garry & fiona jones c/- frank brennan2 agenda item 2.2.3 overview application no...

Development Assessment Commission29 September 2016

1

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

Garry & Fiona Jones c/- Frank Brennan

Construction of a single-storey detached dwelling

86 Heyward Lane, Monbulla

894/R006/16

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE NOAGENDA REPORT 1-12ATTACHMENTS

1: DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROVISIONS 13-182: APPLICATION & PLANS 45-623: PUBLIC NOTIFICATION DOCUMENTS 62-744: COUNCIL REPORT & DAP MINUTES 75-1045: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION – Council 1056: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION – Applicant 106-8


2

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

OVERVIEW

Application No 894/R006/16(Council ID 894/046/16)Unique ID/KNET ID 2016/08039/01Applicant Garry and Fiona Jones c/- Frank Brennan ConsultingProposal Construction of a single-storey detached dwellingSubject Land 86 Heyward Lane, MonbullaZone/Policy Area Primary Production ZoneRelevant Authority Wattle Range Council (DAC Concurrence)Lodgement Date 29 February 2016Council Wattle Range CouncilDevelopment Plan Wattle Range Council Development Plan

Consolidated 7 February 2013Type of Development Non-ComplyingPublic Notification Category 3Representations NAReferral Agencies NAReport Author Laura KerberRECOMMENDATION CONCUR

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application is for the construction of a detached single storey dwelling on a5.64 hectare allotment within the Primary Production Zone.

A dwelling is a non-complying form of development on an allotment less than 30 hectareswithin the Primary Production Zone.

Public notification (Category 3) was undertaken by Wattle Range Council with two (2)representations received. The application was considered by Council’s DevelopmentAssessment Panel (DAP) on 22 April 2016. The DAP resolved to grant Development PlanConsent subject to two (2) conditions and the concurrence of the DevelopmentAssessment Commission (DAC).

The Applicant intends for the dwelling to be used in association with low intensity primaryproduction activities on the land. The location of the dwelling has taken into accountelectricity supply, privacy, amenity and elevation considerations. On balance, theproposal is considered to be consistent with the existing character of the locality and isnot expected to compromise primary production activities on adjacent land.

I recommend that concurrence be granted for this application.

ASSESSMENT REPORT

1. BACKGROUND

1.1 Strategic Context

On 14 June 2012 (and amended on 21 February 2013) Wattle Range Council lodged aStatement of Intent (SoI) with the Department of Planning, Transport &Infrastructure (DPTI) to commence a General Development Plan Amendment (DPA)process. The DPA sought to provide for the development of a dwelling on land in thePrimary Production Zone with an area less than 20ha created before 8 November2011. The SoI suggested that the current non-complying provisions in the zone havecreated an unfair disadvantage for land owners and resulted in decreased property


3

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

values for ‘undersized allotments’. The amendment was to apply across the entirePrimary Production Zone.

On 10 May 2013, DPTI requested further information from Council and queriedwhether full consideration had been given to the policy implications of such anamendment. Noting the horticultural importance of the region, DPTI queried whetherCouncil had fully considered the potential for rural living land uses together with theassociated impacts from horticultural activities.

In light of DPTI’s position Council subsequently amended the DPA to exclude theproposed changes to the Primary Production Zone.

1.2 Similar Application

This application is one of five non-complying concurrence requests of a similar naturereceived from Wattle Range Council in 2016. All applications have been for theconstruction of a dwelling on allotments ranging in size from 2.32 to 12.9ha in thePrimary Production Zone.

Concurrence has been granted for three of the applications. In those cases wereconcurrence has been granted, the proposed developments were not considered tooffend the objectives of the Primary Production Zone due to the presence of existingdwellings on allotments less than 30ha in the locality; and because the subject siteswere not of a sufficient size to support sustainable primary production. In each caseit was determined that the dwelling would not inhibit the continuation of primaryproduction activities in the locality.

On 28 July 2016, the Commission refused to grant concurrence to an application for adwelling in the Horticulture Policy Area. The Commission determined that the dwellingdid not have a demonstrated connection with farming or other primary production,and may result in interface impacts with existing and future adjacent horticulturalactivities.

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

Application details are contained in ATTACHMENT 2.

The proposal is for the construction of a detached single storey dwelling with a total floorarea of 300m2. The dwelling comprises an open plan kitchen, dining and family area,separate living and rumpus rooms, four (4) bedrooms plus study, garage and pergolaunder the main roof. The external walls are brick veneer. The roof is clad in Colorbondcustom orb with a pitch of 22.5 degrees. Height to the top of the wall is 2.44m.

The dwelling is sited approximately 50m from the rear of the allotment, 300m fromHeyward Lane, and 51m from the western allotment boundary. The dwelling will beoriented so that the living areas face north. Vehicular access will be via a rubbledriveway from the unmade road at the rear of the allotment.

No reticulated services are available to the subject site. Sewer and wastewater will bestored and treated in an on-site septic tank. A (proposed) groundwater bore andrainwater tanks will provide water to the dwelling.

Landscaping using appropriate trees and shrubs will be planted around the environs ofthe dwelling. The dwelling and curtilage will be fenced off from the remainder of the site.


4

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

3. SITE AND LOCALITY

3.1 Site Description

The site consists of 1 allotment, described as follows:

Lot No Street Suburb Hundred Title

ReferenceA677, FP 191239 86 HeywardLane

Monbulla Monbulla CT 5803/796

The subject land is an “L” shaped allotment with frontage to Heyward Lane, a servicelane off Clay Wells Road, with a total site area of 5.65ha. An un-made road runsalong the rear of the subject site. Both of these roads are under the care and controlof Council.

The subject site is predominantly cleared with scattered vegetation predominantly onits boundaries. The subject site is currently used for livestock grazing. Councilpreviously approved a shed on the subject site on 15 March 2016 (DA 894/034/16).

Figure 1: Subject Site3.2 Locality


5

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

The site is located approximately 6.5km west of the Penola Township and is one of astring of allotments ranging in size from 2-7ha along Clay Wells Road. The Applicanthas advised that these were created in the 1830s as ‘workingmen’s blocks’. Thereare some 15 existing dwellings located on these allotments which are accessed fromminor service lanes (Figure 3).

To the north of subject site is the former Monbulla School and a row of large treesalong the Heyward Lane road frontage. To the east is a cleared allotment with onedwelling in the south-eastern corner. To the south and west of the subject site areprimary production allotments.

Figure 2: Wider Locality

4. COUNCIL COMMENTS

4.1 Wattle Range Council

A Statement of Effect was prepared by Frank Brennan Consulting Services, dated29 February 2016, on behalf of the Applicant.

Category 3 public notification was undertaken with two (2) representations received,one of which supported the application, and the other raising concerns. The Applicantsubmitted a response to the representations.

An assessment report was prepared by a qualified person, Catherine Peglar of WattleRange Council, which was considered by the Council DAP on 22 April 2016. The DAPmade a resolution to approve the development subject to conditions and DAC’sconcurrence. The recommended conditions relate to development in accordance withthe approved plans; and the subject land being maintained in a good state of repair.

Council has provided all the required information to the Commission and hasconfirmed that fees have been paid including non-complying assessment fees.


6

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

5. STATUTORY REFERRAL BODY COMMENTS

No mandatory referrals were required under Schedule 8 of the Development Regulations2008.

6. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

The application was notified as a Category 3 development (pursuant to Section 38(2)(c)of the Development Act 1993 – i.e. neither Category 1 or 2). Public notification wasundertaken (by directly contacting adjoining owners and occupiers of land, thosepotentially affected to a significant degree and via public notice in a newspaper with localdistribution) and two (2) representations received:

R1: Dennis Gray (previous owner of the subject site): in support of theapplication.

R2: Paul & Christine Weston (adjoining landowner to the west): raisedconcerns regarding access to the allotment during winter; setback distanceof the dwelling from the Representor’s property; construction impacts; dogcontrol and electricity supply.

Figure 3 – Representation Map

A response to the representation from P&C Weston was prepared by Mr Frank Brennan,which includes the following key points:

It is acknowledges that the un-made road at the rear of the allotment does notcurrently provide all-weather access and further consultation with Council isrequired to bring the road up to a suitable standard.

Impacts during construction will be subject to Environment Protection Authoritycontrols.

The keeping of dogs will be subject to the Dog and Cat Management Act 1995.


7

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

Power supply to the subject site will be from an existing 11kV powerline whichruns along the un-named road at the rear of the subject site.

Overall, the Applicant rejects the Weston’s assertion that the application will result inundue impact on the Representor’s primary production activities.

7. POLICY OVERVIEW

The subject site is within the Primary Production Zone as described within the WattleRange Council Development Plan (Consolidated 7 February 2013). Relevant planningpolicies are contained in ATTACHMENT 1 and summarised below.

7.1 Zone

The Primary Production Zone is for sustainable primary production. Land should beprotected from encroachment by incompatible land uses. The zone envisagesresidential development in specific circumstances as described in PDC 6.

PDC 6 A dwelling should only be developed if:

(a) there is a demonstrated connection with farming or other primary production(b) the location of the dwelling will not inhibit the continuation of farming, otherprimary production or other development that is in keeping with the provisions ofthe zone(c) it is located more than 500 metres from an existing intensive animal keepingoperation unless used in association with that activity(d) it does not result in more than one dwelling per allotment.

7.2 Council Wide

The Council Wide provisions provide guidance for residential development and theprotection of natural resources. The policies generally seek residential developmentof a high architectural standard that contributes positively to the amenity of alocality; is energy efficient; is serviced with adequate infrastructure; and does notcreate adverse impact and conflict between land uses.

Development should not jeopardise the continuance of adjoining authorised land usesor prejudice the development of a zone for its intended purpose.

8. PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Council has assessed the application against the relevant provisions of the Wattle RangeCouncil Development Plan (Consolidated 7 February 2013). The key planning issues aresummarised below.

8.1 Land Use and Character

PDC 6 (Zone) states that a dwelling should only be developed if there is ademonstrated connection with farming; the location of the dwelling will not inhibit thecontinuation of farming; and it does not result in more than one dwelling perallotment.

The subject site is one of a line of allotments ranging in size from 2-7ha along ClayWells Road which were established in 1837 as ‘workingmen’s blocks’. An un-maderoad reserve runs along the southern boundary of the allotments.


8

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

Over time, dwellings have been developed on a number of these allotments (referFigure 3). Property data is available for the existing dwellings as follows:

5 dwellings have no recorded date of construction 9 dwellings constructed between 1960-2003 1 dwelling constructed in 2012

Up to 2007 a dwelling in the Primary Industry 2 Zone was only non-complying wherelocated an allotment of less than 20 hectares created after 31 August 2000.

Figure 3: Existing Dwellings

The Applicant’s consultant, Frank Brennan, has advised that the dwelling and itscurtilage will be fenced off from the balance of the property. The Applicant recentlypurchased the property and intends to continue the livestock grazing enterprise runby the site’s previous owner (Dennis Gray). Mr Brennan has advised that the area tobe fenced off is approximately 5,265m2 as shown in Figure 4.

Mr Brennan has advised that the proposed sheep stocking rate for the land will beequivalent to that of larger primary production properties in the vicinity of the subjectland as follows:

Based on a set stocking rate (sheep) of 3.0 dry sheep equivalent (DSE) per acrein this locality and the proposed utilisation of approximately 5,265m2 (or 1.30acres) for the dwelling and its curtilage then the overall stocking rate for theproperty will be reduced by 4 sheep (from 42 down to 38 head).

Mr Brennan therefore suggests that the construction of a dwelling will not significantlydiminish the productive capacity of the subject site.


9

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

Figure 4: Proposed dwelling curtilage (attrib. Frank Brennan)

There are, however, cumulative impacts associated with this proposal. Approval ofthis application may contribute to a progressive loss of farming land in the zone, asthe construction of a dwelling on this site will likely prevent the land from beingamalgamated or used in conjunction with existing primary production land.

In terms of proximity to other farming operations, the proposal will not result inmore than dwelling on the subject site and is not located within 500 metres from anexisting intensive animal keeping operation. The proposal does, however, representan incremental loss of primary land to rural living which is not consistent with theobjectives for the zone. For this reason, the proposal is considered to be at variancewith the provisions of the zone (i.e. land use)..

8.2 Design and Appearance

Objective 3 (Zone) seeks the protection of the scenic qualities of rural landscapes.

The dwelling has a relatively large footprint but is of a single storey construction withexternal finishes that are appropriate to the rural locality. The proposed dwelling issited some 300m from the northern allotment boundary and will be obscured fromview by existing buildings and vegetation.

The existing character along Clay Wells Road remains relatively open and typical of aPrimary Production zone. The average allotment frontage is 200m wide and allvehicle access is provided from minor service lanes or Council Roads. Existingdwellings are well spaced from one another and set back from Clay Wells Road. Thedwelling immediately east of the subject site is sited some 280m from Clay WellsRoad and a cluster of three (3) dwellings further east are sited 140-170m from ClayWells Road.


10

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

Overall, the design and appearance of the proposed dwelling is considered to beconsistent with the relevant Development Plan policies in relation to design andappearance.

8.3 Interface Between Land Uses

Objective 1 (Interface between Land Uses) seeks development that is located anddesigned to prevent adverse impacts and conflict between land uses. Sensitive landuses should not conflict with the continuation of lawfully existing developments.

The subject site abuts primary production allotments to the north, south and west. Adwelling is located on the allotment to the east. Existing primary production activitiesin the locality appear to be predominantly low intensity livestock grazing. Theseparation distance between the dwelling and the adjacent allotments isapproximately 51m to the west and 70-75m to the south. This provides sufficientroom for landscaping to be established around the dwelling and provide a vegetationbuffer around the perimeter for the development.

The applicant has advised that landscaping will consist of screening trees and shrubsalong the eastern, southern and western fence boundaries of the proposed dwellingand its curtilage, while a domestic garden will be established in front of the dwelling.The Applicant has advised that this will provide a reasonably open view from thedwelling to the north while providing a windbreak and screening from the otheraspects.

During the public notification period the owner of the adjacent allotment to the westraised several concerns about the proximity of the proposed dwelling to her livestock.The concerns related mainly to construction impacts but also touched on access tothe dwelling. The Representor noted that the concerns would be overcome if thedwelling were to be located to the north of the allotment fronting Heyward Lane.

Mr Brennan has advised that the Applicant considered a number of locations for thedwelling including adjacent Heyward Lane. The proposed location was selected forthe following reasons:

Electricity supply only available at the rear of the property – no existingelectricity supply along Heyward Lane / Clay Wells Road.

Reduced traffic noise from vehicles on Clay Wells Road. Increased privacy. Higher ground elevation. Mr Brennan has advised that the front of the

property adjacent Heyward Lane was recently inundated with the heavy rains.

The concerns raised by the Representor regarding access to the dwelling and thecondition of the un-made road are valid. These matters are discussed further underAccess & Infrastructure (below).

On balance the proposal is considered to be consistent with the relevant DevelopmentPlan policies in relation to interface between land uses.


11

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

8.4 Access and Infrastructure

PDC 1 (Infrastructure) states that development should not occur without theprovision of adequate utilities and services including water supply, waste and effluentdisposal, and formed all-weather public roads.

With no reticulated water or sewer services to the subject site, on-site systems will berequired. The applicant has advised that the on-site effluent disposal system will be‘subject to separate development applications if required’. Similarly rainwater tanksand a groundwater bore are proposed.

The Applicant has advised that electricity can be supplied to the subject site from anexisting 1kV power line which runs along the un-made road at the rear of theproperty.

The application also proposes to gain access from the un-made road at the rear of theallotment. In response to concerns raised during the public notification period, theApplicant has advised that this road ‘is not formed as to provide all–weather access tothe subject land… this would require approx. 200m of rubble to be installed to servicethe subject land. The Applicants will be liaising with Wattle Range Council regardingthe upgrade of this section… to provide all weather access to the subject land’.

Whilst the applicant proposes to have their main driveway from the rear unmaderoad, alternate all-weather access is available from Heyward Lane at the front of theallotment. Council has advised that they are ‘not overly concerned’ which option ofaccess is used and are open to further negotiations regarding works to the unmaderoad if desired by the Applicant. In this regard Council’s policy is for the constructioncosts to be shared: 75% developer, 25% Council.

Overall, the subject site has suitable all-weather access from Heyward Lane andadequate space for on-site services (subject to further approvals). For these reasonsthe proposal is considered to adequately address the relevant Development Planprovisions.

9. CONCLUSION

PDC 2 (Primary Production Zone) states that development listed as non-complying isgenerally inappropriate and not acceptable unless it can be demonstrated that it does notundermine the objectives and principles of the Development Plan.

The approval of this application will establish a rural living land use within a PrimaryProduction Zone as well as further consolidate a strip of similar development along aportion of Clay Wells Road, neither of which are encouraged in the Development Plan.However, some weight must be placed on the existing context and use of the land,noting the historical pattern of settlement, and the gradual re-purposing of smallerallotments for both low intensity grazing and rural living purposes.

Whilst it would be desirable to reflect on-the-ground circumstances through existingpolicy, there is no current process to amend the Development Plan.

The Applicant has indicated an intention to utilise the balance of the land for livestockgrazing. Whilst the intent is positive, approval of the application will nonetheless changethe land use from primary production to rural living and introduce the potential forinterface impacts. The application proposes to minimise these impacts through bufferlandscaping and appropriate setbacks.


12

AGENDA ITEM 2.2.3

The application meets the majority of Council-wide planning provisions relating to designand appearance, energy efficiency, hazards, landscaping walls and fences, naturalresources, residential development, and siting and visibility. The provision ofinfrastructure (on-site water and effluent disposal) may require further approvals.

In conclusion, whilst the application may contribute to a cumulative loss of primaryproduction land, its location within the ‘workingmen’s blocks’ subdivision provides adefined extent to this form of development. The proposal is consistent with existingdevelopment in the locality and is not expected to result in unreasonable interfaceimpacts. On balance, the historic context of this locality, and the proposal’s consistencywith the majority of Council-wide provisions, provide sufficient merit to warrant approval.

Pursuant to Section 35(2) of the Development Act 1993, and having undertaken anassessment of the application against the relevant Development Plan, the application isNOT seriously at variance with the provisions of that plan.

10. RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the Development Assessment Commission:

1) RESOLVE that the proposed development is NOT seriously at variance with thepolicies in the Development Plan.

2) RESOLVE TO CONCUR with Wattle Range Council’s recommendation to grantDevelopment Plan Consent for Development Application 894/R006/16 (Council ID894/046/16) by Garry and Fiona Jones c/- Frank Brennan Consulting for adetached dwelling at 86 Heyward Lane, Monbulla.

LAURA KERBERSENIOR PLANNING OFFICERDEVELOPMENT DIVISIONDEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, TRANSPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE

garry & fiona jones c/- frank brennan2 agenda item 2.2.3 overview application no...

Documents