Retail Tenancies

14801247 =2727m2

5.5 per 100m2 150

Garden Centre 325 1 per 150m2 or equal10% of site, whicheveris larger

2

Store Building 1Trade CentreBuilding 2 Cold StoreBuilding 3 Goods InBuilding 6 Bin Store

860950245290 =2345m2


47

Office Building 4 45 1 per 35m2 withminimum of 2

2

Stage 2 Bulky Goodsand Office Mezzanine

1350m2

145m25.5 per 100m2 shop1 per 35m2 office

744= 78 total

The Council’s Development Plan provides parking rates for shop (Table AdHi/4). The Development legislation lists bulky goods as a shop, therefore theshop carparking rates are considered applicable. There is a requirement for 78spaces for bulky goods and office, 4 are proposed. However the approvedservice trade premises required 22 carparks. Therefore the proposed changeof use results in a shortfall of 52 carparks. The proposal therefore does notaccord with PDC 59.

The applicant’s traffic report states that there will be a slight decrease invehicle activity to the site generated by a bulky goods outlet.

7. SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONThe application proposes a change of use from service trade premises to bulky goods ofsome 1350m2. The proposal sits within a residential area, with the Business Centre policyarea located some 500m away.The subject land is zoned Country Township (Balhannah & Oakbank). However, it doesnot envisage the establishment of retail activities on this site within the Balhannah WestPolicy Area.Council has allowed some small-scale retail on the subject site but considers a bulkygoods outlet an inappropriate extension and intensification of approved developmentwhich would negatively impact on the existing retail centre of this small township.The proposal is inconsistent with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan, andwhilst it is considered the proposal is not seriously at variance with the Development Plan,staff recommend that Development Plan Consent be REFUSED for the reasons outlinedin the recommendation.


8. RECOMMENDATIONThat the Council Development Assessment Panel considers that the proposal isnot seriously at variance with the relevant provisions of the Adelaide Hills CouncilDevelopment Plan, and REFUSE Development Plan Consent to DevelopmentApplication 15/258/473 by Woolcock Construction Pty Ltd for change in the use ofApproved Stage 2 - Service Trade Premises to bulky goods at 37 OnkaparingaValley Road, Balhannah on the following grounds:

Proposal At Variance with Development PlanThe proposal is at variance with the following provisions of the Adelaide HillsCouncil Development Plan:

Country Township (Balhannah & Oakbank) ZoneObjective 3 as it does not promote the business and shopping centre in Balhannahas the future business and retail centre.

Principle of Development Control 1 as it does not concur with theBalhannah/Oakbank Structure plan.

Council WideObjectives 44, 45, 46, 48 & 51 as it does not meet the day to day needs of the localcommunity and is not located so as to not adversely affect any designated centre.

Principles of Development Control 103, 105, 107, 109, 114, 117 & 124 as it is not inthe centre, is larger than those envisaged outside a centre, does not includeadequate parking and will unreasonably impact on nearby residentialdevelopment.

9. ATTACHMENTS1. Locality Plan2. Aerial Site Plan3. Proposal Plans and Details4. Representations5. Applicant’s response to representations

Respectfully submitted Concurrence

___________________________ _______________________________

Vanessa Nixon Deryn AtkinsonActing Manager Development Services Acting Director Strategy & Development

ATTACHMENT 1

LOCALITY PLAN

ATTACHMENT 2

AERIAL SITE PLAN

ATTACHMENT 3

PROPOSAL PLANS AND DETAILS

ATTACHMENT 4

REPRESENTATIONS

ATTACHMENT 5

RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS



Applicant: Adelaide Polo Club Inc Landowner: SP Estate Pty Ltd

Agent: Graham Burns, Masterplan Ward: Onkaparinga ValleyDevelopment Application: 14/743/473 Originating Officer: Tom Victory

Application Description: Change of portion of land to polo grounds comprising threepolo fields, clubhouse, horse yards, associated car parking, 22.5 kL water tank, removal ofnative vegetation (six River Red Gums) & earthworks (non-complying)

Subject Land: Lot:21 Sec: P5257DP:79204 CT:6055/380Subject Land: Lot:9 Sec: P5256FP:157731 CT:6055/378

General Location: 181 Pfeiffer Road,Woodside SA 5244

(Refer to Locality Plan Attachment 1)

Development Plan Consolidated : 9 Jan2014Maps: AdHi/18 and AdHi/57

Zone/Policy Area: Watershed (PrimaryProduction) Zone - Onkaparinga ValleyPolicy Area

Form of Development:Non-complying

Site Area: 109 Hectares

Public Notice Category: Category 3

Notice published in The Advertiser on 9Jan 2015



1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe purpose of this application is for a change of a portion of land to polo groundscomprising three polo fields, clubhouse, horse yards, associated car parking, 22.5 kLwater tank, removal of native vegetation (six River Red Gums) & earthworks.

The subject land is located within the Watershed (Primary Production) Zone -Onkaparinga Valley Policy Area and is a non-complying form of development. Fourrepresentations were received during the Category 3 public notification period whichgenerally were not fundamentally opposed to the application but raised some matters forfurther consideration by the applicant.

As per the CDAP delegations, the CDAP is the relevant authority for Category 3 non-complying development.

The main issues relating to the proposal are pollution risk to the watershed, traffic, nativevegetation removal and impacts on primary production activities.

Following an assessment against the relevant zone and Council Wide provisions withinthe Development Plan, staff are recommending that CONCURRENCE from theDevelopment Assessment Commission be sought to GRANT Development PlanConsent.

Council Development Assessment Panel Meeting – 2 June 2015Adelaide Polo Club Inc.14/743/473

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSALAs way of background, this application seeks to re-locate the Adelaide Polo Club whichhas been based at Barker Road, Mount Barker since 2000. The proposal is to containsimilar facilities to that at the existing site. In 2010 the existing site was rezoned from ruralto residential. Subsequently a contract has been entered into to sell the Mount Barkerfacility to the District Council of Mount Barker for subsequent division and urbandevelopment.

This has led to this development application to shift the club to the proposed location onthe outskirts of Woodside.

It is proposed to establish new polo grounds and facilities comprising the following:

three polo fields - Fields A and B are full size with outer dimensions of 329 metres by164 metres which contain a 274 metre by 146 metre playing field. Field C is slightlyshorter and narrower with overall dimensions being 309 metres by 145 metres. Thefield locations have been selected on flatter portions of the site however will requireearthworks to create the required gradients for competition fields. The earthworks foreach field is estimated to be in the order of:

- Field A cut and fill: 13,000 cubic metres- Field B cut and fill: 30,000 cubic metres- Field C cut and fill: 11,000 cubic metres

stormwater runoff from each field would be collected via grassed swales and directedto receiving basins designed to manage water quality and peak flow rates

a clubhouse adjacent to Field A, including an on-site waste control system. Arainwater tank with 22,500 litres of storage capacity is proposed and would collectroof water that would be plumbed into the kitchen and toilet facilities

irrigation system used for growing grass

vehicle and horse float parking adjacent to each field

internal unsealed driveways and installation of culverts for drainage lines

horse yard/pony line area

three-sided concrete manure storage pad

removal of six River Red Gum trees to enable the three fields

the club would hold events mainly on weekends with some mid-week twilightsessions from November to March each year, totalling approximately 35 days peryear

polo competitions would be played during daylight hours only, generally between thehours of 8am and 5:30pm

it is anticipated anywhere up to 70 people would attend the site for most matches.Occasionally, major events would occur at which persons attending would be muchgreater in number (such as additional spectators) and for such events up to 300horses may be present on the land. Such major events may comprise the clubcompeting with other clubs from Strathalbyn, Penola and interstate


given the infrequency of the use of the site and the desire to minimise water run-off,it is not proposed that the driveways be bitumen sealed. It is proposed that alldriveways and associated parking areas be constructed of compacted rubble.Spectator car parking for larger events around the field would be informal andunsurfaced and generally around the perimeters of the playing fields

the applicant has stated that a Code of Practice or Set of Rules would be developedwhich members and visitors would be required to abide by. These would include:

- no overnight camping allowed

- no overnight access to toilet facilities (other than in association with a polo event)

- horse floats are not to be cleaned out other than in the designated horse float areas

- no washing of vehicles, horse floats or trailers

horses used in competitions would be temporarily stabled in the temporary horsestalls and pony lines. This area will be used for the temporary stabling of not morethan 300 horses prior to and after the event

manure from the horse float areas and pony lines would be heaped and collected byclub members each day and transported at the end of each day to the manurereceiving pad adjacent to the pony lines area.

The proposed plans, reports and Statement of Effect are included in Attachment 3.

3. HISTORY2 Sep 2009

Council (via DA 09/168/473) approved a change in use from farming to viticulture,grazing and irrigated horticulture (on the two subject allotments in this applicationas well as a third parcel on the south-eastern side of Pfeiffer Road). This approvalwould not appear to have eventuated on the land however, with the land currentlygenerally being used for grazing purposes.


EPAThe EPA was subject to a mandatory referral under Schedule 8 of theDevelopment Regulations, 2008. In summary the EPA has no objection to theproposal and has recommended one condition be attached to any approval (seerecommended Condition 3) which requires the provision of some further detail inthe construction environment management plan, which would include a detailedSoil Erosion and Drainage Management Plan. This document is sought to ensureconstruction impacts are minimised during the establishment of the grounds andfacility.

A copy of the referral response is included as Attachment 4.


NVCThe NVC considered the documentation and did not raise any objections to theproposal. It stated that the proposal is likely to improve the quality of remnantnative vegetation on the property over time provided that a number of measuresoutlined in the application documentation are undertaken. It acknowledged that itis proposed to remove six River Red Gum trees and that clearance approval willbe required. The NVC further outlined the procedures involved with this process.

A copy of the referral response is included as Attachment 5.

AHC EHUCouncil’s Environmental Health Section has granted approval to install a wastewater treatment system associated with the clubroom building.

DEWNR (NRM BOARD)An informal referral to the AMLRNRM Board was undertaken. The Board did notprovide comment however suggested that the applicant should liaise with theWater Licensing Branch regarding whether an amendment to the water licenseapplying to the subject land (which currently applies to three allotments) mayneed to be amended to only apply to the two subject allotments in thisapplication.

A copy of the response is included as Attachment 6.

5. CONSULTATIONThe application was categorised as a Category 3 form of development in accordancewith Section 38(2)(c) of the Development Act, 1993 requiring formal public notificationand a public notice. Four representations were received (including one from CrownLands SA). All were from adjacent and nearby properties. The submissions were notfundamentally opposed to the application but raised some matters for furtherconsideration by the applicant.

One representor, Mr Sam Virgara requested to be heard.

The applicant and/or their representative Mr Graham Burns (Masterplan) may be inattendance.

The issues contained in the representations can be briefly summarised as follows: potential for the increased risk of infection of nearby vineyards from Phylloxera

due to interstate visitors from Phylloxera zones in Victoria attending tournamentsat the site. Such infection to vineyards could destroy them economically due torestrictions on grapes movements and loss of contracts with wineries

a Phylloxera Control Plan should be produced and approved by the PhylloxeraBoard and monitored by an appropriate authority and existing protocols of thePhylloxera and Grape Industry Board of South Australia should be adhered to

the times of the proposed polo competitions are likely to correspond with times offire-bombing activities of aircraft from the adjacent airstrip. It is pointed out thatthe airstrip will not alter its activities to suit and seeks that the applicantacknowledges this position


Crown Lands SA provided comment that it has no objection to the proposal aslong as the development does not encroach on adjacent Crown Land (theallotment immediately west of the subject land which is a reserve with forestryplantation)

discussions were also undertaken between the applicant and an officer of SAWater during the public notification process, to clarify that the proposed Field Cwould not encroach on an existing water main which dissects the property.


In response the applicant stated:

the Adelaide Polo Club has no concerns with the use of the adjacent property as alanding strip for firefighting aircraft, and indeed it supports its continuing use forsuch purposes. The Club therefore looks forward to forming a mutually beneficialand harmonious working relationship with the owner of the airstrip

the applicant has examined the National Phylloxera Management Protocol. It isapparent that the pest is primarily spread as a result of the movement of phylloxerainfested grapevine planting material from one vineyard to another. As no part of thedevelopment site has been, or is proposed to be, planted to grapevines, and thereis no intention to provide access to the adjacent vineyard from the developmentsite, the risk to nearby vineyards is considered to be very low

it is further noted from the research material that phylloxera risk vectors includegrapevine material or winery equipment and machinery. Interstate visitors to theWoodside polo grounds would be most unlikely to be carrying grapevine material,winery equipment or winery machinery

nevertheless the applicant is prepared to abide by the terms of the Protocol, to theextent that it might be relevant, in order to allay the fears of surrounding vineyardowners and operators

regarding the query from Crowns Lands SA, it is confirmed that Polo Field C islocated entirely within the development site and will not encroach into adjacentCrown Land (better known as Ridge Forest Reserve)

the applicant discussed the siting and design detail of Polo Field C in relation to theeasement with an SA Water officer. SA Water is now satisfied that there will not beany conflict with its easement or infrastructure.



i. The Site’s Physical CharacteristicsThe subject land is 108.5 hectares in total and comprised of two allotments asfollows:

Allotment 9- Roughly rectangular in shape with an area of 56.3ha Allotment 21- Roughly triangular in shape with an area of 52.2 hectares


The two allotments have traditionally (and currently) been held in ownership andused in conjunction with a third allotment on the southern side of Pfeiffer Road(Allotment 10) which contains a dairy. In recent years the land has been used forgrazing and other agricultural uses.

A small dwelling exists in the south-western corner of Allotment 9, traditionallyused as a manager’s residence associated with primary production activities.

The land is dissected by Inverbrackie Creek which runs generally east-westthrough the land which is fed by a secondary watercourse further north whichalso runs generally east-west.

The land is moderately sloping, with the exception of the western, eastern andnorthern edges which rise up more steeply.

Scattered gum trees dot the subject land with more dense native vegetationfollowing watercourses. There are some planted windbreaks and a dense areaof vegetation in the north-western portion of the land abutting the Ridge ForestReserve.

Allotment 21 is dissected by an SA Water underground water main which runsnorth-south through the allotment. Some associated small easements forwater infrastructure exist in the northern corner of this allotment associatedwith an SA Water tank immediately north of the site.

ii. The Surrounding Area

The subject allotments are approximately 200m east of the main developedtownship of Woodside at their closest point. The site is however quite physicallyseparated from the township due to being on the eastern side of a ridge and alsoa strip of rural living properties immediately west of the subject land. The actualsite of the clubrooms and fields would be in excess of 500m from the township.

Land uses within the locality are generally grazing, viticulture, rural living andwineries. To the west is the Ridge Forest Reserve which is Crown Land underthe custodianship of Council and dedicated to recreation and plantationpurposes. An emergency services airstrip immediately adjoins the land to thesouth with that allotment also containing a dwelling. On the opposite side ofPfeiffer Road is Bird in Hand Winery, vineyards and a dwelling. Further eastalong Pfeiffer Road is the recently constructed Petaluma Winery. Vineyardsadjoin the land to the east. North of the site are rural living uses along RidgeRoad.

All land immediately adjoining the site is zoned Watershed (Primary Production)Zone, as is the subject land.

iii. Development Plan Policy considerationsa) Policy Area/Zone Provisions

The subject land lies within the Onkaparinga Valley Policy Area of theWatershed (Primary Production) Zone and these provisions seek the retentionof the existing rural character by ensuring the continuation of farming and


horticultural activities and excluding rural living or other uses which wouldrequire division of land into smaller holdings.

The following are considered to be the relevant Policy Area provisions:

Objectives: 1

AssessmentThe proposal should be generally in accordance with the Objective of thisPolicy Area. As discussed in further details below, the existing rural charactershould generally be retained on the subject land. The development is not of atype which would require the division of land into smaller holdings.

The subject land lies within the Watershed (Primary Production) Zone andthese provisions seek:

the maintenance and enhancement of the natural resources of the southMount Lofty Ranges

the enhancement of the Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed as a source ofhigh quality water

the long-term sustainability of rural production in the south Mount LoftyRanges

the preservation and restoration of remnant native vegetation in the southMount Lofty Ranges

the enhancement of the amenity and landscape of the south Mount LoftyRanges for the enjoyment of residents and visitors

the development of a sustainable tourism industry with accommodation,attractions and facilities which relate to and interpret the natural andcultural resources of the south Mount Lofty Ranges, and increase theopportunities for visitors to stay overnight.


Objectives: 1 - 6PDCs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 29, 31, 32, 36, 37, 39, 42,

43 and 44

Assessment

Visual/Landscape Amenity

The proposal involves very little in the way of permanent structures on theland, which are limited mainly to the clubhouse, water tank, concrete manurepad and horse/pony lines. As such, overall the application should not pose anysignificant reduction or depletion of landscape amenity of the locality. The landcurrently generally contains open fields used for grazing uses. The conversionof these fields to irrigated, grassed polo fields should be quite similar in natureto the existing land, albeit at different gradients.

Earthworks consisting of a mix of both cut and fill will be required to flatten outthe land to be used for the polo fields (to the required gradients for the sportwhich is a maximum gradient of 3 percent).


The applicant has engaged engineers to determine the most appropriate sitingto minimise the extent of earthworks.

Following discussions with Council the applicant amended the external colourscheme of the clubhouse building to Colorbond® Dune (light brown) which isconsidered to be an appropriate non-reflective finish that should minimise theimpacts of the building in the landscape. The building won’t be in a high pointin the land and will have a significant setback from all boundaries and PfeifferRoad. As such it should have negligible visual impacts to the locality.

It is proposed that roadways through the site be mainly confined to existingtracks. These are to be constructed (where not already) of compacted gravel.This, compared to bituminising or paving the roadways should ensure thatvisual impacts are minimised. It is evident from reviewing the current MountBarker fields that the horse stalls/pony lines are simple wooden or steelrailings structures less than 2m high. These should not have any noticeableadverse impacts on the locality.

It is further noted that for approximately two thirds of the year (outside of poloseason) the site should be generally void of activity.

In relation to all the above, the proposal is considered to generally accord withObjective 5 and PDCs 1, 2, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 37 and 39.

Environment/Pollution Risk

Significant documentation is provided in the application which assesses thecurrent state of the subject land, watercourses, vegetation and other generalfeatures of the land. The documentation proposes in detail the features of theproposed change in land use and associated works to the land to facilitate thedevelopment such as the creation of the playing fields, upgrading of tracks,installation of stormwater detention ponds, improvements/management ofexisting weeds on the land and along the banks of watercourses.

It is evident from the various reports provided that the proposal may have a netoutcome of improving the environmental management of the land,watercourses and vegetation compared to the current situation.

Detailed documentation was provided regarding the proposed installation of aseptic tank and soakage trench suitable for use of up to the usual 75 personsor less to attend the clubhouse. This proposed waste control system has beenapproved by the Council environmental health section.

It is proposed that some infrequent tournaments may host up to 300 persons(as well as up to 6 functions outside of the polo season for friends and familiesof club members). It is proposed that portaloos will be utilised in addition to thepermanent amenities for such occasions. All effluent from the portaloos wouldbe transported off-site to a facility licensed to receive the waste.

The EPA has assessed all relevant documentation of the application and isgenerally satisfied with the proposal, subject to one condition requiringadditional detail to a Construction, Environment Management Plan to ensure


construction impacts are minimised (refer recommended reserved matter inCondition #3).

Given the above it is considered that the application suitably addressesObjectives 1 and 2 and PDCs 3, 4 and 36.

Primary Production

It is noted that the proposal is not to convert the entirety of the two allotmentsto polo use. Significant portions of the two allotments (around the polo fields)should remain available for grazing and other light primary production activitiessimilar to the current use of the land. Further, the land is only proposed to beused for approximately one-third of the year, with the remaining period beingavailable for primary production activities, albeit likely to not be of an intensivescale on the actual fields.

An independent report on primary production impacts was commissioned bythe applicant which concluded that “the site currently appears to have relativelyunproductive and poorly managed pastures and watercourses do not appearto have been well managed with weed management being ineffective”. Itfurther concludes that “the polo fields does not remove productive land fromprimary production in that pasture is still being produced and may be able tobe harvested for hay and silage”.

Lastly, the limited permanent structures being proposed in the applicationmeans that if the proposed use of the land ceases in future, it would berelatively easy to revert back to current primary production activities or convertthe land to other agricultural or horticultural uses.

Notwithstanding that the proposed land use is not specifically for primaryproduction activities, it is however not far removed from, and does haveconnections with, rural activities.

In relation to potential impacts on existing adjacent and nearby vineyards,other primary production uses and wineries, there should be negligible impactsto these uses as long as the site is carefully managed during the constructionstage and on tournament days in accordance with documentation provided inthe application. The proposed use is unlikely to have potential interfaceconflicts with adjacent uses given the close connection with rural activities,setbacks from boundaries and detailed management plans to be implemented.

Comments were raised from adjacent vineyard operators during publicnotification process regarding potential Phylloxera infections to vineyards frompotential interstate visitor’s vehicles and horses. The applicant reviewed thesesubmissions and responded stating that:

“As no part of the development site has been, or is proposed to be, planted tograpevines, and there is no intention to provide access to the adjacentvineyard from the development site, the risk Mr Virgara’s and other nearbyvineyards is considered to be very low.


Moreover, we note from the research material that phylloxera risk vectors(things that could carry Phylloxera) include grapevine material or wineryequipment and machinery. Interstate visitors to the Woodside polo groundswould be most unlikely to be carrying grapevine material, winery equipment orwinery machinery. Nevertheless our client is prepared to abide by the terms ofthe National Phylloxera Management Protocol, to the extent that it might berelevant…”

The above response is considered appropriate. As an abundance of caution, itis however considered appropriate for a Phylloxera Control Plan to bedeveloped and implemented for tournament days based on theabovementioned Protocol and in consultation with the relevant Board. This isreflected in a recommended reserved matter (refer Condition #2).

Given the uncertain nature of the non-complying process and the likelihoodthat the matter can adequately addressed, it is considered reasonable that thismatter be addressed via a reserved matter following any Development PlanConsent being issued (but prior to the issue of Building Rules Consent).

Considering all of the above, the proposal is considered to generally accordwith Objectives 3 and PDCs 16, 17, 42, 43 and 44.

Conservation/Native Vegetation

The application is considered to have been suitably designed so as tominimise the need to remove native vegetation whilst also balancing otherfactors such as avoiding impacts on watercourses, appropriate vehiclemovements and the selection of relatively flatter land to minimise earthworks.

Notwithstanding, six (6) River Red Gum trees are required to be removed tofacilitate the establishment of the three playing fields. Four of these are withinthe area of proposed field C (south-western corner of the site) and one treeeach on fields A and B. The documentation states that other planted trees(such as windbreak and farm forestry trees) are also proposed to be removedbut which are not protected by any legislation.

The Native Vegetation Act amongst other things requires an off-set to beestablished when vegetation has been approved by the Native VegetationCouncil for removal.

In anticipation of this requirement the applicant has anticipated that an offsetarea of 1.4ha would be required for the six trees to be removed. The applicanthas nominated a vegetated portion of land (adjacent Ridge Forest Reserve) inthe north-western corner of the site of some 3.5 hectares for an off-set area inwhich environmental improvements are to be made. These would include theremoval of woody weeds with a commitment to maintain weed control for 10years and the area to be fenced to prevent livestock.

The application was referred to the Native Vegetation Council for comment onthese removals and the proposed off-set. No objection was raised to theproposed removal of the trees and it stated that the proposal is likely toimprove the quality of remnant native vegetation on the property over time


provided that a number of measures outlined in the application documentationare undertaken.

Whilst the removal of the six trees in question is unfortunate, it is consideredreasonable in the context of the overall development of the site which mustbalance a range of competing planning issues such as ensuring other moresignificant stands of vegetation, watercourses and steeply sloping land isavoided. Further, the overall land management improvements (and legislatedoffset area improvements) that may occur as a result of the development ofthe site are considered to balance the removal of the trees.

The application is therefore considered to generally accord with the intent ofObjective 4 and PDCs 29, 31 and 32.

b) Council Wide provisions

The Council Wide provisions of relevance to this proposal seek (in summary):

Orderly and economic development Compatibility between land uses Safe and convenient vehicle movements Protection of primary production land/activities Protection of native vegetation Minimisation of pollution impacts to water resources Minimising visual impacts to the rural landscape Protection from bushfire


Objectives: 1, 4, 5, 6, 11, 14, 20, 21, 58, 61, 68, 70, 72, 73, 76, 77, 78, 8187, 88, 90, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 127,128, 129, 130 and 131

PDCs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 41,42, 43, 44, 48, 50, 56, 58, 59, 60, 161, 174, 202, 203, 205, 208, 209, 210,212, 213, 214, 216, 217, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 244,245, 248, 249, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 303, 306, 307, 350, 351, 354, 358,359, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379,383, 384 and 385

Orderly and economic development

The subject land has appropriate access to a well-made, all-weather road,access to water (via the existing water licence) and other infrastructure suchas electricity and telecommunication services. As discussed elsewhere itshould not have a detrimental impact on existing primary production activities ifmanaged well and in accordance with the documentation and recommendedconditions.

The proposal is therefore considered to accord with Objectives 1, 58 and 81and PDCs 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 14, 24, 25 and 161.


Compatibility between land uses

PDC 208 may be the most relevant policy in the Development Plan regardingthis proposal as it mentions ‘recreation activities’ such as ‘organised horseriding’ and seeks that such activities be located where there is a minimum ofdisturbance. With regards to this PDC, it is noted that the subject land is to besited near a number of other large scale developments along Pfeiffer Roadsuch as two significant wineries (both with ancillary cellar door/functionactivities) and an airstrip. The proposal therefore should be generallycompatible with the character of the area which hosts a diverse range of largescale land uses (not only rural/horticulture) but which also have ties to ruralland uses similar to the proposal.

The site also has good physical separation from the township of Woodsidedue to it being on the other side of a ridge and the fields and clubroom arealso confined to the south-eastern portion of the subject land with areasonable buffer distance from rural living uses along Ridge Road. Further,the two main fields are to be well separated from the existing dwelling on theairstrip land.

Given all of the above, the proposal should not adversely impact on anyexisting dwellings to any significant degree and is considered to have beendesigned to minimise any potential impacts. The proposal should not adverselyprejudice existing land uses from continuing, nor preclude future land usessought by the Watershed (Primary Production) Zone.

The proposal is therefore considered to accord with PDCs 9, 13 and 208.

Safe and convenient vehicle movements

An independent transport impact assessment report was commissioned by theapplicant. In summary, this report concluded:

approximately 45 car parking spaces would be required for theclubroom for the majority of events of the club, based on the listing of‘non-residential Club in Table AdHi/4 in the Development Plan. Thissets out that one car parking space should be provided for every 6m2

of floor area capable of being used by the members (includingamenities). Given the clubrooms would be 266 m2 this would equate to45 spaces. The application proposes a car parking area catering forsome 60 spaces and therefore accords with this

all vehicles should be able to exit in a forward direction

sight distances at the access points satisfy relevant Austroadrequirements and should operate well

the site is expected to generate up to 60 vehicle trips on a typical eventday which should not adversely impact on existing traffic movementsalong Pfeiffer Road which is estimated at less than 1000 movementsper day


for the vast majority of the year there will be no impact on the roadnetwork as events would be limited to approximately 35 days per year

the club could consider installing warning signage on Pfeiffer Roadwhen large events are anticipated to warn approaching drivers of slowmoving horse floats entering and exiting the driveways (Note - this isreflected in recommended Condition 19).

Given all of the above the application is considered to accord with Objectives11, 14, 20 and 21 and PDCs 41, 42, 43, 44, 48, 50, 56, 58, 59 and 60.

In addition to the above it is deemed appropriate for the two access points tobe sealed between the carriageway of Pfeiffer Road to a point twenty metresinside the property boundary. This will assist in ensuring safer entry andexiting of the site and reduce potential for materials to be carried out onto thecarriageway of the road (refer recommended Condition 6).

It is further noted that Development Approval 14/724/473 (and 10/65/473) forspecial events (two concerts up to 3000 person capacity per calendar year) atthe adjacent Bird in Hand Winery, includes the provision a car parking area ona portion of Allotment 21 in association with these events. This agreement wasreached between the winery and the current owner of Allotment 21. Shouldthis polo club application be successful it is understood the Polo Club wouldthen purchase Allotment 21.

It is therefore recommended that the Adelaide Polo Club liaise with Bird inHand Winery and Council regarding the scheduling of tournaments/events atboth properties to ensure this parking arrangement is accounted for. Majorevents at both properties at concurrent times/days should be avoided tominimise potential traffic and other impacts. This is reflected in recommendedAdvisory Note 14.

It is considered that this agreed arrangement does not affect theappropriateness or otherwise of this current Polo Club application, but rather ismore an issue for the winery to consider in relation to its events. An AdvisoryNote on the Development Approval of 14/724/473 states that if thecurrent/future owners of Allotment 21 (which may become the Polo Club)withdrew permission for the parking arrangement for the winery’s events, thenthe winery would be required to seek a variation to that approval to addressthat issue.

Protection of primary production land/activities

See discussion in relation to the Watershed (Primary Production) Zone. Theapplication is generally considered to accord with Objectives 5, 6, 61 and 62and PDC 174.

Protection of native vegetation

See discussion in relation to the Watershed (Primary Production) Zone. Theapplication is generally considered to accord with Objectives 70, 72, 73, 76, 77and 78 and PDCs 17, 203, 209, 210, 212, 213, 214 and 366.


Minimisation of pollution impacts to water resources

See discussion in relation to the Watershed (Primary Production) Zone. Theapplication is generally considered to accord with Objectives 4, 103, 104, 105,119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131 and PDCs 15, 19,20, 216, 217, 296, 297, 298, 299, 350, 351, 354, 358, 359, 367, 368, 369, 370,371, 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 383, 384 and 385.

Minimising visual impacts to the rural landscape

See discussion in relation to the Watershed (Primary Production) Zone. Theapplication is generally considered to accord with Objectives 68, 87, 88 and 90and PDCs 7, 22, 23, 202, 205, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235,244, 245, 248 and 249

Bushfire Protection

It is not proposed to establish a residential use and as such fire protection tothe clubhouse is less relevant compared to a dwelling. Notwithstanding, thedriveways leading to the clubroom should be sufficient to enable CFS fireappliances to access the clubhouse in the event of a fire with the ability to exitin a forward direction. A 22,000 litre water storage tank is proposed adjacentthe clubhouse.

It is considered prudent to place a condition (recommended Condition 20) toensure that prior to major event days, that grass in the location of theproposed informal parking areas (around the perimeter of the fields or otherlocations) is to be mowed to a very low height to minimise the risk of firesstarting from the underside of vehicles.

Overall, the proposal does not raise any significant bushfire risk issues andgenerally accords with Objectives 106 and 107 and PDCs 300, 303, 306 and307.

7. SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONThe application, although not a specifically envisaged land use within the Watershed(Primary Production) Zone, has demonstrated that it should be generally compatible withthe site and its surrounding locality. Although the proposal is a significant land use interms of area, it is however noted that the club would only operate for some 35 days ofevery year, with some ancillary use outside of polo season being restricted to six days peryear with a maximum of 300 persons. For the vast majority of the year, the site should begenerally void of activity and light rural activities (such as grazing) could continue as iscurrently the case.Impacts on primary production should be negligible as such activities can continue on theremaining untouched portions of the subject land, or even on the fields during the off-season.As long as the site is constructed and managed in accordance with all details in thedocumentation the proposed use should not have a detrimental impact on theenvironment or surrounding land uses to any significant degree.


Whilst the removal of six native trees to enable the establishment of the three playingfields is unfortunate, it is considered that the application has been sensitively designed soas to avoid vegetation removal as much as possible and the applicant has anticipated anappropriate offset to enhance and improve other areas of native vegetation on theproperty. This combined with other proposed improvements to land management on thesite, may result in a net neutral or potentially beneficial outcome to the environmentoverall within the site.The proposal is sufficiently consistent with the relevant provisions of the DevelopmentPlan, despite its non-complying nature, and it is considered the proposal is not seriouslyat variance with the Development Plan. In the view of staff, the proposal has sufficientmerit to warrant consent. Staff therefore recommend that CONCURRENCE from theDevelopment Assessment Commission be sought to GRANT Development PlanConsent, subject to conditions.

8. RECOMMENDATIONThat the Council Development Assessment Panel considers that the proposal isnot seriously at variance with the relevant provisions of the Adelaide HillsCouncil Development Plan, and seeks the CONCURRENCE of the DevelopmentAssessment Commission to GRANT Development Plan Consent to DevelopmentApplication 14/743/473 by Adelaide Polo Club Inc. for a change of a portion ofland to polo grounds comprising three polo fields, clubhouse, horse yards,associated car parking, 22.5 kL water tank, removal of native vegetation (sixRiver Red Gums) & earthworks (non-complying) at 181 Pfeiffer Road, Woodside,subject to the following conditions:

(1) Development In Accordance With The PlansThe development herein approved shall be undertaken in accordancewith the following plans, details and written submissions accompanyingthe application, unless varied by a separate condition:- Planning Report/Statement in Support by Masterplan, dated August 2014- Amended Clubroom Elevations and Floor Plan date stamped as receivedby Council- Property Review by Environments by Design updated August 2014 anddate stamped as received by Council 26 August 2014- Statement of Effect by Graham Burns of Masterplan date stamped asreceived by Council 24 Dec 2014- Primary Production Impact Report by Scholefield Robinson HorticulturalServices date stamped as received by Council 24 Dec 2014- Transport Impact Assessment by GTA Consultants date stamped asreceived by Council 24 Dec 2014- Site Plan by Masterplan date stamped as received by Council 24 Dec2014- Correspondence from Mr Graham Burns of Masterplan, dated 18 Feb2015 regarding the number and capacity of proposed functions insideand outside of the Polo Season- Polo Field Civil Works Construction Environment Management Plan bySouthfront Engineers, ref: 13093-3A, dated 13 February 2015, (exceptwhere amended supplemented by Condition #3)- Watercourse Separation Plans by Masterplan, date stamped as receivedby Council 6 Mar 2015


- Correspondence from Masterplan (to the Environment ProtectionAuthority) dated 24 March 2015 regarding stormwater, culverts andmanure management

REASON: To ensure the proposed development is undertaken inaccordance with the approved plans.

(2) Reserved MatterPrior to Building Rules Consent being granted the Council DevelopmentAssessment Panel requires the following matter which is reservedpursuant to Section 33(3) of the Development Act, 1993 to be addressedto the reasonable satisfaction of Council staff:

A Phylloxera Control Plan for tournament days shall be preparedand implemented in consultation with the Phylloxera and GrapeIndustry Board of South Australia.

REASON: To ensure risk of Phylloxera infection to existing adjacent andnearby vineyard uses in the locality are minimised.

(3) Reserved MatterPrior to Building Rules Consent being granted the Council DevelopmentAssessment Panel requires the following matter which is reservedpursuant to Section 33(3) of the Development Act, 1993 to be addressedto the reasonable satisfaction of the Environment Protection Authorityand Council staff:

The Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) (asdescribed in the Southfront Polo Fields Civil Works CEMP report,ref: 13093-3A, dated 13 February 2015) and including a SoilErosion Drainage Management Plan (SEDMP) must be preparedand implemented for the full duration of the earthworks,construction and grass establishment period. The SEDMP mustinclude measures to protect watercourses from pollutant andsediment inflow during the construction and/or modification ofroads and culverts.

REASON: Development should prevent erosion and stormwater pollutionbefore, during and after construction.

(4) Commercial Access PointsThe vehicle access point(s) and cross-over shall be constructed at amaximum width of 12 metres. Any existing crossing places not providingvehicle access shall be considered redundant and shall be closed off.

REASON: For safe and convenient movement of vehicles.


(5) Vehicle Access Point(s) Line Of SightThe vehicle access point(s) and cross-over(s) shall be kept free of anyobstructions that may obscure the line of sight of a driver e.g.vegetation, letterboxes, fences.

REASON: For safe and convenient movement of vehicles.

(6) Sealing Of Vehicle AccessThe two existing vehicle cross-overs into the subject land shall be sealedin Hotmix bitumen, concrete, brick paving or similar material, from theedge of the sealed carriageway of Pfeiffer road and continue a furtherdistance of twenty metres into the site from the property boundary.

NOTE: The access shall be constructed to ensure no constructionmaterials or other materials are deposited onto the carriageway ofPfeiffer Road.

REASON: To maintain safe and convenient movement of vehicles.

(7) Commercial LightingFlood lighting shall be restricted to that necessary for security purposesonly and shall be directed and shielded in such a manner as to not causenuisance to adjacent properties.

REASON: Lighting shall not detrimentally affect the amenity of thelocality.

(8) Restriction On Retail SalesNo retail selling of goods shall be conducted on the subject land.


(9) External FinishesThe external finishes to the building herein approved shall be as follows.WALLS: Colorbond® Dune or similarROOF: Colorbond® Dune or similar

REASON: The external materials of buildings should have surfaceswhich are of a low light-reflective nature and blend with the natural rurallandscape and minimise visual intrusion.

(10) Car Parking Directional SignageDirectional signs indicating the location of car parking spaces shall beprovided on the subject land and maintained in a clear and legiblecondition at all times.

REASON: To identify the location of off-street parking and ensure thefree flow of traffic.


(11) Unloading And Storage Of Materials And GoodsAll materials and goods shall at all times be loaded and unloaded withinthe confines of the subject land. Materials and goods shall not be storedon the land in areas delineated for use as car parking.

REASON: To provide safe and efficient movement of people and goods.

(12) Carparking Designed In Accordance With Australian Standard AS2890.1:2004.All car parking spaces (except informal spectator parking), drivewaysand manoeuvring areas shall be designed, constructed, drained inaccordance with Australian Standard AS 2890.1:2004. Driveways, vehiclemanoeuvring and parking areas shall be constructed of compactedgravel prior to occupation and maintained in good condition at all timesto the reasonable satisfaction of the Council.s

REASON: To provide adequate, safe and efficient off-street parking forusers of the development.

(13) Restriction On Number Of Functions Outside of Polo SeasonThe number of functions in a calendar year (outside of the polo season)shall not exceed six (6) functions per year. Such functions shall have amaximum capacity of 75 persons, unless appropriate provision ofportaloos occurs in which case functions shall not exceed 300 persons.Any increase in the number of functions/capacity will require separatedevelopment approval.

REASON: To ensure the proposed development is undertaken inaccordance with the approved documentation, to ensure thatneighbouring properties are not impacted on negatively by thisdevelopment and to ensure the waste control system is adequate.

(14) Overall CapacityFor polo events, at any one time, the overall capacity of the entire siteshall be limited to a maximum of 75 persons, unless appropriateprovision of portaloos occurs to cater for anticipated/actual numbers ofpersons.

REASON: To ensure the proposed development is undertaken inaccordance with the approved documentation, to ensure thatneighbouring properties are not impacted on negatively by thisdevelopment and to ensure the waste control system is adequate.

(15) Vegetation RemovalVegetation shall not be removed from the site until the start of thebuilding works is imminent and only from the area of removal approvedon the plans of the development.

REASON: To ensure vegetation removal is avoided where practical


(16) Stormwater overflow managementStormwater overflow management shall be designed so as to not permittrespass into the effluent disposal area. Stormwater should be managedon site with no stormwater to trespass onto adjoining properties.

REASON: To minimise erosion, protect the environment and to ensureno ponding of stormwater resulting from development occurs onadjacent sites.

(17) Removal Of Solid WasteAll solid waste from the Clubrooms including food, leaves, papers,cartons, boxes and scrap material of any kind shall be stored in a closedcontainer having a close fitting lid. The container shall be stored in ascreened area so that is it not visible to Pfeiffer Road.

REASON: To maintain the amenity of the locality.

(18) Regular Removal Of Solid Waste From The SiteAll solid waste from the clubrooms shall be removed from the subjectland at least once weekly during periods of use.

REASON: To maintain the amenity of the locality.

(19) Traffic Signage on Major Event DaysOn major event days, the Club shall install warning signage on PfeifferRoad (in consultation with the Council Engineering Department) to warnapproaching drivers of slow moving horse floats entering and exiting thesite.

REASON: To ensure safe and convenient vehicle movements.

(20) Grass Height in Informal Parking Areas on Major EventsPrior to major events, grass in the location of the proposed informalparking areas (around the perimeter of the fields or other locations) shallbe mowed to a very low height to minimise the risk of fires starting fromthe underside of vehicles.

REASON: To ensure risk of bushfires starting from the site is minimised.


NOTES(1) Development Plan Consent

This Development Plan Consent is valid for a period of twelve (12)months commencing from the date of the decision (or if an appeal hasbeen commenced, the date on which the appeal is determined,whichever is later). Building Rules Consent must be applied for prior tothe expiry of the Development Plan Consent, or a fresh developmentapplication will be required. The twelve (12) month period may be furtherextended by written request to, and approval by Council. Application foran extension is subject to payment of the relevant fee.

(2) Works Close to the BoundaryThe development herein approved involves work within close proximityto the boundary. The onus of ensuring development is in the approvedposition on the correct allotment is the responsibility of the landowner/applicant. This may necessitate a survey being carried out by alicensed land surveyor prior to the work commencing.

(3) Erosion Control During ConstructionManagement of the property during construction shall be undertaken insuch a manner as to prevent denudation, erosion or pollution of theenvironment.

(4) EPA General Environmental DutyThe applicant is reminded of his/her general environmental duty, asrequired by Section 25 of the Environment Protection Act 1993, to take allreasonable and practical measures to ensure that the activities on thewhole site, including during construction, do not pollute the environmentin a way which causes, or may cause, environmental harm.

(5) Department of Environment, Water & Natural Resources (DEWNR) –Native Vegetation Council NoteThe applicant is advised that any proposal to clear, remove limbs or trimnative vegetation on the land, unless the proposed clearance is subjectto an exemption under the Regulations of the Native Vegetation Act 1991,requires the approval of the Native Vegetation Council. The clearance ofnative vegetation includes the flooding of land, or any other act oractivity that causes the killing or destruction of native vegetation, thesevering of branches or any other substantial damage to nativevegetation. For further information visit:www.environment.sa.gov.au/Conservation/Native_Vegetation/Managing_native_vegetation

Any queries regarding the clearance of native vegetation should bedirected to the Native Vegetation Council Secretariat on 8303 9777. Thismust be sought prior to Full Development Approval being granted byCouncil.


(6) EPA Information SheetsAny information sheets, guideline documents, codes of practice,technical bulletins, are referenced in this decision can be accessed onthe following web site:http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/pub.html

(7) DEWNR Taking of WaterThe applicant is advised:This development authorisation does not include the taking of water forwhich an authorisation may be required under the Natural ResourcesManagement Act 2004. If there is a proposal to take surface, watercourseor underground water, or if there are any existing water uses that may beimpacted by the development, the interested parties should contactDEWNR to ensure compliance with relevant legislation. For furtherguidance pertaining to Authorisations and Licence applications pleasecontact the Department of Environment, Water & Natural Resources on8463 6800, email: [email protected] or visit:http://www.sa.gov.au/subject/Water,+energy+and+environment/Water/Water+use+for+irrigators/Water+licences+and+permits

(8) Duty In Relation to NRM ActThe applicant is reminded of their duty to act reasonably in relation tothe management of natural resources within the State, in accordancewith Section 9 of the Natural Resources Management Act 2004.

(9) Water Storage TanksA water storage tank (and any supporting structure) which:a) is not part of a roof drainage system; orb) has a total floor area exceeding ten (10) square metres; orc) is not wholly above ground; ord) has a part higher than four (4) metres above the natural surface ofthe ground,will require Council approval.

(10) Signage Requires Separate Development ApplicationA separate development application is required for any signs oradvertisements (including flags and bunting) associated with thedevelopment herein approved.

(11) Responsibility In Relation To FloodingThe applicant is reminded that Adelaide Hills Council accepts noresponsibility for damage to, or loss of property, as a result of flooding.It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that all appropriate steps areundertaken to minimise the potential damage to property as a result offlooding.


(12) Compliance with Food Act SA 2001This approval under the Development Act 1993 does not in any way implycompliance with the Food Act SA 2001 and/or Food Safety Standards. Itis the responsibility of the owner of other person operating the foodbusiness from the building to ensure compliance with the relevantlegislation before opening the food business on the site.

(13) Food Handling NotificationFood business notification must be provided prior to commencing anyfood (or consumable product) handling activities. This may be providedon-line at www.fbn.sa.gov.au or by obtaining a notification form fromAdelaide Hills Council.

(14) Parking arrangements for events relating to Bird in Hand WineryIt is noted that Development Approval 14/724/473 (and 10/65/473) forspecial events (two per calendar year) at the adjacent Bird in HandWinery, includes the provision a car parking area on a portion ofAllotment 21 in association with these events. It is recommended thatthe Adelaide Polo Club liaise and Bird in Hand Winery liaise regardingthe scheduling of tournaments/events at both properties to ensure thisparking arrangement is accounted for. Major events at both properties atconcurrent times/days should be avoided due to potential for traffic andother impacts.

9. ATTACHMENTS1. Locality Plan2. Aerial Site Plan3. Proposal Plans and Details4. EPA Response5. NVC Response6. DEWNR (NRM Board) Response7. Representations8. Applicant’s response to representations


___________________________ _______________________________

Tom Victory Vanessa NixonActing Team Leader Statutory Planning Acting Manager Development Services

ATTACHMENT 1

LOCALITY PLAN

ATTACHMENT 2

AERIAL SITE PLAN

ATTACHMENT 3

PLANS AND DOCUMENTATION

ATTACHMENT 4

EPA RESPONSE

ATTACHMENT 5

NVC RESPONSE

ATTACHMENT 6

DEWNR (NRM BOARD RESPONSE)

ATTACHMENT 7

PUBLIC REPRESENTATIONS(INCLUDING CROWN LANDS RESPONSE)

ATTACHMENT 8

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS



Applicant: S J Puls Landowner: S J Puls

Agent: Damian Schultz Ward: Marble Hill WardDevelopment Application: 15/30/473 Originating Officer: Melanie Scott

Application Description: Retaining wall (maximum height 2.8m), deck constructed overwater tank, pool fence, fences (maximum height 1.8m), combined fence and retaining wall(maximum height 4.2m) & associated earthworks

Subject Land: Lot:91 Sec: P1022FP:171040 CT:5324/817

General Location: 33 Yanagin RoadGreenhill

(Refer to Locality Plan Attachment 1)Development Plan Consolidated : 9January 2014Map AdHi/3

Zone/Policy Area: Hills Face Zone


Site Area: 1193 m²


Notice published in The Advertiser on 13February 2015



1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe purpose of this application is a combined fence and retaining wall structure, creationof decking, other fencing and recladding of existing fencing and associated earthworks.

The subject land is located within the Hills Face Zone and is a merit form of development.Four representations in opposition to the proposal were received during the Category 3public notification period.

The application seeks to rectify land stability issues on the eastern and western propertyboundaries of 33 Yanagin Road and to provide privacy to the rear yard with theinstallation of fencing and retaining walls. The application also addresses pool safety.The conversion of the roof of a large water tank into a deck with its potential foroverlooking and the bulk of the combined fence and retaining wall structure on thewestern boundary were the main issues of concern with representors. The proposal wasmodified in response to the representations but the essential nature of the proposalremains.

As per the CDAP delegations, the CDAP is the relevant authority as Category 3representors wish to be heard.

The main issues relating to the proposal are technical construction issues, overlooking,overshadowing and consequential amenity issues.

Council Development Assessment Panel Meeting – 2 June 2015Sally Puls15/30/473

In consideration of all the information presented, and following an assessment against therelevant zone and Council Wide provisions within the Development Plan, staff arerecommending that the proposal be GRANTED Development Plan Consent, subject toconditions:

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSALThe proposal is for the following:

Retaining wall varying in height from 0.6m to 2.8m along 20.6m of the commonwestern rear side boundary with 31 Yanagin Road.

Colorbond© fencing atop this retaining wall of 1.2m height adjacent the pool andvarying height down the hill from 1.2m to 1.6m.

Colorbond© fencing along northern section of western boundary 1.8m high.

Colorbond© fencing with a corner cut down for some 12.9m of the common westernboundary(towards the front of the property) with 31 Yanagin Road.

Colorbond© fencing cladding added to existing paling fence for some 22.5m oncommon eastern boundary with 35 Yanagin Road.

Colorbond© fencing 1.8m high for some 30m of the common eastern boundary with35 Yanagin Road.

Pool and deck balustrading (1.250m high) glass, some frosted.

Pool fencing 1.8m.

Temporary safety fencing on tank roof top deck, eastern edge.

Earthworks including fill to a maximum depth of .913m on the western boundary.

Landscaping.

The proposal as submitted has been modified from the original design as part of theresponse to the Category 3 representations. The modifications from the original proposalinclude:

Plans relevant to this application only submitted.

Height of the retaining wall modified with the resultant fence height reduction.

Earthworks modified to ensure the proposal is a merit form of development.

Extent of fence modified.

Landscaping proposed.

Frosted glass proposed.

The proposed plans are included in Attachment 2.


3. HISTORYCurrent 15/31/473 Earthworks - maximum cut 2m and maximum fill 1m

on eastern boundary, Category 3 Merit publicnotification ends 29 May 2015.

March 3 2015 15/32/473 Council approved replacement roof on existingconcrete tank.

December 22, 2009 09/1224/473 Council approved a variation to wall cladding.June 22, 2009 09/267/473 Council approved a dwelling addition - deck with

maximum height 3m

4. REFERRAL RESPONSESNo referrals were required for this application.

5. CONSULTATIONThe application was categorised as a Category 3 form of development in accordancewith Section 38(2)(c) of the Development Act 1993 requiring formal public notificationand a public notice. Four (4) representations were received opposing the proposal.Some were from adjacent and nearby properties.

The following representors wish to be heard:


Nominated Speaker

Craig Vale Per 31 Yanagin RoadGreenhill

Self

Chris Vounasis Per 31 Yanagin RoadGreenhill

Self

Matthew and Kylie Johns 31 Yanagin Road Greenhill SelfCraig and DonnaLigertwood

35 Yanagin Road Greenhill Self

The applicant or their representative – Damian Schultz or Brenton Burman may be inattendance.

The issues contained in the representations can be briefly summarised as follows: overlooking bulk and scale elements of other applications included in plans excessive fill incorrect classification work affecting the stability of neighbouring land (Section 60 of the Development

Act) and possible encroachment. concerns regarding cost under the Fencing Act





i. The Site’s Physical CharacteristicsThe subject land is 1193m² in area and is a rectangular shape with the shortends facing Greenhill and Yanagin Road. The site slopes down to GreenhillRoad from a high point on Yanagin Road. There is also a cross fall from theeast to the west. There is a dwelling, garage, large water tank and pool extanton the property situated in the southern half of the land. The land slopes moresteeply in the northern half and there is limited flat area in the rear yard. Thereare at least 5 stringybarks in the rear yard but not much other vegetation.There is a very large road verge on the Greenhill Road boundary of some17m.

ii. The Surrounding AreaThe southern side of Greenhill Road has a row of regular shaped allotmentssimilar in size to the subject land. Most have similar development, being ahouse and large water tank. The subject land contains one of the moremodest buildings in the locality. To the northern side of Greenhill Road thereare large landholdings best described as grazing. To the south is ClelandConservation Park.

iii. Development Plan Policy considerationsa) Zone Provisions

The subject land lies within the Hills Face Zone and these provisions seek:

The Hills Face Zone- preservation and enhancement of the natural character of the zone- accommodation of low intensity agricultural activities and public/private

open space


Objectives: 1, 2PDCs: 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 13, 15, 16, 22, 24

It is considered that the proposal is generally in accordance with the keyObjectives and PDCs of the Hills Face Zone. Earthworks are required in the formof filling up to 1m in height on the eastern side of the new retaining wall to bringthe ground level up to that consistently found across the subject land. This fillingis on the low side of Yanagin Road and not readily visible to neighbouring land,and hidden from the Adelaide Plains.

The locality is developed with numerous residences on similar sized allotments.The proposal meets the objectives seeking to preserve the visual amenity of theHills Face Zone as it will be not readily visible from the public realm. The subjectland is located below the ridgeline, and the structures should not be visibleagainst the skyline when viewed from public roads.

The scale of the proposal from the western neighbours is large and has beenmodified through a reduction in height and a design more commensurate with thenatural slope of the land and the use of frosted glazing. The applicant has


proposed landscaping and offered to work with the neighbour with regards tocolours and finishes. Whilst finely balanced the proposed structures areconsidered appropriate in terms of design, scale, bulk, use of excavation and filland work with the topography of the land.

The proposal will result in approximately 90% of the side boundaries having 1.8mhigh Colorbond© fencing. Whilst solid fencing is not generally supported in thezone the applicant has demonstrated with the use of landscaping and the largeset back from Greenhill Road the proposed fencing will not impact on amenityfrom the public realm. The solid fencing addresses privacy and overlookingconcerns.The proposed structures will not impact on primary production.

The combination of the above characteristics will ensure that the development isappropriate within the locality. As previously stated the site does not act as abackdrop to the Adelaide Plains and the proposal meets the intent of the HillsFace Zone policies of the Development Plan.


The Council Wide provisions of relevance to this proposal seekOrderly and economic developmentBuilt form which incorporates high quality design techniques, arecomplimentary to the character of the area and contribute to safe,pleasant and convenient environments


Objectives: 1, 4, 29, 68, 70, 74, 75, 77, 78, 87, 88, 90PDCs: 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 13, 17, 22, 23, 76, 77, 78, 81, 82, 84, 86, 88, 89,202, 203, 205, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 233, 234, 235, 245, 249

Orderly DevelopmentThe proposal represents ancillary development to an existing establisheddwelling, pool and water tank which is intended to allow improved safe andstructurally sound site conditions and in principle accords with PDC 3.Representors have raised construction issues and suggested alternativestructural options. Assessment of the construction issues and structural concernsis not part of the planning assessment, however the applicant has providedengineering documentation to support the proposal in accordance with PDC 4.

There is currently a minimum 2m fall between the swimming pool coping at 33Yanagin Road and the paved area adjacent the rear of the dwelling at 31 YanaginRoad. The pool coping is undermined in the north western area. There is aretaining wall at paving level at 31 Yanagin Road which would appear to be doorheight. This fall happens over a short cross distance.

Adjacent the pool the proposal is considered to improve a failing and unsightlysituation with potential land stability issues in accordance with PDCs 6, 7 & 17,81, 82.

33 Yanagin Road has a water tank which previously had a corroded tin lid andwas accessible from paving adjacent the pool and the rear of the dwelling andbecome unsafe. The applicant sought in a previous application to improve the


safety of the water tank by installing a new concrete lid. This applicationto convert the tank lid into a deck area adjacent the pool, as the tank lid is at thesame height as the pool coping.

The proposed deck is adjacent a shed at 31 Yanagin Road and is at a similarheight to the roof of that shed not overlooking or overshadowing the windows oroutdoor living areas of the adjacent dwellings, in accordance with PDC 86. Theextension of the retaining wall and fencing beyond the pool coping past the watertank is an effort to afford the subject land and their neighbours some privacy inaccordance with PDCs 9, 13 & 76, 77, 84. The tank lid/deck is offset from theproperty boundary by approximately 1.4m and frosted glass is proposed to aheight of 1.2m on this edge, ensuring the focus of any potential overlooking is tothe north.

Landscaping has been proposed between the tank and the proposed fence andretaining wall structure to further mitigate the potential for overlooking and meetthe expectations of PDC 78. The proposal has been significantly modified in thisarea to step both the retaining wall and the associated fencing down the hilltowards Greenhill Road to reduce the maximum height of the proposed structurefrom 5.6m to 4.2m. The fence is proposed to be Colorbond© © Monument whichmeets Council’s requirements to be non reflective as in PDCs 22 & 88, 235.

With regards to the fencing and recladding of existing fence proposed on theeastern boundary, no earthworks have been proposed in this application inassociation with this fencing. The dwelling at 35 Yanagin Road is at a levelhigher than the ground floor of the dwelling on the subject land and there exists acut along much of the common boundary. The fence is proposed along the top ofthis cut and a further application addresses some earthworks to provide a smoothlandscaped garden bed adjacent this fence.

No tree removal has been proposed and the rear setback of the fence combinedwith the large verge on Greenhill Road ensure the proposal is in accordance withPDC 23.

Residential DevelopmentThe existing site conditions are problematic with the subject land having a pooland garage on the boundary with the western neighbours and when combinedwith the natural topography in the area the potential for amenity impact on theneighbours is unavoidable. The existing two storey dwelling on the subjectland exacerbates issues in the area. The proposal is arguably an attempt tobetter fit the subject site into the locality in accordance with PDCs 89 & 227,245, 249 as many of the dwellings in the locality have been modernised andthe subject land has not.

Further the applicant has submitted the proposal is to return much of the siteto something reminiscent of its original topography in accordance with PDC229.

Water Supply & Effluent DisposalThe existing septic system on site is not proposed to be changed.


ConservationAs mentioned elsewhere in this report the proposal will have minimal visualimpact on the public realm, does not involve the removal of any trees andproposes landscaping which is native in accordance with PDCs 202, 203, 205,228, 230, 231,233 & 234. .

Construction issuesAs previously mentioned one representor is concerned about the style offootings chosen for the retaining wall and potential for building damage andpossible encroachment. The applicant has provided engineering details andconfirmed an alteration to the design to ensure the footings will be solely ontheir own land.

Other MattersThe applicant lodged three applications originally and lodged the same set ofplans with all three applications. This created some confusion once thisapplication was put on public notification. Subsequent plans submittedseparated the plans. There is another application for earthworks on theeastern boundary still to be assessed, which can be done independently of thisapplication. The third application was approved for a tank lid as Category Onedevelopment.

7. SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONThis proposal for retaining, fencing, earthworks and landscaping seeks to rectify somehistorical site issues. Dwellings in the area are built close to each other on sloping landwith the attendant potential problems for amenity exacerbated by the location of theexisting swimming pool. On balance the amended proposal addresses overlooking withthe use of frosted glass and the bulk and scale of the proposal has been reduced. As aresidential enclave in the Hills Face Zone with smaller than usual allotment sizes, theproposed fencing is considered reasonable to ensure privacy and will have minimal visualimpact from the public realm.The proposal is sufficiently consistent with the relevant provisions of the DevelopmentPlan, and it is considered the proposal is not seriously at variance with the DevelopmentPlan. In the view of staff, the proposal has sufficient merit to warrant consent. Stafftherefore recommend that Development Plan Consent be GRANTED, subject toconditions.

8. RECOMMENDATIONThat the Council Development Assessment Panel considers that the proposal isnot seriously at variance with the relevant provisions of the Adelaide Hills CouncilDevelopment Plan, and GRANTS Development Plan Consent to DevelopmentApplication 15/30/473 by S J Puls for Retaining wall (maximum height 3.8m), deckconstructed over water tank, pool fence, fences (maximum height 1.8m),combined fence and retaining wall (maximum height 4.2m) & associatedearthworks at 33 Yanagin Road, Greenhill SA 5140 subject to the followingconditions:


(1) Development In Accordance With The PlansThe development herein approved shall be undertaken in accordance withthe following plans, details and written submissions accompanying theapplication, unless varied by a separate condition:- Amended plans date stamped by Council 13 May 2015 revision D,

sheet 4, 5, 7(revision E) & 10


(2) Residential LightingAll external lighting shall be directed away from residential developmentand, shielded if necessary to prevent light spill causing nuisance to theoccupiers of those residential properties.

REASON: Lighting shall not detrimentally affect the residential amenity ofthe locality.

(3) External Materials And FinishesAll external materials and finishes shall be of subdued colours which blendwith the natural features of the landscape and are of a low-light reflectivenature

NOTE: browns, greys, greens and beige are suitable and galvanised ironand zincalume are not suitable

REASON: The external materials of buildings should have surfaces whichare of a low light-reflective nature and blend with the natural rurallandscape and minimise visual intrusion.

NOTES(1) Development Plan Consent Expiry

This Development Plan consent (DPC) is valid for a period of twelve (12)months commencing from the date of the decision (or if an appeal has beencommenced the date on which it is determined, whichever is later).Building Rules Consent must be applied for prior to the expiry of the DPC,or a fresh development application will be required. The twelve (12) monthtime period may be further extended by Council agreement followingwritten request and payment of the relevant fee.



(3) EPA Environmental DutyThe applicant is reminded of his/her general environmental duty, asrequired by Section 25 of the Environment Protection Act 1993, to take allreasonable and practical measures to ensure that the activities on thewhole site, including during construction, do not pollute the environment ina way which causes, or may cause, environmental harm.

(4) DEWNR Native Vegetation CouncilThe applicant is advised that any proposal to clear, remove limbs or trimnative vegetation on the land, unless the proposed clearance is subject toan exemption under the Regulations of the Native Vegetation Act 1991,requires the approval of the Native Vegetation Council. The clearance ofnative vegetation includes the flooding of land, or any other act or activitythat causes the killing or destruction of native vegetation, the severing ofbranches or any other substantial damage to native vegetation. For furtherinformation visit:www.environment.sa.gov.au/Conservation/Native_Vegetation/Managing_native_vegetation

Any queries regarding the clearance of native vegetation should be directedto the Native Vegetation Council Secretariat on 8303 9777. This must besought prior to Full Development Approval being granted by Council.

(5) Works On BoundaryThe development herein approved involves work on the boundary. Theonus of ensuring development is in the approved position on the correctallotment is the responsibility of the land owner/applicant. This maynecessitate a survey being carried out by a licensed land surveyor prior tothe work commencing.

9. ATTACHMENTS1. Locality Plan2. Proposal Plans and Details3. Representations4. Applicant’s response to representations


___________________________ _______________________________

Melanie Scott Tom VictoryStatutory Planner Acting Team Leader Statutory Planning

ATTACHMENT 1

LOCALITY PLAN

ATTACHMENT 2


ATTACHMENT 3

REPRESENTATIONS

ATTACHMENT 4




Applicant: Massimo Zorzi Landowner: M Zorzi & N R Zorzi

Agent: N/A Ward: Marble HillDevelopment Application: 15/2/473 Originating Officer: Doug Samardzija

Application Description: Two storey dwelling alterations and additions, deck (maximumheight 2.7m), retaining walls (maximum height 3.5m) and associated earthworks

Subject Land: Lot:7 Sec: P850 DP:5971CT:5595/382

General Location: 37 Kintyre Road,Woodforde

(Refer to Locality Plan Attachment 1)Development Plan Consolidated : 09January 2014

Zone/Policy Area: Residential 1 Zone


Site Area: 2070m²

Public Notice Category: Category 2 Representations Received: 1


1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe purpose of this application is to construct dwelling alterations and additions includinga 2.7m high deck at the rear of the dwelling and retaining walls at a maximum height of3.5m.

The proposed two storey alterations and additions are consistent with the size and scaleof the existing two storey dwelling and other dwellings in the locality. The altered colourselection to the existing dwelling to match the proposed additions will result in acontemporary design that should blend in better with the natural landscape.

The subject land is located within the Residential 1 Zone and is a merit form ofdevelopment. One representation in opposition of the proposal was received during theCategory 2 public notification period.

As per the CDAP delegations, the CDAP is the relevant authority for Category 2applications where a representor wishes to be heard.

The main issues relating to the proposal are the impacts on the adjoining neighbour.

In consideration of all the information presented, and following an assessment against therelevant zone and Council Wide provisions within the Development Plan, staff arerecommending that the proposal be GRANTED Development Plan Consent, subject tocondition.

Council Development Assessment Panel Meeting – 2/06/2015Massimo Zorzi2015/2/473


Upper level addition of some 120m² consisting of front porch area with entry foyer andfront balcony with the majority of the addition occurring towards the back of thedwelling to include new kitchen and meals area with direct entry onto thebalcony/deck area.

Lower level addition of some 65m² consisting of entertainment/games room,equipment storage and covered patio area.

Retaining walls to a maximum height of 3.5m. The highest retaining wall is to belocated at the front of the dwelling and used to redefine existing driveway width andcreate access to the front entry.

New landscaping at the front to create a lawn area as well as landscaping to the rearof the dwelling to formalise two court yard areas. Earthworks should be minimal asthe areas in question are already relatively flat.

Two trees and number of small shrubs at the front and back of the dwelling will beremoved as part of the proposal. The trees in question are not protected under theDevelopment Act 1993. The large gumtrees at the back of the allotment will remain.

The existing tiled roof will be replaced by custom orb roof sheeting and flashing inColorbond Basalt© colour. Roof pitch will remain at 23 degrees with the height of theroof increasing by 1.28m along the western side of the dwelling where the bulk of thework would occur. The remainder of the roof maintains the existing roof height. Theexisting face brick walls will be rendered and painted “Wattle Alabaster©” as well assandstone finish.


3. HISTORYNil


AHC ENGINEERINGCouncil’s Engineering Department has advised that stormwater discharge is to bedirected to the rear of the property through a spreader pipe to reduce thepossibility of erosion.

5. CONSULTATION

The application was categorised as a Category 2 form of development in accordancewith Residential 1 Zone PDC 27 requiring formal public notification. One (1)representation was received opposing the proposal.


The following representor wishes to be heard:


Nominated Speaker

Carmela Pezzuto 39 Kintyre Road,Woodforde

Carmela Pezzuto

The applicant may be in attendance.

The issues contained in the representation can be briefly summarised as follows: Increasing the roof height by 1.28m Blocking current views available


A copy of the submission is included as Attachment 3 and the applicant’s response tothis is provided in Attachment 4.


i. The Site’s Physical CharacteristicsThe subject land is 2070m² in area and contains an existing two storey brickveneer dwelling. The property also features a range of shrubs and native treesmost of which are located at the back of the allotment. The dwelling is locatedon the southern side of Kintyre Road with the allotment sloping down to thesouth-west.

ii. The Surrounding AreaThe locality is characterised by generous size allotments of regular shaperanging from around 800m² allotments along the northern side of Kintyre Roadwith allotments along the southern side ranging between 1000m² and 2000m².The street scape is defined by a range of housing styles ranging from single totwo storey dwellings with various setbacks. The subject lan borders the HillsFace Zone to the south with allotments being considerably larger and relativelyundeveloped.

Properties towards south/west are located either in Residential 4 Zone orResidential 1D Zone and are characterised by mixture of allotments sizes mostof which are consistent with the Residential 1 Zone with the exception of theformer youth detention centre site which has recently been rezoned forresidential development.

iii. Development Plan Policy considerationsa) Zone Provisions

The subject land lies within the Residential 1 Zone and these provisions seek:- Detached dwellings at low densities on individual allotments- Protecting visual and environmental assets



Objectives: 1 and 2PDCs: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 17, 18, 21, 22 and 23

The proposal is for dwelling additions and alterations at low density on anexisting allotment. The bulk and scale is similar to that of other dwellings in thelocality constructed to work with the contours of the land. Proposed externalalterations to the dwelling will improve the appearance of the existing dwellingby altering the colour scheme of the whole dwelling and utilising natural tonecolours and materials. Current colour scheme is red weathered tiled roof withcreamy yellow brick walls. The proposal is therefore considered to accord withPDCs 1 and 3.

The existing dwelling is two storeys and therefore the proposed two storeyadditions are considered to be acceptable given that they will complement thescale of existing built form and therefore accord with Objective 1. Although theexisting dwelling is inconsistent with PDC 4 which calls for dwellings not toexceed 6 metres in height, proposed increase to the dwelling height by 1.28metres along the lower side of the allotment along the western boundary isconsidered to be acceptable and consistent with PDCs 6 and 8. These PDCscall for additions to buildings to maintain the profile of the existing dwelling andto be located on the lower side thereby minimising the obtrusiveness of thecompleted building. Adjoining neighbours to the east have raised concernswith the proposed increase in the roof height by 1.28 metres in that it will blocktheir views to the west. While it is acknowledged that some of the views will beimpacted by the proposed works due to the topography of the land suchimpacts have been reduced due to the additions being along the lower portionof the allotment. It is therefore considered that the two storey additions withthe increased roof height by 1.28 metres will not detract from the characterand amenity of the locality and should not deviate from Objective 2 of thezone.

Given the slope of the land along Kintyre Road some overshadowing over theland to the west is unavoidable. Proposed additions do however maintain theexisting dwelling line along the western side and will therefore have a minimumsetback of 4 metres and widening to 6 metres from the western boundary ofthe allotment. The issue of overlooking has been addressed by adding aprivacy screen along the western side of the balcony up to 1.7 metres fromfinished floor level. The proposal is therefore considered to reasonably satisfythe requirements of PDCs 11 and 17. Proposed additions to the front of thedwelling will reduce the setback from the front boundary by 3.4 metres with thenew setback to the front porch area proposed at 6 meters with the setback tothe rest of the house at 8 metres. Proposed alteration to the front will alsoinclude new landscaping along the eastern side of the allotment. The proposalis therefore considered to accord with PDC 10.

Whilst some of the proposed retaining walls do not conform to all the aspectsof PDCs 21 and 22 which call for retaining walls to be designed in steppednature rather than on one vertical plane, it is noted that the retaining wall at thefront of the dwelling along the driveway will be replacing an existing retainingwall. The wall will be of a colour and material to match the dwelling with


approximately 1.2 metres of the wall protruding above the ground level asviewed from the north- east side of Kintyre Road. Retaining wall at the back ofthe property while being visible from the property to the west will also bematched in with the existing house. Although the walls are of one verticalplane rather than in a stepped nature, earthworks required should be minimaland the walls will be retaining existing fill on site. As such whilst not beingconsistent with certain aspects of PDCs 21 and 22, the proposed retainingwalls should not detract from the amenity of adjoining properties and shouldnot result in overshadowing, cutting off lights or views.


The Council Wide provisions of relevance to this proposal seek (in summary):- Orderly and economic development- The amenity of localities not impaired by the appearance of land and

buildings


Objectives: 1, 26, 27, 29, 78, 87, 88, 111 and 112PDCs: 2, 5, 7, 13, 22, 23, 25, 76, 77, 86, 87, 88, 89, 227, 230, 231, 233, 234,235, 244, 245, 249, 333, 334 and 367

Form of DevelopmentThe proposed development is considered to be orderly and economic andtherefore consistent with Objective 1 and PDC 2. The majority of the proposedworks involve additions to the back along the lower western side of the existingtwo storey dwelling with majority of the works to the front comprising of a smalladdition with remainder being mainly cosmetic works. Although the existingdwelling is within Residential 1 Zone, the subject land adjoins the Hills FaceZone to the south. Whiles the proposed additions are not similar in scale andbulk to most dwellings in the Hills Face Zone it is important to note that theworks proposed will match and complement the existing two storey dwellingand should be in keeping with the scale and bulk of dwellings in theResidential 1 Zone. The proposal is however inconsistent with PDC 5.

The majority of the proposed works will occur on existing flat areas of the site.However small levels of earthworks will be required along the front of thedwelling to create the lawn area as well as the back for the courtyard areas.The excavation and filling should however be kept to a minimum and shouldtherefore accord with PDCs 7 and 230.

Residential DevelopmentThe locality contains a number of large two storey dwellings on allotments ofsimilar size and configuration. It is therefore viewed that the proposed twostorey alteration and additions will not affect the character and amenity of thelocality. The proposed size, scale and bulk are considered to be consistentwith the locality and accord with Objectives 87 and 88 and PDCs 13, 76, 89,227, 231, 234, 245 and 249. Any potential for overlooking has been addressedby way of a screen on the western side of the balcony to a height of 1.7metres from finished floor level. Due to the topography of the land some


overshadowing is expected along the western side, however given thesetback, overshadowing should be minimal and as such the proposal does notdeviate too far from PDC 86. Materials and colours proposed are of naturaltone and consistent with locality and in accordance with PDCs 22, 88 and 235.

Whilst the works proposed are not single storey in nature and not located in avalley or below the ridge line, the addition is onto the existing two storeydwelling. Given that the site in question is located in a relatively establishedarea characterised by various housing designs, the proposal is considered tobe partially consistent with PDC 87. The proposed additions to the front of thedwelling will reduce the setback from the front boundary by 3.4 metres with thenew setback to the front porch area proposed at 6 metres with the setback tothe remainder of the house at 8 meters. The setback proposed is consideredto be consistent with average setback of dwellings along Kintyre Road and isconsidered to accord with PDC 23. Whilst the proposed works also involveremoval of vegetation, there should be no impact on any significant treeslocated on site and as such proposal is considered to be consistent with PDCs333 and 334.

Appearance of Land and BuildingsWhilst the proposed additions and alterations should match the existingdwelling in bulk and scale, proposed works also include substantive cosmeticworks which will change the external appearance of the dwelling to that whichwould be contemporary in nature. Although the proposed works will increasethe overall roof height by 1.28 metres, the alterations and additions, includingthe cosmetic changes will improve the overall appearance of the dwelling andthe manner in which it blends with the landscape.

Stormwater Management & any potential for Flooding, Subsidence or Erosionof the landCouncil’s Engineering Department has advised that stormwater discharge is tobe directed to rear of the property through a spreader pipe to reduce possibilityof erosion.

Water Supply & Effluent DisposalThis site is connected to mains sewer.

Solid Waste DisposalThe site is serviced by the Council’s waste collection service.

7. SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONThe proposal is for two storey dwelling alterations and additions. Whilst it is anticipatedthat due to the topography of the land the proposed works will have some impacts on theadjoining properties, it is considered that the impacts will be minimal. The proposal shouldnot cause adverse amenity impacts on the adjacent properties and the scale and bulk ofthe proposed additions should be consistent with that of adjoining properties andimmediate locality.The proposal is sufficiently consistent with the relevant provisions of the DevelopmentPlan, and it is considered the proposal is not seriously at variance with the DevelopmentPlan. In the view of staff, the proposal has sufficient merit to warrant consent. Stafftherefore recommend that Development Plan Consent be GRANTED, subject toconditions.


8. RECOMMENDATIONThat the Council Development Assessment Panel considers that the proposal isnot seriously at variance with the relevant provisions of the Adelaide Hills CouncilDevelopment Plan, and GRANTS Development Plan Consent to DevelopmentApplication 15/2/473 by Massimo Zorzi for two storey dwelling alterations andadditions including deck (maximum height 2.7m), retaining walls (maximumheight 3.5m) and associated earthworks at 37 Kintyre Road, Woodforde subject tothe following conditions:

(1) Development In Accordance With The PlansThe development herein approved shall be undertaken in accordancewith the following plans, details and written submissions accompanyingthe application, unless varied by a separate condition:

Amended existing site plan, drawing number Z001 DA01 datestamped and received by Council 22 April 2015

Amended proposed site plan, drawing number Z001 DA02 datestamped as received by Council 22 April 2015

Amended demolition floor plan, drawing number Z001 SD03 datestamped as received by Council 22 April 2015

Amended lower ground demolition floor plan, drawing numberZ001 DA04 dates stamped as received by Council 22 April 2015

Amended proposed floor plan, drawing number Z001 DA05 asreceived by Council 22 April 2015

Amended proposed lower ground floor plan, drawing numberZ001 DA06 date stamped as received by Council 22 April 2015

Amended proposed roof plan, drawing number Z001 DA07 datestamped as received by Council 22 April 2015

Amended elevation plans, drawing number Z001 DA08- Z001 DA11date stamped as received by Council 22 April 2015


(2) Residential LightingAll external lighting shall be directed away from residential developmentand, shielded if necessary to prevent lighting spill causing nuisance tothe occupiers of those residential properties.

REASON: Lighting shall not detrimentally affect the residential amenityof the locality.

(3) External FinishesThe external finishes to the building herein approved shall be as follows:

WALLS: Sandstone ashlar pattern and rendered brick painted inWattle Alabaster

ROOF: Colorbond® Basalt or similar


REASON: The external materials of buildings should have surfaceswhich are of a low light-reflective nature and blend with thenatural rural landscape and minimise visual intrusion.

(4) Soil Erosion ControlPrior to construction of the approved hay bales (or other soil erosioncontrol methods as approved by Council) shall be placed and securedbelow areas of excavation and fill to prevent soil moving off the siteduring periods of rainfall.

REASON: Development should prevent erosion and stormwaterpollution before, during and after construction.

(5) Stormwater Roof Runoff To Be Dealt With On-SiteAll roof generated by the development herby approved shall be treatedon-site to the satisfaction of Council by discharging the stormwater tothe rear of the property though a spreader pipe.

Stormwater should be managed on site with no stormwater to trespassonto adjoining properties.

REASON: To minimise erosion, protect the environment and to ensureno ponding of stormwater resulting from development occurson adjacent sites.


This Development Plan consent (DPC) is valid for a period of twelve (12)months commencing from the date of the decision (or if an appeal has beencommenced the date on which it is determined, whichever is later).Building Rules Consent must be applied for prior to the expiry of the DPC,or a fresh development application will be required. The twelve (12) monthtime period may be further extended by Council agreement followingwritten request and payment of the relevant fee.




(4) DEWNR Native Vegetation CouncilThe applicant is advised that any proposal to clear, remove limbs or trimnative vegetation on the land, unless the proposed clearance is subject toan exemption under the Regulations of the Native Vegetation Act 1991,requires the approval of the Native Vegetation Council. The clearance ofnative vegetation includes the flooding of land, or any other act or activitythat causes the killing or destruction of native vegetation, the severing ofbranches or any other substantial damage to native vegetation. For furtherinformation visit:www.environment.sa.gov.au/Conservation/Native_Vegetation/Managing_native_vegetation

Any queries regarding the clearance of native vegetation should be directedto the Native Vegetation Council Secretariat on 8303 9777. This must besought prior to Full Development Approval being granted by Council.

(5) Works On BoundaryThe development herein approved involves work on the boundary. Theonus of ensuring development is in the approved position on the correctallotment is the responsibility of the land owner/applicant. This maynecessitate a survey being carried out by a licensed land surveyor prior tothe work commencing.

9. ATTACHMENTS1. Locality Plan2. Proposal Plans and Details3. Representations4. Applicant’s response to representations


___________________________ _______________________________

Doug Samardzija Tom VictoryStatutory Planner Acting Team Leader Statutory Planning

ATTACHMENT 1

LOCALITY PLAN

ATTACHMENT 2


ATTACHMENT 3

REPRESENTATIONS

ATTACHMENT 4

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS



Applicant: Real Time Investments Pty Ltd Landowner: Real Time Investments Pty Ltd

Agent: Masterplan SA Ward: Mount LoftyDevelopment Application: 14/1013/473 Originating Officer: Marie Molinaro

Application Description: Change of use from shop to office & change of use from officeto dwelling (non-complying)


General Location: 156 Mount Barker Road,Aldgate SA 5154

(Refer to Locality Plan Attachment 1)Development Plan Consolidated : 9January 2014Map AdHi/29

Zone/Policy Area: Country Living Zone

Form of Development:Non-complying

Site Area: 1 550m²


Notice published in The Advertiser on 17April 2015

Representations Received: One

Representations to be Heard: Nil

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe purpose of this application is to gain consent to change the use of a shop building toan office building and also gain retrospective consent to change the use of an officebuilding to a dwelling.

The subject land is located within the Country Living Zone and is a non-complying form ofdevelopment, due to the office component of the proposal. One representation wasreceived during the Category 3 public notification period.

As per the CDAP delegations, the CDAP is the relevant authority as the application is aCategory 3 non-complying form of development.

The main issue relating to the proposal is whether a commercial office use is appropriatewithin the low-density residential Country Living Zone.

Following an assessment against the relevant zone and Council Wide provisions withinthe Development Plan, staff are recommending that CONCURRENCE from theDevelopment Assessment Commission be sought to GRANT Development PlanConsent.

Council Development Assessment Panel Meeting – 2 June 2015Real Time Investments Pty Ltd14/1013/473


Change of use of a shop building to an office building. The office is to be occupied bya real estate company and operate from 9am-5pm Monday to Friday with eight staff.

Internal alterations to create an open plan office area with associated meeting roomand call room. The existing storage area within the building, toilets and staff kitchenare to remain.

Utilisation of 15 existing car parking spaces in front of the building, along the westernside of the building and western side boundary of the subject land.

New signage to replace existing signage attached to the front façade of the buildingvia a separate development application.

Retrospective change of use of a separate two storey office building to a dwelling.

No internal alterations, existing office rooms to be converted to bedrooms. The lowerlevel will contain four bedrooms, open plan living/dining room, kitchen, bathroom,utility and laundry. The upper level will contain the master bedroom andfamily/rumpus room.

Utilisation of three existing car parking spaces to the western side of the dwelling.


3. HISTORYJune 4, 2011 10/1013/473 Withdrawn application - change of use of a

portion of a building to shop & gallery (non-complying) – relates to existing officebuilding

November 10, 2010 10/869/473 Council staff approved signage –Blockbuster (illuminated) ticket signadjacent entrance door and free standingsign in entrance to carpark – relates toexisting shop building

October 12, 2010 10/549/473 CDAP approved change of use to shop inaddition to an existing office (non-complying– relates to existing shop building

April 14, 2009 08/897/473 CDAP approved change of use of existingdwelling to office in addition to existingoffice and carparking (non-complying) –relates to existing office building

August 10, 2004 04/255/473 CDAP approved change of use from arestaurant and dwelling to an office anddwelling – relates to existing shop building

December 30, 1998 98/180/473 CDAP approved conversion of a churchbuilding to a restaurant – relates to existingshop building


As part of this development authorisation a lease was also granted over part of theCouncil road verge in front of the subject land. This allowed part of the Council roadverge to be used as a sealed car parking area associated with the restaurant.

October 4, 1974 10692 District Council of Stirling approved brickchurch hall and amenities - includingexisting office building which was approvedas a dwelling for the church priest to live in.

Despite being originally developed as two associated buildings, subsequentdevelopment approvals have allowed the two buildings to operate as distinct andseparate land uses.


AHC PropertyThe Property Section advised that the Council road verge area in front of theexisting shop building is still leased on an annual basis. The Property Officerrecommended that the applicant purchase the encroachment if the success of thedevelopment application relies on the continued use of the road verge.

It is the opinion of staff that the success of the proposal is not solely reliant on thecontinued use of the road verge, as regardless if the proposal gains consent ornot the approved shop use can continue, which has greater car parkingrequirements than the proposed office. This is based upon Table AdHi/4 of theDevelopment Plan.

A copy of this response is included as Attachment 3.

AHC RatesThe Rates Section advised that if this change of use application is approved theproposed office building shall be known as 1/156 Mount Barker Road, Aldgateand that the proposed dwelling shall be known as 2/156 Mount Barker Road,Aldgate.

A copy of this response is included as Attachment 4.

5. CONSULTATIONThe application was categorised as a Category 3 form of development in accordancewith Section 38(2)(c) of the Development Act (1993) requiring formal public notificationand a public notice. One representation from an adjacent property owner was receivedduring the public notification period. The representor did not wish to be heard insupport of their representation.

The issue contained in the representation can be briefly summarised as follows:

Loss of amenity due to light spill.

This issue is discussed in the following sections of the report.


A copy of the submission is included as Attachment 5 and the applicant’s response tothis is provided in Attachment 6.


i. The Site’s Physical CharacteristicsThe subject land is approximately 1,550m² in area and contains two separateshop and office buildings. The shop building is located near the frontboundary and the office building is located behind the shop near the rearboundary.

The two buildings are approximately 10 metres apart, with a masonry wall andlandscaping forming a direct physical barrier or screen between the twobuildings.

The shop building when originally constructed as a church was built into thesubject land, so as a result the office building is on higher land which providesa further physical barrier between the two buildings.

Sealed car parking areas are located along the western side boundary and infront of the shop building on the Council road verge.

ii. The Surrounding AreaThe immediate locality as defined by adjacent properties is residential innature, consisting primarily of single dwellings located on large allotments.

Further east along Mount Barker Road commercial uses are more common,with the subject land being approximately 630 metres from the commerciallydefined District Centre (Stirling) Zone.

iii. Development Plan Policy considerationsa) Country Living Zone Provisions

The subject land lies within the Country Living Zone and these provisionsseek:

- Accommodation of single dwellings at low densities.- Low-density living areas with a rural character.


Objectives: 1,2PDCs: 1,2,3,4,5,7,10,11,14,15,19,24,25,28,29,30,31,33

Form of DevelopmentThe Country Living Zone is primarily a low density residential zone,accommodating single dwellings on individual allotments.

The proposal is considered to result in a development outcome that is more inkeeping with the desired and dominant land use of the zone and locality as it


will result in a decrease in commercial activity occurring from the subject lnad.This is relative to the proposed office use which is considered to have lesspotential to prejudice residential amenity then the existing shop use, which canoperate seven days a week with trading hours up to 9pm on weeknights and10pm on Saturday nights. This is also relative to the fact that the proposal willsee an existing office building being converted to a residential dwelling.

This decrease in commercial activity on the subject land is consistent withPDCs 2 and 4.

Whilst PDCs 3 and 7 discourage commercial development along Mount BarkerRoad, the subject land has a 17 year history of being used for commercialpurposes, and the proposed office building has previously been used as anoffice.

Movement of People and Goods15 car parking spaces are provided for the proposed office and three carparking spaces are provided for the proposed dwelling. The proposed officeand dwelling will utilise existing car park spaces.

15 car parking spaces for the proposed office use is sufficient to meet the off-street car parking requires of the Development Plan. As listed in Table AdHi/4of the Development Plan, one car parking space is required for every 35m² offloor area providing office accommodation. With a total floor area of 220m²,seven car park spaces are required. If all eight staff are ever at the office atthe same time, this would still allow for seven car parking spaces forcustomers.

The Development Plan does not provide minimum off-street car parking ratesfor residential development, but the nominated number of proposed car parkspaces are considered appropriate.

Public UtilitesThe subject land is connected to mains water, sewer and electricity. This isconsistent with PDCs 24 and 25.

Appearance of Land and BuildingsNo external changes are proposed to either existing building, apart from theinstallation of replacement signage on the front façade of the proposed officebuilding. This would be via a separate development application.

Non-complying DevelopmentIn accordance with PDC 33, the proposal is non-complying as an office is anon-complying form of development in the Country Living Zone.

Whilst non-complying forms of development are generally consideredinappropriate, a non-complying determination should not be seen asautomatically fatal to a development application unless it is seriously atvariance with the Development Plan.

As discussed above, the proposal is considered to be mostly consistent withthe Country Living Zone principles of development, despite the fact that anoffice is generally inappropriate in the zone.


The proposal is not introducing an additional commercial use to the CountryLiving Zone as the proposed office is replacing a commercial shop use. Asdiscussed above, the proposed office use is considered to also have lesspotential to prejudice residential amenity than the existing shop use.


The Council Wide provisions of relevance to this proposal seek (in summary):- Orderly and economic development.- The safe and efficient movement of people and goods.- Development of compact extensions to existing built-up areas.- A variety and choice of dwelling types.- Safe, pleasant and efficient residential zones.


Objectives: 1, 14,15,20,22,26,27,29PDCs: 2,3,9,13,16,46,49,50,67,71,72,76,78,79,82,84,86

Form of DevelopmentThe existing shop building is vacant, with the applicant advising that it has notbeen possible to secure a retail tenant to lease the building. Accordingly, theproposal is considered to be orderly and economic as it will ensure the re-useof a vacant building located in a prominent position on the main arterial roadlinking Aldgate to Stirling.

The siting of an office and dwelling on the same allotment is not considered tolead to potential land use conflicts given the separation between the twobuildings, the limited hours of operation of the office and the existence ofseparate car parking areas. The proposed office is not likely to generateexcessive noise or any odours.

In regards to light spill prejudicing residential amenity, as part of developmentapplication 10/549/473 a condition of consent required that wall-mounted glarescreens and landscaping be installed in front of the existing car parking areafacing Mount Barker Road which is to be maintained in good condition at alltimes. This screen and landscaping has been installed, but in any event thepotential for light spill prejudicing residential amenity is reduced as theproposed office will not be open to the public after 5pm.

The proposal is therefore consistent with Objective 1 and PDCs 2,3 and 9which call for orderly and economic development which is located on landsuitable for its intended use, and which does prevent the effective use of otherland in the locality.

Transportation (Movement of People and Goods)The existing access point from Mount Barker Road is to be retained, with theexisting driveway and manoeuvring area on the subject land being wideenough to cater for two cars to pass each other, and for cars to turn around onthe subject land ensuring that they exit onto Mount Barker Road in a forwardmotion. This is consistent with Objective 20 which calls for the safe andefficient movement of people and goods.


No formal rights of way exist over the subject land, ensuring access to the rearbuilding, but this has been the situation during all previous land uses. If a landdivision application is ever lodged to separate the buildings onto their ownallotments, a community title arrangement would likely to be encouraged asthe Development Plan discourages the use of right of ways as the sole accessto an allotment.

Although Mount Barker Road is an arterial road referral of the proposal to theDepartment of Transport, Energy & Infrastructure (DTEI) to provide commenton the access arrangements was not considered necessary as the existingaccess will not be altered and change of movement through the access isconsidered minimal.

Residential DevelopmentA bin storage, clothesline area and private open space of approximately 140m²has been provided for the proposed dwelling.

A 2,000L water supply for fighting purposes will be provided for the proposeddwelling, which is consistent with PDC 82 in ensuring that residentialdevelopment should minimize the potential for damage arising from bushfires.

Other MattersIf Development Plan Consent is granted, the applicant will still need to seekBuilding Rules Consent for the proposal in which the internal building works tothe existing shop building will be assessed along with matters relating toenergy efficiency and the like.

7. SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONThe proposal is for the conversion of a shop building to an office building, andretrospective conversion of an office building to a dwelling which are located on oneallotment in the Country Living Zone.The Country Living Zone is primarily a low density residential zone, and the proposal isnon-complying due to the office component of the proposal.Despite being non-complying, the proposal is considered to be sufficiently consistent withthe Country Living Zone principles of development control as the proposed use of bothbuildings should positively contribute to the residential amenity of the zone and locality.This is considering a residential form of development is being introduced to the subjectland, and the proposed office use has reduced trading hours and car parkingrequirements compared to the existing shop use.The proposal is sufficiently consistent with the relevant provisions of the DevelopmentPlan, despite its non-complying nature, and it is considered the proposal is not seriouslyat variance with the Development Plan. In the view of staff, the proposal has sufficientmerit to warrant consent. Staff therefore recommend that CONCURRENCE from theDevelopment Assessment Commission be sought to GRANT Development PlanConsent, subject to conditions.


8. RECOMMENDATIONThat the Council Development Assessment Panel considers that the proposal isnot seriously at variance with the relevant provisions of the Adelaide HillsCouncil Development Plan, and seeks the CONCURRENCE of the DevelopmentAssessment Commission to GRANT Development Plan Consent to DevelopmentApplication 14/1013/473 by Real Time Investments Pty Ltd for Change of use fromshop to office & change of use from office to dwelling (non-complying) at 156Mount Barker Road, Aldgate subject to the following conditions:

(1) Development In Accordance With The PlansThe development herein approved shall be undertaken in accordancewith the following plans, details and written submissions accompanyingthe application, unless varied by a separate condition:Amended site plan by Masterplan, received by Council 1 April 2015Existing floor plan (shop building), received by Council 20 January 2015Amended proposed floor plan (office building, received by Council 1April 2015Amended proposed rear dwelling floor plan, received by Council 21November 2014Amended Statement of Effect by Masterplan, received by Council 1 April2015


(2) Residential LightingAll external lighting shall be directed away from residential developmentand, shielded if necessary to prevent light spill causing nuisance to theoccupiers of those residential properties.

REASON: Lighting shall not detrimentally affect the residential amenityof the locality.

Firefighting Water Supply - Mains Water Supply Available(3) A supply of water independent of reticulated mains supply shall be

available at all times for fire fighting purposes for the dwelling:o a minimum supply of 2,000 (two thousand) litres of water shall be

available for fighting purposes at all times; ando the water supply shall be located such that it provides the required water

and is accessible by the fire authority; ando the water supply shall be fitted with domestic fittings (standard

household taps that enable an occupier to access a supply of waterwith domestic hoses or buckets for extinguishing minor fires); and

o the water supply outlet shall be located at least 400mm above groundlevel for a distance of 200mm either side of the outlet; and

o a water storage facility connected to mains water shall have anautomatic float switch to maintain full capacity; and

o where the water storage facility is an above-ground water tank, the tank(including any support structure) shall be constructed of non-combustible material.


REASON: To minimise the threat and impact of fire on life and propertyas your property is located in a MEDIUM Bushfire Prone Area

(4) Unloading And Storage Of Materials And GoodsAll materials and goods shall at all times be loaded and unloaded withinthe confines of the subject land. Materials and goods shall not be storedon the land in areas delineated for use as car parking.

REASON: To provide safe and efficient movement of people and goods.

(5) Opening HoursThe opening hours of the office shall not exceed 9am - 5pm from Mondayto Friday.

REASON: To ensure the development operates in accordance with theapproval

NOTES(1) Development Plan Consent

This Development Plan Consent is valid for a period of twelve (12)months commencing from the date of the decision (or if an appeal hasbeen commenced, the date on which the appeal is determined,whichever is later). Building Rules Consent must be applied for prior tothe expiry of the Development Plan Consent, or a fresh developmentapplication will be required. The twelve (12) month period may be furtherextended by written request to, and approval by Council. Application foran extension is subject to payment of the relevant fee.

(2) Signage Requires Separate Development ApplicationA separate development application is required for any signs oradvertisements (including flags and bunting) associated with thedevelopment herein approved.

(3) Property IdentifiersThe property identifiers for this property are now:Existing shop to office - 1/156 Mount Barker Road, AldgateExisting office to dwelling - 2/156 Mount Barker Road, Aldgate.

9. ATTACHMENTS1. Locality Plan2. Proposal Plans and Details3. AHC Property Section Response4. AHC Rates Section Response5. Representations6. Applicant’s response to representations



__________________________ _______________________________

Marie Molinaro Tom VictoryStatutory Planner Acting Team Leader Statutory Planning

ATTACHMENT 1

LOCALITY PLAN

ATTACHMENT 2


ATTACHMENT 3

AHC PROPERTY SECTION RESPONSE

ATTACHMENT 4

AHC RATES SECTION RESPONSE

ATTACHMENT 5

REPRESENTATIONS

ATTACHMENT 6




Applicant: Rostrevor College Landowner: Rostrevor College & ChristianBrothers Inc

Agent: Paul Fathers Ward: Marble Hill WardDevelopment Application: 14/802/473 Originating Officer: Sandra Fawcett

Application Description: Four light poles associated with existing sports oval (maximumheight 15 metres) - (north east corner adjacent Heather Avenue & Morialta Road)


General Location: 67-91 Glen Stuart RoadWoodforde(Refer to Locality Plan Attachment 1)

Development Plan Consolidated : 9January 2014Map AdHi/11

Zone/Policy Area: Residential 1D Zone


Site Area 47.5ha

Public Notice Category: Category 3Merit

Notice published in The Advertiser on 3October 2014

Representations Received: 1 (Opposing)

Representations to be Heard: 1 (alreadyheard at March meeting)

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe purpose of this application is for the construction of 4 light poles with a maximumheight of 15 metres in association with an existing school sporting oval. The light towersare a retrospective application.

The application was submitted to the Council’s Development Assessment Panel (CDAP)at its meeting on 3 March 2015, and the CDAP resolved to DEFER consideration of theapplication to enable the applicant to obtain an assessment report from an independentLighting Engineer addressing the light glare and light spill impact from the developmenton neighbouring properties.

The previous CDAP minutes and agenda are contained as Attachment 2.

Following the above resolution, Council staff have consulted with the applicant todetermine the scope of modifications which could be undertaken to minimise adverseeffects on adjoining neighbours. A letter from Lucid Consulting Engineers dated 13 April2015, including before and after photos from the representors land has been received.

In consideration of all the information presented, and following an assessment against therelevant zone and Council Wide provisions within the Development Plan, staff arerecommending that the proposal be GRANTED Development Plan Consent, subject toconditions.

Council Development Assessment Panel Meeting – 2 June 2015Rostrevor College and Christian Brothers14/802/473


4 light towers adjacent the north-western corner of the main oval.

The following modifications have been undertaken:

The installation of the lights complies with AS4282-1997 – Control of theObtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting,

Repositioning of light heads by tilting them 1 degree below the horizontal.

Refer Attachment 3 for correspondence and photos regarding amendments.

3. SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONThe applicants have sought advice from an independent external lighting engineer whoundertook a review of the light spill from the towers and in particular from therepresentors balcony. The engineers undertook assessment on two occasions to ensurethe lights complied with the relevant standard. This necessitated the repositioning of thelight heads and replacement of globes.In conclusion the lights now satisfy AS4282-1997 and the light spill is well within theprescribed limitations as defined within the standard.The proposal is sufficiently consistent with the relevant provisions of the DevelopmentPlan, and it is considered the proposal is not seriously at variance with the DevelopmentPlan. In the view of staff, the proposal has sufficient merit to warrant consent. Stafftherefore recommend that Development Plan Consent be GRANTED, subject toconditions.

4. RECOMMENDATIONThat the Council Development Assessment Panel considers that the proposal is notseriously at variance with the relevant provisions of the Adelaide Hills CouncilDevelopment Plan, and GRANTS Development Plan Consent to DevelopmentApplication 14/802/473 by Rostrevor College for four light poles associated withexisting sports oval (maximum height 15 metres) - (north east corner adjacent HeatherAvenue & Morialta Road) at 67-91 Glen Stuart Road, Woodforde SA 5072 subject to thefollowing conditions:

(1) Development in Accordance with Approved PlansThe development herein approved shall be undertaken in accordance withthe following plans, details and written submissions accompanying theapplication, unless varied by a separate condition:Plans and documentation submitted by the applicants:o Site plan date stamped AHC 16 September 2014o Elevation details prepared by G&S Industries dated 30 November 2006o Letter submitted by Rostrevor College proposing amendments to towerdated 5 January 2015 date stamped AHC 28 January 2015.o Light Lux figures date stamped AHC 28 January 2015,o Light tower visor assembly design date stamped AHC 28 January 2015 ando Correspondence prepared by LUCID Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd dated13/4/2015.

Council Development Assessment Panel Meeting – 2 June 2015Rostrevor College and Christian Brothers14/802/473

REASON: To ensure the proposed development is undertaken in accordancewith the approved plans.

(2) AmenityThe light towers shall not be illuminated after 10pm on any given eveningwithout prior written consent of Council.

REASON: To ensure the proposed development does not interfere theamenity of residents within the locality.


This Development Plan consent (DPC) is valid for a period of twelve (12)months commencing from the date of the decision (or if an appeal has beencommenced the date on which it is determined, whichever is later).



5. ATTACHMENTS1. Locality Plan2. Minutes and Documentation from previous CDAP meeting – 3 March 20153. Correspondence – LUCID Consulting Engineers dated 13 April 2015.


___________________________ _______________________________

Sandra Fawcett Tom VictoryStatutory Planner Acting Team Leader Statutory Planning

ATTACHMENT 1LOCALITY PLAN

ATTACHMENT 2

MINUTES AND DOCUMENTATION FROM PREVIOUS CDAP MEETING3 MARCH 2015

ATTACHMENT 3

CORRESPONDENCELUCID CONSULTING ENGINEERS DATED 13 APRIL 2015

council development assessment panel meeting 2 …...jun 02, 2015 · the applicant or their...

Documents