DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT - Shire of Augusta-Margaret …amrshire.wa.gov.au/library/file/2Services/09... · 08/01/2016 A3168 1 (Lot 17) Isaacs Road, Margaret River Holiday House

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT Minutes of the Development Assessment Unit

Shire of Augusta Margaret River On 12 January 2016

ATTENDANCE Johan Pienaar, Matt Cuthbert, Lucy Gouws, Johan Pienaar and Angela Satre APOLOGIES CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Minutes of meeting dated 5 January 2016 confirmed as correct. PLANNING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED Date Rec’d Assess

No. Address Proposal DA No.

23/12/2015 A11255 7 (Lot 104) Bluebell Place, Margaret River

Amendment to Endorsed Structure Plan

P215672

04/01/2016 A11020 Gasbay, Reserve 41545, Gasbay Road, Gnarabup

Surfing Event on Shire Reserve - Subway Summer Series - 6 &7 February 2016

P216000

05/01/2016 A3736 278 (Lot 16) Kevill Road West, Margaret River

Vegetation Clearing P216001

05/01/2016 A5407 63 (Lot 28) Baudin Drive, Gnarabup Retrospective Approval for Fill and Proposed Retaining Wall

P216002

06/01/2016 A11076 A11520

Lot 2 Lovejoy Road, Cowaramup Dam P216003

05/01/2016 A3899 Gloucester Park Oval, 39 Wallcliffe Road, Margaret River

Public Event on Shire Reserve - Lions Australia Day Breakfast - 26 January 2016

P216005

05/01/2016 A3983 71 (Lot 9) Yates Road, Margaret River Compliance - non-compliant dwellings on rural lot

P216006

06/01/2016 A3833 432 (Lot 51) Wallcliffe Road, Margaret River

Survey Strata subdivision P216007

06/01/2016 A2415 Lots 100 and 101 Gnarawary Road, Margaret River

Subdivision P216008

06/01/2016 A5605 48-50 Town View Terrace, Margaret River

Public Event on Shire Reserve - Night Markets - 22 January, 19 February & 18 March 2016 Memorial Park

P216009

07/01/2016 A8778 44 (Lot 42) Jersey Street, Cowaramup Storage Shed P216010 07/01/2016 A3492 11 (Lot 30) Wooredah Crescent, Prevelly Holiday House (Large) P216011 08/01/2016 A3168 1 (Lot 17) Isaacs Road, Margaret River Holiday House P216012 08/01/2016 A6134 39 (lot 28) Hermitage Drive, Margaret

River Dwelling Additions (swimming pool) P216013

06/01/2016 A1448 137 Fifty One Road, Cowaramup Public Event on Private Property - Tropfest - 5 & 6 March 2016 (Howard Park Wines)

P216014

08/01/2016 A8915 127 (Lot 10) Hillview Road, Augusta Dwelling Additions P216015 BUILDING LICENCE APPLICATIONS RECEIVED Date Rec’d Assess

No. Address Proposal BLDG

No. 04/01/2016 A638 15 (Lot 99) Ryans Road, Margaret River Shed 216000 04/01/2016 A11997 4 (Lot 8) Goodenia Street, Margaret River Dwelling 216002 05/01/2016 A11700 51 (Lot 262) Tonkin Boulevard, Margaret

River Dwelling 216003

06/01/2016 A1372 6 (Lot 214) Flinders View, Augusta Demolition 216004 06/01/2016 A11560 10 (Lot 5) Eldridge Avenue, Witchcliffe Dwelling 216005 08/01/2016 A11350 15 (Lot 1017) Ridgeview Close, Margaret

River Dwelling 216007

SUBDIVISIONS DETERMINED Date Rec’d Officer DA No. Address Description of Matter Recommendation 24/11/2015 Matt

Slocomb P215595 426 (Lot 30) Carters Road, Burnside Subdivision Conditional

support

LEVEL 1 APPLICATIONS DETERMINED BY DIRECTOR Date Rec’d Officer Address Proposal Outcome DA No. 18/09/2015 Lara

Hoole Lot 7 Agonis Close, Margaret River

Building Envelope Variation Dwelling, Ancillary Accommodation/Garage/Gym, Swimming Pool and 2 x Water Tanks

Approved P215441

16/10/2015 Lara Hoole

3 (Lot 7) Lakeview Crescent, Prevelly

Holiday House Approved P215507


21 (Lot 612) Barnard Street, Cowaramup

Outbuilding (Shed) Ancillary to Dwelling

Approved P215510

03/11/2015 Matt Slocomb

244 (Lot 3) Forest Grove Road, Forest Grove

Rural Industry (Distillery) Approved P215547

12/11/2015 Lucy Gouws

15 (Lot 452) Hibbertia Terrace, Margaret River

Retaining Wall and Boundary Fence

Approved P215566


41 (Lot 508) Res 50552 Clarke Road, Margaret River

Community Garden Approved P215584


46 (lot 1) Boronia Road, Rosa Glen

Caravan Park Additions (Staff Kitchen and Sitting Room)

Approved P215596


89 -157 (Location 688) Stevens Road, Witchcliffe

Proposed Increase in maximum number of patrons for one event 27/2/16 (Leeuwin Concert)

Approved P215599


22 (Lot 264) Noreuil Circuit, Cowaramup

Outbuilding (Detached Garage) Approved P215645

LEVEL 2 APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION BY DPDS Date Rec’d Officer Address Proposal Outcome

of DAU Meeting

DA No.


Lot 71 Ellen Brook Rd, Margaret River

Cellar Door and Agriculture Intensive (Vineyard Extension)

Approve P215417

22/10/2015 Johan Pienaar

Lot 201 Burnside Road, Margaret River

Building Envelope Variation Approve P215515

29/10/2015 Angela Satre

Lot 101 Waverley Road, Cowaramup

Child Care Centre (increase in capacity)

Approve P215538

16/07/2015 Johan Pienaar

Lot 115 Tunbridge Street, Margaret River

Community Purpose – St John Ambulance Subcentre

Approve P215322


Lot 365 Peppermint Drive, Augusta (Flinders Bay)

Demolition of Existing Dwelling and Proposed New Dwelling

Approve P215398


79 (Lot 104) Baudin Drive, Gnarabup

Holiday House (Large) Referred to Council

P215390

LOCAL LAW PERMITS Date Rec’d Officer Address Proposal Outcome DA No. 21/10/2115 Nick

Logan Reserve 41545 (Surfers Point), Margaret River

Installation and streaming of CCTV Camera Surfcam

Approved P215551

8/11/2016 Nick Logan

Bussell Highway, Margaret River Public Outreach Fundraising – 10, 16 February 2016

Approved P216016

OTHER APPLICATIONS determined under delegation Date Rec’d Officer Address Proposal Outcome DA No.

5/1/2015 Cath Gardiner

Gloucester Park Oval, 39 Wallcliffe Road, Margaret River

EVENT – Public Event on Shire Reserve – Lions Australia Day Breakfast – 26 January 2016

Approved P216005

COMPLIANCE Date Rec’d Officer Address Proposal Outcome DA No. ELECTED MEMBERS ATTENTION Date Rec’d Officer Address Proposal Outcome

of DAU Meeting

DA No.

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ASSESSMENT (DAU) Report to Manager Planning Services Proposed Cellar Door and Agriculture Intensive (Vineyard Extension) on Lot 71 Ellen Brook Road, Cowaramup

Major (Level 2) P215417; PTY/11289 REPORTING OFFICER : Lucy Gouws DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST : Nil General Information Lot Area 28ha Zone Priority Agriculture Proposed Development Planning approval is sought for the construction of a cellar door and the

expansion of the vineyard. The current vineyard has an area of 4.29ha. The proposal includes the expansion of the vineyard by a further 4ha of vines. The vineyard extension is proposed over existing cleared areas within the site, and does not require the removal of existing vegetation. The vineyard will be accessed from internal roads only. The cellar door consists of a low key, single storey building, to be located in the western part of the property, with access from Ellen Brook road. The applicant has provided a covering letter which outlines the proposal: - Currently the property has 4.29ha of established cabernet sauvignon and

shiraz vines. - The proposal is to expand by a further 4ha in preparation for additional

chardonnay planting next spring. - Production on the site is under 4000 cases per annum, and is considered

as a Boutique cellar Door, with a capacity of up to 50 patrons and any one time.

- The vision is to create a family owned boutique estate producing single vintage and premium quality wines.

- The cellar door will serve as an elegant, simple space for tastings and direct sales of our wines produced, with views of the vineyard and surrounding natural bush.

- Preservation and protection of the natural bush and wildlife is part of our vision. Upon completion of the cellar door a native replating programme will commence.

Permissible Use Class Cellar Door Sales – ‘P’ (permitted) use, and Agriculture Intensive ‘P’ (permitted).

Heritage/Aboriginal Sites Nil Encumbrance None shown Date Received 08/09/2015

http://intranet/Logos/Forms/AllItems.aspx�

Policy Requirements Is the land or proposal referred to in any Council Policy? √ Yes ☐ No If yes, state the Policy/Policies Local Planning Policy 5 – Cellar Door Sales

Relevant Considerations Comprise: • Visual Impact • Parking – in accordance with LPS1 • Health Matters • Fire Protection • Association with Agriculture • Road Upgrading Requirements. • Scale of Cellar Door Sales – Boutique, Small or Large Cellar Door

Sales. Officer Comment

The proposed cellar door is classed as a Boutique. The building will be visible from Ellen Brook road, but with additional screening over time the building will be less visible. The visual impact is considered minimum when considering the small scale of building and the finish using granite walls, painted weatherboard cladding in a charcoal colour, and a Colorbond roof in ‘Wallaby’ (mid shade of grey). Schedule 12 – Car Parking The closest fitting use in the schedule is considered to be ‘shop’ which requires one car bay per 25m² NLA. As the NLA of the cellar door is 40m² 2 car bays are required. Ten (10) bays are proposed, including 1 disabled bay. The car parking is considered to be adequate for the cellar door. It is not considered appropriate necessary for the car parking area to be sealed, considering the rural setting. However, the crossover is required to be sealed as per the Shires standards. There are no concerns from a fire management perspective as the site includes an extensive network of vineyards, with areas that are cleared grazing areas (low fuel zones) with access to water from large dam. The wine is produced off site at Naturaliste Vintners in Carbunup, from produce grown on the site.

Structure Plans and Local Development Plans (DAP) Is the land in any Structure Plan Area or subject to a DAP? ☐ Yes √ No Advertising/Agency Referrals Has the application been referred to adjoining landowners/agency? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Has a submission been received by Council? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A

No. received: 1 Have agency or authority comments been received? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A

Additional Vines

Proposed Cellar Door

Name Nature of Submission Officer Comment

Neighbour (north)

Objection - The 20m setback should be adhered

to fully. - Concerns over spray drift and that

precaution should be put in place.

- The application has been amended so that

the vines are located 20m from the property boundaries.

- To address the potential for spay drift, a 10m revegetation buffer zone has been included adjacent

Has the application been referred to internal departments? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A

Department of Water Risk mitigation To minimise risks, DoW recommends the following measures where practical/appropriate, consistent with DoW's 'Water Quality Protection Note 34 — Orchards Near Sensitive Water Resources':- • Having drainage channels properly located and designed to minimise

erosion and nutrient transport. Specifically, stormwater runoff from the 2.69ha western vineyard should not be allowed to enter the shallow open drain (that is connected to the western dam) by means of earthen bunds

• Establishing perennial grasses between planted rows to control erosion and attenuate nutrients

• The use of organic fertilisers / soil amendments like manure, compost and mulch is encouraged

• The use of fertilisers, pesticides and fertilizers follow best management practices

• Plantings between the existing dams and vineyards to minimise spray drift into the surface water resource.

The application has been amended to address the measures that were recommended.

Department of Parks and Wildlife • Recommendation of a revegetation plan to be prepared and implemented to a Parks and Wildlife satisfaction.

• If the Shire approves the proposal, appropriate buffers to protect downstream water quality impacts.

The application has been amended to address both appropriate revegetation of both the site boundaries and water courses.

Infrastructure Services No issues are presented by the proposal, and conditions have been recommended to be included.

Environmental Health Department Recommended conditions to be included. Assessment of Application Is the land referred in the Heritage Inventory? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any Contributions applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any compliance issues in relation to existing development? ☐ Yes √ No R Codes Are R Codes applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Development Standards (Schedule 13) Are the development Standards applicable? √ Yes ☐ No Officer Comment Schedule 9 - Development Standards:

Development is required to be setback 30m from the front, and 20m from the side and rear boundaries. The proposed car park in association with the proposed cellar door will be located 6m from the boundary. This location presents a variation to the 30m front setback requirement of Schedule 9. The location of the car park has been based on the topography of the land, and is located as such that it will not require the removal of existing vegetation, and wont impinge views from the cellar door to the dam. Given the reduced setback, and the location of the car park near Ellen Brook Road, the applicants are proposing a re-vegetation buffer to screen the car park from the road. The proposed additional screening is considered an acceptable solution to mitigate potential visual impacts due to the proximity of the car park to the boundary. Further mitigating factors are the relatively small size and compacted gravel standard of the car park.

Planning History - Existing vines were planted back in 1993, when the site was part of Edward Winery, - 2005 - Approval to subdivide the site (Lot 71 was created, P25045), and - 2013 – Planning approval was granted for expansion of the dam (P213546). Building Height Scheme / Policy Requirement Wall - 7m Roof - 8m State the proposed building height Wall – 4.5m

√ Complies ☐ Doesn’t Comply

Roof - 5m Clause 67 A. In the opinion of the officer, would approval of the planning consent be appropriate under Clause 67 of the

Deemed Provisions of the Scheme? Officer Comment

The proposed agriculture intensive (vineyard) use is consistent with the objectives of the priority agriculture zone. The proposed development will not cause any amenity or spray drift impacts. The application has been amended to allow a 20m setback from the site boundaries, of which 10m will be heavily landscaped to create a buffer to minimise the prospect of spray drift. The site is located in Visual Management Area ‘A’. Development should result in in-evident visual alteration to the landscape. It is recognised that changes can occur, but that the development should be of similar form, scale and pattern of the existing landscape. The construction of the cellar door will be evident, but given the scale, materials and form of the building, it is not considered that it will be visually harmful, but will contribute to the landscape surrounding.

B. In the opinion of the officer: i. Are utility services available and

adequate for the development? Yes.

ii. Has adequate provision been made for the landscaping and protection for any trees or other vegetation on the land?

No clearing is required, only additional revegetation is to occur.

iii. Has adequate provision been made for access for the development or facilities by disabled persons?

Yes.

iv. Is development likely to cause detriment to the existing and likely future amenity of the neighbourhood?

No.

v. Is the development likely to comply with AS3959 at the building permit stage?

N/A

Other Comments Any further comments in relation to the application? Officer Comment

The proposed cellar door and vineyard additions are supported and are recommended for conditional approval.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That the Acting Manager of Planning and Development Services GRANTS Planning Consent under Delegated Authority Instrument No. 15 pursuant to Clause 68(2) of the Deemed Provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for a Cellar Door and Agriculture Intensive (Vineyard Extension) on Lot 71 Ellen Brook Road, Cowaramup subject to compliance with the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. The development is to be carried out in compliance with the plans and documentation listed below and

endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent.

Plans and Specifications

P1 – P2 received at the Shire on the 16 December 2015 and P3 – P6 received on the 8 September 2015

2. If the development, the subject of this approval, is not substantially commenced within two (2) years from the

date of this letter, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect. Where an approval has lapsed, development is prohibited without further approval being obtained. (P)

3. The cultivation of land or spraying of pesticides, herbicides or application of non-nitrogenous fertilisers is

prohibited within 50 metres off the bank of any water course or natural soak.

4. Surface stormwater runoff from the site shall be stripped of sediment before entering any open watercourse or public drainage system.

5. The vineyard operation shall not cause the escape of dust, smoke, fumes, offensive matter or foul odours that constitutes a nuisance.

6. The crossover shall be designed, constructed, sealed, and drained in accordance with the Shire's standards and specifications.

7. A Landscape Plan shall be prepared by a suitably qualified and/or experienced landscape consultant and submitted for the approval to the Shire prior to the commencement, of any works. The Landscape Plan shall be drawn to scale and shall show:

a) A landscape buffer a minimum of 10m in width planted with a mixture of trees, shrubs and ground covers as recommended in the Queensland Guidelines (see advice note h).

b) Landscape screening between the boundary and the proposed car park. c) The landscape buffer shall be setback appropriately from the boundary to allow provision of a fire break;

and d) The application of reticulation or irrigation to buffer plantings using water sensitive principles. (P)

8. The approved Landscape Plan shall be implemented prior to installation of the vineyard additions and shall be

maintained at all times to the satisfaction of the Shire. (P) 9. The vehicle parking and access ways shall be designed, constructed and drained to a minimum compacted

gravel or similar material standard in accordance with the Shire’s standards and specifications, prior to occupation of the development. (I)

10. All stormwater and drainage run-off from the development shall be contained within the lot boundaries or disposed offsite by an approved connection to the Shire’s drainage system in accordance with the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River Standards & Specifications. (I)

ADVICE NOTES a) You are advised of the need to comply with the requirements of the following other legislation:

(i) This is not a Building Permit. A Building Permit must be issued by the relevant Permit Authority before any work commences on site as per the Building Act 2011;

(ii) The Bush Fires Act 1954 as amended, Section 33(3), Annual Bush Fires Notice applies to this property.

b) You are required to obtain a separate certificate under the Health (Public Building) Regulations for the use of

the premises as a ‘Public Building’. An application is available from the Shire and shall be submitted for assessment. (EH)

c) Signage for the development is not included in this approval and may require further planning approval from the Shire.

d) An apparatus for the onsite treatment and disposal of waste water shall be installed in accordance with the

Health (Treatment of Sewage and Disposal of Effluent & Liquid Waste) Regulations 1974 and to the satisfaction of the Department of Health prior to occupation of the building. (EH)

e) Onsite effluent disposal system shall have a minimum 1.2 metre vertical separation from highest known level of

groundwater and shall not be constructed closer than 30 metres from any well, bore, stream, river or water course intended for consumption by humans (including non-perennial streams).(EH)

f) The development is to provide a potable water source in accordance with Shire of Augusta Margaret River

Health Local Laws 1999 (e.g. water to be treated by filter and ultra violet light). (EH) g) Chemical use, storage, mixing, preparation and wash down facilities are required to comply with the Health

(Pesticides) Regulations 1956 and Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Western Australia) Act 1995. (EH)

h) It is advised that the Queensland Guidelines for the establishment of buffers be used for the design of the vegetation buffers along the boundaries.

i) The Department of Water (DoW) has advised that the measures contained in the DoW “Water quality Protection Note 34 – Orchards near Sensitive Water Resources” be implemented where practical/appropriate.

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ASSESSMENT (DAU) Report to Manager Planning Services Proposed Building Envelope Variation - 693 (Lot 201) Burnside Road Margaret River Major (Level 2) P215515; PTY/8393

REPORTING OFFICER : Johan Pienaar DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST : Nil General Information Lot Area 4.99ha Zone Rural Residential Proposed Development Approval is sought for a variation to and relocation of the existing building

envelope. The building envelope is currently hexagonally shaped and is approximately 3800m² is area. It is proposed to shift the new building envelope in a north-easterly direction and change it to an L-shape to avoid vegetation that exists in the vicinity of the new location. The proposed building envelope is slightly smaller in area at approximately 3600m². The proposed location is on the crest on the site to utilise the views to the east and north-east.

Permissible Use Class A building envelope is not a use class. The building envelope identifies an area within which development on the site is permitted.

Heritage/Aboriginal Sites Nil Encumbrance Nil Date Received 22/10/2015


Policy Requirements Is the land or proposal referred to in any Council Policy? ☐ Yes √ No Structure Plans and Local Development Plans (DAP) Is the land in any Structure Plan Area or subject to a DAP? √ Yes ☐ No If yes, state the Policy/Policies

Officer Comment

The relevant considerations under the Subdivision Guide Plan are the building envelope locations for each lot in the subdivision area as well as the identification of a landscape protection zone, which affects the southern and eastern portions of the subject site. The landscape protection zone follows the creek lines and is generally between 50-60m wide on either side of the creek lines. The landscape protection zone is shown as the grey area in the figure below. The proposed new building envelope will not protrude into the landscape protection zone area.

Advertising/Agency Referrals Has the application been referred to adjoining landowners/agency? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A

Has a submission been received by Council? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A No. received: 2

Have agency or authority comments been received? ☐ Yes ☐ No √ N/A

Name Nature of Submission Officer Comment

Submission 1

Indicated support without any additional comments.

Noted

Submission 2 (confidential)

Do not object provided the following concerns are addressed:

The existing stands of trees remain to ensure visual privacy between dwellings.

That the location of the dwelling in the building envelope is screened from view.

That the dwelling be setback appropriately from the southern stand of trees so that it would not be impacted by required fire management measures.

It was evident during a site visit that the proposed building envelope location would not result in additional visual impacts on the adjoining lots to the south. The proposed location is further away from the southern boundary and the development will be screened from the dwellings on the adjoining lots to the south by existing mature vegetation on the subject lot as well as the adjoining lots. This application does not involve built development. It would however be onerous to require any additional screening as the existing vegetation would provide sufficient screening. The application included a preliminary Bushfire Attack Level (BAL) assessment, which demonstrates that an acceptable of construction can be achieved, without having a substantial impact on the existing vegetation. A final BAL assessment is required to be undertaken at development stage. The potential impacts of any required building protection zone on vegetation will be assessed at development application stage.

Has the application been referred to internal departments? ☐ Yes √ No ☐ N/A

Assessment of Application Is the land referred in the Heritage Inventory? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any Contributions applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any compliance issues in relation to existing development? ☐ Yes √ No R Codes Are R Codes applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Development Standards (Schedule 13) Are the development Standards applicable? √ Yes ☐ No Officer Comment The proposed building envelope maintains sufficient setbacks from the side boundaries to

comply with the 10m standard of the Scheme. The proposed 20m setback would also allow for the establishment of a 20m building protection zone within the boundaries of the property, as per the requirements of the Shire’s annual fire break notice. The proposed building envelope is located well in excess of the 30m setback standard from the front and rear boundaries.

Car Parking N/A

Building Height N/A.

Clause 67 C. In the opinion of the officer, would approval of the planning consent be appropriate under Clause 67 of the

Deemed Provisions of the Scheme? Officer Comment

Yes. The Scheme allows for discretion, under the provisions of clause 4.22.2, for the approval of a variation or relocation of a building envelope. Clause 5.10.2 of the Scheme sets out the criterial under which an application for a variation or relocation should be assessed. In considering the application against the criteria under clause 5.10.2 it is concluded that the proposed variation and relocation is acceptable as the new building envelope:

will not compromise the objectives of the zone, particularly the objective to preserve the environmental and landscape values.

will not affect the visual amenity of the location to any greater degree than would have been the case with the exiting building envelope.

will not make it more difficult to protect the property from bushfire risks, and is of a suitable size to accommodate future development. The proposed building

envelope, although considered to be generous in size, is smaller than the existing building envelope.

D. In the opinion of the officer: vi. Are utility services available and

adequate for the development? Yes

vii. Has adequate provision been made for the landscaping and protection for any trees or other vegetation on the land?

Yes

viii. Has adequate provision been made for access for the development or facilities by disabled persons?

N/A

ix. Is development likely to cause detriment to the existing and likely future amenity of the neighbourhood?

No

x. Is the development likely to comply with AS3959 at the building permit stage?

Yes. A preliminary BAL assessment was submitted with the application. It shows that a BAL of between 19 and 29 is achievable with setbacks of between 8m and 26m from existing vegetation. This sufficiently demonstrates that development is possible in the location of the proposed building envelope to an acceptable standard. This will be assessed in more detail at development application stage.


The proposed building envelope is supported and is recommended for conditional approval.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That the Statutory Planning Coordinator GRANTS Planning Consent under Delegated Authority Instrument No. 15 pursuant to Clause 68(2) of the Deemed Provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for a Building Envelope Variation at 693 (Lot 201) Burnside Road, Margaret River subject to compliance with the following conditions:

CONDITIONS 1. The development is to be carried out in compliance with the plans and documentation listed below and


Plans and Specifications Plan P1 received at the Shire on 7 December 2015

2. The revised building envelope hereby approved, wholly replaces that previously applicable to the site. (P) 3. Clearing of vegetation is prohibited outside the building envelope, unless in accordance with the Bush Fires Act

1954 or required for the purpose of constructing an approved driveway, installing essential services, or removing dead or dangerous trees.(P)


(i) The Bush Fires Act 1954 as amended, Section 33(3), Annual Bush Fires Notice applies to this property. b) Please be advised that most development in the Rural Residential zone is not exempted from planning approval

under the Deemed Provisions of Local Planning Scheme No.1. Under the provisions of Local Planning Policy 1 - Outbuildings and Farm Buildings outbuildings of a certain design is exempted from planning approval. Please contact the Shire’s Planning Department for further advice in this regard.

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ASSESSMENT (DAU) Report to Manager Planning Services Proposed Child Care Centre (Increase in Child Care Centre Capacity from 30 to 36) at 'Cowtown Kids' at 5 (Lot 101) Waverley Road Cowaramup

Major (Level 2) P215538; PTY/6288 REPORTING OFFICER: Angela Satre DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST: The applicant is known to the officer however this association has

not influenced the outcome of this planning assessment General Information Lot Area 1320m2 Zone Residential R15 Proposed Development Proposed increase in numbers of children from 30 to 36 comprising:

• Eight (8) babies 0 – 18 months; • Twenty five (25) toddlers 18months – 2.5years; and • Three (3) ‘priority’ places for children that are in need of immediate

care and are aged from 0 – 2.5 years. Staff numbers would not change; the use would continue to be operated by six (6) staff (two staff for the babies and four for the toddlers). There are no proposed changes to the building.

Permissible Use Class ‘A’ advertising required Heritage/Aboriginal Sites No Encumbrance Notification - Water Corp notification regarding the Pressure Sewer System

remaining the property of the land owner. No impact arises to the proposal from this notification.

Date Received 29/10/2015


Policy Requirements Is the land or proposal referred to in any Council Policy? ☐ Yes √ No Structure Plans and Local Development Plans (DAP) Is the land in any Structure Plan Area or subject to a DAP? ☐ Yes √ No Advertising/Agency Referrals Has the application been referred to adjoining landowners/agency? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Has a submission been received by Council? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A

No. received: __2___________ Have agency or authority comments been received? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Name Nature of Submission Officer Comment

Nearby landowners Support Indifferent

Noted. Noted. During the advertising period a strong verbal objection to the proposal was raised due to adverse noise impacts arising from the existing operation. No written submission was however received.


Environmental Health: Based on the acoustic report submitted with the application, the proposal is likely to achieve compliance with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997. Notwithstanding, the following are also recommended:

The Noise Management & Compliance Monitoring Plan and Guidelines for child care centres (CCC) acoustic assessment are recommended to be applied as a condition and advice to any approval granted. CCC’s are also regulated by the Department of Local Government and Communities, Education and Care Regulatory Care Unit. This unit ensures monitors CCC’s and ensures they meet legislated standards dealing with maximum capacity, the ratio of staff depending on the number and age of children in attendance, & permitted maximum

• A Noise Management and Compliance Monitoring Plan; &

• The Association of Australian Acoustic Consultants Guidelines for Child Care Centre Acoustic Assessment which provides good noise control recommendations.

operating times (CCC’s are now permitted to operate Saturdays and Sundays and for 24 hours). There is however no limit to the amount of indoor or outdoor time or to the various age ratios of children that may attend CCC’s. The amount and nature of outdoor time and activities and the various age groups of the children can have a strong impact to the amenity enjoyed by surrounding landowners particularly those that are sensitive noise premises (e.g. shift workers). For this reason the Noise Management & Compliance Monitoring Plan and Guidelines for CCC acoustic assessment are recommended to be applied to the proposal. It is also noted that the outcome of the noise impact assessment for CCC’s, as detailed in the acoustic report, depends on the age ratio of the children in attendance. As stated in the acoustic report: ‘…noise emissions from babies, or children under 3, is considerably less than for children over 3…’. The acoustic report submitted with the application, demonstrates that the use is likely to meet the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997, at the proposed greater capacity, due to the younger ages of the children. For these reasons, any approval granted is recommended to limit the age of children to only those less than three years of age. Further approval and noise impact assessment would therefore be required for the CCC to accommodate additional and/or older children.

Engineering: The amended parking plan submitted with the application is considered acceptable subject to line marking in accordance with the Australian Standards.

Noted – this is to be addressed as a condition of any approval granted.

Assessment of Application Is the land referred in the Heritage Inventory? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any Contributions applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any compliance issues in relation to existing development? ☐ Yes √ No R Codes Are R Codes applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Development Standards (Schedule 9) Are the development Standards applicable? √ Yes ☐ No Officer Comment The development standards are applicable to built development and in this case the

application does not involve any changes to the built form. There are no implications arising from the Development Standards to this application.

Car Parking LPS1 / R Codes Requirement

Car Bays Required - <12> Car Bays Proposed -<12>

Dimensions 2.5 x 5.5m √ Complies ☐ Doesn’t Comply Turning Bay/Circles and vehicle manoeuvring √ Complies ☐ Doesn’t Comply

Disabled Bays Existing √ Complies ☐ Doesn’t Comply Officer Comment

LPS1 specifies for Educational Establishments, including child/day care centres, that the parking standards are to the determined by the local government in each case having regard to the number of teachers in attendance at any one time and the number of support personnel also in attendance. Adequate pick up and set down facilities are also required. Historically the Shire has applied the parking requirements under Planning Bulletin 72/2009 Child Care Centre (PB72) which is 1 space per 5 children and based on this guideline 7 bays for the children are required. Neither LPS1 nor PB72 provide parking requirements for staff however historically the Shire has required one bay per staff member. In this case the proponent has demonstrated that six staff parking bays can be provided. The site is developed with 12 car parking bays. The proponent has made a commitment to provide the additional parking bay required to increase the capacity of the use. With the provision of 13 bays the proposal meets the parking requirements under LPS1.

Clause 67 E. In the opinion of the officer, would approval of the planning consent be appropriate under Clause 67 of the

Deemed Provisions of the Scheme? Officer Comment Yes F. In the opinion of the officer: xi. Are utility services available and adequate for the development? Yes xii. Has adequate provision been made for the landscaping and

protection for any trees or other vegetation on the land? Yes – no impact to vegetation

xiii. Has adequate provision been made for access for the development or facilities by disabled persons?

Yes – Disabled parking bays are required to be provided and appropriately line marked.

xiv. Is development likely to cause detriment to the existing and likely future amenity of the neighbourhood?

No

xv. Is the development likely to comply with AS3959 at the building permit stage?

n/a


The proposal to increase the capacity of the existing CCC did not raise written objections during the notification period. Additional measures are therefore recommended to be applied to any approval granted as best practice standards for noise management for the CCC including a requirement for a NMP. The proposal was assessed and found to meet LPS1 standards. Conditional approval is recommended.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That the Statutory Planning Coordinator GRANTS Planning Consent under Delegated Authority Instrument No. 15 pursuant to Clause 68(2) of the Deemed Provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for a Child Care Centre (increase in Child Care Centre capacity from 30 to 36) at 'Cowtown Kids' at 5 (Lot 101) Waverley Road Cowaramup subject to compliance with the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. The development is to be carried out in compliance with the plans and documentation listed below and


Plans and Specifications P1 received at the Shire offices on 21 December 2015.



3. The Child Care Centre the subject of this development approval is permitted to accommodate a maximum of 36

children at any one time. The children that are permitted to attend the Child Care Centre shall be no older than three years of age. (P)

4. The Child Care Centre the subject of this development approval is permitted to operate from 7am to 6pm

Monday to Friday. 5. Vehicle parking areas, access ways and crossover(s) shall be designed, constructed, sealed, kerbed, drained,

line marked and thereafter maintained in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2890.1 – 2004 and the Shire’s standards and specifications within 30 days from the date of this development approval. (I)

6. A Noise Management Plan (NMP) shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Shire prior to implementation of

the additional children on site the subject of this development approval. The approved NMP shall be incorporated into the Centre’s overall management measures and shall be prepared with regard to the Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants Guideline for Child Care Centre Acoustic Assessment. The NMP shall include but not be limited to preparation of a daily program for outdoor use, details of noise management measures applied on site and compliant record keeping and response procedure and process (refer to Advice Note c). (P)



(ii) Health Act 1911 and Department requirements in respect to the development and use of the premises; and

(iii) The Bush Fires Act 1954 as amended, Section 33(3), Annual Bush Fires Notice applies to this property. b) Noise emissions (sound levels) resulting from the increase in numbers at the child care centre shall not exceed

the assigned levels in the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 and shall not unreasonably interfere with the health, welfare, convenience, comfort or amenity of an occupier of any other premises. (EH)

c) The Noise Management Plan (NMP) should address, but not be limited to, the following:

i) A daily program for warmer and cooler months to regulate children’s time spent outdoors and indoors including: Details of the numbers of children playing outside at any one time with regard to staggering

playtimes throughout the day to mitigate noise impacts (a reduction in the number of children by half will reduce the noise impact by 3dB).

Commitments to monitor the behaviour and noise levels of children to mitigate noise impacts while outside as required by trained child care workers.

Commitments for carers to be educated to control their voice levels while outside. Details of noise management measures such as avoiding use of amplified music, and maximising

the separation between active and passive activities (painting, drawing etc) and neighbouring residential premises.

The daily program is be made available to parents and neighbours and is to include contact details for the Centre’s director to facilitate communication and to resolve neighbourhood issues that may arise due to operation of the Centre. ii) The NMP is to include details of noise management measures applied on site such as:

details of measures to deal with crying children such as taking children inside the Centre to be comforted to mitigate noise impacts;

commitments to ensure parents and guardians are informed of the importance of noise minimisation when entering the site, dropping off or picking up children;

use of self-closing gates with soft close hinges; use of low noise air conditioning condensers; minimising the use of speed humps and ensuring car park surfaces and access ways are smooth; locating staff parking bays in proximity to neighbouring residential premises rather than drop off

parking bays to minimise noise impacts from car doors closing; minimising hard-paved areas and pathways in the play area to reduce the reverberant noise

levels; and locating buildings and other structures such as storage sheds or covered shade areas in the

outdoor play area to provide acoustic shielding.

iii) The NMP is to include a compliant record keeping and response procedure and process for amending the operation of the Centre to address the concern(s) raised and to mitigate the effects of noise on adjoining premises.

d) The proponent is reminded of the obligations of the operator and employees of the child care centre to achieve

a current Provider Approval and Service Approval, under the Education and Care Services National Law (WA Act 2012) and the Education Care Services National Regulations 2012, from the Department of Local Government and Communities.

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ASSESSMENT (DAU) Report to Manager Planning Services Proposed Community Purpose (St John Ambulance Sub-Centre and Parking) - 36 (Lot 115) Tunbridge Street, Margaret River

Major (Level 2) P215322; PTY/5212 REPORTING OFFICER : Johan Pienaar DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST : Nil General Information Lot Area 1062m² Zone Residential.

(The Council resolved, at its Ordinary Meeting of 27 August 2014, to adopt the rezoning of the site from Residential to Public Purpose Reserve for Community Purposes with restricted use right. The restricted use right allows the site to be developed for community purposes only. The rezoning was undertaken as part of the Amendment 29 to Local Planning Scheme 1 [omnibus scheme amendment]. Amendment 29 is currently with the WAPC for endorsement and approval by the Minister).

Proposed Development Approval is sought for the development of a car park and a building for the garaging of two ambulance vehicles. The two ambulance vehicles to be stored in the proposed building are intended for training and displays at community events and not for regular use. The car park will provide parking for people attending scheduled training sessions in the existing St Johns Ambulance facility on adjoining Lot 198. It is proposed to use the car park occasionally for training during the day and occasionally at night. The building comprises an area of approximately 104m² and includes a lean-to component at the back for the purposes of a store, unisex toilet and a porch. The proposal includes the replacing/repair of the dilapidated fencing that exists mainly along the western boundary of the site. A Stormwater Management Plan was prepared to demonstrate how stormwater will be managed onsite.

Permissible Use Class Community Purpose – ‘A’ use Heritage/Aboriginal Sites Nil Encumbrance Nil Date Received 16/07/2015


Policy Requirements Is the land or proposal referred to in any Council Policy? ☐ Yes √ No Structure Plans and Local Development Plans (DAP) Is the land in any Structure Plan Area or subject to a DAP? ☐ Yes √ No Advertising/Agency Referrals Has the application been referred to adjoining landowners/agency? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A

Has a submission been received by Council? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Have agency or authority comments been received? ☐ Yes √ No ☐ N/A Nature of Submission Officer Comment

The Shire has received responses from three adjoining land owners. One neighbour outright supports the proposed development. The issues that were raised in the other two submissions comprise: Submission 1 1. The trees in the south-west corner of the site should be

retained to reduce impacts on the street scape and soften the impact of the car park on Tunbridge Street and the neighbourhood in general. Deleting two car bays is all that is required to retain the trees. The remaining 15 car bays should be enough to address the St John’s parking needs for the near future.

Submission 2 1. Drainage and stormwater management and treatment

is a concern. Confirmation is sought that runoff from the proposed development will not exceed current run off levels and that stormwater is adequately treated not to impact on the Peppermint Brook at the bottom of Mann Street.

2. Removal of trees at the front of the proposed car park will have environmental and visual impacts. The protection and preservation of trees at the entry of the site enhances the visual interest of the streetscape (The trees to the Baptist car park are indicative of what can be achieved.

3. Vegetation must be introduced on the subject site (similarly to the native plantings to the rear of existing St Johns’ building) to extend the habitat the existing vegetation provides.

The removal of the trees in the south-west corner of the site will have a substantial impact on the existing streetscape and the amenity of the location. The proponent has submitted amended plans showing the retention of the trees in the south west corner of the site. Under the provisions of the Scheme one tree per 6 parking bays is required, to soften/reduce the impact of paved area and to provide shade. Proposed trees are not spaced to meet the objectives/requirements of the Scheme. This issue can appropriately be dealt with through a condition requiring a detailed landscaping plan to be submitted for approval prior to the commencement of any works. The adjoining neighbours have not specifically objected to the replacement of the dilapidated fence. The proponent will be advised the replacement of the existing boundary fence must be in consultation with the affected adjoining neighbour. The Dividing Fences Act provides guidance on procedures to achieve an acceptable outcome. A Stormwater Management Plan was submitted to the Shire. The plan includes calculations demonstrating that sufficient storage is provided for stormwater runoff in the form of rain gardens. The overflow from the rain gardens will be directed to the rear of the site via a rock rill outlet. This dissipates any overflows from the rain garden as sheet flows to replicate the pre-development situation as close as possible. The proponent has provided, at the request of the Shire, detailed calculations to demonstrate that predevelopment flows will not be exceeded. The calculations demonstrate that post-development flows is “…less or equal to predevelopment flows with the proposed basin and 2500L water tank for all recurrence intervals that were modelled (1year ARI through to 100year ARI)”.


Assessment of Application Is the land referred in the Heritage Inventory? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any Contributions applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any compliance issues in relation to existing development? ☐ Yes ☐ No R Codes Are R Codes applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Development Standards (Schedule 13) Are the development Standards applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Officer Comment Nil

Car Parking The Scheme does not include a parking standard for community purposes of this nature. The parking is for people attending training in the St John facility on the adjoining site. Schedule 12 requires parking for educational establishments to be provided to the requirements of the local government.

The initial site plan showed 17 car parking bays. Two parking bays were removed on an amended site plan in order to retain the mature trees in the south-western corner of the site. The remaining 15 car parking bays are considered sufficient. A condition is recommended to ensure all parking is done on-site. Building Height Scheme / Policy Requirement Wall - 7m Roof – 8m State the proposed building height (above NGL)

Wall – 4.5m Roof – 4.7m


Officer Comment

Nil

Clause 67 G. In the opinion of the officer, would approval of the planning consent be appropriate under Clause 67 of the

Scheme? Officer Comment

Yes.

H. In the opinion of the officer: xvi. Are utility services available and

adequate for the development? Yes

xvii. Has adequate provision been made for the landscaping and protection for any trees or other vegetation on the land?

Yes. Revised plans were submitted to ensure the mature trees in the south-west corner of the site is conserved. A condition is recommended requiring the preparation of a detailed landscaping plan to ensure sufficient and appropriately located landscaping.

xviii. Has adequate provision been made for access for the development or facilities by disabled persons?

This is a requirement under the BCA and will be assessed at building licence stage.

xix. Is development likely to cause detriment to the existing and likely future amenity of the neighbourhood?

The condition which would apply to the site under the endorsed Amendment is that the “development shall be designed to address and mitigate light and noise emanating from the site with particular consideration to surrounding residential use”.

The ambulances/vehicles that would be parked in the building are intended for training and displays at community events and not for regular use. St John operational guide lines state that they do not use sirens when departing the depot, unless adverse traffic conditions require it. It is proposed to use the car park for training. It is recommended to apply a condition that would restrict the use of the car park for training to appropriate hours i.e. 7am to 7pm Monday to Saturday.

The Plans submitted for approval show bollard lighting in the car park. This is an acceptable proposal to mitigate potential impacts from lighting on the site. A condition is proposed to reiterate that only bollard lighting is permitted in the car park. The proponent wil also be advised of the existence of the Shire’s Environment and Nuisance Local Law 2013 and the provisions in relation to when lighting emanating from a site would be considered a nuisance.

xx. Is the development likely to comply with AS3959 at the building permit stage?

N/A

Other Comments

Any further comments in relation to the application? Officer Comment

The application is supported and is recommended for conditional approval. Stormwater management is a critical consideration as there is no existing shire stormwater infrastructure available for connection. Stormwater is therefore required to be managed on-site. The proponent was requested to provide further detailed calculations to demonstrate that post-development flows from the site wil not exceed pre-development flows. The Shire’s Infrastructure Department confirmed that the additional information that was provided sufficiently demonstrates that the post-development stormwater impacts will be not be exceeded. Notwithstanding, a condition is recommended requiring monitoring of the effectiveness of the stormwater system/infrastructure over the first winter after completion and the undertaking of any necessary modifications to ensure the system is achieving the intended outcomes.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That the Statutory Planning Coordinator GRANTS Planning Consent under Delegated Authority Instrument No. 15 pursuant to Clause 68 (2) of the Deemed Provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for Community Purpose (St John Ambulance Sub-Centre and Parking) at 36 (Lot 115) Tunbridge Street, Margaret River subject to compliance with the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. The development is to be carried out in compliance with the plans and documentation listed below and


Plans and Specifications

P1 received at the Shire on 5 November 2015; and P2-P3 received at the Shire on 31 July 2015



3. All stormwater and drainage run-off from the development shall be contained within the lot boundaries.

Stormwater infrastructure shall be installed in accordance with the approved Stormwater Management Plan. (I)

4. The Stormwater Management Plan shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the development. The effectiveness of the stormwater infrastructure must be monitored over the first winter after completion of the development and any necessary modifications shall be undertaken to ensure the system is achieving the intended outcomes. (I)

5. A 3m wide drainage easement shall be registered along the northern boundary of Lot 115 as recommended in

the submitted Stormwater Management Plan. The drainage easement shall be to the benefit of the local government and shall be registered at the cost of the proponent.(I)

6. The car park may be used for training on Monday to Saturday between 7am and 7pm.

7. A Landscape Plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Shire by a suitably qualified and/or experienced

landscape consultant and be submitted to the Shire prior to the commencement of development. The Landscape Plan shall be drawn to scale and show the location, name and mature heights of existing and proposed trees and shrubs and ground covers. Shade trees must be provided at a ratio of 1 tree per 6 parking bays.

8. Landscaping shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the development and shall be maintained at all

times.

9. The existing mature trees in the south-west corner of the site shall be retained and any trees on adjoining properties shall not be impacted by the excavation or construction phases of the development.

10. Vehicle parking areas, access ways and crossover(s) shall be designed, constructed, (lit), sealed, kerbed,

drained, line marked and thereafter maintained in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2890.1 – 2004 and the Shire’s standards and specifications, prior to occupation of the development. Footpaths are to remain continuous at vehicle crossovers, and shall be reinforced with mesh. (I)

11. Lighting in the car park shall be in the form of bollard lights as shown on the approved site plan. Any external

lighting proposed on the property must be installed so that there is no detrimental impact upon traffic safety and amenity in the locality. (P)

12. A schedule of colour and texture of the building materials shall be submitted for approval prior to the issue of a

building permit and shall be implemented accordingly. (P)

13. The walls and roof of the building shall be clad in a non-reflective materials and colours.

14. Works are prohibited within the road reserve including any pruning or clearing of vegetation without prior written approval of the Shire.

15. Prior to the commencement of any works the proponent shall pay a development bond to the Shire under the

provisions of Infrastructure Policy 4 – Developments.

16. A Construction Management Plan must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Shire prior to the issue of a building licence. (I) (see advice note ‘e’)

17. Privacy screening must be installed, to the satisfaction of the Shire, in appropriate locations to address

overlooking onto adjoining residential properties. The privacy screening shall be installed prior to the occupation of the development.

18. The use or development of the site shall not interfere with the amenity of the locality, and shall not cause or

permit the emission of noise, vibration, odour, fumes, dust, liquid waste or liquid refuse, waste products or grit, oil or otherwise from the premises, that constitutes a nuisance. (P/H)



(ii) Health Act 1911 and Department requirements in respect to the development and use of the premises; and

(iii) The Bush Fires Act 1954 as amended, Section 33(3), Annual Bush Fires Notice applies to this property. b) An apparatus for the onsite treatment and disposal of waste water shall be installed in accordance with Health

(Treatment of Sewage and Disposal of Effluent and Liquid Waste) Regulations 1974 to the satisfaction of the Local Government and the Department of Health. (EH)

c) The existing fences along the northern and western boundaries are shared fences. It is advised that the

replacement of any fences be done in consultation with the adjoining land owner. The sharing of cost and any dispute in relation to a boundary fence is dealt with under the Dividing Fence Act 1961. The Shire does not get involved as a third party in these matters.

d) Lighting is required to be directed inward and must not cause any detrimental off-site impacts. The Shire’s

Environment and Nuisance Local Law 2013 provides guidance in relation to the level of emission that would be considered a nuisance.

e) The construction management plan to include but not limited to the following:

a. Preparation and Implementation of a Traffic Management Plan b. Pre start meeting with Shire Officers; c. Protection of existing infrastructure; d. Protection of vegetation; e. Working in Shire reserves; f. Ensuring proper approvals have been obtained; g. Access points to building site; h. Materials lay down; i. Haulage routes; j. Construction workers parking; k. Fencing of building sites; l. Scaffolding and protection works; m. Litter and building rubbish control; n. Stormwater, sedimentation and erosion control; o. Dust control; p. Working hours; q. Construction noise; r. Minimum facilities to be provided; s. Storage of goods; t. Insurances for construction related use of public areas; u. Infrastructure development bond.

f) It is expected that St John operate any emergency vehicles as per the St John operational guide lines which

state that sirens should not be used when departing the depot, unless adverse traffic conditions require it.

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ASSESSMENT (DAU) Report to Manager Planning Services Proposed Demolition of Existing Dwelling & Proposed Dwelling at 7 (Lot 365) Peppermint Drive Augusta

Major (Level 2) P215398; PTY/1527 REPORTING OFFICER : Angela Satre DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST : Nil General Information Lot Area 666m2 Zone Residential R15 (SCA4) Proposed Development Demolition and redevelopment with a single storey dwelling Permissible Use Class ‘P’ permitted subject to approval Heritage/Aboriginal Sites No. Encumbrance No Date Received 28/08/2015 Site Context The site is located within the historic settlement of Flinders Bay, south of the

town of Augusta. Flinders is a small coastal settlement that historically represents coastal shack settlement. The site is located fronting Peppermint Drive, a street that has an informal layout, with soft edges, no curbing and areas of deep road reserves which can contain areas of vegetation. The site is an irregular shaped lot that contains an existing dwelling to the north and ancillary accommodation building to the south.


Policy Requirements Is the land or proposal referred to in any Council Policy? √ Yes ☐ No

Shire of Augusta Margaret River Municipal Inventory of Heritage Places (MI) Local Planning Policy 27 – Heritage Places (LPP27) Draft Local Planning Policy 29 – Development in Flinders Bay (DLPP29)

Officer Comment

Municipal Inventory: Flinders Bay is classified in the MI as Place No. AU – 12. The Flinders Bay Settlement is of significance for a number of reasons including the following:

its association with, and evidence of, the informal development of a “coastal shack” settlement by both holiday makers and permanent residents in the interwar years.

the surviving examples of the modest interwar shacks that reflect the “coastal shack” lifestyle.

the traditional informal layout and landscaping of the narrow, winding residential streets.

Overall the settlement has a ‘moderate’ level of significance and therefore appears on the Shire’s Heritage List under Local Planning Scheme No. 1. Local Planning Policy 27 – Heritage Places: LPP27 states that for places identified as having moderate significance ‘conservation of the place is highly desirable…original fabric should be retained wherever feasible…’. Comment – Engineering Report: The proponent has submitted a report from a structural engineer in support of their proposal to demolish the existing dwelling. The report verifies that the dwelling is more than 50years old & has undergone multiple alterations & extensions and has a number of defects including:

An ‘extremely’ uneven stumped timber floor due to poor ground conditions and/or rot to sole plates under stumps. This uneven stumped floor ‘causes irreversible damage to the structural members of a building’ & would require restumping which would be ‘difficult and impractical’ without major works to address the uneven ground

conditions beneath the dwelling. Ant caps to the stumps show signs of ‘considerable rust…making them in-effective

in providing a visual termite barrier…’. Timber rot throughout. Asbestos roof sheeting in poor condition. Mould to ceiling indicating roof leakage.

The report recommends complete removal of the dwelling. Comment – Heritage Impact Statement A Heritage Impact Statement was required to be submitted pursuant to LPS1 clause 6.4.4.2. The Heritage Impact Statement that was submitted verifies that the proposed development ‘…supports the traditional informal layout and landscaping of the narrow winding streets…’. It also states that the ‘…extant building has been substantially altered and in a poor structural condition…’ and this existing building has a low level of authenticity due to these changes. In conclusion it is recommended in the Heritage Statement that:

‘Demolition of the earlier house and its accretions is permitted. Development of the site with the addition of the proposed new cottage is permitted’.

The recommendations of the Heritage Impact Statement are accepted and together with the structural report, they demonstrate that it is not feasible or realistic to retain the dwelling and that the proposed dwelling is acceptable. Draft Local Planning Policy 29 – Development in Flinders Bay: Policy Measure 5.1 - New Development (a) Preservation and conservation of the existing dwelling has been considered however

demolition of the existing dwelling has been found to be acceptable when assessed against the Heritage Impact Statement and structural report & given the new dwelling would be sympathetic to the style and design of the original housing stock.

(b) The height, mass and scale of the proposed dwelling complement the existing dwelling

on site, neighbouring dwellings and the streetscape. The total footprint of the proposed dwelling is 223m2 including the garage and alfresco dining area. This is larger (by 90m2) than the existing 132m2 dwelling, however, the total size of the proposed dwelling is reasonably modest and not out of character with the scale of dwellings in the locality. The proposed single storey dwelling, and existing ancillary dwelling, achieves a considerable amount of open space on site such that the impact to the amenity of the area is unlikely to be adversely affected due to the bulk and scale of the dwelling. Setbacks from boundaries for the existing and proposed dwelling are consistent with the narrower setback corresponding to the north eastern corner. Accordingly the proposed dwelling meets policy measure 5.1(b).

(c) The proposed colour of the dwelling is a charcoal weatherboard. This is consistent with

the existing ancillary accommodation building on site; it is non-reflective and meets the policy measure 5.1(c).

(d) DLPP29 policy measure 5.1 (d) specifies that garages are not permitted to be located

in the front of the dwelling and are to be located either at the side or the rear of the site. Assessment of an alternative location and its impact on the streetscape will be considered where there is no other alternative.

In this case the proposal is for a single garage on the south western side of the dwelling fronting Peppermint Drive & setback 1.0m to the street with a solid garage door. The proponent has confirmed that there would be no removal of vegetation on the site or in the Peppermint Drive road reserve to access the garage & there is no proposed driveway or crossover. These commitments are recommended to be reiterated as conditions of any approval that may be granted. It is noted that the site is unusually shaped; it is as narrow as 9m wide at one point with the longest length fronting Peppermint Drive. The layout of the proposed dwelling is consistent with the layout of the existing dwelling with the alfresco dining area fronting the northern eastern corner of the site and the side of the dwelling fronting Peppermint Drive. The shape of the lot and layout of the dwelling makes the location of the garage on any boundary, other than Peppermint Drive, impractical. It is noted that the garage is a single garage which minimises potential adverse impact to the streetscape from solid walls on this frontage. The dwelling is also designed with the alfresco dining area and a second balcony on the south west elevation of the dwelling both fronting Peppermint Drive which addresses the need for interaction with this streetscape. It is also noted that a single garage fronting Peppermint Drive is consistent with the design of dwellings in the locality. For these reasons, the proposed location of the single garage is acceptable in accordance with DLPP29 clause 5.1(d).

Policy Measure 5.2 – Streetscape The proposal is not considered to be adverse to the streetscape appeal of Peppermint Drive. The traditional informal layout and landscaping of the street is not likely to change as a result of the proposal. There is no proposed clearing of vegetation on the Peppermint Drive frontage, the stonewall fronting Peppermint Drive is existing, and although the dwelling would be setback closer to Peppermint Drive these frontages would be developed with openings to provide suitable interaction and maintenance of the open outlook of the site. Furthermore the proposal does not involve boundary fencing consistent with the open outlook in the area. The proposal is unlikely to have an adverse impact to streetscape appeal and is consistent with policy measure 5.2. Policy Measure 5.3 – Vegetation The proposal does not involve removal of vegetation on site or in the road reserve. Lawns are shown to be preserved on site. The proposal is consistent with policy measure 5.3. Policy Measure 5.4 - Demolition The proposed demolition of the dwelling is not considered to be likely to have an adverse impact to the unique characteristics of Flinders Bay for the following reasons:

The layout and scale of the proposed dwelling is consistent with the layout and scale of the existing dwelling. The proposed dwelling has incorporated the structural aspects of the existing dwelling including its single storey scale, low wall height and weatherboard materials.

The proposal reflects an understanding of the significance of the building to the Peppermint Drive streetscape and the values of Flinders Bay as a coastal shack settlement.

The proponent has submitted additional information, including a Heritage Impact Statement & structure report, in support of their proposal for demolition and redevelopment.

The proposed demolition of the dwelling and redevelopment is considered acceptable in this case.

Structure Plans and Local Development Plans (DAP) Is the land in any Structure Plan Area or subject to a DAP? ☐ Yes √ No Advertising/Agency Referrals Has the application been referred to adjoining landowners/agency? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Has a submission been received by Council? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Have agency or authority comments been received? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Name Nature of Submission Officer Comment

One submission was received from the two nearby landowners

Objection with the following concerns raised: 1. Given the narrowness of Peppermint

Drive there are already problems with vehicles reversing and as a result it is necessary to reverse on to the opposite road verge. There are therefore concerns about the proposed narrow setbacks to Peppermint Drive and the garage at only 0.9m from the boundary.

2. What is the actual position of the bitumen on Peppermint Drive as there are no measurements on the site plan to confirm this?

3. There is a need for further consideration of the parking requirements for the site given there is only one garage and three vehicle parking spaces are required.

4. ‘We would not like to see the building line on this section be further compromised by nonconforming setbacks to Peppermint Drive…’.

5. The proposed setbacks to the garage, workshop, veranda and stone wall on the boundary will impact further on the narrowness of Peppermint Drive at this point.

6. The proposed stone wall on the

1. The proposed location of the garage, together with the 5.0m wide road verge provides adequate vehicle manoeuvring area to comply with Australian Standards for vehicle manoeuvring area. 2. The edge of bitumen is shown on the site plan. 3. There is adequate space on site for one parking bay immediately north of the ancillary accommodation and for one parking bay north of the proposed dwelling. The three required parking bays can be provided on site consistent with the current situation for parking on this site. 4. Given the unusual shape of the block it would not be reasonable or practical for the site to be developed without variations to the setback to Peppermint Drive. Nor would it be consistent with the streetscape development in the locality as all surrounding lots are developed with narrow setbacks to the street. To comply with the setback guidelines in this regard would be inconsistent with the layout of development in the area. 5 – 7. The stone wall fronting Peppermint Drive

boundary will compromise the ambience of the area.

7. Can the position of the dwelling be reconsidered with regard to bigger setbacks onto Peppermint Drive.

is existing and not proposed as notated on the site plan. It is acknowledge that the proposed setbacks from the dwelling to Peppermint Drive would result in development being closer to this frontage. This is not however unusual for development along this street and the narrow setbacks are consistent with development in the locality. While the concerns raised in the advertising period are noted the issues are considered to have been adequately addressed in the proposal.


Environmental Health: There appears to be at least one unused septic tank on this property; the applicant will need to ensure that it is decommissioned in accordance with r.21 of the Health (Treatment of Sewage and Disposal of Effluent and Liquid Waste) Regulations 1974.

Noted this will be addressed with the building permit for any development

Assessment of Application Is the land referred in the Heritage Inventory? √ Yes ☐ No Are there any Contributions applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any compliance issues in relation to existing development? ☐ Yes √ No R Codes Are R Codes applicable? ☐ Yes √ No

Design Element R Codes Req Provided Officer comment Front Setback 6.0m 0.9m Variation under Table 2 & clause 5.1.2

for the proposed 0.9m setback to the garage wall

East Side Setback (south east elevation)

14.3m long, no major openings, 3.1m high = 1.5m

1.2m Variation clause 5.1.3

Rear Setback 6.0m 1.2m Variation clause 5.1.3 Secondary Street Setback 1.5m 6.2m Complies Garage/Carport Setback 4.5m 0.9m Variation clause 5.2.1 Driveway Width 6.0m 5.0m Complies Garage Width 20m (50% of

frontage) 3.8m Complies clause 5.2.2

Open Space Requirement 50% 51.8% Complies Upgrade Landscaping √ Required ☐ Not Required Overlooking √ Yes ☐ No Variation clause 5.4.1 Street surveillance √ Yes ☐ No Street Walls and Fences ☐ Yes √ No Overshadowing ☐ Yes √ No Energy efficiency/solar access √ Yes ☐ No Officer’s Comments against performance criteria

Clause 5.1.2 Variation 5.1.2 Street Setback – the proposal involves a variation to the 6.0m front setback guideline for the proposed 0.9m setback to the garage/dwelling wall. The proposed variation has been assessed against the design principles with the outcome as follows: • The proposed setback is consistent with the streetscape in the locality. • The proposal would result in adequate privacy and open space. • Adequate parking areas are available on site, which is consistent with the

current situation, & there would be no adverse impact to vegetation or utilities on site.

• Safety clearances for services are provided. • The proposed dwelling would include design features, such as balconies, to

affect interaction, size and scale of building. Accordingly the proposal is acceptable when assessed against the design principles under clause 5.1.2. Clause 5.1.3 Variation clause 5.1.3 Lot Boundary Setback – The proposal involves a variation to the setback guidelines to the eastern side boundary & the rear setback. The

variations have been assessed with regard to the design principles and it is noted that the variations would result in the following:

No adverse impact to building bulk and scale on adjoining properties. Adequate provision of open space, sunlight and privacy.

It is also noted that the proposed 1.2m setback to side and rear boundaries is consistent with the setback along these boundaries to the existing dwelling. The proposal is acceptable when assessed against the design principles under clause 5.1.3. Clause 5.4.1 Variation clause 5.4.1 Privacy – the proposal involves overlooking from the western portion of the building which is proposed to have a finished floor level up to 1460mm above natural ground level. As a result there is overlooking as follows: • From the alfresco dining area which is proposed to be setback 5m to the

northern/rear boundary which is a variation to the 7.5m setback guidelines under clause 5.4.1 (noting that there is no overlooking to the north west due to the 6m wide road that abuts the north eastern boundary of the site).

• From the major openings in the northern elevation from the dining area which are proposed to be setback 3.0m to the boundary which is a variation to the 6m setback guideline under clause 5.4.1.

The proposal was notified to neighbours and no objections to these variations were received. It is noted that the proposal is consistent with the current situation where the existing northern deck enjoys similar views to the north/rear. Furthermore given the open landscapes and lack of boundary fencing is valued in Flinders Bay the installation of privacy screening along the boundary is not recommended. Therefore landscape screening is recommended to be required to address overlooking to the north as a condition of any approval that may be granted. Clause 5.3.3 Variation clause 5.3.3 Parking – three parking bays are required to be provided for the dwelling and ancillary accommodation and the proposal shows parking for one bay in a single garage. The variation is assessed against the design principles of clause 5.3.3 and is considered acceptable given the site would have adequate lawn areas available for parking for the two additional parking bays.

Development Standards (Schedule 13) Are the development Standards applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Car Parking LPS1 / R Codes Requirement

Car Bays Required - <3> Car Bays Proposed -<3>

Dimensions 2.5 x 5.5m √ Complies ☐ Doesn’t Comply Turning Bay/Circles and vehicle manoeuvring √ Complies ☐ Doesn’t Comply

Officer Comment

While a single garage is proposed there is adequate space on site to accommodate the two additional parking bays. The allocation of bays on existing lawn areas on site is consistent with the current situation and with the parking arrangement for other dwellings in the locality. The parking arrangement is considered acceptable in this case.

Building Height Scheme / Policy Requirement Wall – n/a Roof – 6.0m State the proposed building height Wall – 3.8m

Roof – 6.0m


Clause 67 I. In the opinion of the officer, would approval of the planning consent be appropriate under Clause 67 of the

Scheme? Officer Comment

Yes

J. In the opinion of the officer: xxi. Are utility services available and adequate for the development? Yes xxii. Has adequate provision been made for the landscaping and

protection for any trees or other vegetation on the land? Yes

xxiii. Has adequate provision been made for access for the development or facilities by disabled persons?

n/a

xxiv. Is development likely to cause detriment to the existing and likely future amenity of the neighbourhood?

No

xxv. Is the development likely to comply with AS3959 at the building permit stage?

Yes


The proposal generates a requirement for planning approval due to its location in SCA4 & given variations proposed under the Rcodes. The proposal was referred to neighbours and one objection was received. The issues raised were considered in the assessment of the application and the variations proposed are acceptable in spite of the concerns raised. The proposal is acceptable under the Shire’s LPP’s and when assessed against the design principles under the Rcodes. Conditional approval is recommended.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That the Director of Sustainable Development GRANTS Planning Consent under Delegated Authority Instrument No. 15 pursuant to clause 68 (2) of the Deemed Provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for Demolition of Existing Dwelling and Proposed Dwelling at 7 (Lot 365) Peppermint Drive, Augusta subject to compliance with the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. The development is to be carried out in compliance with the plans and documentation listed below and endorsed

with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent.

Plans and Specifications P1 – P3 received at the Shire offices on 28 August 2015.

2. If the development, the subject of this approval, is not substantially commenced within two (2) years from the date

of this letter, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect. Where an approval has lapsed, development is prohibited without further approval being obtained. (P)

3. All stormwater and drainage run-off from the development shall be contained within the lot boundaries or

disposed offsite by an approved connection to the Shire’s drainage system.(I) 4. This development approval does not permit the removal or interference of vegetation on the site or in the road

reserve and any trees on adjoining properties shall not be impacted by the excavation or construction phases of the development. Steps must be taken during construction to ensure retention of vegetation on site and in the adjoining road reserve. (P)

5. A Landscape Plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Shire for approval and be submitted to the Shire

prior to the commencement of works. The Landscape Plan shall be drawn to a scale and show the location, name and mature heights of existing and proposed trees and shrubs and ground covers to address overlooking from the internal living areas and alfresco dining area toward the northern/rear boundary pursuant to clause 5.4.1 of the Residential Design Codes. The approved Landscape Plan shall be implemented on site prior to occupation of the dwelling and the landscaping shall be maintained at all times thereafter. (P)

6. No fencing or boundary treatments are permitted to be erected. (P) 7. Sealed / paved crossovers or driveways are not permitted to be constructed or installed. (P) 8. A schedule of colour of the building materials shall be submitted for the approval of the Shire prior to issue of a

building permit and shall be implemented accordingly. (P) 9. Details and the location of the proposed solar hot water system shall be provided to the Shire prior to issue of a

building permit. (P) 10. The development the subject of this approval is permitted up to a maximum height of 6.0m from natural ground

level pursuant to clause 5.13.2 of Local Planning Scheme No. 1. (P) ADVICE NOTES a) You are advised of the need to comply with the requirements of the following other legislation:


(ii) Health Act 1911 and Department requirements in respect to the development and use of the premises; and (iii) The Bush Fires Act 1954 as amended, Section 33(3), Annual Bush Fires Notice applies to this property.

b) Clearing or pruning of any roadside vegetation is prohibited without the prior written approval of the Shire.(I) c) The handling, transportation and disposal of asbestos should be carried out in accordance with the

requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 (and Regulations), Health (Asbestos) Regulations 1992, Environmental Protection Act 1986 and Environmental Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2004. (EH)

Documents

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT - Shire of Augusta-Margaret …amrshire.wa.gov.au/library/file/2Services/09... · 08/01/2016 A3168 1 (Lot 17) Isaacs Road, Margaret River Holiday House