notice of council assessment panel meeting · 2020-01-15 · council assessment panel meeting - 17...

Notice of Council Assessment Panel Meeting

Tuesday 17 December 2019

MEMBERSHIP Mr R McBryde Independent Member (Presiding Member) Mr P Dungey Independent Member Mr G Salmon Independent Member Ms B Merrigan Independent Member Mr D Wyld Elected Member

NOTICE is given pursuant to Sections 87 and 88 of the Local Government Act 1999 that the next COUNCIL ASSESSMENT PANEL MEETING will be held in the Council Chambers, 571 Monatgue Road, Modbury on TUESDAY 17 DECEMBER 2019 commencing at 10.00AM A copy of the Agenda for the above meeting is supplied

JOHN MOYLE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Dated: 11 December 2019

Council Assessment Panel Meeting - 17 December 2019

CITY OF TEA TREE GULLY

COUNCIL ASSESSMENT PANEL MEETING 17 DECEMBER 2019

AGENDA 1. Attendance Record:

1.1 Present 1.2 Apologies

2. Minutes of Previous Meeting

That the Minutes of the Council Assessment Panel Meeting held on 19 November 2019 be confirmed as a true and accurate record of proceedings.

3. Business Arising from Previous Minutes - Nil 4. Reports and Recommendations

4.1 CAP.070/117618/2019 - 070/Mixed Use Aged Care Facility at 2-30 Surrey Farm Drive Golden Grove ...................................................................................... 5

Recommended to Grant Development Plan Consent 4.2 CAP.070/117636/2019 - Motor Repair Station at 1013 Lower North East

Road Highbury ................................................................................................... 359 Recommended to Grant Development Plan Consent 4.3 CAP.070/117547/2019 - Deferred Item from 15 October 2019 Meeting-

Carport Forward of the Dwelling at 128 Perseverance Road, Vista .................. 439 Recommended for Refusal 5. Other Business 5.1 E.R.D. Court Matters Pending - Nil 5.2 Policy Considerations Planning policy considerations will be recorded in the minutes following discussion

by members.

Council Assessment Panel Meeting - 17 December 2019

5.3 Pending State Commission Assessment Panel Concurrence CAP.070/117543/2019 – Non-Complying two (2) Residential Flat Buildings at 806-

808 Lower North East Road Dernancourt Outcome: Council staff are awaiting concurrence. 6. Information Reports - Nil 7. Date of Next Meeting

21 January 2020

Council Assessment Panel Meeting - 17 December 2019 Page 5

Item

4.1

REPORT NO: CAP.070/117618/2019 RECORD NO: D19/78123 TO: COUNCIL ASSESSMENT PANEL MEETING - 17 DECEMBER 2019

FROM: Daniel Oest Senior Planning Officer

SUBJECT: MIXED USE AGED CARE FACILITY AT 2-30 SURREY FARM DRIVE

GOLDEN GROVE

SUMMARY Applicant: Holmes Dyer Pty Ltd Nature of Development: To construct an integrated mixed use aged care facility and

associated ancillary uses, and the removal of a regulated tree (Eucalypt Wandoo)

Address: 2-30 Surrey Farm Drive GOLDEN GROVE Application No: 070/117618/2019 Lodgement Date: 28 June 2016 Kind of Development: Merit Development Plan: Consolidated 27 December 2018 Zone and Policy Area: District Centre Zone – Policy Area 2 – Precinct 2 Relevant Development Plan Provisions: Objectives District Centre Zone: 1, 2, 3, 5 Golden Grove District Centre Policy Area 2: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,

10 Building near Airports: 1 Centres and Retail Development: 2, 3, 4, 6 Crime Prevention: 1 Design and Appearance: 1, 2 Energy Efficiency: 1 Interface between Land Uses: 1, 2, 3 Landscaping, Fences and Walls: 1, 2 Medium and High Density Development (3 or more Storeys): 1,

2, 3, and 4 Natural Resources: 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 Orderly and Sustainable Development: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Regulated Trees: 1, 2 Supported Accommodation: 1 Waste: 2


Item

4.1

Principles of Development Control District Centre Zone: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 Golden Grove District Centre Policy Area 2: 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 10, 12,

14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23 Building near Airports: 9 Centres and Retail Development: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 Crime Prevention: 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10 Design and Appearance: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16,

17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 Energy Efficiency: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Hazards: 23 Interface between Land Uses: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 Landscaping, Fences and Walls: 1, 2, 3, 4 Medium and High Density Development (3 or more Storeys): 1,

2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 Natural Resources: 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 Orderly and Sustainable Development: 1, 6, 8, 9 Supported Accommodation: 1, 2, 3, 4 Transportation and Access: 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 20,

21, 22, 23, 25, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 49, 50, 51

Waste: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Public Notification: Category 2 Number of Properties Notified: 25 Number of Representations Received: 2 Names and Addresses of Representors: Barry and Mantanna Jeans 15 Griffin Place, Wynn Vale Donald Allen 16 Griffin Place, Wynn Vale Nathan and Lisa Shepherd * 1 Frontingnac Court, Wynn Vale Representors marked with ‘*’ wish to be

heard by the Panel Number of Representors wishing to be

heard: 1 Schedule 8 Referral: Nil Was a request for additional information/amendments made? Yes Issues: Land use, form and scale, traffic, visual amenity Recommendation: Development Plan Consent


Item

4.1

1. PROPOSAL

The proposal is an integrated mixed use aged care facility comprising predominately residential supported accommodation with ancillary non-residential land uses.

The site comprises five buildings in total. The largest building (referred to as the “primary building”) is located adjacent to the Golden Way and comprises five levels. Four of these levels are above ground with a single level understorey carpark area. The building is split level to follow the general fall of the land from east to west. Contained within the ground floor of the primary building are the general community facilities, including clubhouse and café. There is an undercroft carpark that has a split level to integrate with the level of the Golden Way, and as a result the carpark extends underneath the eastern end of the building. Dining facilities, a lounge and library are centrally located within the primary building across the second and third floors. The western end of this building accommodates 38 independent living units and the eastern end accommodates 42 care suites. The remainder of the site accommodates 80 independent living suites arranged in four distinct terraces within the four remaining buildings. Each terrace accommodates single storey units in a stacked configuration, however they remain completely independent in terms of courtyard, garaging and unit access. The two central terraces are uniquely designed to cater for the fall of the land, having the upper and lower units with alternate orientations. A total of 46 independent units are proposed within these terraced buildings. In total, 126 living units are proposed throughout the development. Access is provided via existing rights of way that lead into a shared road network for occupant’s vehicles, waste vehicles, community buses and pedestrians. The internal road network also accommodates a total of 177 carparks associated with the various components of the proposal. The site is to be extensively landscaped, including inside the development, around the perimeter of the building, and within existing Council screen reserves. The latter is subject to appropriate permits being granted. A copy of the relevant site plans and elevations can be found in Attachment 4.

2. BACKGROUND The application presented to the Council Development Assessment Panel (CAP) is a revised version of an approved Development Plan Consent for an integrated mixed use supported accommodation facility 070/111262/2016 considered by the CAP at its meeting of 18 October 2016. This application included 78 independent living units, 24 serviced apartments and 80 aged care beds within three buildings generally four storeys in height and underground parking for 155 vehicles.


Item

4.1

The resolution of that particular application resulted in dedicated rights of way from Surrey Farm Drive being created. Those rights of way are consistent with the access arrangement for the current proposed development. The current application is considered to be a revision of the approved development by reducing the intensity and scale of the proposal to improve viability for the project and adjusted for demographic factors and local demand. Plans of the previously approved supported accommodation facility can be found in Attachment 18.

3. PROCEDURAL MATTERS

This application proposes a facility to accommodate the primary land use of supported accommodation, in addition to ancillary land uses within the same built form. The proposal is not listed as complying in either table TTG/1 of the Development Plan or Schedule 4 of the Development Regulations 2008 (the Regulations), nor is it listed as non-complying in the District Centre Zone. The proposal therefore defaults to an “on merit” assessment pursuant to 35(5) of the Development Act 1993 (the Act), and any such development must be assessed on its merit taking into account the provisions of the Development Plan. Having regard to the relevant provisions within the Development Plan, the nature of the development, the zoning and locality within which the development is situated, the proposal is not considered to be seriously at variance to the Development Plan pursuant to 35(2) of the Regulations.

3. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

Section 38(2)(a) of the Act states that a Development Plan or the Regulations may assign different forms of development to a category for the purposes of public notification. The District Centre Zone in the Development Plan does not assign any development to a particular category. The development therefore relies on the Regulations for categorisation. Clause 18(c) in Schedule 9 of the Regulations states that any development in a Centre Zone is assigned to Category 2 where the development is adjacent to land in a zone which is different to the zone which applies to the site of development. The subject site is located within the District Centre Zone and is located adjacent land within the Residential Zone across Surrey Farm Drive and the Golden Way. Therefore, the proposal requires Category 2 notification. Notification commenced 9 September 2019 and closed 23 September 2019 during which eight representations were received. Seven of the eight representations came from sources that were not directly notified through the Category 2 notification process including a representation from the Member of Wright – Mr Blair Boyer, see Attachment 14. These representations in accordance with the Act, technically speaking, are invalid.


Item

4.1

Upon closure of the notification period, a mailing error was detected also resulting in the notification to be improper as per the Act. Notification was again required superseding the first notification period. This notification period recommenced 1 October 2015 until 15 October 2019 to which two representations were received, see Attachment 13. A collection of all the representations from both notification periods were forwarded to the applicant to consider. The applicant wishing to still receive the invalid representations to understand wider issues in the locality. The concerns of the representors and the corresponding applicant responses are summarised in the table below. Additional planning comments have been added by Council staff to address each issue.

Table 1 – Representations, Response and Commentary

Representor concerns (in summary)

Applicant's response (in summary) Additional Planning comments by assessing officer

Bulk and scale of the development resulting in excessive height that is out of character with the locality

Although large in scale, the proposed built form provides for a high degree of articulation to provide an attractive built form and to break up the apparent mass of the building fronting The Golden Way. Views from the representor’s land will be impacted, however the Development Plan does not seek to maintain such sightlines.

Views are not protected by the Development Plan, however it is understood that outlook does play part into a site occupier's amenity. There is a direct conflict between the development application built form and the amenity of the representor, however the Development Plan's absence in specifics regarding outlook in this particular situation is outweighed by the proposals high degree of compliance with the Development Plan in terms of land use, form, function and scale. The building along the Golden Way is largely consistent in terms of scale to that of the preceding application which did not raise this objection.

Impact to privacy through overlooking

Privacy concerns are mitigated through sight line separation from points of overlooking to areas of sensitivity, having specific regard to Good Residential Design SA which states direct overlooking is limited to 15 metres from 45 degrees from the plane of a window. The sight line distance is 26 metres at its minimum over public space, with filtered views of improved screen reserve plantings is considered to alleviate any direct or unreasonable overlooking. Limiting views form the proposed development will impact on the livelihood of the future inhabitants.

See section 5.8


Item

4.1

Overshadowing due to scale of the development

Shadow plans provided for 21 June demonstrate adjacent land will not be impacted by shadow

See Attachment 6 for shadow plans

Interference of radio and television due to loss of line of sight with broadcasting antennas

There are many examples of properties that do not have direct line of sight to antennas by buildings, alternate means of ensuring appropriate radio and television interference are available

The Development Plan does not consider radio or television interference

Traffic and parking impacts due to school expansions and further congestion of Surrey Farm Drive and the Golden Way intersection

Additional traffic detail supplied analysing current vehicle movements in the locality with projected increase as a result of the development. There is a negligible increase in the total vehicle movements per day to result in detriment to the immediate road network.

No issues raised by Council's Traffic Engineers with respect to impacts on local road network within this development application, nor for the preceding development application that was considered to have a greater intensity. Detail provided by the applicant demonstrates that peak additional vehicle movements will be an unlikely contributor to additional peak vehicle movements in the locality. Much of the congestion that exists in the locality is due to existing lawful land uses. Council and the Schools in the area are currently working with DPTI to improve current congestion.

Noise and dust from construction and vehicles

Construction will be in accordance with EPA noise policies, and dust suppression will be utilised during construction. Deliveries will accord with relevant EPA noise policies and all vehicle movements will be internal to the site, inclusive of basement carparks. Similar Life Care developments have proven to be remarkably quiet.

Construction disturbance is controlled outside of the assessment process and governed by alternate legislation. Agreed that the noise generated by the development will be consistent with a residential area. Impacts of noise are unlikely, particularly given the development is directly adjacent an arterial road that in itself is a significant noise generator.

Loss of gully breezes in summer months due to scale of development

The development and its siting in relation to adjacent land is unlikely to have any impact on prevailing winds that come from the south west to the north west.

Development Plan does not consider impacts to prevailing winds in this circumstance. Nevertheless the Applicant demonstrates that there is to be no appreciable impact to the representor's land.

Loss of property value

It is contested that the land in the area will devalue as a result of the development. Noted that the change to property value is not a matter considered by the South Australian planning system.

Agreed with applicant that changes in value are not a planning matter.

For a complete copy of the applicant’s response to representors concerns, please refer to Attachment 15.


Item

4.1

4. SITE AND LOCALITY

4.1 Subject site

The subject site is a single allotment comprising 1.293 hectares, formed by the balance of undeveloped land recently divided from Pedare College. The subject site is bound by Pedare College to the east, the College’s private road to the south, and a strip of Council screening reserve to the Golden Way and Surrey Farm Drive frontages. An easement to Distribution Lessor Corporation is aligned toward the Surrey Farm Drive edge of the subject site. The site itself is vacant and sparsely vegetated, however a regulated tree is located adjacent to the Golden Way frontage adjacent to Council’s screen reserve. The reserve is also partially landscaped. A cross-fall of approximately 8 metres exists from the north-east portion of the allotment adjacent to The Golden Way, downhill to the southern boundary formed by the private Pedare College road and Surrey Farm Drive. The site currently has two rights of way approved over the Council screen reserve to Surrey Farm Drive, however no crossovers currently exist.

4.2 Locality

The locality is plotted in Figure 1 below. The locality is relatively large given the size of the proposed development site and its range of potential interaction with surrounding land.

Figure 1 – Locality Plan


Item

4.1

The locality comprises a mix of land uses, however primarily residential in the form of detached dwellings. These land uses are consistent with the extent of the Residential Zone to the north and west of the proposed development site. To the east lies Pedare College. Much further to the north-east, other land uses are evident including a petrol filing station and shops associated with the larger ‘Golden Grove Village’ shopping centre. The shopping centre also encompasses a bus interchange. There are two main transport corridors that intersect the locality. The Golden Way to the north is a Department of Planning Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) controlled road, while Surrey Farm Drive to the west is designated as a Council controlled road. The two roads are commensurate with the boundaries of the Residential Zone Policy Area 15, with the zoning changing from Residential to District Centre Zone at Helicon Drive further to the north.

5. PLANNING ASSESSMENT

5.1 Land Use

The proposed development is wholly contained within the District Centre Zone – Policy Area 2 – Precinct 2 of the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan. The Zone Desired Character Statement identifies Precinct 2 as:

“…the focus for community, recreation and education facilities within the Golden Grove District Centre. Accessibility to services provided by these facilities is of prime importance.

Medium density and if appropriate, high-density residential development is desirable in locations within this Precinct that are indicated on the relevant concept plan maps. These are located in the south-western and south-eastern corners of the precinct.

Development will contribute to the creation of a consolidated and integrated Golden Grove District Centre.”

Concept Plan TTG/1 is referenced in the Desired Character Statement and demonstrates the desirable land use of the site to be medium density residential development. The concept map in Figure 2 below identifies the proposed development site in relation to the remainder of the District Centre.


Item

4.1

Figure 2 - Concept Plan TTG/1 – subject site circled in yellow

The above figure demonstrates the application for supported accommodation is within the designated “Potential Medium Density Residential” area of the Concept Plan.

Supported accommodation by nature provides a place for residency for a specific demographic of the wider residential population of the Golden Grove Area, however is not considered to be a residential land use. Nevertheless, the site is located within the potential medium density residential development area which has a desired character statement for the precinct advising that higher density development may be appropriate on the subject site. Higher density residential development is defined in District Centre Zone PDC 9 as more than 67 dwellings per hectare. The density proposed is 126 units on a 1.29 ha allotment. Should the units be considered as independent dwellings, the resulting density of 97 dwellings per hectare and will still align with the precinct’s vision for potential high density residential development. Although not strictly residential in land use, the expected independent living unit population is still considered to be similar to envisaged dwelling densities consistent with District Centre Zone Policy Area 2, Precinct 2. Furthermore, the proposed supported accommodation ancillary land uses such as club room and café will have access to patrons beyond the site are envisaged within the Zone, however this will not prejudice the operation of the existing or future retail activity within District Centre to align with Zone PDC 3.


Item

4.1

5.2 Supported Accommodation

The development is considered to comply with the criteria in Council’s Development Plan relating to Supported Accommodation, particularly Supported Accommodation Objective 1 in that the supported accommodation is to satisfy community needs.

Particular regard has been given to the applicant’s planning report (Attachment 5) that identifies a need for supported aged care in the Tea Tree Gully Council area as part of the State’s 30 Year Plan. Such accommodation is highly desirable within the locality to satisfy the needs of the local community for alternative living arrangements. As such, the proposed land use is considered to satisfy Objective 1 through its apparent benefit in meeting demand and the needs of the local community.

Supported Accommodation PDC 1 and 2 advises of the requirements for this type of accommodation such as siting, how it fits in the locality and that it is fit for purpose.

Being located on the fringe of a District Centre Zone, the proposal is in an ideal location to take advantage of the proximity to the services contained within the District Centre. In particular, the accessibility to public transport infrastructure.

Access to the site is designed to provide the easy flow of all envisaged traffic. Car parking is provided with minimal changes in grade, achieves preference for pedestrian movements to be on one continuous level, and is designed with the needs of the facility occupants in mind. The car parking and circulation areas cater for the expected number of residents, visitors and staff, as well as providing the required space for emergency and service vehicles.

Subsequently, the proposal is considered to meet the needs of the intended residents and therefore satisfies Supported Accommodation PDCs 1, 2, 3 and 4.

5.3 Design and Appearance

The proposal comprises a number of buildings varying between two storey independent living units in a terraced arrangement, to a four storey split level building (the primary building) in an apartment style arrangement. The primary building has a maximum height of 15 m above natural ground level in order to comply with the Airport Building Heights in Overlay Map TTG/11 Development Constraints.

The primary building undercroft carpark is split over two levels and hidden beneath the primary building in order to reduce visibility from outside of the site. The result is a consistent interface with the building to that of the Golden Way road frontage. The bulk of the built form is orientated towards the Golden Way through the primary building which includes a split to cater for the general fall in the land.


Item

4.1

Zero setbacks envisaged in Policy Area 2 PDC 8 have been achieved as far as practicable given that a screen reserve is located between the Surrey Farm Drive and The Golden Way frontages, and there are necessary infrastructure (power line) clearances required. Verandahs, balcony overhangs and eaves face the street interfaces to activate frontages, provide a human scale and improve visual appearance as per Policy Area 2 PDC 9(a). Colours and materials have been selected to both integrate with the predominant built form in the zone, whilst having regard to the features and character of residences to the north and west. Although of a considerable scale where fronting the Golden Way for some 85 metres, the articulation of the façade is sufficient to minimise the resulting bulk and scale as far as practicable to satisfy Design and Appearance Objective 1 and PDC 1. The high degree of articulation through balconies and architectural features alleviates the monotony of the proposed building given its length to comply with Design and Appearance PDC 16. The general siting of the primary building with a strong northern aspect and perpendicular terraced rows improves the buildings’ access to natural sunlight and accords with Policy Area 2 PDC 10. The site has a considerable interface with the adjacent Residential Zone. It is however noted that the interface in fact consists of a four-lane arterial road, a high capacity local road, rather wide nature strips and screen reserves to the edges of the road reserve. The proposal has considered Interface between Land Uses Objectives 1, 2, 3 and PDCs 1, 2, 4, and 6, which require land uses to minimise the adverse impacts on more sensitive and existing land uses. Notwithstanding the high degree of separation between land use and elements providing this separation, the interface of supporting accommodation is akin to the function of the Residential Zone despite being non-residential. Interface issues by way of conflict with land uses is expected to be low and reasonable. The requirements in Policy Area PDCs 12 (f)(i)–(vi) and 14 to create active pedestrian areas, passive surveillance, canopies at ground level and rest areas have been satisfied through the inclusion of pedestrian connection from the primary building to the Golden Way, balcony overhangs, communal facility interfaces with public spaces, and landscaping that is expected to flow from the development site, seamlessly into the screen reserve. The proposed development achieves pedestrian linkages with the main activity zones in the District Centre as per Concept Plan TTG/1. This ensures the development is an active and functioning component of the District Centre and satisfies Zone Objective 2, PDC 3, and Policy Area 2 Objective 1.

The site is considered to be a ‘major corner site,’ where any development should define and create a landmark building in accordance with Policy Area 2 PDC 16.


Item

4.1

The proposal enlists a number of design elements to signify the importance of the site including building to the corner, minimal boundary setbacks, and creating a high degree of articulation. It is considered that the corner statement has been achieved, whilst sensitively integrating with the Residential Zone opposite. Given the above, the proposal is noted to be of a high quality design that satisfies the built form requirements of both the zone and policy area.

5.4 Landscaping

A concept landscape plan was submitted as part of the application, see Attachment 8. The concept plan includes internal landscapes of the site, its fringes, and the planting of the Council screen reserves. Endorsement for planting the screen reserves has been given in principle however requires further detail and approval of relevant permits under Council by-laws. The planting of the screen reserves is considered to be beneficial for both the developer and Council in that it will see an improvement to the existing screen reserve vegetation and will be managed under the care of the developer. The community is said to also benefit from this arrangement in that a consistent and seamless landscaping theme can be implemented along the Golden Way and Surrey Farm Drive frontages, creating a much improved external interface. Noting that more work needs to be done with regard to preferred species, a condition of consent is recommended to enable the developer to continue to work with Council’s relevant departments to finalise a landscaping plan that can be endorsed under appropriate permits. The concept landscape plan has nominated areas of planting with specimens to be chosen for their particular siting, either as internal gardens, screening, or to soften or complement the built form. The landscaping proposed in concept is considered to result in high quality spaces that complement the performance and function of the facility. Despite landscaping being proposed in concept, the landscaping methodology is considered to comply with Landscaping, Fences and Walls Objective 1 and PDCs 1, 2, and 3.

5.5 Regulated Trees

A lone regulated tree is located within the subject site to the northern end of the allotment. The species is identified as a Eucalyptus Wandoo with a multi-stemmed trunk of 1.4m and 1.0m circumferences, measured at 1.0m up from its base. The tree will need to be removed to facilitate the development.

Regulated Trees Objective 1 advises that regulated trees are to be conserved where they make an important environmental or aesthetic benefit.


Item

4.1

With regard to Regulated Trees Objective 2, the tree is not considered to be a significant contributor to character to visual amenity of the locality, is not indigenous to the locality (being endemic to Western Australia), is not rare or endangered, and does not form an important habitat for native fauna, limiting the tree’s protection value. Given the tree has limited important aesthetic and environmental benefits, is not of a kind that is considered to be worthy of retention having regard to Objective 1, and therefore should be removed to facilitate the development. As the tree is regulated, replacement plantings of two trees is required or payment into the Urban Tree fund. Given that the development is to include comprehensive landscaping, the replacement trees could simply be included in the finalised landscaping plan.

5.6 Site Access and Impact to Existing Road Network

Vehicular access to the site is proposed via two, two-way crossovers from Surrey Farm Drive created through rights of way approved during the course of the proceeding development application of 070/111262/2016. The applicant supplied a Traffic and Parking Report by MFY Pty Ltd that advises vehicle access and circulation is appropriate for all vehicles associated with the development, inclusive of community busses and waste collection vehicles, see Attachment 10. The traffic report has been considered by Council’s Traffic Engineers who have endorsed the report as being accurate, however requested that the undercroft carpark be redesigned to include a vehicle turnaround for when the carparks are full. MFY have responded via the applicant (see Attachment 16) advising that devices will be installed to inform motorists that the carpark is full prior to entering the carpark thus eliminating the need for turnarounds and maximising car parking efficiency. The response had been forwarded to Council’s Traffic Engineer who supported the amendments. Council Traffic Engineers have otherwise raised no concern with regard to the land use and the existing road network. Nevertheless, in response to representor concerns, the applicant has provided a study of the likely increase of vehicles per day resulting from the development. The study ascertained that the increase in vehicle movements per day will have a negligible increase in additional vehicles, and subsequently the existing road network is able to cater for the proposed land use. The study is contained with the response to representor’s concerns in Attachment 15. Vehicle movements and traffic are therefore considered to satisfy Transportation and Access Objective 2 and PDC 8 in that the development proposed safe and efficient access for all anticipated transport modes.


Item

4.1

5.7 Car parking

The applicant’s traffic report by MFY Pty Ltd also identified the likely car parking demand for all components of the development. The report considered each potential use of the land and identifies likely parking demands given the composition of land uses, measuring trips per day for associated land uses and likely full time occupation of shared carparking spaces. As a result of the analysis, the MFY report concludes that the following breakdown of the 177 total parking spaces is adequate: 59 shared carparks to service the primary building independent units, care

suites and ancillary land uses, 46 private carparks for the terraced independent units in the form of garages,

with 42 of these having its own visitor park forward of the garage, 30 parking spaces for shared visitors located throughout the internal road

network. With reference to Tables TTG/2 the relevant car parking rate for an aged person’s home/retirement village is one space per residential unit, plus one common visitor parking space for four units, plus one additional space per staff member. For the potential ancillary uses within the supported accommodation (clubhouse and café) that may attract outside users, the minimum rate for a designated area in accordance with Table TTG/2A is three spaces per 100m² of leasable floor area. Based on the above rates, the expected parking rate is 154 spaces, allocating for 23 for staff (staff numbers are unknown however a reasonable assumption). The proposed carpark is likely to accord with the Development Plan, however it is admitted that the traffic report provides a far better analysis of parking rate than the generalised and nonspecific approach. The car parking rates applied to the development have been supported by Council’s Traffic engineer. Notably Table TTG/2 nominates a requirement for retirement village like development to have boat and caravan parking at a rate of one space every six residential units. The applicant advises that storage of such vehicles will be off-site at appropriate storage yards.

It is considered that on-site storage is not necessary in this instance given the type of living style the proposal promotes, and it is agreed that an offsite facility is appropriate for the residents who will require such parking. Subsequently the carpark rate is considered satisfactory and satisfies Transport and Access PDCs 31, 32, 33, and 41.


Item

4.1

5.8 Visual Privacy

Design and Appearance PDC 12 and 13, Medium and High Rise Development (3 or more storeys) PDC 4, and Residential Development PDC 19 offer means and measures to minimise overlooking. These include privacy screening, positioning of balconies and living rooms to maximise separation, appropriate setbacks, and use of mature vegetation where possible. Regard is given to the layout of the proposed units and their proximity to adjoining areas of private open space. In this case, units are distanced significantly from areas of private open space despite having minimal setbacks to the Golden Way and Surrey Farm Drive. For reference, the closest line of sight from a proposed unit to an area of private open space over The Golden Way is measured to be some 38 metres and across Surrey Farm Drive a distance of some 35 metres. A close regard has been given to the applicant’s response (Attachment 15) with specific consideration to the measured impacts of visual privacy relating to Good Residential Design SA (1999). Where the Development Plan does not provide enough guidance as to the interpretation of performance measures for overlooking, some regard may be had to Good Residential Design SA (1999) published by Planning SA. This established design criteria for the achievement of visual privacy in residential development is considered appropriate for guidance as per the case of Lowrie v Unley CC [2001] SAERDC 74. It is also noted that Good Residential Design SA is to be used as an aid and not a substitute for a professional opinion, as per the case of Stuart v Charles Sturt CC (1998) 5 SAPED 27. It is advised that Good Residential Design SA provides an extent of 15 m at 45 degrees from the plane of a window to be an area subject to direct overlooking. In the instance of the proposal and existing dwellings, the distances of direct line of sight are more than double the suggested appropriate distance. Noting one of the performance measures of the Development Plan is for adequate separation (however no numeric measure is provided), the measurable distance for direct sight lines is determined as being applicable. Regard is also given to the circumstances of the proposed degree of overlooking. Despite being over twice the recommended minimum sight line distance suggested, it is also separated by an arterial road or collector road, and to the rear boundaries of properties facing Griffin Place and an additional screen reserve. In the context of the Good Residential Design SA guidelines, sight lines are in relation to high density living with buildings and areas of private open space directly adjacent. The situation for this proposal is improved by the separation provided by public road areas which ensures the distance will always be maintained.


Item

4.1

It is also noted that the proposal nominates supplementary landscaping of tall growth vegetation, namely to the Surrey Farm Drive frontage, to further assist in obscured sightlines. Given the context of the separation distances between points of overlooking and areas of sensitivity, the relevant principles as mentioned above regarding visual privacy mitigation are therefore considered to be adequately satisfied.

5.9 Stormwater Management

A stormwater management plan has been provided in support of the application demonstrating the arrangement for stormwater capture and disposal from the site, see Attachment 7. Council’s Stormwater Engineer has considered the plan and raised some concern with respect to specifics of discharge and pipe sizing, however this has since been satisfied through amendments. Council’s Engineer did note that there was a lack of Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) with the application and there was an interest to see more implemented. This comment was returned to the applicant for consideration, who after some investigation responded advising that the soil in the location was found to contain high concentrations of clay. This meant that WSUD was limited in its application due to the soil type being unable to assist with subsurface drainage or water absorption. The applicant instead proposed to capture runoff for active reuse within the site, particularly for irrigation. Council’s engineers have advised that given the particulars of the site, this approach is satisfactory. Subsequently the stormwater design with active capture and reuse is considered to satisfy Natural Resources PDCs 5 -16 to thereon satisfy Objectives 5, 6, and 8.

5.10 Site Contamination

The applicant has submitted a Preliminary Site Investigation that identified that historically, the land has been used as a vineyard up until the development of Golden Grove, see Attachment 9. It was also identified that the site may have been used as a holding yard for soil. It is believed that this soil originated from, and was in association with, upgrade works to Pedare College circa 2009. The preliminary site investigation advises of a low to moderate risk of contamination from the service station some 100m away, uphill from the site, and recommends that the soil be tested out of an abundance of caution. The rest of the activities within or adjacent to the site have a minor risk of contamination. The investigation summarised that the risk of contamination was low in the context of a proposed aged care land use.


Item

4.1

The site is therefore considered to be fit for purpose however should further testing reveal a source of contamination, remediation is able to occur during the construction phase of the development.

6. CONCLUSION

The proposed land use of supported accommodation, although not strictly residential in nature, remains as a land use that takes on residential qualities in a commercial form. The resulting unit density is consistent with the density envisaged for this portion of District Centre Zone Golden Grove Policy Area 2. A commercial use that is akin to residential also creates a sensitive land use interface between the District Centre Zone and adjacent Residential Zones. Ancillary uses that form part of the larger facility are able to cater for the direct needs of the site occupiers, however are of a kind and scale that will not detract from the hierarchy of the Policy Area as a whole, nor the amenity of nearby residential land uses.

The built form continues to be responsive to adjacent residential land uses, taking on a character that acts as a transition between zones. The built form is to be integrated with comprehensive landscaping to achieve a high quality outcome.

External impacts have been addressed and are well within predetermined parameters. The extent of overlooking and traffic have all been justified through the submission of technical reports. Car parking is adequate for the site, and vehicle movements are expected to derive little to no conflict with the existing movement of traffic or public transport services. Although a finalised landscaping plan is currently outstanding, agreements are in place to achieve a complete and integrated landscaping theme that complements the development, as well as improve the existing screen reserves. This detail is to be supplied as a condition of consent and will enable the appropriate permits to be put in place with regard to maintenance, permissions and planting schedule.

7. RECOMMENDATION

That pursuant to the authority delegated to the Council Development Assessment Panel by Council, the Council Development Assessment Panel:

A. RESOLVES that the proposed development is not seriously at variance with the

policies in the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan. B. RESOLVES to GRANT Development Plan Consent to the application by Holmes

Dyer Pty Ltd at 2-30 Surrey Farm Drive, Golden Grove, as detailed in Development Application No. 070/117618/2019 subject to the following conditions and advisory notes:


Item

4.1

1. The development shall be undertaken, completed and maintained in accordance with the plan(s) and information detailed in Application No. 070/117618/2019, including: The architectural plans by Marchese Partners dated 7 August 2016

including: Site Plan DA1.03 Floor Plans DA2.01 to DA2.07 Site elevations DA3.01 to DA3.04

Architectural Plans by Studio Nine dated 26 June 2019 Plans 090.029-PA01 to 090.029-20

Stormwater Management Report and site works and drainage plans by PT Design dated 25 July 2019 project number 20968 unless otherwise superseded by amendments to the Stormwater Report issued 13 September 2019 by PT Design

Traffic and Parking Report by MFY Pty Ltd, dated August 2019 reference number 16-0128.

Building Services Plans by Bestec reference number 56332 plans SP-01 to SP-08

Waste Management Report by Rawtec dated 12 August 2019 version V1.1

Except where varied by any conditions(s) listed below.

2. A finalised comprehensive landscaping plan to Council’s satisfaction is to be received by Council prior to the issue of Development Approval. The landscaping plan is to be comprehensive in nature detailing individual specimens, planting densities, planting methodology and maintenance, details of irrigation, surface treatment and details of fencing. The landscaping is to be accordance with the concept plans provided by Oxigen dated July 2019 and November 2019 (as amended), and include planting of the Council screen reserves along Surrey Farm Drive and the Golden Way. All landscaping is to be thereafter planted and maintained subject to the ongoing reasonable satisfaction of council, with any dead or dying specimens being immediately replaced. The landscaping shall include two suitable replacement trees for the removal of the Regulated Eucalyptus Wandoo. Reason: to ensure the comprehensive landscaping of the development to enhance its interface with the surrounding locality

3. The premises are to be kept tidy and all buildings, fences, landscaping and

paved or sealed surfaces shall be maintained in good condition at all times. Reason: To maintain the amenity of the site and locality.

4. All off-street car parking spaces shall be line marked, in accordance with Australian Standards AS 2890.1:2004 and 1742.2.2009. The line marking, signposting and directional arrows shall be maintained to a clear and visible standard at all times.

Reason: To maintain safety for users.

5. Car parking spaces shall be provided for motorists with a disability in accordance with the Australian Standard 2890.6.2009 and shall be line marked and signposted. The line marking and signposting shall be maintained to a clear and visible standard at all times.

Reason: To provide safe and convenient parking for motorists with a disability.


Item

4.1

6. All loading and unloading of service vehicles shall be carried out upon the subject land shall not be permitted to be carried out in the street in conjunction with the consent herein granted.

Reason: To minimise the impact on adjacent properties, roads, road users and infrastructure.

7. Free and unrestricted access shall be available to both the designated car

parking spaces and the vehicle access ways at all times. Reason: To ensure useable access and appropriate off-street car parking

is provided.

8. Except where varied by the approved plans or other conditions listed below, the new or modified crossing place shall meet the minimum standard of design and construction as detailed on City of Tea Tree Gully drawings (as applicable): 1/15/SD – ‘Concrete Vehicle Crossing Place’; 2/15/SD – ‘Block Paved Vehicular Crossing Place’; 40/15/SD – ‘Property Access Grades;’ and/or; 45/15/SD – ‘Commercial Concrete Vehicular Crossing Place.’ Reason: To maintain consistency of the streetscape and protect the infrastructure within the road verge.

Note(s):

1. The cost of rectifying any damage or conflict with existing services or infrastructure arising out of this development will be borne by the applicant.

2. The applicant is reminded of its general environmental duty, as required by

section 25 of the Environment Protection Act, to take all reasonable and practical measures to ensure the activities on the site (including during construction) do not pollute the environment in a way which causes or may cause environmental harm. This includes being mindful of and minimising off site noise, dust and vibration impacts associated with development.

3. If the approved development involves building over an easement held in the

name of any public authority (e.g. SA Water) then building work should not be commenced without the permission of the public authority concerned.

4. The Disability Discrimination Act places obligations on the applicant/developer

in relation to the provision of facilities and access for people with disabilities.

5. The granting of this consent does not remove the need for the applicant to obtain all other consents that may be required by other statutes or regulations.

6. The Council has not surveyed the subject land and has, for the purpose of its

assessment, assumed that all dimensions and other details provided by the Applicant are correct and accurate.

Attachments 1. Aerial Photo ............................................................................................................... 25 2. Development Application Form .................................................................................. 26 3. Certificate of Title ....................................................................................................... 33


Item

4.1

4. Site Plans and Elevations .......................................................................................... 40 5. Applicant's Planning Report ....................................................................................... 79 6. Shadow Plans .......................................................................................................... 152 7. Stormwater Report ................................................................................................... 156 8. Concept Landscaping Plan ...................................................................................... 170 9. Preliminary Site Investication (Contamination Report) ............................................. 178 10. Traffic Report ........................................................................................................... 235 11. Waste Management Report ..................................................................................... 260 12. Building Services Plans ............................................................................................ 280 13. Representations from Second Category 2 Notifcaiton ............................................. 288 14. Representations from First Category 2 Notification Period ...................................... 308 15. Applicant's Response to Representations ............................................................... 319 16. Response to Traffic Engineer Concerns .................................................................. 332 17. Response to Stormwater Engineer Concerns .......................................................... 334 18. Development Plan Consent Plans 070/111262/2016 .............................................. 346

Report Authorisers

Daniel Oest

Senior Planning Officer 8397 7370

Nathan Grainger

Manager City Development 8397 7200

Carol Neil

Director Community & Cultural Development 8397 7341


Item

4.2


FROM: Chelsea Tully Senior Planning Officer

SUBJECT: MOTOR REPAIR STATION AT 1013 LOWER NORTH EAST ROAD

HIGHBURY

SUMMARY Applicant: Warr Investments c/- Planning Studio Pty Ltd Nature of Development: Demolition of existing buildings and the construction of a motor

repair station, car parking and signage Address: 1013 Lower North East Road HIGHBURY SA 5089 Application No: 070/117636/2019 Lodgement Date: 19/08/2019 Development Plan: Consolidated 27 December 2018 Zone and Policy Area: Neighbourhood Centre (no Policy Area) Relevant Development Plan Provisions: Objectives: Centres and Retail Development 1, 2

Crime Prevention 1 Design and Appearance 1, 2 Interface between Land Uses 1, 2

Landscaping Fences and Walls 1 Natural Resources 5, 6, 7

Orderly and Sustainable Development 1, 3, 4 Outdoor Advertisements 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Transportation and Access 2 Neighbourhood Centre Zone 1, 2, 5 Principles of Development Control: Centres and Retail Development 2, 3, 4

Crime Prevention 1, 2 Design and Appearance 1, 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18,

19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25 Interface between Land Uses 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 Landscaping Fences and Walls 1, 2, 3 Natural Resources 1, 5, 7 Orderly and Sustainable Development 1, 8 Outdoor Advertisements 1, 2, 3, 4 Transportation and Access 22, 25, 29, 31, 32, 33, 36, 39, 40, 41


Item

4.2

Neighbourhood Centre Zone 1, 2, 4, 7, 11 Public Notification: Category 2 Representations: Number of Properties Notified: 7 Number of Representations Received: 1 Names and Addresses of Representors: Mr W Chong

1013A Lower North East Road, Highbury

Number of Representors wishing to be heard: 1 Schedule 8 Referral: Department Planning Transport and Infrastructure Was a request for additional information made? Yes Issues: Land use, built form, amenity Recommendation: Development Plan Consent

1. PROPOSAL

This application seeks consent for the demolition of an existing motor repair station, and construction of a new motor repair station with associated car parking, landscaping and advertising. The new motor repair station development comprises the following: Single storey building with a total floor area of 254 m², comprising 218 m² workshop

area, 20 m² office/waiting area, and 16 m² office Workshop area accommodating five vehicle bays Six on-site car parking spaces within a car park area The new building is to be constructed using 6 m high precast concrete panel walling and finished in a ‘Monument’ (dark grey) colour with sections of yellow panels to reflect corporate branding. The design includes a sunshade canopy which extends along the two elevations of the building facing the street. Advertising is proposed in the form of corporate signage which is non-illuminated and attached to the building and on the south and west elevations. The hours of operation are proposed to be 8am to 5pm, Monday to Friday only. Landscaping is proposed along the southern and western boundaries, being the Lower North East Road and Rogers Street respectively. Landscaping consists of a variety of trees, flowering plants, low shrubs, ground covers and tussock grasses, and has been designed having regard to low water usage and locally appropriate species. All waste will be stored indoors and screened from view, with collection via a private contractor.


Item

4.2

2. PROCEDURAL MATTERS

2.1 Kind of Development

The Development Plan assigns a ‘motor repair station’ as a non-complying form of development, however this development is seeking to redevelop a lawful and established use on the land. Legal advice was obtained and confirmed the current development application can be assessed as a reasonable expansion of an existing use. This is based on case law which states that there is a statutory right to continue pre-existing lawful uses, and this right would be undetermined by not allowing its practical continuation by improving, replacing or adding to the buildings, or by better adapting the existing conditions. It is recognised that the matter of reasonable expansion is one of fact and degree, however a reasonable expansion is where a development is so closely identified with an existing use that it takes on the character of that use. The applicant’s submission has advised that the scale of the operations will in fact reduce as a result of the application by way of reduced vehicle service bays and reduced hours of operation, see Attachment 10. The scale therefore could not be considered an intensification of the existing use. In light of the above, the application has been determined as a merit kind of development on the basis that it is a continuation of an existing lawful use. Having regard to the existing use of the land, the nature of the proposed redevelopment and the zoning of the land, it is considered that the development is not seriously at variance with the Development Plan pursuant to Section 35(2) of the Development Act 1993 (‘the Act’).

2.2 Schedule 8 Referral(s)

The subject site is located on an arterial road and the design includes a number of access changes, including the removal of a crossover from Lower North East Road and the creation a new access point within 25 m of the junction at Lower North East Road. The application was therefore referred to the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) on behalf of the Commissioner of Highways pursuant to Schedule 8 of the Development Regulations 2008 (‘the Regulations’). DPTI raised no objection to the proposal, subject to a number of standard conditions. This advice can be found in Attachment 13.

3. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Section 38(2)(a) of the Act states that the Regulations or a Development Plan may assign different forms of development to a category for the purposes of public notification.


Item

4.2

The Neighbourhood Centre Zone of the Development Plan does not assign any development to a particular category. Clause 18(c) in Schedule 9 of the Regulations states that any development in a Centre Zone is assigned to Category 2 where the development is adjacent to land in a zone which is different to the zone which applies to the site of development. In this instance, as the subject site is located in the Neighbourhood Centre Zone and is adjacent land in the Residential Zone, the application was determined to be Category 2. 11 properties were notified, and one representation was received from the owner of 1013A Lower North East Road, see Attachment 14. Mr Chong is opposed to the development for the following reasons: The development will have a negative impact on the value of his property. The development will adversely impact on the amenities and current enjoyment of

his backyard. The industrial nature of the development will cause noise nuisance. The vibrations will cause damage to his wall. The high wall extending the whole length of his backyard will take away the view he

currently enjoys and affect his property value. Mr Chong suggests a 1 m gap between his property and the development would improve access in case of fire and reduce vibration damage, and that the wall along the fence line should be disallowed. The applicant has responded to these concerns (Attachment 15), with the response summarised as follows: Consideration was given at design stage of the amenity on site and adjoining land

within the zone, and it was considered high amenity does not exist, nor was there evidence of the representor’s land being utilised for residential living or the backyard being used for private recreational pursuits.

The locality of Lower North East Road is predominantly commercial, including land to the east of the representor.

Increase in setback by 1 m would make little difference to the visual impact of the wall, but would be detrimental to achieving safe and convenient access, on-site parking, and landscaping.

Reduction in floor area would be untenable and one metre setback would be ineffective.

Applicant would consider a colour or landscaping change to reduce the representor’s concerns.

Property value is not a planning matter, and the development will improve the appearance of the site.

Noise is expected with a commercial development, however it will not be unreasonable in the context of the locality during the day.

Acoustic report provided and is based on a new use (no dispensation for existing use), and concludes that the proposal will not result in any undue noise impact to adjoining properties.

There is no technical evidence that supports the claim that the proposal will result in undue vibrations or damage. During construction, all endeavours will be made to minimise dust nuisance.


Ite

m 4

.2

The representor has nominated to be heard by the Panel.

4. SITE AND LOCALITY

Figure 1: Location Plan (red star identifies location of representor) The subject site is 1013 Lower North East Road, Highbury, and is located in the Neighbourhood Centre Zone. The site is a relatively regular-shaped allotment with a site area comprising approximately 610 m², a frontage of 12.74 m to Lower North East Road, and a frontage of 32.95 m to Rogers Street. The site currently comprises a single storey motor repair station building containing two workshops, attached canopy structure, and informal parking and storage areas. Access is currently achieved via a crossover to Lower North East Road and three crossovers on Rogers Street. The site is relatively flat, with a slight side-fall down towards Rogers Street, and there are no regulated trees on the land. The site has a small easement registered to the Title in relation to a historic building encroachment at 1013A Lower North East Road. The locality comprises both the Neighbourhood Centre Zone and the Residential Zone. Land to the north consists of residential allotments, land to the east and west of this site contains a variety of mixed use (dwelling and office) and consulting rooms, while the land located south of this site comprises council-owned recreation facilities (Turramurra Recreation Centre). The combination of land uses in the surrounding area is reflective of the nearby boundary between the Neighbourhood Centre and Residential Zones.


Item

4.2

The locality is characterised by a moderate level of mature plantings, particularly within road verge areas and on the adjoining council reserve along the southern side of Lower North East Road. The scale of development in the locality is generally low rise and compact built form, with the exception of some larger commercial and recreation buildings. The adjoining property to the east has an overhanging eave which encroaches this land and is contained within an existing easement.

5. PLANNING ASSESSMENT 5.1 Land Use

Neighbourhood Centre Zone Objective 1 encourages the development of a centre that provides a range of facilities to meet the shopping, community, business and recreational needs of the surrounding neighbourhood. Neighbourhood Centre Zone Principle of Development Control (PDC) 1 lists a range of land uses envisaged in the zone but does not include a motor repair station. Rather, the zone procedural matters lists a motor repair station as non-complying development. Schedule 1 of the Regulations defines a motor repair station as follows:

Motor repair station means any land or building used for carrying out repairs (other than panel beating or spray painting) to motor vehicles

As discussed in Section 2 of this report, the land was previously occupied by Highbury Auto as a motor repair station and has been operating as a motor repair station since 1950 in accordance with the above definition. This application seeks consent for a new motor repair station facility and hence is consistent with the existing use rights on the land. Notwithstanding the non-complying nature of this form of development, the application has been assessed on merit as a reasonable expansion of an existing use, see Section 2.1 of this report. The original use associated with Highbury Auto operated with capacity for three indoor bays plus outdoor work areas, three mechanics plus office staff, serviced on average 15 vehicles per day, and operated during the hours of 7:30am to 6pm Monday to Friday, and 8am to 1pm Saturday. The proposed use accommodates five indoor bays only, two to three mechanics plus office staff, average of eight to 10 vehicles serviced per day, and operating hours of 8am to 5pm Monday to Friday, with no weekends. The new development will see a reduced scale of operation compared to the existing and lawful operations of the existing land use. It is therefore considered that the proposed redevelopment of an existing motor repair station with reduced intensity to the existing operation is considered appropriate from a land use perspective.


Item

4.2

5.2 Built Form

Design and Appearance Objective 1 seeks development of a high standard and appearance that responds to and reinforces positive aspects of the local environment and built form.

Design and Appearance PDC 15 states that buildings and signage should have a co-ordinated appearance that maintains and enhances the visual attractiveness of the locality.

The subject site is located in the centre of an existing Neighbourhood Centre Zone where there is a mixture between old established sites and newly renovated or redeveloped land. There is an existing building on the land which is in a deteriorated condition and is not considered to contribute to the amenity of the streetscape, particularly the section of large canopy located along the Lower North East Road frontage. The proposed building consists of 6m high precast concrete panels finished in a ‘Monument’ (dark grey) colour. The building size and footprint is larger than existing, however it is considered that the scale of development will not unreasonably impact the streetscape character of this centre. Recent development in the locality has been undertaken using similar building materials to the proposal. In addition, the provision of a canopy to the front and side elevations creates a sense of human scale for the building and contributes to the style of buildings that currently front Lower North East Road in the immediate locality. Furthermore, the design incorporates glazing and door openings to address the two road frontages and contribute to an active streetscape, noting the design focus for this type of development is car park design and roller door access to the workshop. Notwithstanding the much larger building size to that existing on site, it is considered that the development has been designed to address the two road frontages and has responded to the positive aspects of the local area. It is therefore consistent with Design and Appearance PDC 1 in that the building height, mass and proportion reflects the character of the locality. While it is recognised that a 6 m wall height on a common boundary is not ideal and is something raised by the adjoining property owner as a concern, it is considered that the zoning of the land and the approved mixed use on the representor’s land does not afford a right to the high level of amenity typically found in a residential area. Furthermore, a lack of building height or setbacks restrictions within this zone suggests that development on this site not subject to the same restrictions in the adjoining Residential Zone, such as maximum 3 m wall heights or 8 m wall length on the boundary.


Item

4.2

The visual impact is not ideal, however it is considered that being located to the west of a property used as a dwelling and office, it will not result in an unreasonable shadow impact, nor will the bulk or appearance of the wall in this part of the zone have an unreasonable visual impact. With respect to setbacks, the Neighbourhood Centre does not have any minimum requirements. Design and Appearance PDC 22 states that buildings should be setback to be similar to or compatible with setbacks of buildings on adjoining land and other buildings in the locality. Commercial development on the northern side of this centre is mixed and does not achieve a particular setback character along Lower North East Road. This is influenced by car parking design, topography and the presence of landscaping. Having regard to the zero metre setback of the canopy on the existing site, coupled with the reduced setbacks of buildings to the east at 1013A and 1015 Lower North East Road, it is considered that the reduced setback of the proposed building is acceptable and will not have a detrimental impact on the streetscape character.

5.3 Access and Movement

5.3.1 Access and manoeuvring This proposal to redevelop an existing motor repair station facility seeks to rationalise and improve the existing access arrangement, both from Lower North East Road and Rogers Street. An existing crossover to Lower North East Road is to be removed, and three crossovers along Rogers Street are to be consolidated to two dedicated access points. The most northern access along Rogers Street will allow one way traffic in only, while the southern access closest to the Lower North East Road intersection allows two way movements. The proposed access layout and on-site manoeuvrability has been designed in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards, as confirmed by Council’s traffic engineer, who has reviewed the design and advised that it is acceptable, see Attachment 12. Furthermore, the application was formally referred to DPTI who also supports the access arrangement, see Attachment 13. The development is therefore consistent with the intent of Transportation and Access Objective 2 and PDCs 25 and 33.

5.3.2 Car parking In accordance with Table TTG/2A of the Development Plan, the subject site has a minimum car park demand rate of three spaces per 100 m² gross leasable floor area. The proposed motor repair station workshop has a total floor area of 254 m² and therefore requires at least seven on-site parking spaces.


Item

4.2

The development includes six on-site spaces within the car park area which results in a shortfall of one space. It is recognised that the nature of the land use means that there are an additional five bays inside the building which allows up to 11 vehicles to be kept on the land at any one time. It is also worth noting that the rationalised access arrangement along Roger Street will also increase the amount of parking available on the street. The applicant has confirmed that no more than 10 vehicles will be serviced each day and that they arrive/exit at varying times across the day. It is therefore considered that the one space shortfall is not fatal to the application having regard to the scale of operations on the land. Furthermore Council’s traffic engineer has not raised any objection to the provision of car parking as part of their assessment, see Attachment 12. This advice also confirmed the dimensions of on-site parking spaces are appropriate and consistent with the relevant Australian Standard.

5.4 Amenity

The applicant has submitted an acoustic report to review the proposed activity without concession of existing noise impacts associated with the previous operations of Highbury Auto. The report, provided by Sonus, has advised that the proposed activities are consistent with the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Noise Policy requirements without the need for additional acoustic treatment to the site, see Attachment 11. The adjoining property at 1013A Lower North East Road has raised concern with the impact of noise on their property. The applicant’s acoustic report confirms that the day time operations comply with the legislative requirements for noise levels, and it is therefore considered that the noise impact is acceptable. It is also recognised that the proposed hours of operation during the week only and between 8am and 5pm is reasonable and reduces the potential impact on the amenity of the nearby residential locality, notwithstanding the existing Highbury Auto use is permitted to operate longer hours and on weekends.

5.5 Landscaping As part of the redevelopment of this site, landscaping is proposed along the western boundary adjacent the car park, and along the southern boundary adjacent the Lower North East Road frontage. The applicant has provided a detailed Landscape Plan, see Attachment 8. The design includes a combination of trees, low shrubs, flowering plans, grounds covers and tussock grasses, and has been designed to complement the local landscape character of the locality comprising species requiring low water usage.


Item

4.2

The development is therefore considered to be consistent with Landscaping, Fences and Walls Objective 1 and PDC 1.

5.7 Outdoor Advertising

Outdoor Advertisements Objective 1 states that urban landscapes should not be disfigured by advertisements, Objective 3 seeks advertisements that are designed to enhance the appearance of the building and locality, and Objective 5 seeks advertising that is integrated with and complementary to the design of associated development. The proposed signage is attached to the building, is oriented to the two road frontages, and has been positioned above the canopy and below the roofline. The location of signage above a canopy is not ideal having regard to Outdoor Advertising PDC 7, however in this instance it is not considered unreasonable as there is little opportunity to place signage under the canopy due to the open nature of the shop front and the roller door design. Furthermore, the scale of advertising is integrated with the external finish of the building and is not considered excessive in the context of the height and length of the building. As a result, the advertising does not dominate the appearance of the development as viewed from the surrounding locality. The modern design of the building and extensive use of corporate branding is also considered to be consistent with other modern commercial developments in the locality such as Dan Murphy’s. The scale of advertising is therefore considered reasonable in the context of the locality and the size of the development, and therefore achieves the above objectives.

5.8 Site works and drainage The applicant has provided a conceptual storm water management plan, see Attachment 9. It is proposed that all roof water will be collected and directed to the street, and incorporates a silt trap mechanism to manage the quality of water run-off. A detailed design has not yet been provided, and as such it is recommended this be dealt with as a reserved matter should Panel members support this application. This will enable Council’s engineering team to review the proposal, including car park drainage details and water sensitive urban design methods for water reuse. Based on the proposal submitted and the fall of the land towards Rogers Street, it is considered that the conceptual storm water design is acceptable and can be finalised prior to full Development Approval.


Item

4.2

6. CONCLUSION

This development seeks to redevelop an existing site as a reasonable expansion to an existing non-complying use. While the size of the building is larger than that existing, the nature of the operation will be formalised and is expected to have a lesser impact than the previous motor repair station operation. In particular, the number of vehicles serviced per day and the hours of operation have been reduced. The site adjoins the Residential Zone to the north and there is a mixed use residential and office use to the east, however the applicant has submitted an acoustic report which confirms the noise impacts of the development are compliant with the relevant EPA Noise Policy criteria. The visual impact of the wall on the boundary is not ideal but is considered acceptable in the context of the site being in Neighbourhood Centre Zone where there are no setback requirements or building height restrictions. On balance, it is considered that this application displays sufficient merit to warrant consent in accordance with the recommendation below.

7. RECOMMENDATION

That pursuant to the authority delegated to the Council Assessment Panel by Council, the Council Assessment Panel:


policies in the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan.

B. RESOLVES to GRANT Development Plan Consent to the application by Warr Investments for the ddemolition of existing buildings and construction of motor repair station, car parking and signage at 1013 Lower North East Road, Highbury as detailed in Development Application No. 070/117636/2019 subject to the following conditions and advisory notes:

(1) The development shall be undertaken, completed and maintained in

accordance with the plan(s) and information detailed in Application No. 070/117636/2019 except where varied by any condition(s) listed below.

(2) The materials used on the external surfaces of the development and the pre-

coloured steel finishes or paintwork shall be maintained in good condition at all times. All external paintwork shall be completed within 2 months of the erection of the structures herein consented to. Reason: To preserve and enhance the amenity of the site and locality.

(3) The premises shall be kept tidy and all buildings, fences, landscaping and

paved or sealed surfaces shall be maintained in good condition at all times. Reason: To maintain the amenity of the site and locality.


Item

4.2

(4) The hours of operation herein approved are for the hours between 8am and 5pm Monday to Fridayany variation to these hours of operation will require a further consent. Reason: To minimise the impact on adjoining properties.

(5) All driveways, parking and manoeuvring areas shall be formed, sealed with

concrete, bitumen or paving, and be properly drained. They shall be maintained in good condition thereafter. Reason: To ensure useable and safe carparking.

(6) All off-street carparking spaces shall be line-marked, in accordance with the

approved plans and Australian Standards AS 2890.1:2004 and 1742.2.2009. The line-marking, signposting and directional arrows shall be maintained to a clear and visible standard at all times. Reason: To maintain safety for users.

(7) The planting and landscaping identified on the Landscape Plan dated

3/09/2019 herein submitted with the application shall be completed in the first planting season concurrent with or following commencement of the use of the land. Such planting and landscaping shall not be removed nor the branches of any tree lopped and any plants which become diseased or die shall be replaced by suitable species. Reason: To maintain amenity and site of locality.

(9) No materials or equipment are to be stored outdoors.

Reason: To preserve and enhance the amenity of the site and locality

Reserved Matter(s):

(1) The following matter(s) have been reserved pursuant to section 33(3) of the Development Act 1993, and sub-delegated to the Assessment Manager for a determination, prior to the issue of Development Approval:

Detailed site works and drainage plan, including water sensitive urban

design (WSUD) measures, to the satisfaction of Council. Note(s):

(1) This consent does not obviate the need to obtain any other necessary

approvals from any/all parties with an interest in the land. (2) Any works undertaken on Council owned land (including but not limited to

works relating to reserves, crossing places, landscaping, footpaths, street trees and stormwater connections and underground electrical connections), shall require a separate authorisation from Council. Further information and/or specific details can be obtained by contacting Council’s Civil Operations department on 8397 7444.

(3) The granting of this consent does not remove the need for the applicant to

obtain all other consents that may be required by other statutes or regulations.

(4) The development (including during construction) shall not at any time emit

noise that exceeds the relevant levels derived from the Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2007.


Item

4.2

(5) The applicant/developer is reminded of its general environmental duty, as

required by section 25 of the Environment Protection Act, to take all reasonable and practical measures to ensure the activities on the site (including during construction) do not pollute the environment in a way which causes or may cause environmental harm. This includes being mindful of and minimising off site noise, dust and vibration impacts associated with development.

(6) The cost of rectifying any damage or conflict with any existing services or

infrastructure arising out of this development will be borne by the applicant.

(7) The Council has not surveyed the subject land and has, for the purpose of its assessment, assumed that all dimensions and other details provided by the Applicant are correct and accurate.

(8) NBN Co. is responsible for the installation of National Broadband Network

(NBN) fibre for all developments in areas where NBN Co. has already rolled out fibre. To ensure services are available when tenants move in, developers and builders shall register their developments and apply to NBN Co. before building has commenced. To determine if your site is in an NBN area and to register your development, please complete the pre-qualifier forms located at www.nbnco.com.au/newdevelopments. For more information, please contact the NBN Co. New Developments Team on 1800 687 626 or email [email protected].

Attachments 1. Aerial Photo ............................................................................................................. 373 2. Development Application Form ................................................................................ 374 3. Certificate of Title ..................................................................................................... 378 4. Site Plan: Demo/Proposed ...................................................................................... 380 5. Floor Plan ................................................................................................................ 381 6. Elevation Plans ........................................................................................................ 382 7. Signage Details ........................................................................................................ 384 8. Landscape Plan ....................................................................................................... 385 9. Stormwater Plan ...................................................................................................... 386 10. Planning Reports and Correpondence .................................................................... 387 11. Acoustic Report ....................................................................................................... 415 12. Internal Traffic Referral ............................................................................................ 427 13. DPTI Traffic Referral ................................................................................................ 428 14. Representation ........................................................................................................ 430 15. Response to Representation ................................................................................... 431

Report Authorisers

Chelsea Tully

Senior Planning Officer 8397 7223

Nathan Grainger


Carol Neil

Council Assessment Panel Meeting - 17 December 2019 2

Item

4.2



Item

4.3


FROM: Henry Beesley Planning Officer

SUBJECT: DEFERRED ITEM FROM 15 OCTOBER 2019 MEETING- CARPORT

FORWARD OF THE DWELLING AT 128 PERSEVERANCE ROAD, VISTA

SUMMARY Applicant: SA Pergola Specialists Nature of Development: Carport forward of the dwelling Address: 128 Perseverance Road VISTA SA 5091 Application No 070/117547/2019 Lodgement Date: 2 August 2019 Development Plan: Consolidated 27 December 2018 Zone and Policy Area: Residential (No Policy Area) Relevant Development Plan Provisions: Objectives Design and Appearance 1 Landscaping, Fences and Walls 1 Transport and Access 2 Residential Zone 3

Principles of Development Control Design and Appearance 1, 3, 15, 22, 23 Landscaping, Fences and Walls 1, 2 Residential Development 6, 7, 8 Transportation and Access 31, 33 Residential Zone 1, 5, 6, 10, 11 Public Notification: Category 1 Schedule 8 Referral: Not Required Was a request for additional information made? Yes Issues: Carport dominance, visual amenity, front setback, visitor car

parking Recommendation: Refusal


Item

4.3

1. PROPOSAL

The application seeks planning consent for a freestanding flat roof carport at 128 Perseverance Road, Vista. The proposed carport is to be positioned forward of the dwelling over an existing paved driveway, adjacent to the southern side boundary of the site, and will be setback from the front boundary 3.4m. The carport will be 7.0m deep with a width of 5.98m, resulting in a floor area of 41.86m², a post height of 2.4m, and 2.96m at its highest point. The entirety of the carport is finished with paperbark pre coated iron.

2. BACKGROUND

This application was previously considered at the Council Assessment Panel (CAP) meeting on 15 October 2019, during which a decision on the application was deferred to allow the applicant the opportunity to provide the following:

Detailed, scaled drawings demonstrating the materials, colours and finishes of the proposed carport; including design levels in relation to the house and the road boundary; and

A detailed landscaping plan to assist in screening the proposed carport.

The original CAP report can be found within Attachment 3 and minutes of the meeting within Attachment 2. Council officers have received amended architectural plans and additional information from the application, which are discussed in the section below, and can be found in Attachment 1.

3. PLANNING ASSESSMENT

A further assessment has been undertaken with reference to each of the deferred items: 3.1 Design levels

The elevation drawings have been amended to demonstrate the relationship between the design levels of the carport and the dwelling and road boundary. The amended elevation drawings demonstrate that a differential of 1.32 m and 1.59 m exists between natural ground level at the road boundary and the design level at the eastern and western most portions of the proposed carport, respectively. The above differential in the design level of the proposed carport and level at the road boundary is considered to result in a reduction of visual bulk.


Item

4.3

When standing at the road boundary, the observed height of the structures roof will be 0.98 m to 1.41 m above natural ground level at the road boundary. However, the proposed fall of the carport roof towards the primary boundary will result in the roof being visible from the immediate streetscape. This is considered to increase the carports profile from the street and will result in a departure from Residential Development PDC 8.

3.2 Schedule of Materials, Colours and Finishes

Following the outcome of the 15 October 2019 CAP meeting, the applicant has confirmed that the entirety of the structure, including posts, beams, guttering and the ‘Prodeck’ pre-coated roof sheeting will be finished in Colourbond – Paperbark. Additionally, the applicant has confirmed that the Colourbond - Paperbark finish will be applied to both sides of the pre-coated roof sheeting. The use of Colourbond – Paperbark for the entirety of the structure is considered to be sympathetic to the neutral tones of the existing dwelling, as envisaged by Residential Development PDC 6.

3.3 Landscaping Plan

The architectural drawings have been amended to incorporate landscaping along the southern side of the proposed carport. Specifically, landscaping in the form of Cupressus sempervirens ‘glauca’ - Italian Pencil Pines will be planted, with mature specimens at a minimum height of 1.8 metres to be planted. The applicant will plant eight trees, each spaced approximately 80 cm apart. The addition of landscaping along the southern elevation of the verandah is considered to reduce the visual dominance of the carport when viewed from the streetscape south of the subject site. This will appease Landscaping, Fences and Walls PDC 1, which envisages the screening of driveways and parking areas from the view of residents and neighbours. The applicant has opted against additional landscape planting along the northern elevation of the carport, however it is noted that some low level landscaping and a number of mature trees and shrubs currently exists between the proposed carport and the northern side boundary of the subject site (not nominated on the plans). It is considered that this existing landscaping to the north of the proposed carport is unlikely to screen the carport to any substantial degree.

4. CONCLUSION

The applicant has submitted a written response and amended plans to address each of the deferred items raised at the previous CAP meeting on 15 October 2019.


Item

4.3

The additional information provides greater detail in relation to the proposals relationship with the locality, associated dwelling and the road boundary, and also provides detail on landscaping. Whilst the outstanding matters raised by CAP members have been sufficiently addressed, the application is still considered to be finely balanced. The carports visual bulk when viewed from the streetscape is lessened by the design level being situated lower than ground level at the road boundary, however visual bulk is in turn increased by the pitch of the roof angled downwards towards the streetscape, resulting in the roof being visible from the streetscape. Landscaping proposed by the applicant will subsequently screen the carport from view when observed from the south of the subject site, however the lack of landscaping to the north of the carport fails to reduce the structures overall visual dominance. Despite the additional information provided and noting that the carport still satisfies a number of the quantitative provisions of the Development Plan, the carport does not satisfy the front setback criteria and also fails multiple qualitative provisions of the Development Plan. Given the consistent built form and streetscape character of the Perseverance Road locality, the carport is considered to unreasonably impact on the amenity and character of the locality due to its location forward of is associated dwelling, and its reduction in off-street parking opportunities. On balance, the proposed carport does not warrant planning consent and is recommended for refusal, as previously recommended.

5. RECOMMENDATION

That pursuant to the authority delegated to the Council Assessment Panel by Council, the Council Assessment Panel:


policies in the Tea Tree Gully (City) Development Plan.

B. RESOLVES to REFUSE Development Plan Consent to the application by SA Pergola Specialists to construct a carport forward of the dwelling at 128 Perseverance Road, Vista, as detailed in Development Application No.070/117547/2019 on the following grounds:

(1) The proposed carport has an adverse impact on the streetscape and

amenity of the locality.

(2) The carport is at odds with the existing character of the locality together with the desired character statement of the Residential Zone.

(3) The carport does not satisfy the front setback requirements in the

Development Plan.

(4) The carport does not allow for sufficient off-street parking for visitors to the site.


Item

4.3

(5) In particular, the proposed carport is at variance to the following provisions of the Development Plan:

(a) Residential Zone Objective 3 and Residential Zone PDC 6 which

states that development should contribute to the desired character of the zone.

(b) Residential Zone PDC 10 which states that sheds, garages and

similar outbuildings should be designed with a minimum setback from the primary street of 5.5 metres, in order to provide a car parking space between the building and the street frontage.

(c) Design and Appearance Objective 1 which seeks development of a

high design standard and appearance that responds to and reinforces positive aspects of the local environment and built form.

(d) Design and Appearance PDC 22(a) and (b) which state that the

setback of buildings from public roads should be similar to, or compatible with, setbacks of buildings on adjoining land and other buildings in the locality, and contribute positively to the function, appearance and/or desired character of the locality.

(e) Residential Development PDC 8 which states that garages, carports

and residential outbuildings should not dominate the streetscape.

(f) Transportation and access PDC 31 which states Development should provide off-street vehicle parking and specifically marked accessible car parking places to meet anticipated demand in accordance with Table TTG/2 - Off Street Vehicle Parking Requirements.

Attachments 1. Amended Architectural Plans and Additional Information ........................................ 444 2. Minutes from Previous Meeting - 15 October 2019 ................................................. 449 3. Previous Report and Attachments ........................................................................... 452

Report Authorisers

Henry Beesley

Planning Officer 8397 7288

Nathan Grainger


Carol Neil


notice of council assessment panel meeting · 2020-01-15 · council assessment panel meeting - 17...

Documents