minutes of the planning meeting of kempsey shire council · that the minutes of the planning...

MINUTES OF THE PLANNING MEETING OF KEMPSEY SHIRE COUNCIL Tuesday 22nd July 2003 commencing at 9.00a.m. PRESENT: Councillors J A C Hayes, (Mayor and Chairman), J H Bowell, R J Bowen, P J

Parkinson and B R Sowter. General Manager, A V Burgess; Acting Director Environmental Services, R B

Pitt; Ken Woods and Donna Pearson. APOLOGY: 2003. P9 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Sowter Seconded: Cl. Bowen That the apology submitted by Councillors T Hunt, N Joukhadar and J

Sproule for non-attendance at the meeting be accepted and leave of absence granted.

2003. P10 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Sowter Seconded: Cl. Parkinson That Standing Orders be suspended to allow questions and discussion

with Mr Luke Hartsuyker on his arrival.

MINUTES OF THE PLANNING MEETING OF KEMPSEY SHIRE COUNCIL DATED 24TH JUNE 2003.

2003. P11 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Bowell Seconded: Cl. Bowen That the Minutes of the Planning Meeting of Kempsey Shire Council dated

24th June 2003, be adopted. At this stage 9.05 a.m. the Meeting adjourned for an address from Mr

Luke Hartsuyker Federal Member for Cowper.

THIS IS PAGE 1 OF THE FULL TEXT MINUTES OF THE PLANNING MEETING OF THE KEMPSEY SHIRE COUNCIL HELD ON TUESDAY 22ND JULY 2003. ………………………………. MAYOR


Issues covered included;

• Cost shifting enquiry • Pacific Highway Upgrade • Radiation Therapy Unit • Roads to Recovery Funding • Illegal Dwellings and Privacy Laws • Financial Assistance Grants • Heritage Funding • Flood Mitigation Funding • National Environmental Levy • Constitutional Recognition of Local Government

2003. P12 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Bowell Seconded: Cl. Bowen

That Council resume normal Order of Business. At this stage 9.50 a.m. the Meeting resumed and all present at the adjournment were in attendance.

PUBLIC FORUM 1 - Mr Steven Land addressed Council regarding report DES2 Shade Sail - Gladstone page G-6.

2 - Tracey Edwards addressed Council regarding DES4 Proposed Garage 89 Sea Street, West Kempsey Page G11

3 - Scott Whitehair addressed Council regarding DES5

Proposed Two Storey Dwelling Maria River Road, Crescent Head Page G14.

4 - Mr Cordin addressed Council regarding DES9 request for

approval to remove a tree at Greenhill, page G27.

2003. P13 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Sowter Seconded: Cl. Bowen That the items relating to Public Forum be moved ahead and dealt with

accordingly.


CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS RELATING TO PUBLIC FORUM –

Reports DES2, DES4, DES5 and DES9.

DES2 SHADE SAIL - GLADSTONE FILE: T6-03-360 AD {Folio No. 257924}

SUMMARY:

Reporting that Council has received an application for a shade sail structure

within the Gladstone Conservation Area which does not comply with Development Control Plan (DCP) No 35 (Gladstone Conservation Area).

Applicant: Land R P Subject Land: Lot 11 DP 814822 No 21 Kinchela Street, Gladstone (Hotel) Zoning: 2(v) Village Proposal Shade Sail

Heads of Consideration:

The proposal has been examined having regard for the Heads of Consideration identified under Section 79 C(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act with the following matters considered to be of particular relevance to the proposal.

DCP No 35 - Gladstone Conservation Area

An application has been received for a shade sail adjacent to the Gladstone Hotel with concerns being raised regarding the impact of the proposed design upon the heritage significance of the area, its visual impact upon the streetscape, and its overall height (5.0 metres) (Appendix B). Section 2.3(a) of DCP 35 requires that any development should not detract from the heritage significance of the Gladstone Conservation Area, should be designed and constructed in a manner which is sympathetic with and respectful of the character of the Gladstone Conservation area and of adjoining heritage building or places.

An assessment undertaken by Council’s Heritage advisor resulted in the

following:

• “in principle, providing the structure does not attach to heritage fabric and can be removed without disturbance to existing structure, the sails should not significantly reduce the heritage significance of the Gladstone Conservation Area.

However, the visual impact of the proposal on the streetscape is considered

to be intrusive. A simpler triangulated system of sails on fewer posts to alleviate the summer solar load may be more appropriate.


The applicant has expressed dissatisfaction with the assessment and wishes for Council to determine the application and no objections have been received. Planning Comment Whilst the purpose of the proposed structure is seen as positive, it is considered that the scale and height of the proposal will detrimentally affect the surrounding streetscape. It is possible that by reducing the height of the structure and provision of screen planting the impact on the streetscape could be substantially reduced. The applicant has given verbal advice that he wishes to proceed with the proposal as applied for due to the following reasons: • The shade sail is for sun protection of patrons of the Gladstone Hotel; • The proposal will be constructed by local manufactures thereby

retaining employment and economic growth in the local community; • The proposal is better than temporary umbrellas with ‘coca-cola’ or

related advertising; and • The applicant believes and supports “in principle” with the ideas of

Heritage and Conservation in Gladstone. Options Council has three options available with respect to this matter:- 1 Approve the proposal in its present form. 2 Require the applicant to submit amended plans addressing concerns

relating to impacts on the streetscape. 3 Refuse the application.

Director Environmental Services Recommendation:

A That the applicant be requested to submit amended plans within fourteen (14) days relating to reduce the impact of the proposal by reducing the upper tier of sails to not more than 3.0 metres.

B That upon submission of suitable amended plans, that consent

be granted, subject to the following conditions:-

1 The development referred to in this application is to be carried out substantially in accordance with the approved development plans as modified by any conditions of this consent.


2 This consent does not permit commencement of any

works. Works are not to commence until such time as a Construction Certificate has been obtained and the appointment of a Principal Certifying Authority.

3 A Construction Certificate shall not be issued until all relevant conditions of this consent have been complied with.

4 All building work must be carried out in accordance with

the provisions of the Building Code of Australia. Your attention is drawn to the following requirements of

the Building Code of Australia. 5 The plans for the required Construction Certificate are to

include a detailed landscaping plan providing for the establishment of endemic species, suitable to screen the structure from view from Kinchela Street.

C That if the amended plans are not received within the period

specified that the application be refused for the following reasons:-

• The proposal will have an unacceptable impact on the

existing streetscape thereby being contrary to DCP 25 - Gladstone Conservation Area; and

• The proposal is likely to establish an undesirable

precedent for other developments within the Shire. 2003. P14 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Sowter Seconded: Cl. Bowell

That consent be granted, subject to the following conditions:-


2 This consent does not permit commencement of any

works. Works are not to commence until such time as a Construction Certificate has been obtained and the appointment of a Principal Certifying Authority.

3 A Construction Certificate shall not be issued until all relevant conditions of this consent have been complied with.

4 All building work must be carried out in accordance with

the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.


Your attention is drawn to the following requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

5 The plans for the required Construction Certificate are to

include a detailed landscaping plan providing for the establishment of endemic species, suitable to screen the structure from view from Kinchela Street.

DES4 PROPOSED GARAGE LOT 6 DP 22382 No 89 SEA STREET,

WEST KEMPSEY FILE: T6-03-375 SNB {Folio No. 257926}

SUMMARY: Reporting that a Development Application has been received for approval to

erect a large garage and lean-to comprising four (4) bays on a residential allotment.

Applicant: John Robinson

Subject Land: Lot 6 DP 22382 No 89 Sea Street, West Kempsey Proposed: Garage An application has been submitted to erect a large garage measuring 7.0 metres long and 7.5 metres wide, and an attached lean-to measuring 5 metres long and 7.5 metres wide. The height of the building at the eaves is 2.4 metres, and at the ridge line is 3.13 metres. A copy of the plans and elevations is appended to this report as (Appendix E). There is an existing single carport attached to the rear of the dwelling. The owners have advised that this structure is inadequate for the purpose of protecting their vehicle but is to be retained as it provides cover for an external hot water system. The owner has also advised that the proposed garage and lean-to is required to garage two motor vehicles, and a boat, as well as providing a covered area for an outdoor setting. A copy of a submission from the property owners is appended to this report as (Appendix F). Council has received, in recent months a number of applications for relatively large ancillary structures on residential lots. The proposed garage and lean-to are to be located in the rear yard of the property and will utilise an existing crossing situated in Neville Everson Street. A number of existing trees will need to be removed. A site plan is appended to this report as (Appendix G). The building is shown to be 1.8 metres from Neville Everson Street and any approval that may be issued should require a minimum alignment of 3 m.


If Council considers that five covered parking spaces are inappropriate for this residential allotment of 657.6 square metres, the application should be refused as the size is inappropriate for a residential allotment and the proposed alignment will impact on the adjoining premises. Alternatively if Council considers that the proposed shed is not an over-development of the site the application could be approved with the following conditions:-

1 The development referred to in this application is to be carried out

substantially in accordance with the approved development plans as modified by any conditions of this consent.

2 The garage and lean-to is not approved for or to be used for human

habitation, industrial or commercial purposes. 3 This consent has been issued on the basis that Council has been

appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority and Council has accepted the appointment and will be issuing the construction certificate.

4 Two days prior to commencing work Form 7 under Environmental

Planning and Assessment Act Regulations, Notice of Commencement of Building or Subdivision work and Appointment of Principal Certifying Authority is to be submitted to Council

5 The garage and lean-to is not to be occupied prior to the issue of an

Occupation/Interim Occupation Certificate by Council. An application for a certificate is enclosed. It is requested that it be

completed and returned to Council prior to requesting an inspection. A minimum of 48 hours notice is necessary when requesting the inspection. Appointments will be made in accordance with the inspection program for that area.

6 The following inspections are required to be made and a minimum of

48 hours notice is necessary where requesting an inspection. Appointments will be made in accordance with the inspection program for the area. Where inspections are carried out by an accredited certifier other than Council, compliance certificates will be required following each inspection and forwarded immediately to The Principal Certifier. Inspections required: (a) all steel reinforcement prior to the pouring of concrete.

Note: Accounts will be forwarded for inspections that are required and/or

undertaken in addition to those inspections for which a pre-payment has been made.

7 A sign is to be provided in a prominent and visible position (on the

building or fence) stating “Unauthorised entry to the site is not permitted”, together with the name of the person responsible for the site and a contact number outside working hours.


8 Compliance with the Building Code of Australia. All building work must be carried out in accordance with the

requirements of the (BCA).

A construction certificate shall not be issued until the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) is satisfied that the plans and specifications comply with the BCA.

9 Building materials are not to be stored within the road reserve or any

other public place.

10 Excavated material from the site is not to be placed within the road reserve or any other public place.

11 Roofwaters are to be directed by means of sealed pipes to the street

gutter. 12 The building is to have a minimum alignment of 3m to Neville Everson

Street.

Director Environmental Services Recommendation: For the determination of Council.

2003. P15 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Bowell Seconded: Cl. Parkinson

That the Director’s Recommendation be adopted subject to conditions; 1 The development referred to in this application is to be carried

out substantially in accordance with the approved development plans as modified by any conditions of this consent.

2 The garage and lean-to is not approved for or to be used for

human habitation, industrial or commercial purposes. 3 This consent has been issued on the basis that Council has been


4 Two days prior to commencing work Form 7 under

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Regulations, Notice of Commencement of Building or Subdivision work and Appointment of Principal Certifying Authority is to be submitted to Council

5 The garage and lean-to is not to be occupied prior to the issue of

an Occupation/Interim Occupation Certificate by Council.


An application for a certificate is enclosed. It is requested that it be completed and returned to Council prior to requesting an inspection. A minimum of 48 hours notice is necessary when requesting the inspection. Appointments will be made in accordance with the inspection program for that area.

6 The following inspections are required to be made and a

minimum of 48 hours notice is necessary where requesting an inspection. Appointments will be made in accordance with the inspection program for the area. Where inspections are carried out by an accredited certifier other than Council, compliance certificates will be required following each inspection and forwarded immediately to The Principal Certifier. Inspections required: (a) all steel reinforcement prior to the pouring of concrete.

Note: Accounts will be forwarded for inspections that are required

and/or undertaken in addition to those inspections for which a pre-payment has been made.

7 A sign is to be provided in a prominent and visible position (on

the building or fence) stating “Unauthorised entry to the site is not permitted”, together with the name of the person responsible for the site and a contact number outside working hours.




9 Building materials are not to be stored within the road reserve or

any other public place.


11 Roofwaters are to be directed by means of sealed pipes to the

street gutter. 12 The building is to have a minimum alignment of 3m to Neville

Everson Street.


DES5 PROPOSED TWO STOREY DWELLING LOT 910 DP 830044 MARIA RIVER ROAD,

CRESCENT HEAD FILE: T6-02-370 SAR {Folio No. 257927}

SUMMARY:

Reporting that a Construction Certificate and Section 96 modification of

consent has been received for approval to erect a two storey dwelling on a Rural 1(A3) zoning at the above-mentioned address.

Applicant: Tim Mecham Owner: Scott & Julie Whitehair Subject land: Lot 910 DP830044, Maria River Road, Crescent Head. Zone: Rural 1(A3) Background In 2002 a Development Application was submitted for the erection of a dwelling at Lot 910 DP 830044 Maria River Road. This application was submitted to Council on the 13 August 2002 for consideration, and consent granted for the erection of a pole dwelling with a non-habitable ground floor laundry. Proposal The modified dwelling varies from the original proposal in that changes have been made to the internal configuration of the dwelling, a reduction in verandah space, as well as a reconfiguration of the external appearance of the dwelling, including roof changes and the removal of access stairs on the northern portion of the dwelling. The principle change from the original proposal is the partial enclosing of the under floor area of the dwelling, including the addition of an enclosed workshop and storeroom. A copy of the modified and consented plans and elevations is appended to this report as (Appendix H) and (Appendix I). The dimensions of the modified dwelling are 17.8 metres in length and 14.5 metres in width. This constitutes a reduction of 5.430 metres in the overall length of the dwelling & an increase in width of 1.2 metres. No height information was provided on the modified plans however a calculated height of 5.4 metres was determined. This represents a reduction in roof height of 0.5 metres. The modification contains the same number of habitable rooms and the positioning of the dwelling on the site has not been altered. The proposed changes to the upper floor level are compliant with Council requirements. The under floor area has been altered significantly from the original design, forming a semi-enclosed area, incorporating a fully enclosed storeroom and workshop. Under Councils Flood Risk Management Policy, 6.3.1: Urban Development (Residential); “where a building is of 2 storeys only, rooms not


designed for or capable of being used or adapted a habitable rooms will be permitted in the lower floor area.” A habitable room being defined as “any living rooms and any rooms intended or adaptable for sleeping, eating or cooking, but not including a laundry or toilet.” The workshop and storeroom components remain independent from the remaining under floor area by a closeable door, with the workshop containing a large bay window. Because of these features, it is recognized that these rooms could readily be used or adapted to, by definition a habitable room, thereby contravening the requirements of Councils Flood Risk Management Policy. The entire under floor area could be readily enclosed by the addition of roller shutters or the like, creating a habitable living area. The applicant concludes that the “inclusion of walls in the under floor area is required by the structural engineer to ensure the building is capable of resisting the anticipated flood loads”. No supporting evidence has been presented to substantiate this statement, nor can it be justified based on the number of engineer certified pole homes located in flood prone areas within the shire. A copy of the applicants’ statement is appended to this report as (Appendix J). Conclusion That Council should refuse the application on the grounds that the by enclosing the lower floor area and the addition of a workshop and storeroom, the applicant is creating a habitable living area thereby breaching Councils Flood Management Policy in regard to Urban Development. Director Environmental Services Recommendation: 1 That the applicant be invited to submit an amended application

with the enclosed under floor area, workshop and storeroom deleted from the amended plans.

2 That the applicant be advised that unless the requested plans or

written advice to submit such plans is received within fourteen days of the date of notice being given, that the application be refused, for the following reason:

a The proposal is contrary to Councils Flood Risk

Management Policy, 6.3.1. Urban Development (Residential), as the lower floor portion is capable of being used or adapted to a habitable living area.

MOVED: Moved: Cl. Bowell Seconded: Cl. Sowter 1. That approval be granted subject to the conditions applicable by

the General Manager. 2. The rooms on the ground floor not be used for habitable

purposes.


An Amendment was MOVED: Moved: Cl. Hayes Seconded: Cl. Parkinson

1 That the applicant be invited to submit an amended application with the enclosed under floor area, workshop and storeroom deleted from the amended plans.

2 That the applicant be advised that unless the requested plans or

written advice to submit such plans is received within fourteen days of the date of notice being given, that the application be refused, for the following reason:

a The proposal is contrary to Councils Flood Risk

Management Policy, 6.3.1. Urban Development (Residential), as the lower floor portion is capable of being used or adapted to a habitable living area.

The AMENDMENT was PUT to the Meeting and was LOST.

2003. P16 The MOTION was PUT to the MEETING and was CARRIED.

DES9 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO REMOVE A TREE LOT 3 DP 1050208 RIVER STREET, GREENHILLS FILE: T6-03-292 SNB {Folio No. 257931}

SUMMARY:

Reporting that following refusal by Council of an application to remove a tree

under Council's Tree Preservation Order, the owners have requested that the application be reconsidered.

Applicant: T & L Cordin Property: Lot 3 DP 1050208 River Street, Greenhills

On 2nd June 2003 Council approved a Development Application for the construction of a dwelling on the above allotment of land. During the site assessment Council's Development Control Officer noted the presence of a large Moreton Bay Fig tree in the vicinity of the proposed building site. The tree is the only tree on the site. It was determined at the time that the dwelling could be erected without removing the tree. In order to safeguard the tree, the Development Approval was issued with a condition stating that no tree could be lopped or removed except in accordance with Council's Policy on Tree Preservation, and with the written consent of Council. A site plan indicating the location of the tree and the proposed location of the dwelling is appended to this report as (Appendix O). On 5th June 2003 council received a Tree Preservation Order application from the owners seeking permission to remove the subject tree. The reason given for requesting this action was that the tree is regarded as being too close to


the dwelling. In response to this application, Council's Development Control Officer again visited the site. Building profiles were in place and it was determined that the distance between the tree and the nearest point of the house (edge of the rear deck) was 6.3 metres, and the distance to the external wall or the dwelling was 9.7 metres. It was also noted that the dwelling could be re-positioned to increase the distance from the tree. In view of these observations, the application to remove the tree was refused. The owners are now seeking consideration of their Tree Preservation Order Application and have made a written submission for Council's determination. This letter is appended to this report as (Appendix P). In summary the grounds upon which removal of the tree is sought include:- • the destructive nature of Fig species in relation to drainage and paths; • difficulty in re-positioning the dwelling on the site; • poor health of the tree. It is considered that there is adequate space on the allotment to re-position the dwelling without encountering the problems stated in the submission. The land has an area of 11.67ha and even though an easement directs the site ample land is available to construct a dwelling without impacting on the existing tree. A copy of the plans of the proposed dwelling and part site plan is at (Appendix Q) .The application and request for reconsideration have not been supported by an arborists report as required under the Tree Preservation Order Policy when claiming that the tree is a substantial threat to property or life. Director Environmental Services Recommendation:

That Mr & Mrs Cordin be advised to re-position the dwelling to the west of the proposed location and amend the approved site plan accordingly.

MOVED: Moved: Cl. Bowell

Seconded: Cl. Sowter That the applicant’s request to fell the tree be granted. An Amendment was MOVED: Moved: Cl. Parkinson Seconded: Cl. * That the Director’s recommendation be adopted. The Motion lapsed for want of a seconder. An Amendment was MOVED: Moved: Cl. Bowen Seconded: Cl. Hayes That Council allow removal of the tree and that the owners be requested

to plant 3 advanced Morton Bay Fig trees with guards in place.


2003. P17 The MOTION was WITHDRAWN. The AMENDMENT was PUT to the MEETING and was CARRIED, became the MOTION and was CARRIED.

Councillor Parkinson recorded his vote against the foregoing Resolution.

The General Manager introduced Miss Hayley Scott, to Councillors, as a

new member of staff currently Trainee in Corporate and Community Services.

At this stage 10.37 a.m. the Meeting adjourned for Morning Tea and

upon resumption at 10.58 a.m. all present at the adjournment were in attendance.

ADOPTION OF AGENDA ORDER OF BUSINESS 2003. P18 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Parkinson Seconded: Cl. Bowen That the Agenda Order of Business be adopted.

DIRECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REPORT

DES1 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - SELF STORAGE UNITS, LOT 2 DP 808075 No 89-91 WEST STREET, SOUTH KEMPSEY

FILE: T6-03-185 AD {Folio No. 257912} SUMMARY: Reporting on a development application for proposed self storage units in

South Kempsey requiring a variation to Council’s Building Alignments Policy.

Applicant: B Staines - Australian Storage Management Pty Ltd Location: Lot 2 DP 808075 No 89-91 West Street, South Kempsey Proposal: Self Storage Units Zone: 4(a) Industrial (General)

Heads of Consideration:


The proposal has been examined having regard for the Heads of Consideration identified under Section 79 C(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act with the following matters considered to be of particular relevance to the proposal.

The proposal is not contrary to any State Environmental Planning Policy,

North Coast Regional Environmental Plan 1988, or Kempsey Local Environmental Plan 1987.

Policy No C23:2 - Building Alignments

The proposal is located on the corner of South and West Streets in South Kempsey, on land identified in Clause 3 of the Building Alignments Policy as requiring a setback from South Street of 15 metres. The proposal is for three buildings containing approximately 120 storage units. (Appendix A)

• The applicant has submitted that the facility is for storage purposes

only. There will be no commercial, industrial or retail work carried out in the buildings.

• Flammable, dangerous and hazardous materials are prohibited from being stored at the facility. The risk of fire and combustion is minimal.

• There will be no electricity or water connected to the individual units of the building. This also discourages any work being done at the property.

• The buildings are of full steel construction. There is no carpet, gyprock or timber fixed to the units.

• The buildings and site plan have been designed to be in line with the adjoining properties to maintain the standard and presentation of the Industrial Estate.

Planning Comment Clause 9 of the Policy states “Council may at its absolute discretion approve variations”. Initially, the applicant submitted a proposal indicating a 1 metre setback, but to address concerns relating to impacts upon the streetscape the applicant submitted an amended plan showing a setback to South Street of 7 metres. It is considered that in this instance, the variation be justified due to the following reasons: • The traffic generation and parking requirement of storage facilities is

likely to be less than other industrial uses. • The proposal is not considered to detrimentally impact on the

streetscape. • The 15 metre setback requirement was derived from the Municipality

of Kempsey Planning Scheme Ordinance of 1968. Although no documentation has survived, it would appear that the requirement may have related to parking which is not relevant in this instance.

Director Environmental Services Recommendation: That the consent be granted subject to the following conditions:


1 The development referred to in this application is to be carried

out substantially in accordance with the approved development plans as modified by any conditions of this consent.

2 The storage sheds are not approved for or to be used for human

habitation, industrial or commercial purposes. 3 This consent has been issued on the basis that Council has been


4 This consent does not permit commencement of any works.

Works are not to commence until such time as a Construction Certificate has been obtained. A Construction Certificate may be obtained from Council upon application being made or from an accredited certifier.

5 A Construction Certificate shall not be issued until all relevant

conditions of this consent have been complied with. 6 Two days prior to commencing work Form 7 under

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Regulations, Notice of Commencement of Building or Subdivision work and Appointment of Principal Certifying Authority is to be submitted to Council

7 The building is not to be occupied until all conditions of

Council's consent have been complied with to the satisfaction of Council and an Occupation Certificate has been obtained.

8 Before the commencement of site works, demolition or building,

the following activities must be completed:

a Installation of soil erosion and sedimentation control devices.

b Installation of safety fencing/hoardings between the property and the street

c Protection barriers for existing trees d Installation of builder's toilets e Installation of signage in prominent, visible position

including -

• "Unauthorised site entry is prohibited" • Name and phone number of builder or other

responsible person for contact outside working hours.

9 Provision of a security deposit to Council totalling $1200 to cover

any damage sustained to public property including footway and kerb and gutter or road pavement during construction and to ensure satisfactory completion of any works on public property


required in connection with this approval. The deposit is to be lodged with Council prior to the issuing of the required Construction Certificate and will be released upon submission of documentary evidence indicating that an Occupation Certificate has been issued.


minimum of 48 hours notice is necessary where requesting an inspection. Appointments will be made in accordance with the inspection program for the area. Where inspections are carried out by an accredited certifier other than Council, compliance certificates will be required following each inspection and forwarded immediately to The Principal Certifier. Inspections required:

(a) footings in position and prior to the pouring of concrete; (b) all steel reinforcement prior to the pouring of concrete.

Note: Accounts will be forwarded for inspections that are

required and/or undertaken in addition to those inspections for which a pre-payment has been made.

11 Submission of an application(s) to Council pursuant to Section

68 of the Local Government Act 1993 for the following, prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate:-

a Installing a temporary structure on land

b Carrying out water supply work c Carrying out sewerage work d Carrying out stormwater drainage work

e Connecting a private drain or sewer with a public drain or

sewer under the control of a Council or with a drain or sewer which connects with such a public drain or sewer.

12 All excavation and backfilling are to be executed safely and in

accordance with appropriate professional standards, and are to be properly guarded and protected to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property.



14 A builder's toilet complying with Clause 78I of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Regulation, and connected directly to


the sewer is required on site throughout the entire building operation.

Note: Clause 78 I requires that the toilet must be provided before

any work is commenced. 15 All building work must be carried out in accordance with the

provisions of the Building Code of Australia. 16 Building materials are not to be stored within the road reserve or



18 Access from the street to the property boundary to be via a

standard layback and full width concrete paving. Paving to be 125mm thick unreinforced with construction joints to suit service trenches. Applicant is to consult Council's Environmental Services Department for details prior to commencing work on site.

19 The existing kerb and gutter and adjacent road pavement in

South Street for the full length of the development needs to be restored to allow practical vehicular access to the development. The applicant is to liase with Council's Director of Engineering, prior to commencing work on the proposed driveways.

20 All internal parking areas, accessways, turning areas, driveways

and ramps are to be constructed in accordance with Council's Parking Code and Engineering Guidelines for Subdivision and Development before occupation of the building or commencement of the proposed land use. All such areas to be concrete paved and/or bitumen sealed.

21 Provision of a physical barrier across the full road frontage of the

property suitable to prevent vehicular access at locations other than the approved driveways prior to occupation of the premises. Details are to be provided with the plans for the Construction Certificate.

22 All stormwater drainage from this site is to be piped and directed

to Council's piped stormwater drainage system in South Street. Details are to be submitted to Council for approval prior to the issue of the required Construction Certificate.

23 Provision of interception drains at the boundary of the property

at each vehicular access point to collect all stormwater runoff from all paved areas is to be piped then discharged to Council's piped stormwater drainage system in South Street.

Note: Stay brace on major electricity pole located in driveway at

corner of South/West Streets.


24 The applicant is to ensure that at each of the proposed vehicular

access points of South Street has effective cover over the existing AC Water main, having regard to the manufacturers requirements and the relevant Australian Standard. Details to be approved by Council prior to issuing of the required Construction Certificate.

25 The applicant is to provide a 3 metre horizontal

separation/clearance from the existing sewer main on the northern boundary from the foundations of the eastern end of the buildings. Applicant is to consult with Tony Castle of Council's Environmental Services Department prior to the release of the Construction Certificate.

26 Concrete paving is not to be used over the full length of the

northern boundary. Applicant is to consult with Tony Castle of Council's Environmental Services Department prior to the release of the Construction Certificate.

2003. P19 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Parkinson

Seconded: Cl. Bowen

That the Director's Recommendation be adopted with the addition of; 27 That signs be placed in strategic positions stating that hazardous

materials not be stored on this location.

DES2 SHADE SAIL - GLADSTONE FILE: T6-03-360 AD {Folio No. 257924}

This report was dealt with earlier in the meeting just after Public Forum.

DES3 PROPOSED GARAGE LOT 422 DP 575971 LA 8129

No 56 BARNARD STREET, GLADSTONE FILE: T6-02-691 SAR {Folio No. 257925}

SUMMARY:

Reporting that a Development Application has been received for approval to erect a large garage on a residential allotment at the above-mentioned address.

Applicant: B.G Everett Subject land: Lot 422 DP575971, No 56 Barnard Street, Gladstone.


Proposed: Garage The application comprises the erection of a large garage measuring 15 metres long, by 7 metres wide. The height of the structure is proposed to be 3 metres at the eaves & 3.6 metres at the roof apex. A copy of the plans and elevations is appended to this report as (Appendix C) The site is not located within the Gladstone conservation area and existing structures on the site consist of a dwelling, garage and garden shed. The owner advises that the existing garage is inadequate for his storage requirements, but will be retained for storage of his motor vehicle. The proposed garage will be used for the storage of the applicants’ caravan and boat, plus one additional vehicle, as well as containing a small workshop at the rear. The proposed garage is to be located along the southern boundary adjoining an established service station, at a distance of 2 metres from both the southern and western boundaries. Access to the garage will utilise the existing crossover situated on Barnard Street and the setback from Barnard Street is to be 13.48 metres. The proposed garage constitutes a reduction in open space available to the property by a further 105 square metres. A site plan is appended to this report as (Appendix D) If Council considers that the proposed garage is excessive in size and inappropriate for a residential allotment of 1228 square metres, then the application should be refused. Alternatively if Council considers that the proposed garage is not an over-development of the site, then the application should be approved with the following conditions;

1 The development referred to in this application is to be carried out

substantially in accordance with the approved development plans as modified by any conditions of this consent.

2 The garage is not approved for or to be used for human habitation,

industrial or commercial purposes. 3 This consent has been issued on the basis that Council has been


4 The garage is not to be occupied prior to the issue of an

Occupation/Interim Occupation Certificate by Council. An application for a certificate is enclosed. It is requested that it be

completed and returned to Council prior to requesting an inspection. A minimum of 48 hours notice is necessary when requesting the inspection. Appointments will be made in accordance with the inspection program for that area.

5 The following inspections are required to be made and a minimum of

48 hours notice is necessary where requesting an inspection. Appointments will be made in accordance with the inspection program


for the area. Where inspections are carried out by an accredited certifier other than Council, compliance certificates will be required following each inspection and forwarded immediately to The Principal Certifier.

Inspections required:

(a) all steel reinforcement prior to the pouring of concrete.

Note: Accounts will be forwarded for inspections that are required and/or

undertaken in addition to those inspections for which a pre-payment has been made.

6 A sign is to be provided in a prominent and visible position (on the

building or fence) stating “Unauthorised entry to the site is not permitted”, together with the name of the person responsible for the site and a contact number outside working hours.




8 Building materials are not to be stored within the road reserve or any

other public place.


10 Roofwaters are to be directed by means of sealed pipes to the street

gutter.

Director Environmental Services Recommendation: For the determination of Council.

2003. P20 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Bowell Seconded: Cl. Sowter That approval be granted subject to conditions as follows;


2 The garage is not approved for or to be used for human

habitation, industrial or commercial purposes.


3 This consent has been issued on the basis that Council has been appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority and Council has accepted the appointment and will be issuing the construction certificate.

4 The garage is not to be occupied prior to the issue of an

Occupation/Interim Occupation Certificate by Council. An application for a certificate is enclosed. It is requested that it

be completed and returned to Council prior to requesting an inspection. A minimum of 48 hours notice is necessary when requesting the inspection. Appointments will be made in accordance with the inspection program for that area.


minimum of 48 hours notice is necessary where requesting an inspection. Appointments will be made in accordance with the inspection program for the area. Where inspections are carried out by an accredited certifier other than Council, compliance certificates will be required following each inspection and forwarded immediately to The Principal Certifier.

Inspections required:

(a) all steel reinforcement prior to the pouring of concrete.

Note: Accounts will be forwarded for inspections that are required

and/or undertaken in addition to those inspections for which a pre-payment has been made.






8 Building materials are not to be stored within the road reserve or



10 Roofwaters are to be directed by means of sealed pipes to the

street gutter.


DES4 PROPOSED GARAGE LOT 6 DP 22382 No 89 SEA STREET,

WEST KEMPSEY FILE: T6-03-375 SNB {Folio No. 257926}


DES5 PROPOSED TWO STOREY DWELLING LOT 910 DP 830044 MARIA RIVER ROAD,

CRESCENT HEAD FILE: T6-02-370 SAR {Folio No. 257927}


DES6 PROPOSED FENCE LOT 32 DP 835378 No 8 FORTH STREET, KEMPSEY FILE: T6-03-236 KJW {Folio No. 257928}

SUMMARY: Reporting that Council has received an application for a front and side fence

1.8m in height of paling construction within the building line.

Applicant: Ms C Cummings

Subject Land: Lot 32 DP 835378 No 8 Forth Street, Kempsey Proposed: 1.8m fence Background In March 2003 it was noted that a new side and front fence was being constructed at the above address for which an approval from Council was required. The owner was requested to stop work and lodge the necessary application with Council. A Development Application was submitted for the fence on 14th April 2003. Front and side fences up to 1.2m in height within the building line can be constructed without prior approval of Council under DCP 30 Exempt and Complying Development.


The application was accompanied by a submission (Appendix K) in support of a 1.8m fence located on the front and side boundary. The submission can be:- • adding style to the surrounding area; • not restricting or impeding traffic view; • similar to streetscape in Kempsey and improving the streetscape; • footpath and private property have been planted and will continue

which will continue which will further enhance the area; • provide suitable fence for a dog; • provide security; • two set backs have been provided in the fence for front gate of

driveway. The application was advertised in accordance with Council's Policy for ten (10) days. No objections were made. The fence as constructed is 1.8m high and extends across the front of the property for approximately 21m with two set backs. The fence is located against the Council footpath with approximately 2m between the footpath and kerb and gutter which is not suitable for landscaping for the fence. The fence as erected is dangerous to pedestrians and is out of character with the streetscape. To provide landscaping to screen the fence, the fence would need to be relocated 1.5m back from the front boundary with splays on the driveway to provide safety for pedestrians. (Appendix L) Director Environmental Services Recommendation: A. 1. The applicant be invited to amend the application to locate

the fence 1.5m from the front boundary with suitable landscaping provided and with a reduction in height on the side boundaries adjoining No 8 and No 10 Forth Street to 1.2m for a distance of 1.5m and with a 1.5m x 1.5m splay on the western side of the driveway access. 2. On submission of the amended application approval be

granted subject to conditions.

B. 1. That the applicant be advised that unless the requested plans or applicants written advice to submit such plans is received within fourteen (14) days of the date of the notice being given, that the consent be refused for the following reasons:-

a. The proposal has unacceptable impacts on the

character of the streetscape. b. The proposal has an unacceptable impact on the

safety of pedestrians.


c. The proposal is likely to create an undesirable precedent for similar developments within the locality and within the Shire.

2. Council issue a Notice of Proposal to Serve an Order on the

owner for the fence to be removed. MOVED: Moved: Cl. Parkinson

Seconded: Cl. Sowter That the fence as is be allowed to remain.

An Amendment was MOVED: Moved: Cl. Bowen Seconded: Cl. Bowell

That the applicant be asked to modify the structure of the fence (either side of the driveway) to improve the line of sight for pedestrian safety acceptable to the Director of Environmental Services.

2003. P21 The AMENDMENT was PUT to the MEETING and was CARRIED, became the MOTION and was CARRIED. DES7 NAMING OF NEW ROAD OFF KIDMAN AVENUE,

KEMPSEY FILE: T6-02-656 JRM {Folio No. 257929}

SUMMARY:

Reporting that Council has received an application for the naming of a new

road off Kidman Avenue at the intersection with Forest Avenue.

Applicant: Kempsey Nursing Home Pty Ltd

Subject Land: Lot 11 and 12 DP 700765 Cochrane Street, West Kempsey Zone: 2(a) Residential and 3(b) Neighbourhood Business Description of proposal The developer has nominated Forest Place for the name of the new road for Council's consideration. History Development Consent endorsed by Council on 23rd December 1981 considered that the new road would be an extension of Kidman Avenue. Investigations have shown that the house numbering for Kidman Avenue commence at the intersection of Kidman Avenue and Forest Avenue with the numbers increasing to Monash Avenue as shown on Plan (Appendix M). Therefore the naming of the new road as Kidman Avenue would be inappropriate.


Forest Avenue has no property frontages with street numbers and therefore the developer has nominated the new road as an extension of Forest Avenue. Comments It is considered that Forest Avenue should be renamed as Kidman Avenue with Kidman Avenue being continuous from North Street to Monash Avenue and name the new road as Forest Place. (Appendix N) Director Environmental Services Recommendation: For Council's determination.

2003. P22 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Bowell Seconded: Cl. Bowen

That the new road off Kidman Avenue at the intersection with Forest Avenue, Kempsey be named Forest Place. DES8 PLANNING CONTROLS SOUTH WEST ROCKS FILE: T4-40 RBP (NRN) {Folio No. 257930}

SUMMARY:

Reporting on current planning controls, including the status of strategic

planning at South West Rocks.

Council would be aware through recent media reports that certain individuals at South West Rocks are of the view that development is out of control at South West Rocks and that Council has no strategic vision for the township. Contrary to this misconception, development at South West Rocks is being guided by an extensive range of controls. These controls include:- • A range of State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) that are

approved by the Minister and which the Department considers to be of significance for environmental planning of the State.

• North Coast Regional Environmental Plan 1988 (NCREP 1988) which

is approved by the Minister and which includes a range of matters councils must consider when preparing draft Local Environmental Plans (LEPs) and when considering development applications (DAs). NCREP 1988 must be consistent with all relevant SEPPs.

• Kempsey Local Environmental Plan 1987 (KLEP 1987) which is also

approved by the Minister must be consistent with NCREP 1988 and a


range of Ministerial directions. KLEP 1987 sets the landuse zones which determines permissible developments and includes a range of specific controls relating to matters such as subdivision, height restrictions, clearing, etc.

• Development Control Plans (DCPs) and other related policies that are

approved by Council. DCPs are non-statutory policies which provide Council’s detailed requirements for various aspects of different types of development.

• Developer Contribution Plans which relate to planned infrastructure

services and environmental works and the method for determining contributions by developers.

• Strategic planning documents are also prepared to guide future

residential and rural residential land releases which are required by NCREP 1988.

• Various design guidelines produced by the NSW Government. SEPPs of relevance to development at South West Rocks which Council must have regard to include:- • SEPP 5 – Housing for Older People or People with a Disability seeks

to encourage the provision of housing for older people or people with a disability by providing density, design and servicing standards which override Council’s controls, including zoning restrictions.

• SEPP 6 – Number of Storeys in a Building – Provides a definition of a

storey where a LEP specifies height limits by reference to storeys which overrides any local definition. On the basis of this policy, Council was required to review its previous Building Heights Policy.

• SEPP 9 – Group Homes provides for the location of housing for

intellectually and socially disadvantages people in residential areas and overrides any local restrictions.

• SEPP 11 – Traffic Generating Developments – requires referral of

larger traffic generating developments such as shopping centres to the RTA for advice.

• SEPP 14 – Coastal Wetlands requires an Environmental Impact

Statement (EIS) for any draining, clearing or filling within certain designated wetlands.

• SEPP 55 – Remediation of Land specifies certain considerations

relevant to determining Das on contaminated land. • SEPP 64 – Advertising and Signage provides definitions and

standards for advertising signs which overrides any inconsistency with Council’s DCP 25 and KLEP 1987.


• SEPP 65 – Design Quality for Residential Flat Development applies to residential buildings of three(3) storeys or more and more than four(4) dwellings. The policy provides design principals and for the setting up of design review panels to provide advice to councils.

• SEPP 71 – Coastal Protection provides that the Minister for

Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources is the consent authority for certain types of developments and requires referral of certain other types of developments to the Department for comment. Council must take any comments into consideration when determining DAs.

Provisions of NCREP 1988 relevant to development control at South West Rocks which Council must have regard to include:-

• Clause 15 specifies measures to be considered for any development

likely to impact on any wetlands or fisheries habitat. • Clause 29A specifies matters Council must consider when

determining DAs to clear within environment protection zones. • Clause 32B requires Council to take into consideration the NSW

Coastal Policy; Coastline Management Manual; and North Coast Design Guidelines when determining DAs in the Coastal Zone.

• Clause 33 requires Council to take into account the Coastline Management Manual, requiring rehabilitation and the provision of public access when considering DAs likely to be affected by coastal processes in foreshore areas.

• Clauses 36A, 36B, 36C, 36D, 36E and 36F provide controls for heritage items of which a number are located at South West Rocks.

• Clause 38 requires Council to prepare an urban release strategy for urban expansion of South West Rocks.

• Clause 40 requires urban zones to be flexible with the detail to be contained in DCPs.

• Clauses 42 and 43 require Council to provide for multi dwelling development and to maximise residential densities unless the land is subject to inherent constraints. KLEP 1987 contains such provisions and DCP 22 must be consistent with NCREP 1988 and KLEP 1987.

• Clause 51 requires the concurrence of the Director-General of Planning for buildings over 14 metres.

• Clause 66 requires Council to ensure that community and welfare services are adequate when considering DAs for subdivision.

• Clause 75 specifies matters Council must consider when determining DAs for tourism development.

• Clause 76 requires Council to have regard for Tourism Development Near Natural Areas: Guidelines for the North Coast when determining DAs for tourism developments adjacent to National Parks and other significant natural attractions.

• Clause 81 specifies matters for consideration when determining DAs within 100 metres of any waterway.

Provisions of KLEP 1987 relevant to South West Rocks which Council must have regard to include:- • Clause 8 specifies the various landuse zones referred to on the LEP

maps.


• Clause 9 refers to the landuse tables which list those developments permissible either with or without consent and those which are prohibited. The provisions of KLEP 1987 are binding on Council and Council cannot vary those provisions unless a LEP is prepared and approved by the Minister for Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources.

• Clause 12 provides for restrictions on the subdivision of flood liable land.

• Clause 13 requires residential and rural residential land to be connected to the town water supply.

• Clause 14 requires residential subdivisions to be connected to the town sewerage system.

• Clause 16 prescribes minimum allotment sizes for subdivision in rural and residential areas.

• Clause 16A provides for the subdivision of existing residential dwellings into allotments below the standard required for vacant land subdivision which reflects the requirements of SEPP 25 Residential Allotment Sizes (now repealed). This was in response to a direction from the NSW Government for Council’s to prepare local housing strategies so as to avoid a blanket requirement to allow medium density housing in all residential areas.

• Clause 24 prescribes height restrictions in residential zones. • Clause 25 prescribes height restrictions in commercial zones. • Clauses 26,27,28,29 and 30 provide controls for locally listed heritage

items. • Clause 32 includes matters Council must consider when determining

applications in the 7(d) Scenic Protection Zone. • Clause 33 prescribes floor space ratios applying in commercial and

industrial areas. • Clause 34 contains standards relating to motel development. • Clause 39 provides for the fixing of foreshore building lines. • Clause 40 provides specific controls for tourist development adjacent

to the ex terminal site. • Clauses 47, 48 and 49 relate to controls on advertising structures

which is largely overridden by SEPP 64. • Clause 56 relates to development on land likely to be affected by acid

sulphate soils. • Clauses 57 and 58 provide for exempt and complying development

determined by DCP 37 required following amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act in 1998.

Development control plans relevant to South West Rocks which Council must have regard to include:- • DCP 2 – Arakoon Road includes matters relating to subdivision of

rural residential areas at Arakoon. • DCP No. 10 – Provision of Open Space at South West Rocks Identifies open space requirements for South West Rocks and district.

Requires review as based on 1986 Census data. • DCP No. 22- Local Housing Strategy (Urban Areas) 2001


Identifies performance objectives and development standards related to residential development in the Shire’s urban areas.

• DCP 24- Access and Mobility Identifies Council’s requirements for disabled access to public and

commercial buildings. Relevant to mixed residential/commercial development in the CBD. • DCP No. 27- Acid Sulphate Soils Specifies measures to be considered when developing on potentially

acid soils. • DCP No. 29- Bed & Breakfast Accommodation Specifies Council’s parking, health and fire safety requirements for

B&Bs. • DCP No. 30- Exempt & Complying Development Identifies developments that may be carried out without

development consent and developments that can be approved as Complying Development by satisfying a predetermined set of development standards.

Largely overridden by SEPP 71- Coastal Protection within the coastal

zone (currently subject to review) • DCP No. 31- Energy Smart Homes Incorporates the principals of ESD by requiring dwellings to be

designed to meet Sustainable Energy Development Authority standards.

• DCP No. 34- South West Rocks Town Centre Incorporates development standards for implementation of the South

West Rocks Town Centre Master Plan, including relevant requirements of DCP 22.

• DCP No. 36- Engineering Guidelines for Subdivision and

Development Specifies Council’s minimum requirements for subdivision design and

construction. Other Council codes and policies relevant to South West Rocks which Council must have regard to include:- • Building Code of Australia Specifies National building construction standards. • Guidelines for Erosion and Sediment Control Specifies erosion control measures to be installed for all development. • Flood Plain Management Strategy Policy Specifies development controls relating to development on flood prone

land.


• Parking Code Specifies Council’s parking requirements for various types of

development, including residential development. • Building Alignments Policy Specifies Council’s minimum front setback requirements in various

areas, including residential development. • Height of Buildings Policy Details how Council assesses height and the process for considering

variations. • Tree Preservation Order Specifies Council’s requirements for tree removal. Developer contribution plans relevant to South West Rocks which Council must have regard to include:- • Section 94 Contributions Plan for Outdoor Recreation Details the method for determining contributions for the embellishment

of open space. • Section 94 Plan for Stormwater Drainage: South West Rocks Identifies proposed trunk drainage system works and the method for

determining contributions. • Section 94 Plan for Trunk Stormwater Drainage: Belle O’Connor

Catchment Identifies proposed trunk drainage system works for the Belle

O’Connor catchment to protect water quality entering Saltwater Lagoon and the method for determining contributions.

• Section 94 Plan for the Belle O’Connor Catchment Distributor Road Details the method for determining contributions towards the Belle

O’Connor distributor road, including the roundabout on Gregory Street.

• Development Servicing Plan for Water Supply Details the method for determining contributions for water supply

headworks augmentation and reticulation. • Development Servicing Plan for Sewerage Details the method for determining contributions for sewerage

headworks augmentation and reticulation. Strategic planning documents relevant to South West Rocks which Council must have regard to include:- • South West Rocks Structure Plan 1995 Previously used to guide strategic planning, including rezonings for a

range of development by identifying broad development constraints.


No longer accepted by Planning NSW as out of date and lacking sufficient detail.

• Kempsey Residential Land Release Strategy Includes supply and demand balance sheets for the Shire’s towns

and villages based on the availability of infrastructure, population trends and broad development constraints. The strategy identifies future sequencing of urban release areas and is a requirement of North Coast REP 1988.

• South West Rocks Town Centre Master Plan Identifies key land and streetscape elements and acts as a blueprint

for town centre improvement works. • Kempsey Rural Land Release Strategy Details Council’s strategy for the release of land for rural residential

subdivision which is under review. Design Guidelines In particular locations and for particular types of development, Council is also required to have regard to a range of design guidelines including:- • Housing for Older People and People with a Disability in your

Community • North Coast Design Guidelines • NSW Coastal Management Manual • NSW Coastal Policy • Coastal Design Guidelines for NSW • Tourism Development Near Natural Areas: Guidelines for the

North Coast • Residential Development Design Guidelines Future Strategic Direction for South West Rocks The South West Rocks Structure Plan (SWRSP) was adopted by Council in 1995. Since the introduction of the New South Wales Coastal Policy in 1997, rezoning proposals in the Coastal Zone have been increasingly subjected to strict detailed investigations through the Local Environmental Study preparation process. This tightening of procedures has seen the SWRSP become largely redundant as a basis for assessing rezoning proposals. In recognition of these changes within the planning system, Council sought to appoint consultants to review the SWRSP to determine what steps were needed to make the plan relevant in the current planning system. The review was undertaken, which included community consultation, whereby it was concluded by the consultants that considerable investigations relating to flora and fauna, stormwater, hydrology, groundwater and flooding were


required to make the SWRSP relevant within the current planning system. An estimate of the cost of these studies is in the order of $200,000. The NSW Government is also undertaking a comprehensive coastal assessment to identify key elements within the Coastal Zone requiring protection PlanningNSW has been undertaking a review of the plan making system and has developed a new system called PlanFirst. PlanFirst seeks to develop a regional based “whole of Government” system incorporating the requirements of all agencies involved in natural resource management, transport and infrastructure planning, economic and social development. Within this system it is expected that Council will be required to produce Locality Plans to guide development in particular areas. It is anticipated that PlanFirst will be implemented in the Mid North Coast in the next two years. As the precise nature of these Locality Plans is not known at this stage, Council felt that it would be prudent not to commit the substantial expenditure required to update the SWRSP, given that it may again become redundant within two years and that the money may be better spent preparing Locality Plans. As an interim measure and in response to community concerns raised during the review of the SWRSP, Council has formed a community committee to review DCP 22 as it relates to South West Rocks to include landscape element protection and design considerations. Once the format and scope of the Locality Plans is known, Council will then review its position and consider allocation of any funding necessary to under take studies required to support the plans. Financial Implications There are no financial implications associated with this report. Director Environmental Services Recommendation: For information of Council.

2003. P23 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Sowter Seconded: Cl. Bowell

That the information be noted.

DES9 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO REMOVE A TREE LOT 3 DP 1050208 RIVER STREET, GREENHILLS FILE: T6-03-292 SNB {Folio No. 257931}



DES10 GAZETTAL OF RESIDENTIAL REZONING LAND IN PHILLIP DRIVE, SOUTH WEST ROCKS

FILE: T5-74 MEI {Folio No. 257932}

SUMMARY: This report advises Council that a rezoning of a one hectare allotment for

residential purposes has been gazetted and now takes effect.

Subject Land: Lot 506 DP 827889 Phillip Drive, South West Rocks (Appendix R) Owner: R C Laut Previous Zone: 1(c) Rural Smallholdings New Zone: 2(a) Residential The gazetted plan rezones the subject land to 2(a) Residential to create approximately 12 lots. Due to the subject land being within the Coastal Zone the proponent was required to prepare a Local Environmental Study (LES) in support of the proposal. The LES concluded that the site was suitable for residential purposes and that development on the site can proceed without significant environmental impact. Council can now determine a subdivision application for the land, however, the plan amends KLEP 1987 to include the following clause which states that:-

"(2) The Council must not grant consent to the development of the land to which this clause applies unless it has considered a stormwater and sedimentation management plan which will ensure, to the satisfaction of the Council, that:

(a) the stream riparian environments and the integrity

of the downstream wetland under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No 14 - Coastal Wetlands and Saltwater Lagoon will be protected from the potential impacts of residential development, and

(b) sand and topsoil exposed during the development

process will be protected from the impacts of wind erosion."

Therefore any subdivision plan lodged with Council must be supported by such a stormwater and sedimentation management plan. Director Environmental Services Recommendation: For the information of Council.


2003. P24 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Bowell Seconded: Cl. Sowter


DES11 REZONING APPLICATION - POINT PLOMER ROAD, CRESCENT HEAD

FILE: T5-59 MEI (NRN) {Folio No. 257934}

SUMMARY: Reporting on a rezoning application which Council resolved to support in

1997 and which the applicants now wish to reactivate.

Subject Land: Lot 703, DP 749885, 2 ha

Lot 704, DP 749885, 2ha Part Lot 707, DP 1032859, approx 20 ha Current zone: Part 1(c) Rural (smallholdings) and part 7(d) Scenic Protection Proposed Zone: 2(a) Residential Applicant: Portofino Enterprises Council considered this proposal at its meeting of 3rd June 1997 (see (Appendix S) ) and resolved:- 1. That Council resolve to prepare a draft local environmental plan that

aims to rezone Lots 703, 704 DP 749885 and Part Lot 707, DP811608, Crescent Head for residential purposes.

2. That Council's support of the above draft local environmental plan not

be subject to a local environmental study pursuant to the provisions of section 57 of the Act but instead be subject to a comprehensive rezoning planning study being prepared, at no cost to the Council, to support the draft plan. The rezoning planning study should address the issues highlighted in this report under "Issues Arising" as well as matters identified by public authorities.

3. That Council write to the Department of Land and Water Conservation

to invite it make a rezoning application (at its own cost) in respect of Part Lot 216 and obtain agreement to sharing costs associated with rezoning and investigations/LES with Killuke Pty Ltd and Felix Investments Pty Ltd.

Council advised the (then) Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAP) at that time, who advised Council to include the subject land in its Residential Land Release Strategy (LRS) before the matter could proceed. This has been done and the proponents now wish to proceed with the application. The subject land is identified as CH3 in the URS. (Appendix T)


Advice received to date from the Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources (formerly PlanningNSW) has advised:- (Appendix U) 1. That a formal environmental study will be required; and 2. They consider the rezoning to be premature, "leapfrogging" areas

which logically should be developed first. The requirement for a formal local environmental study (LES) is not surprising. Whilst the subject land is not within the Coastal Zone it directly adjoins it. The proposal, being undertaken at this time, is not considered to be "leapfrogging" as the land identified in the LRS as CH1 (Appendix T) is already zoned 2(a) Residential and has an approval for a 100 lot subdivision. The Department of Lands, who are the developers of the subdivision, hope to finalise an amended subdivision plan for CH1 later this year or early next year. CH2 is also owned by the Department of Lands. In their letter received 2nd July 2003 they advise (Appendix V):- • they may not oppose the opening of a public road through CH2 to

CH3, subject to the requirements of the Crown Lands Act; and • it would be appropriate for CH2 to be rezoned 2(a) Residential also. Therefore it can be seen that the development of CH1, CH2 and CH3 will likely proceed in an orderly and co-ordinated manner, addressing the Departments concerns regarding "leapfrogging". Whilst the subject land does not lie within the Coastal Zone it does, as noted above, directly adjoin it. Given this fact the Coastal Council has been consulted in this matter and they are presently seeking clarification on certain issues. It is considered appropriate to take a consultative approach form the outset with the Coastal Council, thereby minimising the chances of any concerns at a later date. From the advice received to date it is apparent that resolution 2 from the 3rd June 1997 meeting will have to be amended to reflect the new requirement for a formal LES, which should still be prepared at no cost to Council, in support of the rezoning. Resolutions 1 and 3 are still considered appropriate. On completion of the consultation process Council and the applicants will be further advised as to the outcomes and the appropriate actions to be taken. Given the changes which have occurred in the planning system since 1997 the advice of relevant agencies has been sought regarding matters which should be addressed in the rezoning process. Director Environmental Services Recommendation: For the information of Council.




2003. P26 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Parkinson Seconded: Cl. Bowell

That Kempsey Shire Council write to the Department and request that they expedite developing stages 2 – 5 of the Goolawah Development.

DES12 LEP AMENDMENT TO PERMIT DEVELOPMENT OF SELF-STORAGE FACILITY COCHRANE STREET, WEST KEMPSEY

FILE: LA13250 MEI {Folio No. 257035}

SUMMARY: Reporting that Council has received an application to amend KLEP 1987 to

permit the development of self-storage units in Cochrane Street.

Subject Land: Lot 104 DP 807723, Cochrane Street, West Kempsey (Appendix W) Owner: R & J Williamson Present Zone: Part 2(a) Residential, part 1(e) Floodway Application This application seeks to amend KLEP 1987 by the insertion of an enabling clause to permit self-storage units. This approach means it will not be necessary to alter the existing land use zones as they currently apply to the subject land, which are part 2(a) residential and part 1(e) Floodway (Appendix X). It also allows Council to take a more specific approach to the proposal in that the enabling clause can be framed to permit with consent only the development the subject of this application and can include any particular matters which Council may consider necessary to be addressed in the carrying out of the development. Proposal The proposal is for the construction of 88 self-storage units with one entry/exit driveway off Cochrane Street, recessed security gates and landscaped gardens at the entry. Photographs of a similar development at Port Macquarie are at (Appendix Y). A site plan is at (Appendix Z). The subject land adjoins the applicants existing removalist and storage depot and lies immediately to the south of the Cedar Place Aged Care Units. The levels of the southern boundary of the lot range from approximately 9 metres AHD to approximately 7.25 metres AHD for this area. The 1 in 100 year flood


level is approximately 7.9m AHD but this would need to be confirmed by survey. The proposal requires access form Cochrane Street, which in this area has a relatively narrow pavement with no kerb and gutter and limited sight lines due to its undulating nature. Planning Comment It is considered that Council should support this application subject to the applicants providing further information on the following matters:- 1. Noise, lights and amenity. As asserted in the application, self-storage units are generally a low key use with minimal impacts on the amenity of an area. The applicant anticipates that up to half the units would be used by commercial/government clients, the remainder by private customers. It is anticipated that the commercial users would access the units generally during business hours and the private users would access them generally outside of normal business hours. This could result in the following impacts on the residents of the Cedar Place Aged Care Units. a) Noise from the users of the units. b) Light overspill from internal lighting of the development and headlights

of vehicles using the units after dark. As noted above, storage units are generally a low impact use, however, Council should seek more information from the applicants regarding operating hours and noise and light attenuation measures to ensure the likely impacts on Cedar Place are considered. 2. Flooding Part of the proposed development lies on floodprone land and will therefore require some cut and fill to raise the development above the flood level. To adequately assess the impact of flooding on the proposal, Council should require the applicant to provide a survey of the site showing ½ metre contours of the existing ground including levels of the proposed development. 3. Traffic and Access Entry/exit to the development is via Cochrane Street, described as a local feeder road. The applicant will need to provide an engineers report that the sight distances for the entry/exit point of the development are adequate to ensure that road safety is not compromised. 4. Residential Land Supply Council's Residential Land Release Strategy (LRS) calculates that the subject land has the potential to provide two (2) residential lots. This is not considered significant and therefore the proposal does not adversely affect residential land supply in Kempsey.


Director Environmental Services Recommendation: That Council amend Kempsey Local Environmental Plan 1987 to permit the proposed development subject to the applicant providing further information on the matters addressed in this report relating to noise and light impacts, flooding and traffic.


That the Director’s Recommendation be adopted.

DES13 REVIEW OF DETERMINATION CAR DETAILING HOME ACTIVITY - EAST KEMPSEY

FILE: T6-03-262 AD {Folio No. 257938}

SUMMARY: Reporting that Council has received an application under Section 82A of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to review a determination of Development Application.

Applicant: M Rolfe & G Bannerman

Subject Land: Lot 1 DP 521343 No 32 Innes Street, East Kempsey Zone: 2(a) Residential Heads of Consideration: The proposal has been examined having regard for the Heads of Consideration identified under Section 79 C(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act with the following matters considered to be of particular relevance to the proposal. Background At its meeting of the 12th December 2000, Council resolved to approve the home activity (car detailing) subject to conditions, including a period of operation for twelve (12) months, contingent upon compliance with imposed conditions of consent. A confidential report to Council on the 14th August 2001 detailed numerous complaints relating to condition of consent, with Council resolving that:- 1. "All conditions of consent are to be complied with whilst operating the

home activity"; and 2. "That in the event of further complaints, Council will have no hesitation

in not renewing the consent."


Condition 2 of the original consent (T6-00-591) required the owner/applicant to re-apply for an extension of consent after 12 months of operation, with an extension granted by Council at its meeting of 11th December 2001, on the basis that Section 95 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EP & A Act) 1979 provides that Council may not limit any consent which involves the erection of the building to a period of less than 2 years, with the extension lapsing on the 8th January 2003. Notices were forwarded to the applicant and the current Development Application was lodged on 23rd April 2003. The application was advertised with eight (8) objections received. Council, at its meeting of the 10th June 2003 determined that: "The application be refused (effective from the 30th June 2003) for the following reasons; 1. The proposal is contrary to the objectives of Clause 17A KLEP 1987. 2. The proposal will adversely impact upon the residential amenity of the

area, thereby being prohibited under KLEP 1987. 3. The proposal will further adversely impact on the neighbourhood by

reason of traffic and noise." The applicants have requested a review of Council's determination under Section 82A of the EP & A Act 1979, and have made a submission which may be summarised as follows:- (Appendix A1) • Councils previous decisions will cause the applicants to become

unemployed; • No guidelines set by Council have been breached; • No complaints of noise or loud music to the police have been made,

nor have any parking problems been reported to Council's Parking Officer or Police.

• Noise from domestic appliances comes from every home. • The neighbourhood has several home activities operating, generating

three or four times the amount of traffic than this activity, and more noise.

• If these people can make a living from their home without having

Council say they upset the amenity of the neighbourhood then we are entitled to do the same.

• There has been no proof of past allegations, of which some were

completely irrelevant to the business. • Closing the business will have emotional and financial impact upon

the family.


Planning Comment Having regard to Councils previous resolutions, Council must assess whether it is prepared to reconsider the determination made on the 10th June 2003 and issue a consent or adhere to its decision and refuse the review of determination. Public Exhibition The request was not advertised as it is not required under Council's Public Notification Policy. Council should be aware that eight (8) objections were received when the application was originally advertised. Director Environmental Services Recommendation: For Council’s determination.

2003. P28 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Parkinson Seconded: Cl. Hayes

That Council reaffirm it’s decision of 30th June meeting, and that the applicant be informed.

DES14 MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LOT 613 DP 731283 GRASSY HEAD ROAD,

GRASSY HEAD - HOLIDAY CABIN FILE: T4-90-02 AD {Folio No. 257939}

SUMMARY:

Reporting that Council has received an application to modify a Development

Consent granted for four (4) holiday cabins and a Managers residence in 1990 which does not comply with current Bushfire Legislation.

Applicant: Mr Karl Mathers

Subject Land: Lot 613 DP 731283 Grassy Head Road, Grassy Head Zone: 1(a3) - Agricultural Protection Background In May 1990 a development consent was granted for four holiday units and a managers residence on the abovementioned land. Building approval was granted for two cabins in 1990, however no other cabins were constructed. Condition 10 of Development Consent No T4-90-02 required that "the total development be completed within three (3) years of the date of consent"- 22nd May 1993. The applicant applied to modify the original consent in accordance with Section 96(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,


seeking to delete Condition 10 of Consent No T4-90-02 and to commence construction of a 1 bedroom unit. Rural Fire Service (RFS) - Planning for Bushfire Protection In order to ensure that the modified application may be acted upon, Council must ensure that the proposal will comply with the bushfire protection requirements of the BCA. An assessment of the proposal against "Planning for Bushfire Protection" indicates the proposal would not comply with the required Asset Protection Zone (APZ) distance prescribed in Section A2 of the document of 20 metres, as the proposal is setback from the northern boundary only (Appendix A2) of 10 metres. Section 4.2.3 (Locations of Asset Protection Zones) states that APZ's should:- "Be located within the boundaries of the development…it is not reasonable to place the burden for provision and/or maintenance of the Asset Protection Zone for a development onto other adjacent land management agencies or landowners." Due to the proximity of a watercourse to the south of the proposed cabin, and the northern boundary, it is not feasible to relocate the proposal elsewhere. The Rural Fire Service in a submission to Council has stated (Appendix A3):- "We are advising that our recommendation for the proposed development is a 20 metre Asset Protection Zone. If this cannot be achieved within the boundaries of the development then it is Council's ultimate decision as to whether they allow the development to proceed." Planning Comment The difficulty in complying with RFS requirements is that a setback on 20 metres would place the cabin immediately adjacent to a creek which could be at risk form erosion and flooding. Although the applicant has stated that the creek does not flood, no evidence has been provided in support of the assertion. Having regard for non-compliance with bushfire guidelines, Council may be found liable in the event of any loss due to fire given that the owner would have no control over re-growth on the adjoining land. Given the proximity of the cabin to the creek, Council may also be found liable in the event of damage due to flooding. Director Environmental Services Recommendation: A. That the applicant be requested to submit an amended

application providing for a setback to any boundary of not less than 20 metres.

B. That in the event, the applicant seeks to relocate any part of the

cabin to within 15 metres of the creek, that the plans be


accompanied by a report prepared by a suitably qualified person indicating that the building would not be affected by a 1 in 20 year storm event in accordance with Australian Rainfall and Runoff in a manner likely to destabilise the creek bank or footings.

2003. P29 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Bowen Seconded: Cl. Parkinson

That the Director’s Recommendation be adopted.

DES 15 DEVELOPMENT LOT105 DP 1036461 No 12 GRANDVIEW PLACE, SOUTH WEST ROCKS

FILE: T6-03-274 DJW {Folio No. 257940}

SUMMARY: Reporting on a request to modify a Development Consent.

Applicant: Mr C & Mrs S Whitby

Subject Land: Lot 105 DP 1036461 No 12 Grandview Place, South West Rocks Proposal: Two storey dwelling Zone: Residential (2a) Background Council issued an approval for a two storey dwelling on the subject land under delegated authority on 26th May 2003. During site preparations it was discovered that an existing filled in dam was located where the dwelling was to be erected. This required the Professional Engineer to redesign the method of structural design causing a cut area of 1.9m approximately (Appendix A4). Discussion The area of non-compliance is a small triangular area consisting of the north/east corner of the building cut to a height of 1.9m. This extends in a western direction from 1.9m to 1.5m for a length of 6metres approximately and returns from 1.9m to 1.5m in a northern direction for a length of 3m approximately. Planning Comment The cut area is considered satisfactory for the following reasons: 1. The proposed cut height is only 0.4metres greater than that permitted. 2. The cut area will not be visually evident externally when the building is

completed.


3. The dwelling complies in all other respects with the relevant standards of DCP 22.

4. The cut area will not have any adverse impact on the adjoining neighbourhood.

Neighbour Notification The Development Application was advertised in accordance with Council’s advertising policy with no objections received. The modifications are substantially in accordance with the approved consent and will have no adverse impact on the adjoining neighbour hood. Therefore the modifications have not been advertised. Conclusion It is considered reasonable for Council to permit a cut greater than 1.5m in this instance due to the circumstances of the case. It is further considered that the proposed development will not adversely affect the adjoining owners. Having considered all of the relevant matters under Section 79(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and the relevant standards of DCP 22. It is recommend that the modifications to development application be approved subject to the original conditions and additional conditions hereunder. Director Environmental Services Recommendation: That the modifications to Development Application T6-03-274 be approved subject to the original conditions and the following additional conditions. 1 The excavation is not to exceed 1.9 metres in depth. 2 Details are to be submitted to Council for approval for the

disposal of the excavated material prior to the release of the construction certificate.

3 The design engineer is to supervise the excavation works. 4 The design engineer is to submit amended engineer's details.

2003. P30 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Parkinson Seconded: Cl. Bowen

That the Director’s Recommendation be adopted. DES16 BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT FILE: B9-2 BWC (NRN) {Folio No. 257941}

SUMMARY: Reporting that the following applications have been approved:


APPROVALS

Local Development (LD) (Appendix A5)

Construction Certificates (CB) (Appendix A6) Comparisons: The following comparisons, in respect to Development and Building approvals, between 2001/2002 and 2002/2003 are submitted.

Local Development Applications

1.7.01 - 30.6.02

1.7.02 - 30.6.03

% change

No. submitted including modifications

765 866 +13%

Value $46,668,896 $64,263,840 +37.7%

Approvals

LD applications approved

619 794 +28.3%

No. modifications approved 45 82 +82% Total approvals

664

876

+24.2%

Construction Certificates issued

608

700

+15.1%

Total approvals

1227

1525

+24.2%

Number refused

6

7

Median processing time

23

25

Percentage approved in 30 days

67%

63%

The following are the quarterly number and value of applications received for 2002/2003. Number Value 17.7.02-30.9.02 205 $ 15,487,482 1.10.02-31.12.02 200 $14,717,499 1.1.03-31.3.03 212 $19,339,527 1.4.03-30.6.03 218 $14,719,332 It is also interesting to note that 85 new Development Applications were received in the four (4) week period to the 4th July 2003. It is interesting and most pleasing to note that there has been a significant increase in the number of applications (13%) and approvals issued (24.2%).


The downside is that unfortunately the approval times have been extended. This is only partially due to the increase in applications but also, as previously reported to Council, to the far more complex and often complicated assessments required on applications. There are referrals to the Rural Fire Service, currently these referrals take up to 25 days. It is likely that more reports to Council will be necessary to address matters that have been considered by the Rural Fire Service. Director Environmental Services Recommendation: That the information be noted.

2003. P31 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Parkinson Seconded: Cl. Bowell

That the information be noted. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Councillor B Sowter Councillor B Sowter was advised:- That in future Council staff would endeavor to distribute the weekly diary on

Friday afternoon.

Councillor J Bowell Councillor J Bowell was advised:-

That Council is awaiting finalisation of the bushfire hazard maps in consultation with the Rural Fire Service.

LATE BUSINESS

2003. P32 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Bowen Seconded: Cl. Bowell That the matter of Water Supply at Syd Sutherlands Lane be dealt with

in Confidential Section meeting as it is deemed by the Mayor to be a matter of great urgency.

MOTION FOR COMMITTEE


2003. P33 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Bowen Seconded: Cl. Bowell

That Council form itself into the Committee of the Whole, and at this stage the meeting be closed to the public to permit discussion of the confidential business items listed for the reasons as stated in the Agenda.

At this stage the Director Business Enterprise submitted a verbal report

on the Water Supply to Syd Sutherlands Lane. REASON FOR PRESENTATION OF REPORT ON A CONFIDENTIAL BASIS

This report is submitted on a confidential basis as it involves involving litigation or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the grounds of legal professional privilege (Local Government Act 1993) Section 10A(2)(g).

2003. P34 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Parkinson Seconded: Cl. Sowter Due to the emergency of a main break Council reaffirm it’s decision to

turn off the water supply to Syd Sutherlands Lane and notify the landholders and that the Director negotiate future requirements of the water supply.

REPORT OF THE MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Upon resumption of Open Council, the following Report of the Committee of

the Whole was submitted by the General Manager. ADOPTION OF REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 2003. P35 RESOLVED: Moved: Cl. Bowell Seconded: Cl. Sowter

That the foregoing recommendations of the Committee of the Whole, as

reported by the General Manager, be adopted. CONCLUSION: There being no further business, the Meeting terminated at 12.08 p.m.

minutes of the planning meeting of kempsey shire council · that the minutes of the planning...

Documents