agenda for planning & development committee … for planning & development committee meeting...

- 1 -

AGENDA FOR PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING

TO BE HELD IN COMMITTEE ROOM, BUNDABERG

ON THURSDAY 12 MAY 2011, COMMENCING AT 9.00 AM

Apologies 2 Confirmation of Minutes

B1 Planning & Development Committee Meeting - 28/04/11

3 Development N1 Back Electra Road, Electra & 323 Back Electra Road, Givelda -

Reconfiguration of a lot for Boundary Realignment 4 lots into 4 lots and Access Easement 3

N2 286 Acacia Street, Woodgate - Development Application for

Request to Change Existing Approval for Reconfiguring a Lot 13 N3 111 Stockyard Road, North Isis - Material Change of Use - 13

Additional Sites 22 N4 8 Arthur Street, Bundaberg South - Material Change of Use -

Additional Unit 34 N5 115 Takalvan Street, Avoca - Material Change of Use - Removal

of 11 Existing Car Bays 53 N6 Greathhead Road, 80 Greathead Road, Ashfield - Negotiated

Decision Request - Fourteen Lot Subdivision and Park (Sanctuary Park Stage 4) 59

N7 1034 Goodwood Road Redridge - Material Change of Use &

Reconfiguration of a lot ( 75 Residential Lots & 2 Balance rural Lots) 81

- 2 -

4 Confidential O1 Planning and Development Ongoing Compliance Investigation 5 General Business 6 Meeting Close

Agenda for Planning & Development Committee Meeting

Meeting held: 12 May 2011

Item 12 May 2011

Item Number:

N1

File Number:

321.2009.26434

Part:

DEVELOPMENT

Portfolio:

Planning & Development Services

Subject:

Back Electra Road, Electra & 323 Back Electra Road, Givelda - Reconfiguration of a lot for Boundary Realignment 4 lots into 4 lots and Access Easement

Report Author:

Alicia Otto, Planning Officer

Authorised by:

Wayne Phillips, Manager Planning (Coastal)

Link to Corporate Plan:

Nil -

Applicant:

RJ Lloyd & MM Lloyd

Owner:

RJ Lloyd & MM Lloyd

Location:

Back Electra Road, Electra and 323 Back Electra Road, Givelda

RPD:

Lots 14 to 17 on RP18252 and Lot 3 on C37250, County Cook, Parish Electra

Area:

20.209, 24.989, 26.1723, 60.703, 20.74ha

Land Designation:

Rural

Planning Scheme:

Planning Scheme for Burnett Shire 2006

Proposal:

Council is in receipt of an application for Lot Reconfiguration for a 4 into 4 lot boundary realignment plus Access Easement. The proposed boundary realignment is to create the following new lots:



Proposed Lot 14 – 21.7ha Proposed Lot 15 – 2.9ha Proposed Lot 16 – 2.71ha Proposed Lot 17 – 62.5ha The Applicant also seeks to create an access easement twenty (20) metres wide and approximately 700 metres long, from the proposed new road intersection. The easement will pass through proposed Lot 17 to benefit Lot 3 on C37250 due to this lot not having formal road access. Subject Site & Surrounding Land Uses The site is located on the northern side of Back Electra Road, adjoining the Burnett River. The site is approximately 1.2 km from Givelda State School. The subject allotments are regular in shape with a total area of approximately 183 hectares. The proposal consists of five (5) parcels of land which have the following area and dimensions. Lot 3 on C37250 is only included due to the proposed access easement which will service this lot. Property Description Site Area Site Width Site Depth

Lot 14 on RP18252 26.17 ha Approximately 216 m Approximately 1060 m Lot 15 on RP18252 24.98 ha Approximately 263 m Approximately 960 m Lot 16 on RP18252 20.20 ha Approximately 204 m Approximately 997 m Lot 17 on RP18252 20.74 ha Approximately 191 m Approximately 1042 m Lot 3 on C37250 60.70 ha Approximately 562 m Approximately 1380 m Lot 3 is currently occupied by a dwelling house with associated rural sheds. Access to the house is provided via a track that traverses Lots 14-17. The access arrangements to Lot 3 are informal as there are no easements registered on Lots 14 to 17 to formalise the access. The site is undulating with the number of natural drains that outlet towards the Burnett River. A majority of the site is used for grazing. The surrounding land uses are generally rural holdings. Planning History There is no planning history related to the assessment of this application. Considerations Burnett Shire Council Planning Scheme 2007 In the Burnett Shire Planning Scheme 2006, reconfiguring a lot within the Rural zone attracts a Code Assessable application. The applicable codes include:



Rural Planning Area Code;

Rural Zone Code;

Reconfiguring a Lot Code;

Development Infrastructure and Works Code; and

Natural Features or Resource Overlay Code (GQAL Class A)

The Development Application’s compliance with the relevant Codes is addressed in the following sections. Rural Planning Area Code The proposal is considered to be consistent with the provisions of the Rural Planning Area Code. This application has been assessed against the Specific Outcomes and standards for development within the Rural Planning Area. The proposal creates two small rural residential type lots (proposed Lots 15 and 16) to enable creation of one larger lot containing most of the Good Quality Agricultural land. The proposal is considered a positive outcome for the site. Rural Zone Code This application has been assessed against the Specific Outcomes and standards for development within the Rural Zone. The Rural Zone Code overall outcomes seeks to ensure that productive and potentially productive agricultural land is protected and preserved for sustainable production, the rural character of the area is maintained, and that residential uses are primarily associated with rural production and finally that ‘uses other than those referred to above are located in the Rural Zone only where – The development provides a significant and direct community benefit; and No other location is suitable and available having regard to the activity’s

specific locations requirements, land area requirements or likely off site impacts.

The current boundary realignment removes the minimum amount of land required to create two (2) rural residential type lots from the balance rural parcels. The applicant has made representations that the rural character of this locality is characterised by lots of 20ha or less. These lots are generally large rural lifestyle lots and are not being used for broad scale agricultural or grazing pursuits. This character would be preserved by reducing concentrated impacts and buffering the proposed new rural residential type lots from the balance rural land. When assessing rural boundary realignments against Planning Scheme criteria, it is Council’s Infrastructure and Planning Department’s aim to ensure new proposals generally comply with the minimum criteria outlined in Schedule 5 of the planning scheme and that new rural lot reconfigurations do not exacerbate the fragmentation



of land in the rural production areas of the region. This reconfiguration is not creating any additional lots and is not considered to exacerbate the existing non compliant situation on the site as most of the Good Quality Agricultural Land is being consolidated into one 62.5 ha parcel. It is considered that proposed Lots 15 and 16 will have adequate, albeit unconstructed road frontage required for small rural home sites and the flood free constructed road from Back Electra Road is considered to be satisfactory. Therefore the proposed configuration is considered generally meet the requirements of the Rural Zone Code. Reconfiguration of a Lot Code This application has been assessed against the Specific Outcomes and standards for development within the Reconfiguring a Lot Code. The code includes requirements relating to lot size, area and configuration, road system, open space, infrastructure and buffers. Whilst the lots are less than the prescribed minimums, the existing situation is not exacerbated as the majority of the Good Quality Agricultural Land is allocated to one large parcel which is to remain under agricultural production. Engineering or Internal Referral Council’s Infrastructure Department has made the following comments with regard to sewerage, water and road access. The below commentary is provided for background/discussion purposes. Water No reticulated water exists in this area, therefore an advice is required pertaining to the lack of a reticulated water network and the necessity for rainwater tanks. Stormwater Planning Scheme Policy 5 refers to Aus Spec #1 – D5 Stormwater Drainage Design (D5) for the design of water quantity issues and the Reconfiguring a Lot Code (ROL code) SO 378 requires that reconfiguration does not adversely impact or introduce the potential to adversely impact the drainage from the subject or adjacent land. Adverse impacts also extend to water quality. In summary, the conditions to satisfy D5 and the ROL code are:

Q 10 ARI for lateral flows; Q 100 ARI major flows need to be maintained; The drainage of upstream properties cannot be worsened by the construction

of the access road and associated cross drainage; and



PSP 5 nominates this development as Low Risk. Accordingly, a Site Based Erosion and Sediment Control Plan will be required at operational works stage.

Onsite Waste Management An onsite sewerage system is required for proposed Lots 14 to 17 due to all lots not being serviced by Council’s reticulated sewerage network. Roadworks and Access Specific Outcome 385 of the Reconfiguring a Lot Code (RLC) states that ‘…safe and convenient vehicular access is available to all Lots.’ The Applicant proposes to give access to the site by constructing a new section of gravel road and upgrading a portion of Back Electra Road over an existing floodway. The Applicant will also provide access to Lot 3 on C37250 via an easement. The lots created ostensibly provide two rural allotments that would allow future rural housing (proposed Lots 15 and 16) and two rural allotments that are not really suitable for housing. Therefore, the two allotments that could accommodate future housing will be provided with vehicle driveways. It should be noted that the Burnett River AMTD recorded flood height in the area is 27.63. This is approximately 7 metres above the current floodway road adjacent to the site. Further the western end of Back Electra Road (near the Pine Creek Road intersection) is at about RL 20.00 metres. This means that this Back Electra Road is cut off in two separate locations when the river floods. It should be noted that the Cedars Road bridge is at approximately RL 10.00 and the Bruce Highway Bridge is approximately 35.00 metres. The site also has access to Pine Creek Road via an unformed section of Back Electra Road to the south of the site and an unnamed and unformed roadway that is substantially higher than the existing floodway. However, to use this road as the primary access to the site it would be necessary to construction approximately 1,500 metres of additional roadway. Due to the surrounding road levels it is recommended that the new section of roadway to the site (across the existing floodway) should be constructed at a minimum RL of 20.00 metres which provides a convenient access and a note should be placed on the rates database to inform the future owners of the lots that Back Electra Road is subject to flooding and that an alternative unformed section of road reserve to the south east of the property is available for emergency egress from the site in the event of flooding. The Reconfiguring a Lot Code Specific Outcome SO.376 provides the ability to request improved access to lots having regard for the road function. Therefore, Type Cross Section for Rural Roads – Access can be specified from the end of the existing wider section of road in Back Electra Road near the western end of 247 Back Electra Road.



No garbage collection is provided to this area and given that the site is approximately 27 km from the nearest area it is unlikely that the premises will ever be provided with refuse collection. Therefore, the access easements and road reserves will not be required to accommodate garbage trucks. State Planning Policies 1/92 – Development and the Conservation of Good Quality Agricultural Land The proximity of residential development, particularly where there is a small lot rural residential component, can inhibit farming practice. Good quality agricultural land has a special importance and should not be built on unless there is an overriding need for the development in terms of public benefit and no other site is suitable for the particular purpose. The fact that existing farm units and smallholdings are not agriculturally viable does not in itself justify their further subdivision or rezoning for non-agricultural purposes. In this regard, it is considered that whilst the proposal is creating two small rural house lots, the proposal is not creating any additional lots. The proposed lots are on the river bank and not considered to be Good Quality Agricultural Land. Additionally, the proposal will be utilising the balance land as a single lot under agricultural production. Referral Agencies The Department of Environment and Resource Management by letter dated 16 September 2010, has no requirements with regard to the proposal. Grounds of Submissions The application is code assessable and therefore not subject to public notification. Infrastructure Charges In this instance infrastructure charges contributions are not payable as the Equivalent Demand of the proposed development does not exceed the recognised Previous Contribution of the land. Conclusions The proposed development involves the reconfiguration of four (4) lots to create four (4) new lots and an access easement over proposed Lot 17 to service Lot 3 on C37250 which currently does not have a secure access point. The proposal has been assessed against the Planning Scheme and has been deemed to generally comply with the relevant codes. The application is therefore recommended for approval.



Attachments:

1 Locality Plan 2 DERM Response 3 Plan

Recommendation:

That application (Council Reference Number 321.2009.26434.1) for Lot Reconfiguration (Boundary Realignment) – 4 into 4 lots and an Access Easement at 323 Back Electra Road, Electra; land described as Lots 14 to 17 on RP 18252 and Lot 3 on C37250, County Cook, Parish Electra, be approved with conditions listed below:-

Development Conditions General 1. The Developer must comply with all of the conditions of this Development

Permit prior to the endorsement of a Plan of Survey unless otherwise stated within this notice;

2. The approved development is to be constructed generally in accordance with

Conditions contained within this notice and the following Approved Plans; Stormwater 3. Stormwater drainage must be designed and constructed in accordance with

the requirements of the Queensland Urban Drainage Manual and Bundaberg Regional Council;

4. Lateral cross drainage must be provided under the proposed new access

road to a minimum standard of Q10 ARI minor; 5. The design for the site drainage system must be undertaken such that flows

from adjacent and upstream properties will not be impeded by the proposed development;

6. The Developer must provide floodway indicators on the access roadway in

accordance with the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices; WSUD – Environmental 7. The drainage system for the development is to incorporate stormwater quality

improvement measures (WSUD) to remove pollutants, including sediment, nutrients, metals, trash, etc., in the construction phase in accordance with the former Burnett Shire Council PSP 5: Stormwater Management Planning Scheme Policy;



Roadway and Access 8. The Developer must construct Back Electra Road to the boundaries of

proposed Lots 15 and 16 from approximately adjacent to north-western boundary of 247 Back Electra Road. The roadway must be a minimum RL 20.00 metres or Q10 ARI (in the floodway) and be in accordance with the former Burnett Shire Council Development Works Planning Scheme Planning policy, AUS-SPEC rural road design criteria and Austroads – Rural Road Design to a Road Classification of Access. The vertical and horizontal geometry must be designed to a minimum 60 km/hr design standard. Road cross section shall be to BSC Type Cross Sections – Rural Roads R102B gravel road on a 6.0 metre formation, except on a curve with substandard geometry for gravel where the road will be sealed to a nominal pavement width of 6.1 metres (plus curve widening);

9. The intersection of the new road and the easement must be at 90 degrees

and be to a standard T-intersection layout; 10. All road pavements (excluding the easement) are to be designed in

accordance with Austroads P-T36/06 – A Pavement Design for Light Traffic: A Supplement to Austroads Pavement Design Guidelines. Back Electra Road is to be designed as an Access Road without Buses classification;

11. The access to the proposed Los 15 to 16 must be constructed generally in

accordance with the former Burnett Shire Drawing Type A Single Access as outlined in Standard Drawing R113 – 1. The details of the crossing can be finalised at the Operational Works phase;

12. The floodway overflow area associated with the localised flood event must be

provided with a bitumen seal in the Q100 ARI areas. The seal, or other method approved by the Manager Sustainable Development, must extend to the table drain where the lateral velocities would cause scouring of the roadway. The floodway overflow specifics must be determined at the Operational Works Stage;

Rural Numbering 13. For any new lot that does not have rural numbering, the developer must:

(a) Provide rural numbering in the location nominated by Council in accordance with Councils adopted rural numbering system using the AS/NZ 4819:2003 Geographic Information – Rural and Urban Addressing”; and

(b) Remove all rural numbers made redundant by this approval.



Electricity and Communications 14. The Applicant shall provide for the supply of electricity to the new Lots 15 and

16 of the proposed Lot Reconfiguration. Arrangements for electricity supply to the development shall be made by liaison for installation of the required works and entering into an agreement with local energy provider;

Note: In this instance Council has no objection to this lot being serviced by overhead supply as long as this infrastructure does not encroach over adjoining allotments;

15. The Applicant shall be responsible for the provision of telecommunications to

the Lots in the proposed Lot Reconfiguration by liaison for installation of the required works and entering into an agreement with the Telecommunications Authority;

Noxious Weeds

16. Remove all declared plants (noxious weeds) existing on the property prior to Council endorsement of the plan of survey.

Alteration/Damage To Services & Utilities 17. Alterations to public utilities, mains and services made necessary in

connection with any of the works arising from this approval including works to restore and reinstate all roads are to be completed at no cost to Council.

Other 18. Any placement of fill material within the subject land shall comply with the

Planning Scheme for Burnett Shire Council’s ‘Filling or Excavation Code’. All fill material to be placed on the subject allotment shall be tested and structurally certified in accordance with the Code;

19. Construction work on the site is not to commence on any day before 7.00am, or continue any such work after 6.00pm. No construction work is to be undertaken on a Sunday or Public Holiday.

20. Adequate precautions are to be taken to ensure dust does not cause

annoyance to adjacent sites or dwellings during construction on the site. This may mean the cessation of work during periods of adverse climatic conditions, if directed by Council.

Survey 21. Prior to Council endorsement of the Plan of Survey, lodge a certificate signed

by a licensed surveyor stating that after the completion of all works associated with the subdivision, survey marks were reinstated where necessary and all survey marks are in their correct position in accordance with the plan of survey as of a particular date.

Attachment 1

Attachment 1 - Locality Plan



Item 12 May 2011

Item Number:

N2

File Number:

321.2008.23148.1

Part:

DEVELOPMENT

Portfolio:


Subject:

286 Acacia Street, Woodgate - Development Application for Request to Change Existing Approval for Reconfiguring a Lot

Report Author:

Merinda Grayson, Planning Officer

Authorised by:

Wayne Phillips, Manager Planning (Coastal)


Nil -

Applicant:

K N Nicolson

c/- Wayne Say & Associates

Owner:

KN Nicolson & PA Nicolson

Location:

186 Acacia Street, Woodgate

RPD:

Lot 3 on RP121156, County Cook, Parish Marathon

Area:

1442 m2

Land Designation:

Residential

Planning Scheme:

Isis Shire Council



Background:

The former Isis Shire Council, at a meeting held on 26 February 2008 approved a development application for Reconfiguring a Lot on the subject site, 186 Acacia Street, Woodgate.

Proposal

A Request to Change the Existing Approval has been made under letter received by Council on 7 April 2011. The request proposes to change the existing approval to the extent detailed below:

Change the Existing Approval.

o Amendment of Condition 8 (Filling of Land). Considerations

Sections 374, 375 and 376 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 provide the legislative framework for considering a request to change a development approval. The Assessment and Decision of this application is in accordance with these provisions. Request to Change Development Approval

The Applicant has requested to amend Condition 8 of the approval such that filling of the land is not required and that any dwelling constructed on the land has a minimum habitable floor level of 3.4 metres AHD in accordance with the requirements of the former Isis Shire Council. The relevant condition is as follows: Condition 8 (Filling of Land)

8. (a) Proposed Lot 66 shall be filled such that the finished level of the land is not less than 3.0m AHD, excluding 1 in 4 tapering to natural surface levels on the north-east and south-east boundaries. The fill tapers on the other boundaries are to be into the road reserve. The height of fill may exceed 3.0m AHD where needed to achieve appropriate site drainage, to the satisfaction of Council. All fill placed on the site shall be contained within the boundaries of the subject land, including the toe of the batter. If filling requires modification of existing sewers, the developer shall pay for any necessary alterations, to the satisfaction of Council.

(b) The applicant shall provide to Council written evidence from a suitably

qualified person that compaction tests have been undertaken on the site and the results comply with Australian Standard AS3798 ‘Guidelines of Earthworks for Commercial and Residential Developments’. This information shall include “as constructed” survey clearly showing the finished fill levels and locations.

(c) Council’s property notes for lots where filling has occurred shall be noted

that:



“Prospective purchasers should be aware that the subject lot may have been filled. Details of the location of fill may be obtained from Council.”

(d) The developer shall provide written certification by a suitably qualified person that all fill deposited on the site is clean fill and not contaminated by acid sulfate soils, nor any other contaminants that have the potential to cause environmental harm.

Comments

The Filling of Land condition essentially provides immunity to flood/storm tide events on the proposed lot. However, it discounts that the surrounding area is still flooded and hence any hazard associated with the flood/storm tide event experienced by future occupants of a dwelling on the proposed Lot is unchanged by the filling of the land. Accordingly, the condition can be changed to accommodate a minimum habitable floor height requirement. It is recommended that the condition be augmented by a note on the Property Notes Database to reinforce the condition. This condition shall be amended as follows and a new property note shall be added to the decision notice as follows:

Any house constructed on proposed Lot 66 must have a minimum habitable floor height of RL 3.4 AHD or such other height as adopted by Council at the time of the submission of the Building Approval.

Property Note:

(A) The minimum habitable floor height for this allotment (Lot 66) must be a minimum of RL 3.4 AHD or such other height as adopted by Council at the time of the submission of the Building Approval.

Conclusions

Council’s Planning and Development Department consider that the planning provisions and policies applying to the development have not changed significantly under the current Planning Scheme despite the application being assessed and approved under a now superseded planning scheme.

Attachments:

1 Original Decision Notice

Recommendation:

That:

(A) The Applicant be advised that Council has considered the representations contained in their letter received on 27 September 2010 and email of 27 January 2011 regarding a Change to Approval for Reconfiguring a Lot, over land situated at 186 Acacia Street, Woodgate; land described as Lot 3 on RP121156, County Cook, Parish Marathon, and agrees with the request to the extent detailed below: -



Amended Condition 8 (Filling of Land)

Any house constructed on proposed Lot 66 must have a minimum habitable floor height of RL 3.4 AHD or such other height as adopted by Council at the time of the submission of the Building Approval.

New Property Note for Proposed Lot 66

The minimum habitable floor height for this allotment (Lot 66) must be a minimum of RL 3.4 AHD or such other height as adopted by Council at the time of the submission of the Building Approval.

AND

(B) Council issue a Notice to the Applicant

Attachment 1

Attachment 1 - Original Decision Notice



Item 12 May 2011

Item Number:

N3

File Number:

322.2010.29085.1

Part:

DEVELOPMENT

Portfolio:


Subject:

111 Stockyard Road, North Isis - Material Change of Use - 13 Additional Sites

Report Author:


Authorised by:

Richard Jenner, Senior Planner


Nil -

Applicant:

Ian Lacey & Soraya Lacey

Owner:

Ian Lacey & Soraya Lacey

Location:

111 Stockyard Road, North Isis

RPD:

Lot 21 on RP818602, County Cook, Parish Childers

Area:

26.76ha

Land Designation:

Rural Zone

Planning Scheme:

Planning Scheme for Isis Shire Council 2007



Subject: 111 Stockyard Road, North Isis; land described as Lot 21 on RP818602, County Cook, Parish Childers. Development Application for Material Change of Use for Extension of existing Caravan Park (additional 13 sites).

Proposal Council is in receipt of an Application for a Material Change of Use for additional sites at the existing Stockyard Road Caravan Tourist Park located at 111 Stockyard Road, Childers more accurately described as Lot: 21 on RP 818602. The proposal is for an additional seven (7) powered sites and six (6) unpowered sites. It is also proposed to construct an additional female amenities block (12m x 3m).

Subject Site & Surrounding Land Uses The site is currently operating as a tourist park. The site gains access from Stockyard Road. There are currently sixteen (16) existing powered sites and four (4) existing unpowered sites. There is an existing toilet block, caretakers dwelling and office on the site. The site is largely screened from Stockyard Road with mature vegetation.

Planning History The tourist park has been operational for 13 years. The original Material Change of Use application was issued on 30 November 1998 by the former Isis Shire Council. The conditions of this approval carry with the land. This approval is to be read in conjunction with the approval reference TP455 and dated 30 November 1998.

Considerations

Isis Shire Council Planning Scheme 2007

Rural Zone Code The site currently operates as an approved 20 site caravan and camping park. The site currently contains 16 powered sites and 4 unpowered sites. The proposal is to add an additional 7 powered sites and 6 unpowered sites. There will also be an additional 12m x 3m building on the site to be utilised as a female amenities block.



It is considered that the proposed small scale of the additional sites will not affect the overall outcomes of the Rural Zone Code. The portion of the site taken up by the caravan park is small and will be screened from Stockyard Road. There are arable sections of the property that have been farmed in the past but the caravan and camping sites are located well away from this area. The proposed amenities block and BBQ facilities are proposed to be located in excess of 250 metres from adjoining properties and 180m from the nearest adjoining agricultural use. Based on the above assessment, the extension to the existing operating caravan and camping park is considered to be generally in accordance with the provisions of the Rural Zone Code.

Rural Development Code It is considered that the proposed development will not compromise or encumber rural activities on adjoining land. The use of the subject site as a caravan and camping park has been undertaken as a lawful use for over 10 years. The development of additional sites will not adversely affect the rural and natural environments of the locality.

Engineering or Internal Referral

Water No council reticulated water is available to service the development. The submitted VDM Engineering Report states that it is proposed to source water for the additional sites from the Paradise Dam through the Sun Water Irrigation System and that the water will be filtered and treated to a potable standard to supply the Caravan Park needs.

Sewerage The site is located in an unsewered area. The proposal must demonstrate compliance with Council’s On-site Treatment and Disposal – Planning Scheme Policy. The submitted VDM engineering report states that a package treatment plant will be provided on-site to cater for the additional sites and that all effluent will be treated in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and dispersed to a suitable area set aside for irrigation purposes, with details to be provided at the operational works stage. The original proposal was for 30 additional sites but was subsequently revised to 13 additional sites in order to not trigger an ERA application by keeping the total volume of effluent below 21 EP. (Refer Urban Planet letter of 11 February 2011 and attachments for details.)



Roadworks & Car Parking Stockyard Road is a Local Government controlled road and has a road hierarchy of Rural Access Road. The proposed layout of internal roads and car parks is depicted on Plan No 09933 drawn by Urban Planet and dated 6 February 2011. The site requires clearing of vegetation/trees within the road reserve in order to comply with Austroads Guide to Road Design road traffic safety visibility requirements. Road widening will also be conditioned to comply with relevant standards and to provide an adequate turning lane.

It is noted that Stockyard Road has been conditioned to be widened between Rosemont and Greci Roads as part of future stages of the Abington Heights Development.

State Planning Policies It is considered that the proposed use will not result in the removal of GQAL from possible future production. Apart from an amenities block, no buildings are proposed as part of this development. Based on this assessment, it is considered that the proposal will not offend the outcomes of State Planning Policy 1/92 - Development and the Conservation of Agricultural Land.

Referral Agencies There are no referral agencies relevant to the assessment of this application.

Grounds of Submissions The application was publicly notified between 22/2/2011 to 17/3/2011. One (1) ‘properly made’ submission was received during this time. The summary the submission and Council officer comments are below: 1. The entrance to Stockyard Road from Goodwood Road is dangerous and

needs to be upgraded to include turning lanes.

Council Officer comments: Goodwood Road is a State Controlled Road but the Department of Transport and Main Roads are not a concurrence agency in the assessment of this application. Therefore Council has no jurisdiction in this regard to condition upgrading of the Goodwood Road/Stockyard Road intersection.

2. Stockyard Road itself is too narrow and virtually only one lane of bitumen and

needs to be widened to cater for the increased traffic.



Council Officer Comments: Council officers undertook a site visit to inspect the road conditions before formally assessing the application. It is considered that the existing road is below the current standards outlined in the Isis Shire Council Planning Scheme 2007 – with the road being at some sections only 3.1 metres wide. This is considered unsafe for motorists. Therefore, it is considered reasonable and relevant to widen the road to the current standard for an indicative distance of 30 metres before and 30 metres after the entrance to the subject site to alleviate some of the concerns with safety and the road standards in this locality. This will be formally assessed at the operational works stage.

3. Most importantly, the entrance to the caravan park is on a crest and there is

no clear vision of oncoming traffic in both direction and it is in effect a death trap. I myself have had many close calls on the crest with traffic both entering and exiting the park.

Council Officer Comments: Council officers undertook visibility tests at the subject site and agree there is reduced visibility at the entrance to the subject site. Council will be conditioning an upgrade to the driveway entrance to include adequate signage and upgrade the standard of the driveway crossover. This upgrade will also include some maintenance of the road reserve foliage to assist in increasing the visibility for vehicles entering and exiting the subject site.

Infrastructure Charges No headworks charges are applicable in this instance as the site is in a Rural Zone and the Isis Shire Council Headworks Policy does not apply to development in the Rural Zone.

Conclusions It is considered that the proposed extension to the existing caravan park is consistent with the relevant provisions of the Isis Shire Planning Scheme 2007. The proposal will utilise land that is an existing approved site for caravanning and camping and will not fragment the surrounding Good Quality Agricultural land. The issues raised in the submission during the public notification period are considered valid and a site inspection by Council officers revealed that unsafe existing road standards exist immediately in front of the site. These issues have been addressed by conditions that are considered reasonable and relevant to the application.

Attachments:

1 Locality Plan 2 Proposed Plan



Recommendation:

That application (Council Reference Number 322.2010.29085.1) for a Material Change of Use for an extension to the existing Caravan Park (additional 13 sites) at 111 Stockyard Road North Isis; land described as Lot 21 on RP 818602, County of Cook, Parish of Childers be approved with conditions as listed below; Part 1(a). Conditions Imposed by the Assessment Manager Approved Plans 1. The proposed development is to be generally constructed in accordance with

Conditions contained within this notice and the following Approved Plans;

Plan/Document number Plan/Document name Date

09933-06 Site Plan drawn by Urban Planet Town Planning Consultants

February 2011

CAM003 Elevations – Female Amenities Block drawn by Campac

April 2010

2. Should the proposed use exceed 21ep the Developer will be required to seek a

Material Change of Use for an Environmentally Relevant Activity – 61 – Onsite Waste Water Disposal.

Management of the site 3. A Management Plan is to be prepared to include the following elements:

(i) Code of conduct; (ii) House rules; (iii) External visitor policy; (iv) Hours of use of washing machines and communal areas; (v) Noise requirements and limitations; (vi) Safety (including fire and emergency management plans) (vii) Security; (viii) Cleaning routines and procedures; (ix) Onsite alcohol limitations or ban; (x) Designated outdoor smoking areas; (xi) Refuse disposal and location of screened area onsite; (xii) Maintenance program; and (xiii) Complaints mechanisms. A copy of the plan must be submitted to the Director Planning and Development for review and endorsement. Once endorsed, this management plan is to be read in conjunction with this Decision Notice.



4. The provision of a manager or supervisor, over the age of 18 years is required at all

times. Guests shall not at any time be used as temporary managers. It will be the ongoing responsibility of the Developers to ensure an appropriate person is employed to manage the facility in accordance with the Management Plan.

Buffer 5. The Developer is to provide buffer areas to be incorporated within the development to

minimise land use conflict between adjoining agricultural practices, and the proposed residential use of the subject land;

Water

6. Potable water supplied to the patrons of the park shall comply with the Australian

Drinking Water Guidelines at all times. The applicant shall install and maintain appropriate devices to meet the required standard. The applicant shall provide written evidence to Council’s satisfaction of compliance with the guidelines.

Wastewater treatment and disposal

7. The development is to connect to an on-site sewerage facility that is designed, operated, constructed and maintained in accordance with the Queensland Plumbing and Wastewater Code and Australian Standard AS 1547 - 2000 under the Plumbing and Drainage Act 2002 (and Councils Planning Scheme On-site Treatment and Disposal Policy).

Fire Safety 8. Provide a sustainable water tank supply to service the development’s fire fighting and

water demands;

9. Fire fighting facilities shall be installed to comply with the requirements of the relevant fire control authority;

Roadworks 10. The Developer must widen Stockyard Road for the full frontage of Lot 21 on RP

818602 to a 6.0m seal on an 8.0m formation as per Isis Standard Drawing Number C043 – 06 for a Rural Access, sealed construction.

11. In conjunction with the widening of Stockyard Road the Developer must design and

construct the Stockyard Road / Caravan Park access Road Intersection in accordance with Austroads Part 5 Intersections at grade. The requirements shall include a sealed BAL and sealed BAR turn treatment on Stockyard Road into the Caravan Park Access Road. The road geometries shall be designed such that the swept paths of turning vehicles into and out of the site do not cross the Stockyard Road centreline.



12. The proposed roadworks are to be designed both in layout and structural strength to

cope with the frequencies and weights of traffic likely to use it, as determined by Council. The design shall be carried out by a Chartered Professional Engineer in accordance with the methods detailed Austroads P-T36/06 – Pavement Design for Light Traffic: A Supplement to Austroads Pavement Design Guidelines;

13. The Developer must design and construct the entry and exits to the caravan park and

remove vegetation in Stockyard Road accordance with the Sight Distance Requirements of Figure 3.2 of Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 and Isis Standard Property Accesses Unkerbed Roads Drawing C043 – 01

14. The internal accesses must be sealed (bitumen, concrete, or similar) from the

property boundary to a minimum of 20 metres into the property. 15. Internal roads must be all weather construction designed and built to the satisfaction

of the Manager Sustainable Development. These roads need not be imperviously sealed. Road widths shall be in appropriate for use by Caravans.

Carparking 16. Provision of one off-street car parking and vehicle manoeuvring area for visitors to

each of the 13 additional caravan sites in accordance with Council’s requirements. Such car parking, access and manoeuvring areas shall be:-

(a) constructed in gravel to an all weather standard; (b) designed to include a manoeuvring area to allow vehicles to leave the site in a

forward gear; (c) designed to include the provision of fill and/or boundary retaining walls to allow for

the containment and management of site stormwater drainage as required; (d) drained to the relevant site discharge point; and (e) designed in accordance with AS/NZS2890.1-2004: ‘Parking Facilities Part 1: Off-

street Car Parking’; Noise 17. Any noise produced by the use is not to exceed the background noise level plus

5db(A) (6am-6pm) or background noise level plus 3db(A) (6pm-10pm) or background noise level (10pm-6am) measured as the adjusted maximum sound pressure level at any noise sensitive place;

Lighting 18. External lighting is to be designed in accordance with AS4282-1997: ‘Control of the

Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting’ so as not to cause nuisance to nearby residents or passing motorists;

General

19. All works are to be undertaken at the developer’s expense;



20. All Conditions contained in this Decision Notice are to be completed/complied with

before the use hereby approved commences, unless otherwise stated within this notice;

Part 1(b). Assessment Manager’s Advices (a) The clearing to be removed to comply with traffic visibility requirements primarily

constitutes the removal of trees and vegetation in the road reserve to the left of the Caravan Park exit driveway heading north. A clear view measured in the traffic exit lane from a point 2.5 metres back from the edge of the road must be achieved to a point at least 160m to the approaching traffic on Stockyard Road.

(b) The conditions of this approval are to be read in association with the original town

planning approval issued 30 November 1998 ref: TP458.

Attachment 1


Attachment 2

Attachment 2 - Proposed Plan



Item 12 May 2011

Item Number:

N4

File Number:

322.2011.31568

Part:

DEVELOPMENT

Portfolio:


Subject:

8 Arthur Street, Bundaberg South - Material Change of Use - Additional Unit

Report Author:

Aaron Kelly, Planning Officer

Authorised by:

Rob Thompson, Manager Planning (City & Hinterland)


Nil -

Applicant:

Jubilee Homes Pty Ltd

Owner:

RJ Lyons & VD Lyons

Location:

8 Arthur Street, Bundaberg South

RPD:

Lot 15 on RP382, County Cook, Parish Bundaberg

Area:

1,012 m2

Land Designation:

Residential "B" (Local Area 4)

Planning Scheme:

Planning Scheme for Bundaberg City



Proposal:

This is an Application seeking a Development Permit for a Material Change of Use to erect one (1) additional two (2) bedroom Accommodation Unit attached to the frontage of three (3) existing Accommodation Units on the site, thereby making four (4) Accommodation Units over the site all contained within one (1) building. Plans submitted with the Application illustrate the additional unit, with a total floor area of approximately 87 square metres, will be sited in the existing vacant space within the area of 15.4 metres from the Arthur Street front property boundary. It is intended for the new unit to match in with the existing development and hence will be of face-brick and colourbond roof construction. The new unit has been allocated a single garage and the two (2) existing visitor car parking spaces for which the new additional unit will replace have been relocated to within the building setback to Arthur Street. The total building footprint for the site as a result of the new unit will increase to 440.764 square metres which equates to building site coverage of 43.5%.

Subject Site & Surrounding Land Uses

The site is an existing Residential “B” Precinct allotment located on the eastern side of Arthur Street, Bundaberg South. Currently on the site are three (3) lowset Accommodation Units (a Triplex) sited to the rear of the site. Surrounding land uses are predominantly low density residential but however with the general area immediately comprising mostly Residential “B” precincts the area is experiencing a transition form low density to medium density residential development as evidenced by the site directly adjacent to the north which has recently gained a Development Permit for four (4) Accommodation Units.

Planning History

A Decision Notice for a Development Permit for Material Change of Use was issued for the three (3) Accommodation Units over the site 2 November, 2003. These units and all relevant Conditions have been completed.

Considerations

Planning Scheme

The site is included within a Residential "B" Precinct in Local Area 4 in the Planning Scheme for Bundaberg City. The proposed development, one (1) additional Accommodation Unit, thereby making four (4) Accommodation Units on the site, is defined as a Residential Multi Unit in the Planning Scheme and will be assessed primarily against the provisions of the Medium Density Residential Code.

The development will also be assessed against the provisions of the Infrastructure Services Code, the Landscaping Code, the Vehicle Parking and Access Code and the Flood Management Code.



Medium Density Residential Code

Purpose

The purpose of the Medium Density Residential Code is:

“To ensure that medium density residences and caravan parks are provided in appropriate locations, that building form, siting, design and use provides and acceptable on-site residential environment, that an acceptable level of infrastructure provision is achieved and that adverse off-site impacts are within limits acceptable to the local community.” Being predominantly located in an area where Residential “B” Precincts are prevalent, unit developments are increasing becoming more common in the area and in the future the immediate area will most likely comprise medium density residential development. Other such existing sites include a Development Permit for four (4) Accommodation Units directly adjacent to the north of the subject site and in several allotments to the north in Burnett Street. In this instance a further additional unit on the subject site whereby three (3) Accommodation Units already exist is considered a good outcome for the area. A vacant space exists on the site to where future possibility has always been available for such an additional unit and such a development will go toward providing an acceptable built form, siting and design that is consistent with the streetscape. Overall, the proposed development is generally in accordance with the purpose of the Medium Density Residential Code, and the Acceptable Solutions prescribed.

Built Form, Setbacks and Open Space

Acceptable Solution A3.3 of the Medium Density Residential Code prescribes a minimum setback distance from the front property boundary of six (6) metres. The proposed Unit has a setback to the front property boundary of 5.247 metres. Acceptable Solution A5.1 prescribes a minimum setback distance of three (3) metres from side or rear boundaries. Where walls are built to within 1.5 metres the Code clarifies there are to be no openings and windows within this setback should have sills a minimum of 1.5 metres above ground level and are to be filled with translucent and/opaque materials. The proposed Unit contains a kitchen door opening and a bedroom window that are 2.13 metres from the northern (side) boundary. No sills and/or translucent/opaque materials within the window are proposed. In this instance it is considered these setback discrepancies are acceptable given the proposed additional units overall contribution to the consistency of the streetscape. The additional Accommodation Unit has been proposed to match the existing three (3) Accommodation Units on the site and has incorporated similar setback and open space arrangements. In no way is it seen that these setbacks compromise the integrity of the predominant character of the locality and provides and acceptable on-site residential environment.



In regards to the setback of the proposed unit to Arthur Street the Applicant has argued that located in an older area existing setbacks at 4 and 10 Arthur Street also encroach within the six (6) metres. The Applicant also argues that the setback distance to the wall is 5.847 metres, an encroachment of only 153mm. It is agreed with the Applicant in this instance that the proposed setback of the new building be allowed as it matches the spatial form and character of the precinct and is not detrimental to the streetscape. An open space plan submitted by the Applicant also demonstrates that the additional unit will not compromise the open space provisions for the development providing adequate communal and private open space overall.

Flood Management Code

Floor Level

The site is subject to Council’s adopted 2005, 2% Annual Exceedance Probability, ie. 1 in 50 year Burnett River Flooding. The adopted flood height for the site is 8.5 metres AHD. The floor level of the existing three (3) Accommodation Units on the site, measured at the front door by Council’s surveyors in early 2005 is 8.54 metres AHD. Under the provisions of the Planning Scheme’s Flood Management Code the minimum required habitable floor level of dwellings is required to be 300 mm above the adopted flood level for the site. The required floor level for the development therefore is 8.8 metres AHD. As part of this Application the Applicant has requested to match the floor level of the existing units at 8.54 metres AHD, 40mm above the adopted flood height for the site but 260 mm below the required level prescribed within the Flood Management Code. The Applicant argues that a 300 mm increase in height has negative ramifications on matching the building design and construction of the existing units whereby it has always been envisaged to construct a unit in this location. The existing units on the site have been constructed in accordance with Council’s Decision Notice dated 2 November, 2001. Condition (3)(b) required a floor level for the site of 8.425 metres. Critically, the adopted flood level for the site at the time of the approval was based on Council’s adopted 1942 Burnett River Flood levels. This level was 8.2 metres AHD, 300 mm below the current adopted flood height. Therefore, the existing units are 300 mm above the previous flood level for the site. It is considered that Council cannot agree to the Applicant’s request to match the existing floor level of the units with the new additional accommodation unit. The required minimum level of all habitable rooms within the new proposed unit will be required to be 300 mm above the adopted flood height for the site at 8.8 metres AHD in accordance with the Flood Management Code. This will be the set Condition.



Alternate Provision

Alternatively, if Council may wish to consider the Applicant’s request to match the existing floor level, which in effect is above the adopted flood height for the site (40mm) in this instance, Council may set a Condition requiring the provisions of an indemnity agreement from the Developer. Investigations carried out reveal that both Brisbane City Council and Ipswich City Council’s consider such concessions with the provision of either Conditions or Advices requiring an Applicant indemnity agreement particularly when it relates to new buildings on the same site with buildings constructed at the levels of superseded flood lines as it proposed in this case.

Of note, the site did not flood during the recent 2010 Christmas Burnett River Flood.

Engineering or Internal Referral

Water

The site has access to Council’s water supply via the property service that was installed for the existing service. Upgrades will be required to the meter to satisfy sub-metering requirements of the Plumbing and Drainage Act.

Sewerage

The existing units are connected to sewerage via a 150 mm VC sewerage main that traverses the adjacent property to the north at 6 Arthur Street. House drainage and a connection point to this line are achieved within the footpath and are hence free of traversing any other properties.

Stormwater Drainage

Stormwater Drainage works required as part of the previous approval over the site are considered adequate to cater for the proposed unit.

Roadworks & Car Parking

Previous works as part of the existing Accommodation Units approval on the site have required the completion of asphalt road widening and concrete ribbon footpath to the Arthur Street frontage. No external roadworks or upgrade to the existing crossover will be required. Standard conditions will apply to the proposed reconfiguration of the car parking and manoeuvring areas for the development.

Infrastructure Charges

Infrastructure charges contributions are required as per the attached calculation sheet.

Attachments:

1 Locality Plan 2 Proposal Plan 3 ICS Charges



Recommendation:

That application (Council Reference Number 322.2011.31568.1) for Material Change of Use – Code Assessment – for One (1) Additional Accommodation Unit at 8 Arthur Street, Bundaberg South; land described as Lot 15 on RP382, County Cook, Parish Bundaberg, be approved with conditions as listed below:- Part 1 - Conditions Imposed by the Assessment Manager

General

1. All works are to be undertaken at the Developer’s expense;

2. All Conditions contained in this Decision Notice are to be completed/complied with before the use hereby approved commences, unless otherwise stated within this notice;

Approved Plans

3. The proposed development is to be generally constructed in accordance with Conditions contained within this notice and the following Approved Plans;

Drawing number

Plan name Sheet No.

Prepared by Date

10/066 Site Plan 1 Blueprint Designs 8 April, 2011

10/066 Floor Plan 2 Blueprint Designs 8 April, 2011

10/066 Elevations 3 Blueprint Designs 8 April, 2011

Infrastructure Contributions

4. Payment of Infrastructure contributions for Sewerage, Water Supply, Stormwater, Transport (local and state controlled roads), Pedestrian and Cycle Ways, and Parks, Recreation and Community Land, in accordance with Council’s adopted Planning Scheme Policy, is required. Contributions required, if paid by 30 June, 2011, are:-

Type of Contribution Equivalent Demand

Recognised Previous Contribution

Amount

Sewerage 0.7 0 $2,408.65 Water Supply 0.7 0 $2,334.66 Stormwater 0.175 0 $262.50 Transport (local controlled road) 0.6 0 $813.27 Transport (state controlled road) 0.6 0 $829.79 Pedestrian and Cycle Ways 0.6 0 $420.84 Parks, Recreation and Community Land

0.6 0 $1,569.72



All contributions are payable prior to the issue of a Development Permit for Building Works, unless stated otherwise within this notice. The actual contribution payable will be adjusted if necessary to allow for variations determined in accordance with the applicable Planning Scheme policy current at the time of payment;

Flooding

5. The minimum habitable floor level of all habitable rooms within the proposed additional Accommodation Unit shall be a minimum of 300mm above Council’s adopted 2005 2% AEP, ie. 1 in 50 year Burnett River Flood height for the site. The adopted flood height for the site is 8.5 metres AHD. The required minimum floor level of all habitable rooms within the proposed additional accommodation unit is to be 8.8 metres AHD;

Water

6. Council permits one water property service only for each property. This means only one connection to the water main although there may be a potable and a fire service feeding from that connection. One only point of connection will be provide and maintained by Council;

7. The Developer is to provide a metered service, and internal infrastructure as required,

to satisfy the fire fighting and water supply demands of the proposed development; 8. Sub-meters are to be installed in accordance with the Water and Other Legislation

Amendment Act 2007; 9. Arrangements for the installation of any new metered service and sub-meters, or

removal of an existing service, are to be made with Council’s Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Planning Technical Support Section. All works are to be undertaken by Council at the Developer’s expense;

Roadworks and Car Parking

10. Provision of an off-street car parking and vehicle manoeuvring area for two (2) visitor parking spaces in accordance with Council’s requirements. Such car parking, access and manoeuvring areas are to be:-

10.1 constructed and sealed with bitumen, asphalt, concrete or approved pavers; 10.2 line-marked into parking bays; 10.3 designed to include a manoeuvring area to allow vehicles to leave the site in a

forward gear; 10.4 designed to include the provision of fill and/or boundary retaining walls to allow

for the containment and management of site stormwater drainage as required; 10.5 sign posted to indicate entry / exit points, in addition to line marking, to indicate

the traffic flow through the site; 10.6 drained to the relevant site discharge point; 10.7 designed in accordance with AS/NZS2890.1-2004: ‘Parking Facilities Part 1:

Off-street Car Parking; 10.8 be provided with a 0.5 metre wide landscaped strip separating the visitor car

parking area from the footpath in accordance with the Blueprint Designs Site Plan, Drawing 10/066, Sheet 1, dated 8 April, 2011;



Fencing

11. The provision of a 1.8 metre high solid screen fence along the side and rear boundaries of the site, commencing from the front boundary of the subject property, where such fencing does not currently exist. From the front building line of the structure to the front boundary of the site such fencing may be reduced to a height of 1.2 metres with exception of any private open space areas between the main building line and Arthur Street. The total cost of this new fencing is to be met by the Developer;

12. Where the fence screens laundry clothes drying areas, the fence is to be extended to

return to the building to enclose the clothes drying areas; 13. Should any existing fence provide insufficient screening then the Developer may, by

agreement with the owner/s of the neighbouring property, replace the existing fence wholly at the Developer’s expense. Any replacement fence must comply with the requirements of this approval;

Landscaping

14. Landscaping of the site is to:-

14.1 consist of the construction of permanent garden beds planted with trees and shrubs, with particular attention to the street frontages of the site. Landscaping is to be completed prior to the premises being occupied and is to be maintained while the use of the premises for the ‘approved use’ continues;

14.2 include species recognised for their low water requirements and is to be provided with an approved controlled underground or drip watering system. Any such system is to be fitted with an approved testable backflow prevention device at the Developer’s expense. Please liaise with Council’s Building Services, and Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Planning Technical Support Sections in this regard;

Lighting

15. External lighting is to be designed in accordance with AS4282-1997: ‘Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting’ so as not to cause nuisance to nearby residents or passing motorists;

Noise

16. Any noise produced by the use is not to exceed the background noise level plus 5db(A) (6 am-6 pm) or background noise level plus 3db(A) (6 pm-10 pm) or background noise level (10 pm-6 am) measured as the adjusted maximum sound pressure level at any noise sensitive place;

Other

17. Any damage occasioned to the kerb and channelling and / or footpath is to be repaired / reinstated at the completion of all works;



18. A sufficient area is to be provided for the storage of all waste bins. This area is to be sealed, screen fenced and designed so as to prevent the release of contaminants to the environment;

19. Any placement of fill material within the subject land is to comply with the Planning

Scheme for Bundaberg City’s ‘Filling and Excavation Code’. All fill material to be placed on the subject allotment is to be tested and structurally certified in accordance with the Code;

Attachment 1


Attachment 2

Attachment 2 - Proposal Plan

Attachment 3

Attachment 3 - ICS Charges



Item 12 May 2011

Item Number:

N5

File Number:

322.2006.17034.2

Part:

DEVELOPMENT

Portfolio:


Subject:

115 Takalvan Street, Avoca - Material Change of Use - Removal of 11 Existing Car Bays

Report Author:

Jenita Porter, Para Planner

Authorised by:



Nil -

Applicant:

Big W

Owner:

Sugarland Shopping Centre Pty Ltd

Location:

115 Takalvan Street, Avoca

RPD:

Lot 100 on SP126643, County Cook, Parish Bundaberg

Area:

7.786 ha

Land Designation:

Commercial (Local Area 3)

Planning Scheme:




Proposal: This is a Development Application to permit the removal of 11 existing Car parks associated with Sugarland Shopping Centre. The Applicant submitted an operation works application (file number 323.2011.31410.1) on 11 February 2011 for civil works associated extension of the existing loading dock for the Big W shop within Sugarland Shopping Centre. The creation of this shall decrease the amount of required car parks for the shopping centre. Subject Site & Surrounding Land Uses The subject is located on the western side of Takalvan Street, Avoca. The site also has frontages on Heidke and Johnston Streets, Avoca. Currently on the subject site is the existing Sugarland Shopping Centre. Surrounding land uses in the area comprise of a mix of commercial, industrial and residential land uses. Considerations Planning Scheme Vehicle Parking and Access Code Council’s records show that there are currently 1,347 car parking spaces available on site, these have been provided in accordance with the shopping centre’s current configuration and Council approvals. It being noted that a concession had been granted by Council for the number of car parking spaces servicing the centre in earlier approvals. The proposed removal of Car parks shall reduce the amount of required car parks for Sugarland Shopping Centre. Therefore provision of works shall include the conditioning of a car parking contribution for each car park being removed, i.e. $3,575.00 per car park. It is noted that Big W has removed the parking spaces for a safer loading and unloading area and therefore they are seeking a reduction in the total fee for the removal of the 11 car parks. They have requested the reduction as they have opted to remove an extra 4 parking spaces although not being necessary but to ensure additional safe manoeuvring and unloading of trucks within this designated area. Engineering Water and Sewerage The site has access to Councils reticulated water and sewerage systems, the proposed loading/ unloading bay shall not create a detrimental impact on Council’s water and sewerage infrastructure services.



Roadworks & Car Parking Provision of works shall include the conditioning of a contribution to council amounting $25,025.00 for the 7 car parking spaces required to be removed. It is noted a concession is recommended to be granted for the extra 4 parking spaces that the applicant has removed to ensure the safety of manoeuvring and unloading trucks. Referral Agencies The Department of Transport and Main Roads provided their concurrence agency comments by letter dated 18 April 2011. Infrastructure Charges In this instance infrastructure charges contributions are not payable as the Equivalent Demand of the proposed development does not exceed the recognised Previous Contribution of the land.

Attachments:

1 Locality Plan 2 Proposal Plan 3 Concurrence Response

Recommendation:

That application (Council Reference Number 322.2006.17034.2) for Material Change of Use for Removal of 11 Existing Car Bays at 115 Takalvan Street, Avoca; land described as Lot 100 on SP126643, County Cook, Parish Bundaberg, be approved with conditions as listed below:- Part 1(a). Conditions Imposed by the Assessment Manager Car Parking Contribution 1. In lieu of the removal of 11 car parking spaces Council shall require a cash

contribution to the amount of $25,025.00 (based on 7 car spaces at $3,575 each and a concession being granted for the 4 extra parking spaces being removed for safety reasons). This is to be paid prior to the commencement of Operational Works.

Emergency Exits 2. Ensure the two (2) emergency exits located within the southern side of the

building (where the ramp is to be located) maintain compliance with the current Building Legislations and Fire Safety Requirements.



Part 1(b). Assessment Manager’s Advices A. Please Note this Decision notice does not represent approval against the

Building Act 1975 and the Building Regulations 2006. Part 2. Concurrence Agency’s Conditions The Department of Transport and Main Roads, by letter dated 18 April 2011 (copy letter attached for information).

Attachment 1


Attachment 2

Attachment 2 - Proposal Plan



Item 12 May 2011

Item Number:

N6

File Number:

325.2010.28547.1

Part:

DEVELOPMENT

Portfolio:


Subject:

Greathhead Road, 80 Greathead Road, Ashfield - Negotiated Decision Request - Fourteen Lot Subdivision and Park (Sanctuary Park Stage 4)

Report Author:

Grant Barringer, Planning Officer

Authorised by:



Nil -

Previous Items:

N2 - Greathead Road & 80 Greathead Road, Ashfield - Material Change of Use and Reconfiguration of a Lot for Fourteen Lot Subdivision and Park (Sanctuary Park Stage 4). - Planning & Development Committee Meeting - 17 February 2011

Applicant:

Sommerfeld Jensen Campbell Pty Ltd

Owner:

G Santalucia & PM Santalucia

Location:

Greathead Road, 80 Greathead Road, Ashfield

RPD:

Lot 11 on SP209684 and Lot 1 on RP134143, County Cook, Parish Kalkie

Area:

6.976 ha, 2365 m2

Land Designation:

Local Area 6

Planning Scheme:




Background:

By Notice dated 18 February 2011 Council approved a Fourteen Lot Subdivision and Park (Sanctuary Park Stage 4) on Greathead Road, 80 Greathead Road, Ashfield. By letter dated 4 March 2011 the Applicant suspended their appeal period and by letter dated 1 April 2011 made representations regarding a number of Conditions contained within the Decision Notice. Considerations

The Conditions of Approval

The Applicant’s representations with respect to condition 6, 19 and 26 and Planning and Development’s comments and recommendations are detailed below. Condition 6

6. The Applicant shall provide a multi-modal pathway link from the internal multi-modal pathway network within the Subdivision to the Bundaberg Ring Road pathway;

Applicants Representation

The Applicant objects to the requirement that the developer bore the entire cost of the pedestrian crossing link to the Bundaberg ring road from the internal pathway network, surplus to the applicable infrastructure contributions within condition 5.

The Applicant has indicated that they have no objection to a condition that includes the development of this pedestrian link. The Applicant has suggested an alternative condition to read: “The developer may offset the cost of the required works against the Infrastructure Contribution amount payable for pedestrian and Cycle Ways as required by condition 5 of this approval. If the cost of works exceeds the amount payable, the developer may offset the additional costs against future Infrastructure Contribution amounts payable for pedestrian and Cycle Ways by the developer or the developer’s associated entities.’ Comments

Council’s Planning and Development Department have considered the Applicant’s representations and provide the following comments:

Drawing No: BCC_ICP_PCW_004 of the Transport Pedestrian Paths and Cycle Ways Trunk Infrastructure Policy identifies the existing and proposed 1.8 metres wide pathway that traverses the subject site labelled PWF29 (Collector path).



The original recommended conditional decision notice that was put forward to the Planning and Development Committee meeting on the 17 February 2011 included the condition for the pedestrian link to the Bundaberg ring road. This condition allowed the required works to be credited against the relevant infrastructure contributions

It is recommended that the condition be amended to reflect appropriate crediting for the pedestrian bridge work: 6. The developer shall provide a multi-modal pathway link, of equal width

from the internal multi-modal pathway network within the subdivision to the Bundaberg Ring Road pathway. The developer may offset the cost of the required scheduled works (as agreed to by the Director of Bundaberg Regional Council’s Planning and Development Department) against the Infrastructure Contribution amount payable for pedestrian and Cycle Ways as required by condition 5 of this approval. If the cost of works exceeds the amount payable, the developer may offset the additional costs (as credited Equivalent Demand Units- EDU’s) against future Infrastructure Contribution amounts payable for pedestrian and Cycle Ways by the developer or the developer’s associated entities. The bridge must be suspended above the existing culvert.’

Condition 19

19. Q100ARI flowpaths traversing the proposed development parkland shall be contained within easements, of sufficient width to transport the Q100ARI flow with adequate freeboard per Queensland Urban Drainage Manual requirements. Easement documentation must be acceptable to Council and be prepared at the full cost of the Applicant. Native grass and boulders must line the base of the drainage path between the drainage outlets and the natural creek corridor;

Applicants Representation

The applicant seeks an amended condition to read: “Q100ARI flowpaths traversing the proposed development parkland shall be contained within corridors of sufficient width to transport the Q100ARI flow with adequate freeboard per Queensland Urban Drainage Manual requirements. Native grass and boulders must line the base of the drainage path between the drainage outlets and the natural creek corridor at the developers cost;” Comments

The parkland area (Lot 150) originally conditioned the requirement of an easement for the said Q100 flows. This requirement is not necessary and conflicts with condition 39 which require Lot 150 to be dedicated as Public Use Land for Park and Drainage Purposes.



The Planning and Development department agree with the request and will recommend this amended condition for inclusion in the Negotiated Decision Notice. Condition 26

26. The Greathead Road frontage of Lots 72 and 73 must be constructed as follows:-

o Construction of layback kerb and channelling for the full length of the

development frontage. Works must match existing alignments in Greathead Road;

o Pavement construction and asphaltic concrete sealing is required to the full development frontage from the proposed kerb and channel alignment to the full depth pavement of the existing carriageway;

o In conjunction with the construction of kerb and channelling the Applicant must provide a verge formation at three (3) percent grade;

o A 1.8m footpath is to be provided to the frontage of each lot; Applicants Representation

The applicant requests that the last dot point of condition 26 reflect council’s standard drawing. Comments

The Condition incorrectly referenced 1.8n instead of 1.5m. The standards footpath requirement of 1.5 metres wide is recommended to replace 1.8m reference and read:

26. The Greathead Road frontage of Lots 72 and 73 must be constructed as follows:-

o Construction of layback kerb and channelling for the full length of

the development frontage. Works must match existing alignments in Greathead Road;


o In conjunction with the construction of kerb and channelling the Applicant must provide a verge formation at three (3) percent grade;

o A 1.5 m footpath is to be provided to the frontage of each lot; Conclusion

Council’s Planning and Development Department consider that Condition’s 6, 19 and 26 be amended as stated above.



Attachments:

1 Applicant's Representation 2 Original Decision Notice 3 Locality Plan 4 Concurrence Agency Response

Recommendation:

That: - (A) The Applicant be advised that Council has considered the

representations contained in their letter received on 1 April 2011 regarding Conditions 6, 19 and 26 of Council’s Approval (Council Reference Number 325.2010.28547.1) for Material Change of Use and Lot Reconfiguration, over land situated at Greathead Road, 80 Greathead Road Ashfield; land described as Lot 11 on SP209684, Lot 1 on RP134143, County Cook, Parish Kalkie, 18 February 2011 and partly agrees with the Applicant’s representations to the extent detailed below:- Condition 6 be amended to read: 6. The developer shall provide a multi-modal pathway link, of equal

width from the internal multi-modal pathway network within the subdivision to the Bundaberg Ring Road pathway. The developer may offset the cost of the required scheduled works (as agreed to by the Director of Bundaberg Regional Council’s Planning and Development Department) against the Infrastructure Contribution amount payable for pedestrian and Cycle Ways as required by condition 5 of this approval. If the cost of works exceeds the amount payable, the developer may offset the additional costs (as credited Equivalent Demand Units- EDU’s) against future Infrastructure Contribution amounts payable for pedestrian and Cycle Ways by the developer or the developer’s associated entities. The bridge must be suspended above the existing culvert.’

And; Condition 19 be amended to read: 19. “Q100ARI flowpaths traversing the proposed development

parkland shall be contained within corridors of sufficient width to transport the Q100ARI flow with adequate freeboard per Queensland Urban Drainage Manual requirements. Native grass and boulders must line the base of the drainage path between the drainage outlets and the natural creek corridor at the developers cost;”



And; Condition 26 be amended to read: 26. The Greathead Road frontage of Lots 72 and 73 must be constructed as follows:-

o Construction of layback kerb and channelling for the full length of

the development frontage. Works must match existing alignments in Greathead Road;


o In conjunction with the construction of kerb and channelling the

Applicant must provide a verge formation at three (3) percent grade;

o A 1.5m footpath is to be provided to the frontage of each lot;

(B) Council issue a Negotiated Decision Notice to the Applicant as attached.

Attachment 2

Attachment 2 - Original Decision Notice

Attachment 3




Item 12 May 2011

Item Number:

N7

File Number:

325.2009.24240.1

Part:

DEVELOPMENT

Portfolio:


Subject:

1034 Goodwood Road Redridge - Material Change of Use & Reconfiguration of a lot ( 75 Residential Lots & 2 Balance rural Lots)

Report Author:


Authorised by:

Richard Jenner, Senior Planner


Nil -

Applicant: S Bonanno & L Bonanno

Owner: S Bonanno & L Bonanno

Location: 668 & 1034 Goodwood Road, Redridge

RPD: Lot 89 on CK377 & Lot 1 on SP137562, County Cook, Parish Childers

Area: 130.3087 ha & 240.7306 ha

Land Designation: Rural A (Superseded Scheme Zoning)

Planning Scheme: Superseded Planning Scheme for the Balance of the Shire of Isis

Proposal: This development application has been submitted for assessment under the Superseded Planning Scheme for the Balance of the Shire of Isis and relates to a Material Change of Use and Lot Reconfiguration application to create 75 rural residential lots and 2 balance rural lots. The proposed rural residential lots range in land area from 6,000 m2 to 8,950 m2. The proposal includes the construction of approximately 900 metres of existing road reserve, as well as an internal road network, to provide access to the proposed lots.



The applicant relates that all proposed lots are intended to be serviced with asphalt roads, kerb and channelling, underground stormwater drainage, and a reticulated water supply. In base terms the development proposal seeks to utilise a Material Change of Use and Reconfiguration of a Lot application to modify the current zoning of part of the subject land from Rural A to Rural Residential. Subject Site & Surrounding Land Uses The land is currently unimproved, contains a large dam, and sparse remnant woodland vegetation. Some of the site to the south is currently being cultivated with sugarcane, whilst the land to the north is open remanent woodland. The subject land is in the locality of Redridge, approximately 8.5 km to the north of Childers and approximately 35 km south of Bundaberg. The property currently gains access from Goodwood Road. There are areas around the subject site that have been developed for rural residential purposes, with other adjoining land uses being rural in nature. Planning History There is no planning history relevant to the assessment of this application. Considerations Superseded Planning Scheme for the Balance of the Shire of Isis 1.1 Superseded Planning Scheme Zoning The site is zoned Rural B in the Superseded Planning Scheme for the Balance of the Shire of Isis. The planning scheme states that land zoned Rural B shall generally be Arable land. Arable lands mean land which is suitable for a wide range of agricultural and horticultural crops with a moderate to no limitation for such use. The limitations may include erosion, slope (up to 12% depending on soil type), water availability and soil depth. This land is predominantly already in productive use. This is the most productive cane land in the Shire and its retention for long term crop production is required. Clause 7(2) of Part 2 of the Superseded Planning Scheme (By Law No. 36 – Town Planning) details requirements that any proposed rural residential development must comply with. These requirements have essentially been duplicated under Council’s Strategic Plan and will therefore be addressed below.



1.2 Superseded Strategic Plan The subject site has a Rural Residential designation (Precinct 9) in the Redridge locality of the superseded Strategic Plan. The goals of the Strategic Plan relevant to this application are:

• To provide for urban residential and rural residential growth with appropriate levels of services and facilities in appropriate locations within the Shire; and

• To provide appropriate access within the Shire. The ‘Rural Residential’ preferred dominant land use designation identifies areas suitable for rural residential development on land which is unsuitable for agricultural or horticultural purposes. At a base level it is acknowledged that the subject site is considered to represent a preferred location for rural residential development, subject to compliance with the broader provisions of the Strategic Plan. Objective 4.4.2 of the superseded Strategic Plan seeks to control the rate of rural residential development within the Shire and specifically, the rate of such development within each of the preferred locations for rural residential development. Council’s control shall be exercised by the following: (a) Requiring that the number of vacant allotments in any one of the defined

locations at the time of the rezoning application be not greater than seven (7) times the annual building rate on rural residential allotments within that defined rural residential location averaged over the preceding 24 months; and

(b) Requiring that the area to be rezoned be capable of subdivision into no more

than 30 lots, with subsequent rezonings not approved by Council until 20% of all lots of the previous stage have dwellings erected upon them.

To ascertain compliance with the provisions of the Strategic Plan, Council’s Planning Services program has undertaken a detailed analysis of the existing supply of vacant rural residential zoned land in the Redridge Locality, supply of land available through current development approvals for rural residential development, and the annual building rate for dwelling construction. For the purpose of the assessment the physical boundaries of the ‘Redridge Locality’ is identified on the Redridge Locality Plan attached to this report. For the purpose of identifying the dwelling construction activity in the Redridge locality (from March 2009 – March 2011) a listing of dwelling construction activity is attached to this report. For the purposes of determining the supply of vacant rural residential land and lots available via current development approvals in the Redridge locality, relevant data is attached to this report. Summary findings from the analysis include:

1. 25 dwellings have been constructed in the Redridge locality between March 2009 and March 2011, equating to an average dwelling construction rate of 13 dwellings per year;



2. 143 rural residential allotments exist in the Redridge locality comprised of vacant (constructed) rural residential allotments and approved (unconstructed) rural residential allotments;

3. Using the annual dwelling construction rate of 13 dwellings per year,

objective 4.4.2 of the Strategic Plan requires that not more than 91 (7 x 13 dwellings) vacant rural residential lots be available in the Redridge locality;

4. Development of the 75 rural residential lots in the current development

proposal in a addition to the existing 143 vacant rural residential lots (or unconstructed approvals) in the Redridge locality, equates to a total of 218 vacant lots (or unconstructed approvals) in the Redridge locality; and

5. 218 vacant rural residential lots (or unconstructed approvals) equates to

16 years of land supply using 2009 - 2011 dwelling completion rates in the Redridge locality.

Objective 4.4.2 of the superseded Strategic Plan seeks to control the rate of rural residential development within the former Isis Shire. Utilising an average annual dwelling completion rate of 13 dwellings for the Redridge locality, the Strategic Plan directs that not more than 91 vacant lots (or unconstructed approvals), be available for rural residential development purposes. Planning Services analysis currently identifies an existing lot supply well in excess of that prescribed by the Strategic Plan, with some 143 vacant rural residential lots (or unconstructed approvals) in the Redridge locality. In consideration of the current 75 lot rural residential proposal this existing land supply figure would increase to some 218 vacant lots (or unconstructed approvals), a figure 16.7 times the annual dwelling completion rate, and in excess of 100% more rural residential land than that directed to be provided (or available) by the Strategic Plan. The above analysis provides some difficulty for the applicant in demonstrating general compliance with the provisions of the Strategic Plan or in demonstrating a tangible demand for the current proposal. As previously discussed, it is acknowledged that the subject land has been identified as a preferred location for rural residential development, subject to compliance with the broader provisions of the Strategic Plan. The applicant has provided detailed representations advocating a demand or ‘need’ for the development, not based on the numeric standards of Planning Policy, but based on a consideration that the proposal in itself delivers a unique and better rural residential product to the community. In terms of community benefit the applicant has proffered a range of considered community benefits through the proposal, including, a proposed access road to the adjoining Forest View Estate; support and contribution to Councils reticulated water supply scheme; provision of a 12.0ha parkland dedication (now removed from the proposal); and a high standard of supporting infrastructure (road, drainage and power) not previously provided for rural residential development in the former Isis Shire area. It is important to note that Planning Services does not necessarily agree that all stated benefits, as provided by the applicant, represent a tangible or perhaps broader community benefit delivered expressly through the development.



Objective 4.4.2(i)(b) of the superseded Strategic Plan requires that the area to be rezoned be capable of subdivision into no more than 30 lots, with subsequent rezoning not approved by Council until 20% of all lots of the previous stage have dwellings erected upon them. The applicant in their submission to Council acknowledges a potential for some point of contention with Council’s interpretation of this provision, particularly as the proposal is currently seeking a development permit for 75 lots (plus 2 balance lots). As a way forward the applicant discusses the opportunity for Council to issue a combination of development permits and preliminary approvals to gain an acceptable level of compliance with this provision. The previous discussion relating to rural residential land supply, coupled with the above outline relating to the Strategic Plan provisions directing a maximum of 30 lots be provided in any single subdivision, leads Council’s Planning Services program to a summary position that the proposal, as submitted, exhibits an unacceptable level of noncompliance with specific provisions of the superseded Strategic Plan. As discussed above, these provisions deal with matters pertaining to rural residential land supply and the number of allotments capable of being approved in any single stage. Due to the nature of the conflict, which is quantifiable in terms of the amount of vacant rural residential lots (or unconstructed approvals) in the Redridge locality, the noncompliance cannot be resolved through any conditioning process. Another key component of the development concept, which requires some detailed discussion, relates to the proposed staging of development. The 75 lot development is intended to be constructed in 3 stages, with the first stage of development (30 lots) proposed to be located in the southern most section of the rural residential area, a minimum 400m from Goodwood Road. The applicant relates that this staging rationale compliments the natural attributes of the land (and is their preferred development area), and is anticipated to better support the significant costs associated with the proposed infrastructure undertakings in the development. Noting the applicant representations, the concern raised by Planning Services in respect to this staging rationale relates to the consideration that the staging methodology is not sequential and has the potential to alienate rural land between Goodwood Road and the first stage of development, should the development of the estate not proceed as intended. For this reason and noting Planning Services broader consideration that, as per the provisions of the Strategic Plan, the proposals staging rationale cannot be supported and any approved lots should be located adjoining Goodwood Road in the general footprint of proposed Stage 2 of development and part of Stage 3 of development to a maximum of 30 lots. Much discussion exists in development industry circles relating to the appropriate mechanisms to qualify a demand or need for specific development. These discussion invariably turn to more qualitative variations relating to land supply (e.g.: sales activity, land availability etc.) which may not be adequately represented through application of purely numeric standards in Planning Policy. In the present case the applicant, has gone to some lengths in the proposal to present a demand argument for the development based on case law perspectives with links to perceived community benefits for the development. In some sense from analysis of the applicants submission, a perspective could be drawn that the applicant and Planning Services are in agreement (somewhat) that application of the pure numeric



standard for demand (as per the Strategic Plan) provides limited favour for additional development in this locality. Whilst some discretion may exist for Council to support a limited amount of additional rural residential development in the Redridge locality drawing on the qualitative arguments relating to land supply, it would be difficult to sustain any credible argument that such discretion would extend to approval of the development as a whole (ie: 75 rural residential lots). Put simply, no rural residential land supply deficiency can be demonstrated, such that the full 75 lots in the development could be supported. Discussion relating to issue of a Preliminary Approval rather than a Development Permit for the full development does not alter or resolve the core matters of Planning Services summary position. It is Planning Services summary consideration that in recognition of some indentified locational advantages in developing part of the subject land for rural residential purposes (via the Strategic Plan) that a limited number of rural residential lots (maximum 30 lots) may be supported by Council. Support for an additional 30 rural residential lots would result in the total available land supply (comprising vacant land and approved land) for the Redridge locality to 173 lots, or 13.3 years supply of land for this locality using the identified dwelling completion rate. It is considered that this additional buffer of available rural residential allotments should placate the qualitative discussion concerning demand and land supply, whilst maintaining the integrity of the relevant Planning Policy. This conclusion draws on the following key aspects of the proposal:

a) The subject land is identified in the superseded Strategic Plan as representing a preferred location for rural residential development, subject to compliance with the broader provisions of the Plan;

b) The proposed development site is well positioned and central to the Redridge locality and adjoining rural residential estates (constructed or approved);

c) Appropriate standards of infrastructure (including reticulated water supply) can be provided to service the development without diminishing present service levels to existing users;

d) The proposed road connection between the proposed development and Forest View Estate is considered to represent a community benefit delivered by the development;

e) Approval of a maximum 30 residential allotments complies with the provisions Objective 4.4.2(i)(b) of the superseded Strategic Plan; and

f) All proposed new lots would be required to be located adjoining Goodwood Road in the general footprint of proposed Stage 2 of development and part of Stage 3 to a maximum of 30 lots.

The balance of the rural residential component of the development (i.e.: 45 lots) should be refused, as a sufficient supply of rural residential allotments is available within the Redridge locality. Other relevant matters contained within the Strategic Plan (eg: Agricultural Land matters) may be adequately resolved through conditions of approval.



1.3. Planning Scheme Provisions – Subdivision of Land By-Law No. 31 If the land is included in the Rural Residential designation under the Superseded Planning Scheme for the Balance of the Shire of Isis the reconfiguration must comply with the provisions of “Subdivision of Land By-Law No 31”. In this area, Council will only consider subdivision of land to a minimum of 4000 m² to 2.5 ha provided that no more than two adjoining allotments on a road frontage have a collective area of less than 1.2 ha. Rural residential subdivision shall also comply with the following requirements:

• The subject land shall be connected to a Council controlled water supply system;

• Access to the proposed subdivision shall be via an existing dedicated road or a new road proposed for dedication within the subdivision;

• Individual allotments within the proposed subdivision shall not have direct access to a Main Road;

• All roads and drainage. The proposed lots comply with the minimum requirements with regard to lot sizes as well as the minimum infrastructure requirements for a thirty (30) lot subdivision. Based on this assessment, the proposed subdivision satisfies the minimum requirements for Rural Residential development as prescribed under the Subdivision of Land Provisions of the superseded Planning Scheme. 1.4 Isis Planning Scheme 2007 The land is not zoned Rural Residential under the Isis Planning Scheme 2007, however Council has previously resolved to assess this application under the provisions of the superseded planning scheme. 1.5 Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan The subject site is designated as Rural Production Area under the Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan. No additional Rural Living land has been allocated for the Redridge area and indeed the whole of Childers for the life of the plan. Rural Residential subdivision would be considered prohibited against this plan. Engineering or Internal Referral Water The development is required to connect to a reticulated water supply as per the requirements of the Strategic Plan. It is considered that the proposed development should directly connect to the existing Woodgate main to service the development with a reticulated water supply. The development can be connected to the existing 225 mm water main in Goodwood Road, however, it will be provided with an appropriate sized balance tank. The water main is known as the ‘Rising Main’ in the policy.



Sewerage No sewerage reticulation is available for this development. Accordingly, each lot in the proposed development will be required to install an onsite waste water system. Roadworks & Car Parking The Developer proposes to construct the roadways generally to a kerbed Rural Residential Standard, refer Isis Shire Council standard drawing C0043-04. However, the Developer requested the use of layback instead of barrier kerb type and instead of the standard 150 mm pavement it is proposed to use the Austroads design standard to determine pavement depth. It is standard practice for a rural residential subdivision to provide an access driveway to each proposed allotment. The access is generally provided because if the access was not provided future residents would have to construct bridged (or piped) crossings over the roadway table drains. Given that the Developer proposes to construct roadways with kerb with channel and underground drainage the requirement for a driveway to each allotment is not reasonable. A bushfire access track exists within Lot 1 on SP137562. The developer proposed to maintain the track in its current location and provide an easement over the track through proposed Lot 4. In light of the recommendation to support a maximum of 30 allotments which will have access to Goodwood Road and Forest View Estate, the proposed Bushfire Access track (which is located centrally on the allotment) is not required. The Developer also proposes to link the development to Gregory Drive, which will be conditioned to be provided in the first stage of development and constructed to a rural residential standard. State Planning Policies As the balance of the site will remain in a rural designation, it is important to consider buffering to this balance agricultural land. The Planning Guidelines to buffer rural land should be applied in this instance. Referral Agencies The Department of Transport and Main Roads were a concurrence agency for the application. By letter dated 15 November 2010, DTMR issued its referral agency response, subject to conditions. There were several key matters conditioned, including the upgrade of the New Road/Garryowen Road intersection. Department of Environment and Resource Management were a concurrence agency for the application for vegetation clearing and an advice agency for wetlands. Their concurrence response was received on the 24 December 2009. There are conditions and advices to be placed on the approval. No advice was received from Ergon Energy.



Grounds of Submissions The application was on public notification between 29 April 2010 and 16 June 2010. Two (2) formal submissions were received. One (1) was considered to be ‘properly made’. Submitters Name Grounds of Submission Peter and Sandra Francis 29 Redridge Crescent, Childers QLD 4660 (Not properly made)

The concerns raised by the submitter relate to drainage and run off from the proposal.

Wide Bay Burnett Conservation Society Numerous concerns were raised by this submitter, including but not limited to: - The proposal is seeking a substantial

change to the superseded planning scheme;

- No proven need to approve additional rural residential land;

- It is inappropriate to locate 75 rural residential lots next to an active cane growing operation;

- The provision for public parkland has now been removed to the detriment of the application;

- The application has a potential for future land use conflicts between the ongoing agricultural activities and the proposed rural residential lots; and

- The loss of native vegetation is considered to be a detriment to the water quality of the dam with increased run off from the developed residential sites.

Council Officer Comments: It is considered that these concerns are general in nature and reflect the in depth discussion of the concerns raised in the body of the planning report. Infrastructure Charges Infrastructure charges contributions are required as per the attached calculation sheet. Conclusions The subject site is located in a locality that has been the subject of rural residential development consistent with the provisions of the superseded Strategic Plan. The provisions for superseded applications have now expired and the current IPA Isis



Shire Planning Scheme 2007 and the Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan Regulatory provisions prohibit any further rural residential subdivision in this locality. Council has agreed to assess the application against the superseded Planning Scheme and a full assessment against this scheme has found that the application, on balance, is generally consistent with the planning provisions of the superseded Planning Scheme for the Balance of the Shire of Isis and Strategic Plan, other than the provisions relating to land supply and those provisions directing a maximum of 30 lots to be created in any single stage of subdivision. All other matters are capable of being regularised via conditions pertaining to any approval. The detailed assessment contained in the body of the report has concluded that the significant levels of existing rural residential land supply (vacant lots and unconstructed approvals) in the Redridge locality, prohibits any reasonable consideration to be given by Planning Services that the current proposal exhibits an acceptable level of compliance with specific provisions of the superseded Strategic Plan. Due to the nature of the conflict, which is quantifiable in terms of the amount of vacant rural residential lots (or unconstructed approvals) in the Redridge locality, the noncompliance cannot be resolved through any conditioning process.

The report details that whilst some discretion may exist for Council to support a limited amount of additional rural residential development in the Redridge locality drawing on the qualitative arguments relating to land supply, it would be difficult to sustain any credible argument that such discretion would extend to approval of the development as a whole (i.e.: 75 rural residential lots). Put simply, no rural residential land supply deficiency can be demonstrated, such that the full 75 lots in the development could be supported. It is Planning Services summary consideration that in recognition of some indentified locational advantages in developing part of the subject land for rural residential purposes (via the Strategic Plan) that a limited number of rural residential lots (maximum 30 lots) may be supported by Council. Support for an additional 30 rural residential lots would result in the total available land supply (comprising vacant land and approved land) for the Redridge locality to 173 lots, or 13.3 years supply of land for this locality using the identified dwelling completion rate. It is considered that this additional supply buffer of available rural residential allotments should placate any reasonable qualitative discussion concerning demand and land supply, whilst maintaining the integrity of the relevant Planning Policy. Based on the criteria set out under the Council’s Strategic Plan to control the rate of development of rural residential lots within the Shire, and having regard for the current and imminent availability of lots in the area, the balance of the rural residential component of the development (i.e.: 45 lots) should be refused, as a sufficient supply of rural residential allotments is available within the Redridge locality. After balanced consideration of the Strategic merit of the proposal along with the applicant’s representations, Council’s Planning Services considers there to be sufficient justification to permit a minor increase in rural residential subdivision over



the subject land, to a maximum of 30 such lots. No basis can be sustained for the approval of the balance 45 rural residential lots in the development, and it recommended that this component of the proposal be refused.

Attachments:

1 Locality Plan 2 DERM Response 3 Infrastructure Charges 4 Proposed Plan 5 DTMR Response 6 Report Attachment

Recommendation: That application (Council Reference Number 325.2009.24240.1) for Material Change of Use and Lot Reconfiguration for Subdivision into 75 rural residential lots and 2 rural lots at 668 & 1034 Goodwood Road, Redridge; land described as Lot 89 on CK377 & Lot 1 on SP137562, County of Cook, Parish of Childers be APPROVED IN PART (30 rural residential lots plus 2 rural lots) with conditions and REFUSED IN PART (45 rural residential lots) as below;

Part 1 – Approval Development Conditions for Development Approval for 30 Rural Residential Lots and 2 Rural Balance Lots Approved Plans

1. The proposed development is to be generally constructed in accordance with Conditions contained within this notice and the following Approved Plans, subject to the modifications listed below:

Plan/Document

Number Plan/Document Name Prepared By Date

9347-13 07010 Drawing 4 Wayne Say and Associates

8 November 2010

a) Approval is for a maximum 30 rural residential lots and 2 balance rural

lots; b) All rural residential lots are to be located in the general footprint of

proposed Stage 2 of development and part of Stage 3 of development to a maximum of 30 lots;

c) All rural residential lots are to be contiguous and no rural residential lot boundary is to extend further than 450m from the Goodwood Road boundary;

d) All rural residential lots are to contain land areas generally in accordance with the spread of lot sizes reflected in the approved plans of development;



e) The 2 balance rural lots (proposed lots 101 & 102) are to be a minimum 100ha in land area, in a configuration generally in accordance with the approved plan;

f) Revised road alignments are to comply with relevant conditions/standard of approval and be designed to the satisfaction of the Manager Sustainable Development.

Revised Plans

2. Prior to submission of any Operational Works application for the development the applicant is required to submit to Council, a revised plan of Drawing No. 9347-13 which reflects the specific variations discussed in Condition 1 (Items a-f) of the Approval.

Water

3. The Developer must provide for the reticulation of water supply to each rural residential lot by supplying all necessary materials and works including structures and equipment and performing all necessary works at the expense of the Developer. The works will include all necessary upgrades of Council infrastructure to ensure that downstream properties are not adversely affected by the increased demand of the proposed development. Works shall include network modelling with main sizing to be finalised in association with Operational Works approval;

4. Looped water reticulation will be required throughout the development;

5. Provision of a partial water property service to each proposed lot in

accordance with Council’s Standard Drawing No 17918;

6. A fire hydrant and sluice valve shall be provided at the termination of reticulation infrastructure (as applicable);

7. The Developer must provide a balance tank and associated infrastructure of

sufficient size to service the whole of the proposed development to the satisfaction of the Manager Sustainable Development. The balance tank must be located on an appropriately sized reserve lot dedicated to Council and at no cost to Council;

Sewerage 8. Each rural residential lot within the development shall contain an area suitable

for the treatment and disposal of wastewater. On-site sewerage treatment and disposal on the subject lots must be designed, operated, constructed and maintained in accordance with the Department of Infrastructure and Planning - Queensland Plumbing and Wastewater Code (QPW code) – 1 January 2008 and Australian Standards (AS) 1547.2000, under the Plumbing and Drainage Act 2002.



Stormwater / Drainage Roadway Drainage

9. Stormwater drainage shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Queensland Urban Drainage Manual and Bundaberg Regional Council, incorporating a piped system with a capacity to cater for Q2 ARI flows, with overland flow paths to be provided for a capacity of Q100 ARI less piped flow;

10. Unless specifically approved otherwise, where roadway drainage is to be

conveyed through the proposed Lots the drainage must be to Q100 ARI underground standard;

11. All proposed allotments must be designed to be above critical 1 % AEP storm

event, as defined using a XP – SWMM two (2) dimensional model, for the creek flows traversing the balance lots;

12. For each Lot draining to the street frontage, the developer must provide two

(2) points of connection in the concrete kerb and channel for roof water discharge. This point of connection shall comprise a heavy duty galvanised steel kerb adapter located a minimum of one (1) metre from any property boundary;

13. The design for the site drainage system, fill and access, etc, must be

undertaken such that flows from adjacent properties will not be impeded by the proposed development;

14. Where lateral flows are provided across a roadway the underground drainage

must be constructed to a Q10 ARI standard; Easements – Within the Proposed Allotments

15. Dedication of minimum 3.0 metre wide stormwater easements or such width required to contain Q100 ARI overland flows, at no cost to Council, to contain the pipes or overland flow paths where they traverse the proposed Lots from property boundary to property boundary. The easements shall be located centrally over the pipes or overland flow paths. The easement documentation shall be acceptable to Council and be prepared at the full cost of the Developer;

Short Easements – Within the Balance Areas

16. Where stormwater is discharged into the balance area from an overland flow path or piped drainage system, the Developer must dedicate at the upstream point a minimum 3.0 metre wide Stormwater Easements or such greater width which is sufficient to contain the Q100 ARI flow to a point of sheet flow in the balance area where the easement will be a minimum of 20 metres wide or a distance of not less than 20 metres from the property boundary if within an existing gullies projected into the balance area. The easements will be in



favour of Bundaberg Regional Council and is to be provided to contain the Stormwater infrastructure where it traverses each lot to the point of sheet flow. Easement documentation is to be acceptable to Bundaberg Regional Council and be prepared at no cost to Bundaberg Regional Council;

Discharge Agreement – At Termination of Easement and Where Lots Drain Directly to Balance Area

17. In conjunction with the short easements, the Developer must also provide a downstream drainage discharge agreement for the balance area to cater for the stormwater flows from the termination of the easements and where the proposed allotments sheet flow directly onto the balance area. The discharge agreement must be binding on successors, be acceptable to the Bundaberg Regional Council and be prepared at no cost to Bundaberg Regional Council;

CCTV

18. Prior to the commencement of the defects liability period all Stormwater infrastructure is to be inspected with a CCTV Unit and an infrastructure condition report prepared for Council approval. All costs associated with this inspection are to be borne by the Developer;

19. All Stormwater infrastructures, or such lesser number of lines as agreed by

the Manager Sustainable Development, must be inspected with a CCTV unit and an infrastructure condition report prepared for Council approval prior to the conclusion of the defects liability period. All costs associated with the inspections shall be borne by the Developer;

Environmental – WSUD

20. The drainage system for the development is to incorporate Stormwater Quality Improvement which could include Devices (SQID) and measures to remove pollutants, including sediment, nutrients, metals and trash in accordance with the State Planning Policy for Healthy Waterways (2009) and the Bundaberg Regional Council Stormwater Management Strategies. At the Operational Works Stage, the developer must submit and obtain an approval of a Site Based Stormwater Management Plan and Erosion and Sediment Control Management Plan outlining how the Stormwater Quality Improvements in both the construction and operational phases will be achieved;

21. The operational and construction WSUD measures will be documented in

each specific stage. This measure will be met by providing at each stage, a Site Based Stormwater Management Plan and a Site Based Erosion and Sediment Control plan;

22. Bioretention measures will have a maintenance period of 24 months. The

maintenance period will be after the completion of the last stage of the development to direct water to the measures;



23. Bioretention extended detention depth must not be greater than 300 mm, unless approved by Manager Sustainable Development;

Roadworks

24. The road layout is to be in accordance with the requirements of Condition 1 of the Approval and reflected on the revised Plan of Development required by Condition 2 of approval. Road access location to Goodwood Road and connection to Forest View Estate is to remain in the location depicted on Wayne Say and Associates drawing number 07010 – 4 dated 8 November 2011 unless otherwise approved by the Manager Sustainable Development;

25. The existing road reserve must be provided with a paved roadway to an

aggregate of eight (8.0) metres width measured between the nominal kerb lines;

26. The roadway within the existing road reserve must be provided with at least

one (1) by Two Lane Angled Slow Point per block and one Local Street Roundabout at the first intersection after the Goodwood Road entrance in accordance with the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices – Part 13 Local Area Traffic Management, or such other speed control measures as approved by the Manager Sustainable Development;

27. The Developer must dedicate new road reserves to a minimum width of

twenty (20) metres. The new road reserves must also be provided with new roads paved to an aggregate width of eight (8.0) metres measured between nominal kerb lines;

28. The new roads must be constructed on both sides of the road for the full

proposed property boundaries of each corner or roadway frontage allotments;

29. All roadways are to be sealed with asphaltic concrete;

30. Layback concrete kerb and channelling is to be provided on each side of all roadways to the standard adopted by Council from time to time in its Statement of Policy;

31. Cul-de-sac bulbs must provide with a minimum twenty (20) metre turning

circle measured from the nominal kerb line;

32. The proposed roads are to be designed both in layout and structural strength to cope with the frequencies and weights of traffic likely to use it, as determined by Council. The design shall be carried out by a Chartered Professional Engineer in accordance with the methods detailed Austroads P-T36/06 – Pavement Design for Light Traffic: A Supplement to Austroads Pavement Design Guidelines;

33. The Developer must provide truncations to all street intersections to a

minimum of six (6.0) metre three (3) chord configuration. The truncation areas must be included in road reserve and dedicated free of cost to Council;



34. The Developer is to supply and erect all necessary street sings and posts.

The Developer is to liaise with the Bundaberg Regional Council for determination of names for the new roadways;

Access

35. Satisfactory vehicular access shall be provided to each proposed lot, with access points to be a minimum of 50 metres from the centreline of intersections.

Headworks

36. Water Supply Headworks Contributions in accordance with Council’s adopted Policies shall be paid prior to the endorsement of the Survey Plan unless stated otherwise within this notice.

Contributions required, if paid before 30 June 2011 are:

$ 272,835.42 for Water Supply Headworks

Electricity and Telecommunications

37. The Developer shall provide for the supply of underground electricity to each Lot of the proposed Lot Reconfiguration. Arrangements for electricity supply and overhead street lighting to the development shall be made by liaison for installation of the required works and entering into an agreement with the local Energy Provider;

38. Padmount transformer locations, where possible, are to be located within the

road reserve fronting proposed parkland or drainage reserves;

39. Electrical crossings are generally to be to the opposite lot boundary to water service crossings;

40. Street lighting to new roads, multi-modal pathways and intersections shall be

by way of provision of underground conduits and cables, poles and street lights. The design and provision of street lighting shall be in accordance with Australian Standard 1158:2005. The applicable lighting category is flagg for all roadways;

41. The Developer shall be responsible for the provision of telecommunications to

all proposed lots by liaison for installation of the required works and entering into an agreement with the Telecommunications Authority;

Parkland

42. The applicant must, in lieu of the dedication of parkland, pay a park contribution of $2000 per lot in accordance with the Isis Shire Planning Scheme Policy PSP2/07 – Public Open Space Contributions.



Vegetation Management

43. The developer shall limit the clearing of vegetation and shall take all reasonable precautions to minimise erosion of the land. These measures shall include the following:- (a) limited clearing or only partial, preferential removal of trees and shrubs; (b) seeding of grass species, plus application of topsoil, fertiliser and

watering as necessary until vegetation is established; and (c) stabilising of earthworks quickly by vegetation (grassing) to prevent

excessive erosion. Declared Plants

44. The owner shall eradicate/ control all declared plants existing on the property. Council shall not seal the plan of survey until it is satisfied all declared plants have been treated as required by the provisions of the Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002.

Bushfire Management

45. All residential allotments created from this subdivision are to be serviced by a reticulated water supply with sufficient flow and pressure characteristics for fire fighting purposes.

Street Names

46. (a) The developer shall supply and erect road name posts and street name plates as part of the operational works;

(b) Council will advise the number and layout of signs required when engineering plans are submitted for approval; and

(c) A list of 3 alternative street names shall be submitted for Council’s approval with the engineering plans of the subdivisional work.

Rural Numbering

47. Rural or urban addressing is to be supplied and installed in accordance with AS/NZS 4819 and the Council's standard post and number components (rural) and/or kerb mounted number plate (urban). Such components are to be installed at the time of construction of property accesses as part of operational works and the numbering sequence will be determined by Council prior to installation.

Plan Sealing

48. The developer is to provide a certificate signed by a licensed surveyor stating that after the completion of all works associated with the subdivision, survey marks were reinstated where necessary and all survey marks are in their correct position in accordance with the plan of survey as of a particular date prior to Council endorsing the plan of survey.



General

49. Any placement of fill material within the subject land shall comply with the Planning Scheme for Isis Shire Council’s “Filling or Excavation Code”. Such filling shall cater for overland stormwater flowpaths from adjacent allotments. All fill material to be placed on the subject allotment shall be tested and structurally certified in accordance with the Code;

Buffers / Landscaping

50. The developer is to provide a forty (40) metre wide vegetated buffer along all new rural residential lot boundaries adjoining rural zoned land to reduce the potential for conflict between rural and residential land uses, with the existence of such reflected on property notes for each relevant allotment.

51. Buffer and landscaping design, works and supporting documents are subject

to Compliance Assessment in accordance with the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 and subordinate legislation and are to be assessed by the Local Government or the nominated entity applicable at the time of lodgement, against the following:

i. Isis Shire Planning Scheme, 2006; ii. Planning Guidelines: Separating Agricultural and Residential Land Uses – August 1997 (DNRQ, 1997) the former ‘Burnett Shire Rural Buffer Zone Tree Planting Advice’ guidelines or such other equivalent guideline as agreed with Manager Sustainable Development; and,

iiii. The conditions of this approval;

52. The request for Compliance Assessment is to be made prior to the commencement of any buffer / landscaping construction works on the site;

53. The design of buffers and landscaping must be approved by Council and constructed / planted prior to the submission of a Plan of Survey;

54. Buffers and landscaping must be maintained by the developer for the first

twelve (12) months from completion in accordance with an approved maintenance regime;

55. The Plan of Survey will not be released until all buffers and landscaping works

have been completed and an appropriate statutory instrument to preserve buffers and landscaping and a maintenance regime has been approved by Council;

General

56. Where there is any conflict between Conditions of this Decision Notice and details shown on the Approved Plans, the Conditions must prevail;



57. All works are to be undertaken at the Developer’s expense;

58. The Developer must comply with all of the conditions of this Development Permit prior to the submission of a Plan of Survey, unless otherwise stated within this notice;

59. The Developer is to lodge a Plan of Survey, for Councils endorsement;

60. Alterations to public utilities, mains and services made necessary in

connection with any of the works arising from this approval including works to restore and reinstate all roads are to be completed at no cost to Council;

61. Any damage occasioned to the roadway and/or footpath shall be

repaired/reinstated at the completion of the works;

Attachment 1


Attachment 3

Attachment 3 - Infrastructure Charges

Development Contributions Summary - Infrastructure Contributions Planning Scheme Policy

TOTAL: $272,835.42 File: 325.2009.24240.1 Transport (Roads - Regional - DTMR) Applicant: Bonanno ED1 (EDU) = 3125.0000

Development type: Rural Lots

Portion: 30 Rural Residential Lots Total PU (EDU) = 3125.0000 Address: 1034 Goodwood Road, Redridge CR = $0 N/A Defined Use in PSP: Rural Residential PC (EDU) = 0.0000 Council & Zone: ISC Rural Zone I = 0.0000 Date: 16/03/2011 Contribution = $0.00

Water Supply Transport (Pedestrian Paths & Bikeways) ED1 (EDU) = 96.0000 1 EDU/Lot [all] ED1 (EDU) = 0.0000 2 Bed Unit - 0.7 EDU/Unit (4 Units)

Total ED = 96.0000 Total ED = 1369.9900 CR = $2,191 Rising Main CR = $0 N/A PC (EDU) = 0.0000 1 EDU - 'As of Right' [all] PC (EDU) = 0.0000 I = 1.2969 I = 0.0000 Contribution = $272,835.42 Contribution = $0.00

Sewerage Drainage & Stormwater ED1 (EDU) = 0.0000 ED1 (EDU) = 0.0000 2 Bed Unit - 0.6 EDU/Unit (4 Units)

Total ED = 0.0000 Total ED = 0.0000 CR = $0 N/A CR = $0 N/A PC (EDU) = 0.0000 PC (EDU) = 0.0000 . I = 0.0000 I = 0.0000 Contribution = $0.00 Contribution = $0.00

Transport (Roads - Sectoral - BRC) Public Parks & Community Land ED1 (EDU) = 0.0000 ED1 (EDU) = 0.0000 2 Bed Unit - 0.6 EDU/Unit (4 Units)

Total ED = 0.0000 Total ED = 0.0000 CR = $0 N/A CR = $0 N/A PC (EDU) = 0.0000 PC (EDU) = 0.0000 I = 0.0000 I = 1.0000 Contribution = $0.00 Contribution = $0.00

Contribution = [(ED-PC) x CR] x I (except for 'Drainage & Stormwater' where Indexation does not apply as a Regulated Infrastructure Charge is applied)

Attachment 4

Attachment 4 - Proposed Plan

Attachment 6

Attachment 6 - Report Attachment

agenda for planning & development committee … for planning & development committee meeting...

Documents