council assessment panel - mid murray council · council assessment panel 1 agenda 18 december 2017...

Council Assessment

Panel

18 December 2017

MID MURRAY COUNCIL

Council Assessment Panel 1 Agenda 18 December 2017

COUNCIL ASSESSMENT PANEL

Agenda

Meeting to be held in the Council Chambers, Main Street, Cambrai

Monday 18 December 2017, 10.00am

1. PRESENT

Bruce Ballantyne (Presiding Member), Kelly Mader, Graham Gaston, Sharon Jardine and Kevin Myers

2. IN ATTENDANCE

Joel Taggart, Acting Director – Development & Environmental Services Jake McVicar, Acting Manager – Development Services Daniel Christian, Development Officer – Planning Brian Irvine, Development Officer – Planning Melissa Marschall, Minute Secretary

3. COMMENCEMENT AND WELCOME AM 4. APOLOGIES 5. CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES

(0 – 20/11/2017) Minutes of the Mid Murray Council Assessment Panel meeting held on 20 November 2017.

RECOMMENDATION Moved __________________ Seconded __________________ that the minutes of the Mid Murray Council Assessment Panel Meeting held on 20 November 2017 be taken as read and confirmed.

6. DECLARATION OF INTEREST BY MEMBERS OF PANEL 7. DEVELOPMENT REPORT

RECOMMENDATION Moved __________________ Seconded __________________ that the report be received.

MID MURRAY COUNCIL


8. LATE CORRESPONDENCE 9. OTHER BUSINESS 10. NEXT MEETING

To be held in the Council Chambers, Main Street, Cambrai on Monday, 22 January 2018, commencing at 10.00am.

11. CLOSURE

MID MURRAY COUNCIL

Council Assessment Panel Table of Contents 18 December 2017

COUNCIL ASSESSMENT PANEL

Meeting to be held in the Council Chambers, Main Street, Cambrai

Monday 18 December 2017, 10.00am

Table of Contents

Item No. Subject Page No. Development Report 7.1 711/415/17 – NBN Co Limited .............................................................. 1 7.2 711/260/17 – RD Heriot ........................................................................ 9 7.3 711/400/17 – Z & J Osis ....................................................................... 21 7.4 711/205/17 – C Boston ......................................................................... 34 7.5 711/287/17 – D Porter .......................................................................... 46 7.6 711/187/17 – BM McGrane .................................................................. 53

MID MURRAY COUNCIL – DEVELOPMENT REPORT 7.1 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 711/415/17 – NBN CO LIMITED


Assessment Manager: Jake McVicar Reporting Officer: Brian Irvine Position: Development Officer - Planning Development No. 711/415/17 Applicant NBN Co Limited Subject Land Section 6, 396 Mungala Road, Wall Flat,

Hundred of Finniss Proposal Fixed wireless telecommunications facility

comprising a 40m high monopole with attached antennas, and associated infrastructure

INTRODUCTION The application has been lodged on behalf of the NBN Co Limited to install a 40m high monopole tower as part of the NBN fixed wireless network. The tower will be located in a rural area but will nevertheless be visually prominent from the surrounding area. Copies of the plans and details submitted with the application are attached. SUBJECT LAND The subject site is Lot 6, 396 Mungala Road, Wall Flat, Hundred of Finniss. This is a roughly triangular shaped allotment, 56 hectares in area and bounded on all sides by public roads – Zadow Road to the north, Talinga Road to the east, Heindrich Road to the south west and Mungala Road to the west. The property is used for farming purposes with the house and farm buildings in the north western corner at the intersection of Zadow Road and Mungala Road, and another farm building near the southern corner at the intersection of Heindrich Rd and Talinga Road. The tower will be located approximately 70 metres north-east of the farm building near the corner of Talinga Road and Heindrich Road, and approximately 50 metres from Talinga Road. This part of the allotment is not used for farming and is covered with sparsely spaced small scrubby bushes and trees. The land is located in the River Murray Zone and the Primary Production Policy Area. DESCRIPTION OF LOCALITY The site is located in an area used predominately for farming purposes. With the exception of the river flats, the land in the locality is gently undulating. A significant proportion of land close to the river is irrigated mainly for dairying purposes. Land further from the river is used for cropping. There is little native vegetation remaining in the locality. The Council boundary with the Rural City of Murray Bridge is located approximately 500 metres south of the proposed tower. Zodows Landing River settlement shack area is approximately 1.2 kilometres to the northwest.



The nearest dwelling is approximately 500 metres to the north east on the other side of Talinga Road. A number of farm houses are located between Martin Road and Wundenberg Road. The nearest house in the Rural City of Murray Bridge is approximately 1.1 kilometres to the south. There are a total of 8 dwellings within 1 kilometre of the dwelling. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The applicant seeks Development Plan Consent for a telecommunications facility which will be part of a fixed wireless network to provide a NBN service. Specifically, at the Wall Flat site, it will comprise the following key elements: a) A 40m high monopole, with a galvanised finish, b) 3 panel antennas, each measuring 750mm high, at the centreline height of

40m, c) 6 Remote Radio Units mounted behind the panel antennas; d) 1 parabolic antenna, 600mm in diameter located at a height of 37m, to link

the site to the network; e) 2 outdoor equipment cabinets, one measuring 1464mm high x 667mm wide

x 944mm deep and the other measuring 2582mm high x 700mm wide x 830mm deep;

f) 1 GPS unit; g) 2.4 m high security fence; h) Installation of ancillary equipment associated with the operation of the

facility, including cable trays and runs. The new facility will be wholly contained within a compound enclosed by a 2.4m tall chain link fence. The existing entrance will be used with a new access track extending from the existing farm building to the new tower. Construction will take approximately 10 weeks. Once operational, the facility will function on a continuously unstaffed basis and will typically on require maintenance works once a year. SITE SELECTION AND BACKGROUND Two other sites were considered. Although both satisfied the necessary technical requirements, the site further to the north on the same property is closer to dwellings and has no screening vegetation, and the other on the other side of Talinga Road will require additional cut and fill, and again has no screening vegetation. CLASSIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT The site is located within the River Murray Zone and the Primary Production Policy Area of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 14 June 2017) as identified on Map MiMu/38 and 99. A telecommunication facility is not listed as either complying development in Schedule 4 of the Development Regulations or as non-complying in the Development Plan, and therefore is subject to an “on-merit” assessment against the relevant provisions of the Development Plan.



REFERRALS A referral to the Minister responsible for the administration of the River Murray Act was required by Schedule 8 of the Development Regulations. Four standard conditions have been directed to be attached to any approval, together with five advisory notes. A copy of the referral report is included in the application details. No other referrals are required. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION A telecommunication facility is not listed as either Category 1 or Category 2 in the Development Plan and therefore is not assigned a category by the Development Plan. Similarly, a telecommunication facility is not listed as either Category 1 or Category 2 in Schedule 9 of the Development Regulations. The proposal therefore defaults to Category 3. Public notification was undertaken but no representations were received. RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE MID MURRAY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Council Wide Objectives: 18, 25, 94 & 95 Principles of Development Control: 53, 55, 66, 164, 168, 365, 366 & 367 River Murray Zone Objectives: 2 & 10 Principle of Development Control: 25 River Murray Zone – Primary Production Policy Area Objectives: 1, 5, 17, 18 & 19 Principles of Development Control: 1, 4, 16, 17, 18 & 21 ASSESSMENT Detailed assessment of the proposal has taken place against the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 14 June 2017), as provided below under headings. Land Use The zone provisions of the Development Plan do not specifically address telecommunication facilities, but Objective 18 for the Zone refers to the economic provision of infrastructure in an environmentally sensitive manner. Council Wide Objective 94 also provides some general support for the proposal by stating that telecommunications facilities be provided to meet the needs of the community.



The Policy Area provisions are orientated to ensuring that new land uses are either rural in nature or compatible with the rural use of the land. The proposed tower is not rural in nature, but provides an essential service to the rural landowners, has a very small footprint, uses land not in agricultural production and in not incompatible with the farming activity in the locality. From a land use perspective, I am of the opinion that, on balance, the proposed site is appropriate for the facility. Appearance of Development Council Wide Objective 95 states:

Telecommunications facilities located and designed to minimise visual impact on the amenity of the local environment.

Recognising that new facility development will be unavoidable in more sensitive areas in order to achieve coverage for users of communications technologies, facility design and location in such circumstances must ensure visual impacts on the amenity of local environments are minimised.

Council Wide Principle of Development Control 365 states:

Telecommunications facilities should: (b) utilise materials and finishes that minimise visual impact; (c) have antennae located as close as practical to the support structure; (e) incorporate landscaping to screen the development, in particular

equipment shelters and huts; and (f) be designed and sited to minimise the visual impact on the

character and amenity of the local environment, in particular visually prominent areas, main focal points or significant vistas.

Other Zone and Policy Area provisions also have a similar theme of ensuring that development is well designed and consistent with the desired character for the Policy Area. A 40 metre high tower cannot be completely hidden. However, its visibility will vary depending where it is viewed from because of the undulating land in the locality. In most instances the lower part of the tower will be hidden by the land form, with only the top part visible from some parts of the river and from some dwellings. It is expected that a significant portion of the tower will be visible from all eight dwellings that are within 1 kilometre of the tower. However, the closest dwelling is approximately 500 metres away and although the tower will be visible, it is not expected to be prominent. On-site vegetation will assist in screening the enclosed yard at the base of the tower. Given that the nearby roads are unsealed rural roads with low traffic, no further landscaping is considered necessary. The tower will be viewed with the sky in the background. The matt grey finish that will be the result when the proposed galvanised finish ages is a suitable finish in these circumstances. Matt grey is a satisfactory compromise colour that blends with both a blue sky and grey and white cloud, when viewed from a distance.



Vehicular Access Access is considered to be adequate. The existing access point will be used with an internal driveway extended to the proposed site. Except during the construction period, the facility will only generate several traffic movements per annum. That level of activity will not cause a level of disruptive to traffic on the local roads to justify any further modification to the existing entrance. CONCLUSION I am of the opinion that the proposed site is appropriate for the facility. I am satisfied that the location minimises the visual prominence of the facility while providing an essential service. I am also of the opinion that access is safe and convenient. Consequently, having regard to the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 14 June 2017), I form the opinion that, on balance, the proposal warrants granting Development Plan Consent subject to conditions and notations. RECOMMENDATION Moved __________________ Seconded __________________ that pursuant to Section 35(2) of the Development Act 1993 that the proposed development is not “Seriously at Variance” with the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 14 June 2017) and that pursuant to Section 33(1)(a) of the Development Act 1993, Development Plan Consent be granted to Development Application 711/415/17, subject to the following conditions and notations: Conditions 1. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details

submitted with the application other than where required to be varied by the following conditions.

2. Except where otherwise required to satisfy any other condition of this Consent, the applicant shall ensure that, in the event of damage being caused to Council infrastructure, the damaged infrastructure shall be repaired or reinstated, at the applicant’s cost, to the satisfaction of Council’s Director – Infrastructure Services: (a) To it’s original condition; or (b) Where (a) is not achievable, in accordance with the relevant

Australian Standard (applicable to that particular type of infrastructure).

Conditions as required by the Minister for Water and the River Murray 3. During construction activities the subject land must be managed in a

manner as to prevent erosion and pollution of the subject site and the environment, including keeping the area in a tidy state and ensuring any waste materials are appropriately contained to ensure no pollutants (including excavation or fill material) enter the River Murray system.



4. Any fill material brought to the site must be clean and not contaminated by

construction or demolition debris, industrial or chemical matter, or pest plant or pathogenic material.

5. Any excavation or fill material surplus to the requirements of the

development must be disposed of such that it will not: a. be located within the 1956 floodplain; b. impede the natural flow of any surface waters; c. allow sediment to re-enter any water body; d. adversely impact native vegetation; e. facilitate the spread of pest plant and pathogenic material.

6. Stormwater run-off from the facility must be managed to prevent erosion or

pollution of the site and the environment. Notations 1. This approval does not imply compliance with the Electricity Act 1996 (as

amended), or the Regulations thereunder. It is the responsibility of the owner and the person undertaking development to ensure compliance with the same.

You are advised to contact appropriate authorities including SA Power Networks, Telstra, SA Water and Council’s Environmental Services (CWMS) Department in relation to the location of supply lines and other requirements prior to commencing work.

2. Development Approval Required Before Commencement

No site works or construction can be undertaken on the land or building by an person unless Development Approval has been granted.

If this Decision Notification Form refers only to Development Plan Consent, Building Rules Consent must be granted before the Development Approval is obtained.

3. Expiry Date for Planning and Building Consents and Development

Approvals

Development Plan Consent is valid for 12 months. The applicant must obtain Development Approval within 12 months of the date of the decision or the consent will lapse.

It is necessary to obtain Building Rules Consent (if shown as STILL REQUIRED on this Decision Notification Form) before full Development Approval is granted.

Once Development Approval is obtained, substantial work on the approved development must be commenced within twelve months of the date of Development Approval or the approval will lapse.



The approved development must be substantially completed within 36 months (3 years) of the operative date of Development Approval, or the approval will lapse and a new application must be lodged with the relevant authority.

4. This application has been assessed and approved pursuant to the

provisions of the Development Act 1993. The approval of the owner of the land to which this consent relates must be obtained prior to commencement of work.

5. During the period that the development is being undertaken, all waste

materials associated with the building work are to be secured and contained within the site. Upon completion of the development all wastes are to be removed and appropriately disposed of.

6. All existing trees on site are to be retained wherever practicable. 7. The applicant is responsible for the correct siting of the proposed building

and shall ensure that the building is sited on the allotment in accordance with the approved site plan.

8. The granting of this consent does not absolve the applicant from obtaining

all other consents which they may be required to do, pursuant to the provisions of any other statutes.

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

Section 25 of the Environment Protection Act, to take all reasonable and practical measures to ensure that the activities on the whole site, including during construction, do not pollute the environment in any way which causes or may cause environmental harm.

10. You are advised to contact other authorities such as Telstra, SA Water etc.

in relation to the location of their supply lines and requirements prior to commencing work on site.

11. The applicant is advised that any proposal to clear, remove limbs or trim

native vegetation, unless subject to an exemption under the Native Vegetation Act 1991, requires the approval of the Native Vegetation Council. Any queries regarding the clearance of native vegetation should be directed to the Native Vegetation Council Secretariat on 8124 4744.

Notations as required by the Minister for Water and River Murray 12. The applicant is advised of their general duty of care under the River

Murray Act 2003 to take all reasonable measures to prevent any harm to the River Murray through his or her actions or activities.



13. The River Murray and many of its tributaries and overflow areas have

abundant evidence of Aboriginal occupation and Aboriginal sites, objects or artefacts may be present on the subject land. Under section 20 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1988 (the Act), an owner or occupier of private land, or an employee or agent of such an owner or occupier, must report the discovery on the land of any Aboriginal sites, objects and remains to the Minister responsible for the administration of the Act, as soon as practicable, giving the particulars of the nature and location of the Aboriginal sites, objects or remains. It is an offence to damage, disturb or interfere with any Aboriginal site or damage any Aboriginal object (registered or not) without the authority of the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation (the Minister). If the planned activity is likely to damage, disturb or interfere with a site or object, authorisation of the activity must be first obtained from the Minister under Section 23 of the Act. Penalties may apply for failure to comply with the Act.

14. If there is an intention to clear native vegetation on the land at any time, the applicant should consult the Native Vegetation Council to determine relevant requirements under the Native Vegetation Act 1991 and its Regulations, which may include the provision of a Significant Environmental Benefit. Note that ‘clearance’ means any activity that could cause any substantial damage to native plants, including cutting down and removing plants, burning, poisoning, slashing of understorey, removal or trimming of branches, severing roots, drainage and reclamation of wetlands, and in some circumstances grazing by animals. For further information contact the Native Vegetation Council on telephone 8303 9777 or visit: http://www.nvc.sa.gov.au.

15. The applicant is encouraged to incorporate locally indigenous plant species into any landscaping, screen planting or revegetation activities at the site to enhance the natural character of the locality, stabilise soils and provide habitat for native species. For information on appropriate species to be planted, please contact State Flora at Bremer Road, Murray Bridge on telephone 8539 2105, or within Belair National Park on telephone 8278 7777 or visit: http://www.stateflora.sa.gov.au.

16. This approval does not obviate any considerations that may apply to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth). For further information visit: http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc.

http://www.nvc.sa.gov.au/

http://www.stateflora.sa.gov.au/

http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc

MID MURRAY COUNCIL – DEVELOPMENT REPORT 7.2 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 711/260/17 – RD HERIOT


Assessment Manager: Jake McVicar Reporting Officer: Daniel Christian Position: Development Officer - Planning Development No. 711/260/17 Applicant RD Heriot Subject Land Lot 5 of FP208561, Younghusband Holdings

Road, Younghusband Holdings, Hundred of Younghusband

Proposal Demolition of existing dwelling, construction of a new elevated dwelling with attached balcony and staircase, underfloor storage area and underfloor wet area, and associated minor excavation and filling in a floodplain

INTRODUCTION The applicant, RD Heriot, lodged the above development application with Council on 22 June 2017, seeking approval for demolition of the existing dwelling, construction of a new elevated dwelling with attached balcony and staircase, underfloor storage area and underfloor wet area, and associated minor excavation and filling in a floodplain. This application is being presented to Council’s Assessment Panel given that the proposed development does not meet all of the Principles of Development Control within the Shack Settlement Policy Area. Due to this, a detailed assessment process has been undertaken, and the development application is being submitted to Council’s Assessment Panel for a decision. Copies of the plans and details submitted with the application are attached. SUBJECT LAND The subject site is Lot 5 of FP208561, Younghusband Holdings Road, Younghusband Holdings, Hundred of Younghusband and is located approximately 7kms east of the town centre along the main channel of the River Murray. The site has a rectangular shape, a site area of approximately 216.10 square metres and a road frontage to Younghusband Holdings Road of 12.50 metres. All sites within the Younghusband Holdings shack settlement include an area between the subject allotment and the river (Area A) and an area between the allotment and the road (Area B), which is dedicated and associated with each Allotment. Generally Area A contains the reserve and river structures, while Area B contains domestic outbuildings associated with the dwelling. The land has a use of rural-residential and is currently being used for residential purposes. The land contains an existing two-storey dwelling with attached balcony, staircase and carport, domestic outbuilding and a rainwater tank. There is a low coverage of vegetation on and immediately surrounding the subject allotment, with the majority of this vegetation along the river’s edge. The entire site is located within the 1956 flood plain.



Photos taken while on-site on 6 July 2017 are attached, with written annotations. DESCRIPTION OF LOCALITY Younghusband is located on the south-eastern corner of the Mid Murray Council. The subject site is located east of the town centre of Younghusband, is located approximately 80 metres from the main channel of the River Murray and is separated from the river by a reserve area. The shack settlement of Younghusband Holdings comprises 28 residential allotments, all positioned within 100 metres of the main channel of the River Murray. The entire shack settlement is located within the 1956 flood level. New elevated dwellings, old ground level dwellings and two-storey dwellings, domestic outbuildings, carports, retaining walls and river structures are common within the locality. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The proposed building works include demolition of the existing dwelling, construction of a new elevated dwelling with attached balcony and staircase, underfloor storage area and underfloor wet area, and associated minor excavation and filling in a floodplain. The new dwelling is proposed to be positioned 0.50 metres from the south-western (front) boundary, 0 metres (on boundary) from the north-eastern (rear) boundary, 1.00 metre from the south-eastern (right) boundary and 0 metres (on-boundary) from the north-western (left) boundary. The proposed dwelling will have a living area on the elevated level of 121.50 square metres, with an attached balcony measuring 26.00 square metres. The ground level will include an enclosed storage area measuring 36.50 square metres and a wet area with a total floor area of 11.00 square metres. The remaining open ground floor area will be approximately 74.50 square metres. As the new dwelling is to be located within the 1956 flood plain, the habitable living spaces will be elevated 2.70 metres above natural ground level. The elevated level will have a ceiling height of 2.90 metres and the overall height of the structure will be 7.40 metres. All main living windows will face the river and the road, and only small windows and frosted wet area windows will face the side boundaries. The proposed dwelling will be constructed of horizontal True Oak Mid roof sheeting with the external walls on the elevated level in Colorbond Stealth shade. The fascias, gutters and downpipes will be of Colorbond Night Sky. The ground level enclosures will be clad in Western Red Cedar timber batten horizontal cladding, and will be removable to comply with flood management requirements. All stormwater associated with the proposed dwelling will be directed into a 25,000 litre rainwater tank. The dwelling must be connected to the Julanker Holdings/Younghusband Holdings Community Wastewater Management System.



CLASSIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT The site is located within the River Murray Zone and Shack Settlement Policy Area of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan. Principles of Development Control 29 and 30 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area state the following: 29 No forms of development are complying in the Shack Settlement Policy

Area. 30 The following forms of development are non-complying in the Shack

Settlement Policy Area: …

Dwelling, (including the replacement of an existing dwelling), except where the dwelling is an elevated dwelling (including the circumstances of development involving the replacement of a ground level dwelling on land outside of the 1956 flood plain) and where the development satisfies all of the following: (a) the dwelling will either replace an existing dwelling on an allotment or

lease site, or will be a new dwelling on a vacant allotment or lease site, and not more than one dwelling will exist on the allotment or lease site at the completion of the development and where all of the following are satisfied:

(i) the allotment or lease site is within a Residential Area identified in

Figures Sh/1 to 49 (ii) where the dwelling is replacing an existing dwelling on an

allotment or lease site, that the existing dwelling has been demolished or is proposed to be demolished as part of the application for the proposed dwelling (or under a separate Development Application that has obtained Development Approval) so that not more than one dwelling is on the allotment or lease site;

(iii) in a shack settlement identified in Figures Sh/1 to 49 where there are 5 or more allotments or lease sites identified in the Residential Area of the shack settlement, the dwelling is connected or is proposed to be connected (as part of the application) to a Community Wastewater Management Scheme that complies with the relevant public and environmental health legislation applying to that type of system

(iv) the dwelling does not exceed one storey in height (excluding the height of any elevation required to minimise the potential for personal or property damage as a result of a flood)

(v) a verandah, pergola, deck, stairs or balcony do not extend more than 3.0 metres beyond the notional principal facade line (as depicted in Principle of Development Control 8 and Figure 8.1 or 8.2) when measured from the notional principal facade line in the direction of the river or other part of the river system such as a lagoon (satisfying this exception is not intended to apply to development outside of the floodplain or allotments or lease sites that are not positioned as illustrated in Figure 8.1 or 8.2 ie not applicable to development on the opposite side of the public road (or common access road) with no direct frontage to a reserve on the river front, the river bank or other part of the river system such as a lagoon)



(b) subject to (c) and (d) below, the underfloor area beneath an elevated

dwelling is open and free from obstruction and is not enclosed on any side

(c) if the underfloor area beneath the elevated dwelling is to be enclosed, the enclosure achieves all of the following:

(i) the area is only used for storage purposes or vehicle parking (ii) the maximum floor area that may be enclosed does not exceed 54

square metres (iii) the area is enclosed using roller doors and/or removable panels,

and each removable panel does not exceed the dimensions of 3 metres by 2.7 metres

(iv) the area has no internal walls, partitions or cladding.

(d) in addition to the enclosed 54 square metres storage area permitted under (c), a portion of the area beneath the elevated dwelling may be enclosed for use as a wet area (i.e. bathroom, toilet and or laundry), provided that the floor area of the enclosed wet area does not exceed 15 square metres.

… In reference to the Principles of Development Control listed above, the proposed elevated dwelling meets all of the above provisions and therefore must be classified as an ‘On-Merit’ application. REFERRALS The application triggered a referral to the Minister administering the River Murray Act 2003 under Schedule 8(19) of the Development Regulations 2008 on the basis that building work is proposed on land within the River Murray Water Protection Area established under the River Murray Act 2003. The Minister’s delegate has provided a referral response, dated 2 November 2017, advising that it has no objections with the development, subject to Council imposing conditions and notations on the Development Plan Consent. A copy of the Minister’s referral response is attached. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Principles of Development Control 31 and 32 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area state the following: 31 All forms of development which are acceptable for the Policy Area are

assigned Category 1 (except where non-complying). 32 Forms of development which are neither acceptable nor non-complying

for the Policy Area are assigned Category 2. As the proposed development is listed within the prescribed detail of Principle of Development Control 31 listed above, the application is considered to be a Category 1 form of development, and no form of public notification was required.



RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE MID MURRAY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Council Wide Objective: 6, 18, 19, 42, 54, 68, 92, 93 & 97 Principles of Development Control: 1, 6, 7, 44, 45, 46, 48, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57,

58, 59, 61, 65, 74, 75, 78, 79, 164, 165, 167, 168, 175, 219, 220, 221, 236, 252, 264, 277, 281, 333, 334, 335, 336 & 394

River Murray Zone Objectives: 2, 4 & 20 Principles of Development Control: 19 & 20 Shack Settlement Policy Area Objectives: 1, 2, 3 & 5 Principles of Development Control: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 &

26 ASSESSMENT A detailed assessment of the proposal has taken place against the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 14 June 2017), as provided below under headings. Flood Management Council Wide Objective 6 states the following: 6 Land liable to flooding from the River Murray, either kept free of

development which could be damaged or which would impede floodwaters, or designed and located to minimise property damage or impede flood waters.

Objective 1 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area states the following: 1 Development that contributes to the desired character of the policy area. The proposed development is for the demolition of an existing dwelling, which would not comply with the current Regulations, and replacing it with a new elevated dwelling, which is considered to be more appropriate than the existing structure. The new dwelling has been designed in accordance with Council’s flood management requirements. The habitable areas will be elevated above natural ground level by more than 2.30 metres, and the storage area on the ground level is designed to opened up in the event of extreme flooding. The development is also considered to contribute positively to the desired character of the Policy Area.



Principle of Development Control 1 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area states the following: 1 Development should not be undertaken unless it is consistent with the

desired character and acceptable forms of development for the policy area. The nature of development appears to meet the requirements of the Development Plan in regards to the Desired Character Statement and list of acceptable forms of development. However there are a number of Principles of Development Control which do not meet the Council’s requirements. Details on this component can be found in the assessment further below. Siting and Visibility Council Wide Objectives 54 and 68 state the following: 54 Protection of scenically attractive areas, particularly natural, rural and

riverine landscapes. 68 Preservation of the River Murray landscape and environment. The Mid Murray Council Development Plan incorporates a high number of Objectives and Principles which help to maintain the natural environment surrounding the River Murray. While development is often limited in the River Murray Zone, the Shack Settlement Policy Area does allow for residential development, including the proposed elevated dwelling. The new dwelling will be located in a position which will require minimal filling and excavation and no clearance of native vegetation. The dwelling will also be setback from the main channel of the River Murray by approximately 70.00 metres and therefore will not have any direct impact on the system, including riverbank erosion and pollution. Council Wide Principles of Development Control 165 and 167 state the following: 165 Buildings should be sited in unobtrusive locations and, in particular, should:

(a) be grouped together; and (b) where possible be located in such a way as to be screened by existing

vegetation when viewed from public roads and especially the River Murray.

167 Buildings and structures should be designed to minimise their visual impact

in the landscape, in particular:

(a) the profile of buildings should be low and the rooflines should complement the natural form of the land;

(b) the mass of buildings should be minimised by variations in wall and roof lines and by floor plans which complement the contours of the land; and

(c) large eaves, verandahs and pergolas should be incorporated into designs so as to create shadowed areas that reduce the bulky appearance of buildings.



The applicant has put forward a proposal which addresses most of the points listed above. The total height of the structure is slightly lower than the maximum allowable height of 7.5 metres, standing at 7.4 metres tall. The skillion roof deign is considered to be common in the Shack Settlement Policy Area, and the incorporation of a deck, balcony and eaves add to the character of the Zone and Policy Area. In regards to the structure being unobtrusive, as referred to in Principle of Development Control 165 above, and the mass of a building being limited in the form of variations of the walls, as referred to in Principle of Development Control 167 above, the proposal does not quite address these. A portion of the structure (approximately 3 metres), in the form of an elevated bedroom, is to be located on the side boundary. Allotment 4 which is located north-west of the subject allotment contains a staircase on the same common boundary. This will mean that the staircase and proposed dwelling will have no separation distance. While the applicant has indicated that the proposed bedroom will not obstruct or be positioned to abut to the existing staircase, I still believe that a minimum separation distance of 1.0 metre is required, as explicitly stated in the Shack Settlement Policy Area. As 3 metres of the proposed structure will be located on the north-western boundary, there will be no windows or doors located on this elevation. This will result in a large portion of uninterrupted walling, which is not envisaged within the Shack Settlement Policy Area. Details on this component can be found in the assessment further below. Council Wide Principle of Development Control 264 states the following: 264 Site coverage should be limited to ensure sufficient space is provided for:

(a) pedestrian and vehicle access and vehicle parking; (b) domestic storage; (c) outdoor clothes drying; (d) a rainwater tank; (e) private open space and landscaping; (f) front, side and rear boundary setbacks that contribute to the desired

character of the area; and (g) convenient storage of household waste and recycling receptacles.

The Younghusband Holdings shack settlement contains individually leased allotments, which contain mainly dwellings, but also includes land which is owned by Younghusband Holdings Pty Ltd, which has an area of 9.8 hectares and surrounds these individual lease sites. Each allotment has two designated areas – one of the river side and one on the road side of the site – which is dedicated to each lease site. While the majority of the lease site itself is occupied (approximately 80%), components such as vehicle access, vehicle parking, domestic storage, rainwater tanks and private open space is available within these two designated areas.



In regards to the side, front and rear setbacks, the proposed development does not comply. All dwellings should be located a minimum of 1.0 metre from a side boundary in the Shack Settlement Policy Area, and in accordance with the Building Code of Australia, all living areas need to be located at least 0.9 metres from a boundary. The proposed development is located only 0.5 metres from the rear boundary and is located on one side boundary, and therefore this component does not meet the requirements in regards to both planning and building. While the wall located on the side boundary does not incorporate windows and therefore can be fire-rated, the wall facing the rear (road) boundary contains both windows and doors and therefore it will make it virtually impossible to fire-rate this elevation. Design and Appearance Council Wide Principles of Development Control 53, 54, 55, 56, 58 and 78 state the following: 53 Development, including alterations and additions to buildings, should not be

undertaken unless it involves a high standard of design with regard to external appearance, building materials, colours, siting and landscaping, so as to preserve and enhance the character of the locality or desired future character of an Area.

54 The design of a building may be of a contemporary nature and exhibit an

innovative style provided the overall form is sympathetic to the scale of development in the locality and with the context of its setting with regard to shape, size, materials and colour.

55 Development should not be undertaken unless:

(a) it conforms with the desired future character of an Area; and (b) it is sited so as to protect scenic views from public roads or reserves,

and is not located on visually-significant ridgelines. 56 Buildings should be designed and sited to avoid creating extensive areas of

uninterrupted walling facing areas exposed to public view. 58 Where a building is sited on or close to a side boundary, the side boundary

wall should be sited and limited in length and height to minimise:

(a) the visual impact of the building as viewed from adjoining properties; and

(b) overshadowing of adjoining properties and allow adequate sun light to neighbouring buildings.

78 Buildings or structures should be sited unobtrusively and be of a character

and design which will blend naturally with the landscape. The nature of development is considered to conform with the Desired Future Character of the Younghusband Holdings shack settlement, and the site is positioned where the structure will not further impede on scenic views of the River Murray from public roads and internal access tracks.



The proposed development includes a high standard of design in the form of shape, size, building materials and colours which are consistent with existing and envisaged development for the Shack Settlement Policy Area. However its external appearance and particularly siting is not considered to be consistent with the Objective and Principles of the Zone. The greatest concern in regards to this development is its position on a side boundary, which will place the dwelling extremely close to the adjacent structure (staircase attached to adjoining dwelling) and may be considered obtrusive. While a closer setback to a side boundary can sometimes be considered when there is no structure within 1.0 metre of the common boundary on the neighbouring allotment, the same does not apply when there is an existing structure. It is important for new development to fit in with and not compromise existing structures, which is why a 1.0 metre separation distance is often required. While a portion of the proposed dwelling will be located on the side boundary, there will not be a significantly large distance of uninterrupted walling along this elevation. The 11.0 metre section of wall will be split into three sections – 3.0 metres and 5.0 metres will be located 1.0 metre from the side boundary, while the remaining 3.0 metres will be hard up against the boundary. This elevation does not include any windows or doors, which therefore reduces the likelihood of direct overlooking into adjoining properties. Council Wide Principles of Development Control 236 and 252 state the following: 236 The appearance of land and buildings should not detract from the Desired

Character of the relevant residential zone and policy area in terms of built-form elements such as:

(a) building height; (b) building mass, scale and proportion; (c) the manner in which buildings address public streets; (d) external materials, patterns, textures and colours; (e) ground floor height above natural ground level; or (f) roof form and pitch.

252 Development should conform in scale, form, height and character with

adjoining buildings, and be sited to minimise impacts on the privacy of adjoining allotments.

In regards to Principle of Development Control 236 quoted above, it appears that the proposed elevated dwelling generally meets every requirement. The structure is of an appropriate height, the building scale is considered to be acceptable, the structure addresses both the road and river frontages, the external building materials and colours are consistent with other nearby dwellings, the habitable areas are elevated the required distance and the roof form is considered to be appropriate. While the development conforms in relation to scale, form and height, and minimises impacts on the privacy of the adjoining allotments by limiting windows and doors on the side elevations, it is arguable to say that it is not consistent with the character of buildings within the Shack Settlement Policy Area. When assessing a new dwelling in this Zone, the side setback requirement is a minimum of 1.0 metre, however this development does not achieve this requirement.



Built Form and Development Principles of Development Control 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area state the following: 6 On allotments or lease sites in a Residential Area, the total ground area

covered by buildings should not cover greater than 70% of the allotment or lease site. Buildings include but are not limited to: (a) a dwelling (floor area including all additional roofed area); and (b) outbuildings including a garden shed, carport, garage, pergola, gazebo

or other roofed structure (including permeable or semi-permeable roofing material such as shade sails) and other open sided structures (but not including a rainwater tank or other water storage tank or tank stand).

7 A dwelling should not exceed the following:

(a) in the case of an elevated dwelling, a maximum elevated floor area of 300 square metres (i.e. excluding any permitted underfloor enclosure and ground level wet area, and not including any deck, verandah or balcony); and

(b) in the case of a ground level dwelling, a maximum total floor area of 90 square metres but not including the floor area described in part (c) and not including any deck, verandah or balcony;

(c) in any case, a maximum total floor area of 15 square metres at ground level for use as a wet area (a bathroom, toilet or laundry or any combination).

9 Buildings, including alterations and additions involving building work (other

than fencing, river structures and retaining walls) such as carports and verandahs or similar, should be set back at least 1.0 metre from side boundaries.

10 A dwelling should be in accordance with the following:

(a) one elevated habitable storey with a maximum floor to ceiling height of 2.7 metres;

(b) a maximum ceiling to roof height of 1.8 metres; (c) an average underfloor clearance of 2.5 metres and in any case not less

than 2.3 metres and not more than 2.7 metres; and (d) a total combined building maximum height of 7.5 metres.

11 An elevated dwelling should have a minimum clearance of 2.3 metres to

the underside of bearers, unless evidence is provided that a reduced clearance will provide a floor level of the elevated living area above the 1956 flood level.

12 An elevated dwelling should locate all living areas such as lounge/dining,

family rooms, sunroom, kitchen and bedrooms and any room capable of being used as a bedroom on the first/elevated level, and the dwelling should not include:



(a) more than three wet areas (and no more than one at ground level and

in any case not exceeding 15 square metres in total floor area at ground level); and

(b) more than one room that is capable of being used as a kitchen. 13 The underneath area of an elevated dwelling:

(a) should not be used for living purposes (lounge/dining, family rooms, sunroom, kitchen and bedrooms and any room capable of being used as a bedroom) nor incorporate internal walls or cladding (other than related to a wet area);

(b) may only be used and enclosed for vehicle (boat and car) and other domestic storage purposes.

The applicant has submitted a Floor Plan and Elevation Plan which meets most of the criteria of the Shack Settlement Policy Area. The elevated living area is well under the 300 square metre restriction, and only occupies 121.50 square metres. Furthermore the ground floor wet area only occupies 11.00 square metres of the allowable 15.00 square metres. The elevated level contains all of the habitable areas, as well as one kitchen and one bathroom, and the ground level contains one storage enclosure and one wet area. This meets all of the relevant provisions. The internal ceiling height is slightly higher than that allowed (2.70 metres) at 2.90 metres, but is considered to be appropriate as the maximum allowable ceiling to roof height of 1.80 metres stands at just 1.50 metres. The underfloor clearance height is greater than the minimum requirement of 2.30 metres and is right on 2.70 metres. Furthermore the total height of the building will be 7.40 metres, which is 0.10 metres short of the maximum allowable height. In regards to the site coverage and side boundary setback, these components currently do not comply. While the Development Plan allows for a maximum site coverage of 70%, the proposed dwelling will occupy about 80% of the allotment. While this Principle has not been achieved, I deem this to be appropriate as parts of the land owned by Younghusband Holdings Pty Ltd can be utilised for other structures including domestic outbuildings and associated parking, and the land between the dwelling and the river can be utilised as green space. However in regards to the side setback, the structure is located on the boundary and therefore the proposal does not meet the requirement of Principle of Development Control 9. While proposals closer to a side boundary can be considered where there is no existing structure within 1.0 metre of the side boundary, the adjoining allotment already contains a staircase abutting the common boundary and therefore approving a dwelling on this same boundary may have the potential to cause issues.



CONCLUSION While the application satisfies many of the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 14 June 2017), it appears that there are some relevant provisions which do not comply. While the proposal may achieve a majority of these provisions, I believe that the non-compliant provisions have more weight in relation to this specific proposal. In regards to the Objectives and Principles of Development Control, both Council Wide and for the Shack Settlement Policy Area, this is mainly in regards to the position of the structure on the boundary. During a preliminary assessment of the application, it was recommended that the structure be shifted so that it sits at least 1 metre off the side boundary, however the applicant was not willing to make this change. After further discussions with the applicant, they were again advised that the application would not likely be supported with its current position on the balcony, in which no further changes occurred. Consequently, I recommend that Development Plan Consent be refused. RECOMMENDATION Moved __________________ Seconded __________________ that pursuant to Section 35(2) of the Development Act 1993 Development Application 711/174/17 is not “Seriously at Variance” but is considered to be “Sufficiently at Variance” with the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 14 June 2017), and is refused, pursuant to Section 33(1)(a) of the Development Act 1993, for the following reasons: (a) The proposal is listed as an acceptable form of development for the Shack

Settlement Policy Area, but is not: (i) Consistent with the desired character of the area

Council Wide Principles of Development Control 55, 78 and 252 Shack Settlement Policy Area Objective 1 Shack Settlement Policy Area Principle of Development Control 1

(ii) Acceptable in regards to the required setbacks from a side boundary

Council Wide Principles of Development Control 53 and 58 Shack Settlement Policy Area Principle of Development Control 9.

MID MURRAY COUNCIL – DEVELOPMENT REPORT 7.3 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 711/400/17 – Z & J OSIS


Assessment Manager: Jake McVicar Reporting Officer: Daniel Christian Position: Development Officer - Planning Development No. 711/400/17 Applicant Z & J Osis Subject Land Lot 2 of CP22673, 21 Preiss Street, Mannum,

Hundred of Finniss Proposal Two storey dwelling with garage under main

roof and temporary storage of 6 metre shipping container during construction

INTRODUCTION The applicant, Z & J Osis, lodged the above development application with Council on 10 October 2017, seeking approval for the construction of a two storey dwelling with garage under main roof and temporary storage of 6 metre shipping container during construction. This application is being presented to the Council Assessment Panel given that the proposed development does not meet all of the relevant Council Wide and Zone specific provisions within the Residential Escarpment Zone. Due to this, a detailed assessment process has been conducted, and the development application is being submitted to the Council Assessment Panel for a decision. Copies of the plans and details submitted with the application are attached. SUBJECT LAND The subject site is Lot 2 of CP22673, 21 Preiss Street, Mannum, Hundred of Finniss and is located south-west of the town centre on a steep escarpment which rises from the River Murray up to the town of Mannum. The site has an irregular shape, a site area of approximately 1,092.9 square metres and a road frontage to Preiss Street of 31.03 metres. The land is within the Residential Escarpment Zone and is currently a vacant residential allotment. The land contains an existing rainwater tank to remain, and a high coverage of native vegetation. Photos taken while on-site on 16 October 2017 are attached, with written annotations. DESCRIPTION OF LOCALITY Mannum is located on the far southern portion of the Mid Murray Council. The subject site is located approximately 1 kilometre south of the town centre and is approximately 100 metres from the main channel of the River Murray, with obstructed views. The subject land is located on a steep cliff, between a new residential sub division and the existing structures along River Lane, with much of the surrounding area being for residential purposes, and some of the surrounding area for commercial purposes and utilities.



Development within the vicinity includes mainly new single storey detached dwellings, some elevated on stilts, and existing two-storey dwellings, on small to moderate size allotments, with associated structures including domestic outbuildings, carports, verandahs, pergolas, rainwater tanks and swimming pools. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The proposed building works include the construction of a two storey dwelling with the garage under the main roof and a temporary shipping container for storage purposes during construction. The new dwelling is proposed to be positioned 6 metres from the western (front) boundary, 8 metres from the eastern (rear) boundary, 6.4 metres from the northern (left) boundary and 1.5 metres from the southern (right) boundary. The temporary shipping container is proposed to be positioned 3 metres from the western (front) boundary and 3.5 metres from the northern (left) boundary. The proposed dwelling will have an upper living area of 203 square metres, with an attached balcony area of 33 square metres and garage area (under main roof) of 54 square metres. A portion of the lower level will also be enclosed, comprising a craft/retreat area and laundry with a total floor area of 84 square metres. The dwelling will occupy approximately 27% of the total site area. The proposed temporary shipping container will have a floor area of 27 square metres and will occupy less than 3% of the total site area. The total height of the two storey dwelling will be 6.95 metres from natural ground level. The ground level up to the ceiling will be 2.8 metres and the elevated level up to the ceiling will have a minimum height of 2.8 metres and a maximum height of 3.8 metres. The skillion roof will follow the rise and fall of the wall heights and will have a 5 degree roof pitch. The shipping container will have a flat roof with a total height of 2.4 metres. The roof of the proposed dwelling will be constructed of Revolution True Oak Deep Roof Deck metal sheeting in Colorbond Woodland Grey. The external walls at the main level will consist of Hardies Hardiplank sheeting from 1.2 metres up to the eaves in Dulux Regency White and 230mm wide Hardiplank (woodgrain finish) to 1.2 metres above floor level in Dulux Portland Stone. The bottom level will be of 230mm wide Hardiplank (woodgrain finish) in Dulux Portland Stone, with a portion of the wall constructed of concrete in natural tones. The shipping container will be painted in similar colours to the proposed dwelling to match. All stormwater associated with the proposed dwelling will be directed into the existing concrete rainwater tank, which has a minimum capacity of 10,000 litres. The dwelling must be connected to the SA sewer network upon approval. CLASSIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT The site is located within the Residential Escarpment Zone of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan.



Principles of Development Control 29 and 30 of the Residential Escarpment Zone state the following: 29 Complying developments are prescribed in Schedule 4 of the Development

Regulations 2008. 30 All development (including building work, a change in the use of land, or

division of an allotment) is non-complying with the exception of:

Detached dwelling Residential outbuilding or domestic structure erected in association with a dwelling …

In reference to the Principles of Development Control listed above, the proposed dwelling and shipping container meets all of the above provisions and therefore must be classified as an ‘On-Merit’ application. REFERRALS This application required no referrals to any external government agency. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Principles of Development Control 31 and 32 of the Residential Escarpment Zone state the following: 31 Category 1 forms of development are:

Residential outbuildings ancillary to a dwelling where:

(a) the wall height is equal to or less than 3 metres; (b) the floor area is equal to or less than 42 square metres; and (c) the minimum set-back from adjoining allotment boundaries is 1.0

metre. 32 Category 2 forms of development are:

Land division that creates an additional allotment or allotments. As the proposed development is not explicitly mentioned in the above Principles of Development Control quoted above, Schedule 9 of the Development Regulations 2008 must now be referred to. Clause 2(a)(i) and Clause 2(d) in Part 1 of Schedule 9 refer to a detached dwelling and outbuilding, in a Zone where the development is not listed as non-complying, as being a Category 1 form of development. The development is therefore classified as a Category 1 form of development in accordance with the Development Regulations 2008.



RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE MID MURRAY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Council Wide Objectives: 7, 18, 19, 42, 44, 45, 54, 68 & 96 Principles of Development Control: 1, 2, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 61, 63, 67, 74, 75,

76, 77, 78, 80, 81, 164, 167, 168, 170, 202, 207, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 242, 243, 244, 248, 252, 254, 255, 256, 258, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 269, 277, 278, 281, 378, 379, 380, 381, 382, 383 & 384

Residential Escarpment Zone Objectives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 7 Principles of Development Control: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 19,

20, 21, 22, 23, 23, 24 & 28 ASSESSMENT A detailed assessment of the proposal has taken place against the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 14 June 2017), as provided below under headings. Land Use and Character Objectives 3 and 7 of the Residential Escarpment Zone state the following: 3 Development designed and sited so that the natural appearance of the

escarpment visible from the River Murray and land located on the eastern side of the River is not impaired.

7 Development that contributes to the desired character of the zone. While the proposed nature of development is envisaged within the Residential Escarpment Zone, there are certain restrictions and limitations when it comes to development, given the high visual dominance of the Zone from the River Murray. Aspects such as building height have been restricted to ensure that structures blend in with the natural features of the environment as much as possible. The subject allotment is slightly unique in comparison to other allotments within the Residential Escarpment Zone, on Preiss Street. Most allotments span the entire width of the land between Preiss Street and River Lane, offering little screening from the River Murray, which means that any structure can be easily viewed from the main channel of the river. Whereas the subject land is separated from the river by an additional allotment, which contains a dwelling, and assists in screening the proposed dwelling from the River Murray. In this case, the development has been designed and sited so that its appearance from the main channel of the river is not unreasonable. Therefore this essentially contributes to the desired character of the Zone.



Principles of Development Control 2, 4, 5, 6 and 13 of the Residential Escarpment Zone state the following: 2 Development undertaken in the Residential Escarpment Zone should be

primarily detached dwellings on individual allotments. 4 The use and placement of outbuildings should be ancillary to and in

association with a dwelling. 5 Development should not be undertaken unless it is consistent with the

desired character for the zone. 6 Development should be restricted to single storey detached dwellings and

their associated outbuildings. 13 Buildings and structures should be designed, in terms of their scale, bulk,

height, roof line, external finishes and colours to limit their visual intrusion in the landscape, particularly when viewed from the River Murray and the eastern side of the River.

The two storey dwelling and associated shipping container are considered to be acceptable within the Residential Escarpment Zone, as a detached dwelling and domestic structure are both listed as acceptable forms of development in the Development Plan. Principle of Development Control 5 speaks about development being consistent with the desired character for the Zone. The proposed development in regards to its scale, roof line, external finishes and colours are considered to be consistent with the requirements of the Development Plan, as well as existing development within the locality. However in regards to the bulk and height of the structure, the proposal is of a nature not typically envisaged within the Zone. Principle of Development Control 6 explicitly states that a dwelling must be restricted to one storey in height. This is to ensure that the structure is not visually dominant on the land, as viewed from the main channel of the River Murray. In this case, the proposed development is for a two storey dwelling and therefore this component of the development is not consistent with Principle of Development Control 6. Further details of this component of the development can be found under the heading ‘Building Height’. Sloping Land and Landform Council Wide Principles of Development Control 380 and 381 state the following: 380 Development and associated driveways and access tracks should be sited

and designed to integrate with the natural topography of the land and minimise the need for earthworks.

381 Development and associated driveways and access tracks, including

related earthworks, should be sited, designed and undertaken in a manner that:

(a) minimises their visual impact; (b) reduces the bulk of the buildings and structures; (c) minimises the extent of cut and/or fill;



(d) minimises the need for, and the height of, retaining walls; (e) does not cause or contribute to instability of any embankment or

cutting; (f) avoids the silting of watercourses; and (g) protects development and its surrounds from erosion caused by water

run-off. While the dwelling is defined as two storey, due to the slope of the land, the structure will appear to be single storey from Preiss Street. This is because the dwelling has been designed to follow the natural contours of the land, which essentially reduces the need for excessive filling and excavation, and the construction of retaining walls. This will also ensure that stormwater can flow efficiently around the allotment. While there is an existing dwelling located on the allotment directly east of the subject site, which will assist in screening the proposed development, the structure will still be in view from the river. The bulk of the structure, being a two storey structure, makes it a more dominant structure from the main channel of the River Murray and may create a negative visual impact on the escarpment. Principle of Development Control 24 of the Residential Escarpment Zone states the following: 24 Development should be designed to relate to the slope of the land, so that:

(a) the amount of cutting and filling of the natural ground profile is minimised;

(b) the need for retaining walls is avoided, or the height of retaining walls is minimised, and

(c) the use of stilts or other building method which results in an elevated building platform is avoided.

Within the Residential Escarpment Zone, there are strict restrictions on filling and excavating the land, however there are also height restrictions and policy which states that stilts should be avoided. Given the slope of many of the allotments within this Zone, this can make any form of development difficult to achieve. In the case of this development proposal, the applicant has demonstrated that an effort has been made to achieve these requirements. While there will be minor filling and excavating, the use of some minor retaining walls and the use of stilts for the balcony, these components have been limited so as to not have a detrimental affect on the land in regards to its visual quality. Design and Appearance Council Wide Objective 18 states the following: 18 Amenity of localities not impaired by the appearance of land, buildings and

structures including landscape.



The proposed dwelling is listed as an acceptable form of development in the Residential Escarpment Zone. The structure will appear to be a single storey dwelling from Preiss Street and will be generally consistent with similar structures within the locality. The structure will have a two storey appearance from the river side, the development will be moderately screened by onsite vegetation. While the proposed dwelling will be positioned higher on the escarpment, the adjoining dwelling, which is located between the subject land and the main channel of the River Murray, will increase visual quality and increase the amenity of the locality. Council Wide Principles of Development Control 53, 55, 75, 78, 236 and 248 state the following: 53 Development, including alterations and additions to buildings, should not be

undertaken unless it involves a high standard of design with regard to external appearance, building materials, colours, siting and landscaping, so as to preserve and enhance the character of the locality or desired future character of an Area.

55 Development should not be undertaken unless:

(a) it conforms with the desired future character of an Area; and (b) it is sited so as to protect scenic views from public roads or reserves,

and is not located on visually-significant ridgelines. 75 Development should take place in a manner which will minimise alteration

to the existing land form. 78 Buildings or structures should be sited unobtrusively and be of a character

and design which will blend naturally with the landscape. 236 The appearance of land and buildings should not detract from the Desired

Character of the relevant residential zone and policy area in terms of built-form elements such as:

(a) building height; (b) building mass, scale and proportion; (c) the manner in which buildings address public streets; (d) external materials, patterns, textures and colours; (e) ground floor height above natural ground level; or (f) roof form and pitch.

248 Buildings should not be erected on posts or stilts unless the lower portions

of the structure are screened from view from public reserves or roads. In regards to the external appearance of the structure, mainly from the main channel of the River Murray, the height of the structure from natural ground level and the use of stilts, means there are a number of Principles which are not met within the Zone.



However excluding the height and view of the structure from off site, the design of the structure includes many components which comply with the Principles listed within the Zone. The dwelling will have a high standard of design in regards to building materials, colours, roof from and roof pitch. The structure has also been designed so that the main living areas face the direction of the river, without compromising the manner in which the structure addresses the primary road frontage. While the siting of the majority of the allotments within the Residential Escarpment has a dominant visual appearance from the main channel of the River Murray, this allotment contains some on site screening in the form of native vegetation, which assists in blending the proposed structure with the natural landscape. There is also an existing dwelling located directly in front of the proposed structure, which will help to further assist the component of screening the site. The proposed structure has been designed to best take into account the existing land form, by minimising the need for excessive filling and excavating, and the excessive use of stilts. While not every component within the Principles of Development Control stated above have been achieved, the structure can still be considered to conform with the desired character of the area. Building Height Principles of Development Control 19 and 20 of the Residential Escarpment Zone state the following: 19 Buildings should be limited in height to one storey.

20 Dwellings should not exceed a height of 5 metres (as measured from

existing natural ground level to the highest point of the building), except where an increase in height is required to provide a split-level dwelling that follows the natural slope of the land.

In regards to all of the relevant Objectives and Principles of Development Control, both Council Wide and Zone specific, the provisions in regards to the height of the proposed structure is considered to be the biggest issue. As stated above, the Development Plan suggests that any new dwelling must be limited to one storey, and must not exceed a total maximum height of 5 metres. The structure has been identified as a two storey structure and the total maximum height of the dwelling will be 6.95 metres (river side of the structure only). As the two Principles quoted above are considered to have a greater weight in comparison to other provisions, it could be argued that the structure is not appropriate for the Zone and area. However the applicant has made every attempt to minimise the bulk and scale of the structure by ensuring that the dwelling appears to be only a single storey dwelling from Preiss Street. This will fit in with other existing dwellings within the vicinity. The dwelling has also been positioned in a way that it follows the natural contours of the land. As a result, the finished floor level of the dwelling will be located slightly below street level. Given that it follows the existing slope of the land, this has helped to reduce the total height of the structure, which could have been several metres higher if it sat in line with the street level.



Privacy and Overlooking In addition to the relevant Objectives and Principles of Development Control, both Council Wide and Zone specific, it has been identified that overlooking and overshadowing may occur as a result of the proposed development. 75 River Lane sits directly adjacent the subject land to the east. This dwelling is located well below the natural ground level of the subject site, with the rear of the dwelling facing towards Preiss Street. As the proposed dwelling will be orientated towards the River Murray, this means that there is potential for overlooking into an area of private open space at 75 River Lane. However given that the subject site contains existing screening in the form of native landscaping, this will help to reduce the impact. The open space at the rear of 75 River Lane is currently occupied by the driveway and parking areas only and is not fenced. Therefore there is currently no formal private open space area. In regards to overshadowing, most of this will occur in the afternoon towards the eastern dwelling. As the proposed dwelling is located higher on the escarpment than the dwelling at 75 River Lane, I accept that some overshadowing will occur in the afternoon. Furthermore, given the steep slope of the land, the adjoining dwelling would currently receive some minor overshadowing from the rear hill and the existing vegetation on the allotment. As the proposal will involve removing the vegetation and constructing a dwelling, this is not likely to change this component of the development detrimentally. CONCLUSION The application does not satisfy all of the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 14 June 2017), but I am satisfied most of the relevant provisions have been considered and are achievable. While the proposed application may not conform with the Development Plan in regards to the height of the structure, most of the remaining components including bulk, scale, roof line, external finishes and colours can be achieved. The proposed structure will look acceptable from Preiss Street and will not be dominant on the escarpment as viewed from the main channel of the river. Consequently, I recommend that Development Plan Consent be granted, subject to the conditions and notations as stated below. RECOMMENDATION Moved __________________ Seconded __________________ that pursuant to Section 35(2) of the Development Act 1993 that the proposed development is not “Seriously at Variance” with the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 14 June 2017), and that pursuant to Section 33(1)(a) of the Development Act 1993, Development Plan Consent be granted to Development Application 711/400/17, subject to the following conditions and notations: Conditions 1. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details

submitted with the application and the following approved plans, other than where required to be varied by Conditions 2-8 inclusive:



Plan Number Plan Type Dated Prepared By

Not Applicable (4 pages)

Correspondence – Letter

Received by Council 7 November 2017

Z Osis (Applicant)

Z01 Site Plan Received by Council 10 October 2017

Z Osis (Applicant)

Z03 Floor Plan Upper and Lower

Received by Council 10 October 2017

Z Osis (Applicant)

Z04 Upper Dimension Floor Plan


Z Osis (Applicant)

Z05 Lower Floor Plan Received by Council 10 October 2017

Z Osis (Applicant)

Z06 Front and Rear Elevation


Z Osis (Applicant)

Z14 Roof and Site Drainage Plan


Z Osis (Applicant)

2. The garage (under main roof) and shipping container shall not be used for

human habitation at any time. 3. Except where otherwise approved, all exterior surfaces of the dwelling

shall:

a) Be of new, non-reflective materials, in accordance with the Approved Plans (see Development Plan Consent Condition 1);

b) Be of appropriate colours, in accordance with the Approved Plans (see Development Plan Consent Condition 1); and

c) Be maintained in good and reasonable condition at all times.

4. Except where otherwise approved, all exterior surfaces of the shipping container shall:

a) Be of appropriate colours, in accordance with the Approved Plans (see

Development Plan Consent Condition 1); and b) Be maintained in good and reasonable condition at all times.

5. In the event of damage being inflicted upon Council infrastructure, caused

as a direct result of the proposed development (or any other kind of work), the damaged infrastructure shall be repaired and/or reinstated, at the applicant’s cost, to the satisfaction of Council’s Director – Infrastructure Services:

a) To its original condition; or b) Where (a) is not achievable, in accordance with the relevant Australian

Standard (applicable to that particular type of infrastructure).



6. The dwelling shall be connected to the SA Water sewerage main, via an

approved connection under the Sewerage Act 1929, at all times.

7. All stormwater shall be managed on the site at all times, in accordance with the Approved Plans (see Development Plan Consent Condition 1), such that:

a) All roof water from the dwelling shall be directed into a rainwater tank

or tanks, having a total capacity of at least 20,000 litres at all times; b) Any rainwater tank overflow, in the event that the tank (or tanks) under

item (a) is full, is directed away from buildings and site boundaries; c) All surface stormwater (tank overflow and runoff collected on-site) is

directed away from buildings and site boundaries, at all times; and d) Stormwater (roof water and/or surface stormwater) does not flow onto,

or cause nuisance to adjoining privately owned land at any time. 8. Except where otherwise approved, the freestanding sides of the attached

balcony shall remain open at all times. No walls being permanent or semi-permanent shall be attached to the sides of the attached balcony at any time.

9. The temporary shipping container must be removed from the site within

3 months of practical completion of the new dwelling. Notations 1. This approval does not imply compliance with the Electricity Act 1996 (as


You are advised to contact appropriate authorities including SA Power Networks, Telstra, SA Water and Council’s CWMS department in relation to the location of supply lines and other requirements prior to commencing work.


Approvals







3. The applicant is reminded that the Consent in regards to the shipping

container and garage (under main roof) are for Class 10a domestic structures only, and as such cannot be used for human habitation, commercial or industrial purposes.




materials associated with the building work is to be secured and contained within the site. Upon completion of the development all wastes are to be removed and appropriately disposed of.

6. All existing trees on the site should be retained wherever practicable. 7. The applicant is responsible for the correct siting of the dwelling and

shipping container. The applicant shall ensure these buildings are sited on the allotment in accordance with the approved Plans.

8. The applicant is advised that Council will instigate appropriate action should

the shipping container or garage (under main roof) be used for anything other than domestic storage.

9. The granting of this consent does not absolve the applicant from obtaining


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

Section 25 of the Environment Protection Act 1993, to take all reasonable and practical measures to ensure that the activities on the whole site, including during construction, do not pollute the environment in any way which causes or may cause environmental harm.

11. You are advised to contact other authorities such as Telstra, SA Water etc.

in relation to the location of their supply lines and requirements prior to commencing work on site.

12. The applicant is advised that any proposal to clear, remove limbs or trim

native vegetation, unless subject to an exemption under the Native Vegetation Act 1991, requires the approval of the Native Vegetation Council. Any queries regarding the clearance of native vegetation should be directed to the Native Vegetation Council Secretariat on 8124 4744.

13. Council recommends that stormwater be retained on site wherever possible

to ensure the efficient use of the water for the benefit of the owners/occupiers of the land and the community,



14. Please note that a rainwater tank (and any supporting structure) requires

Council Development Approval where it does not comply with the following criteria:

(i) is part of a roof-drainage system; and (ii) has a total floor area not exceeding 10 square metres; and (iii) is located wholly above ground; and (iv) has no part higher than 4 metres above the natural surface of the

ground.

MID MURRAY COUNCIL – DEVELOPMENT REPORT 7.4 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 711/205/17 – C BOSTON


Assessment Manager: Jake McVicar Reporting Officer: Joel Taggart Position: Acting Director – Development and Environmental

Services Development No. 711/205/17 Applicant C Boston Subject Land Lot 93 of FP213439, 30 Miller Road, Truro,

Hundred of Jellicoe Proposal Temporary change of use (domestic

outbuilding/shed to motor repair station) and associated advertisement (freestanding sign)

INTRODUCTION The applicant, C Boston, lodged the above development application with Council on 15 May 2017, seeking approval for the temporary change of use of an existing approved structure on site from a domestic shed to a motor repair station, and an associated advertisement in the form of a freestanding sign. This application is being presented to the Council Assessment Panel given that the proposed development is listed as a non-complying form of development within the Township (Deferred) Zone. Due to this, a detailed assessment process has been conducted, and the development application is being submitted to the Council Assessment Panel for a decision. Copies of the plans and details submitted with the application are attached. SUBJECT LAND The subject site is 30 Miller Road, Truro and is located south of the town centre and adjacent the Rural Living Zone and Township Zone. The site has a rectangular shape, a site area of 4.7 hectares and a primary frontage to Miller Road of 151.91 metres. The land is zoned Township (Deferred) and is currently being used for residential purposes. The land contains a single storey detached dwelling, associated domestic structures, rainwater tanks and boundary fencing. There is little native vegetation both on the subject allotment and within the surrounding vicinity. Photos taken while on-site on 19 May 2017 are attached, with written annotations. DESCRIPTION OF LOCALITY Truro is located on the far western boundary of the Mid Murray Council. The subject site is located south of the town centre and is located on the far northern tip of the Barossa Valley region. Truro is designated for future residential expansion when there is both demand for such and when appropriate infrastructure is augmented in the Township (Deferred) Zone e.g. water supply, common effluent, improved electricity network etc.



The subject land is situated in the Township (Deferred) Zone, with the Rural Living Zone located east of Miller Road, directly adjacent the property, and the Township Zone and Rural Zone also within close proximity (within 300 metres). Development within the vicinity includes mainly single storey detached dwellings on large allotments sizes, with associated structures including domestic outbuildings and farm buildings. Most structures within the township of Truro are relatively old, whereas newer structures can be found on the outskirts of the town, which reflects the historic pattern of settlement within the town. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL Development Application 711/205/17 is seeking to convert (change in use) a domestic shed into a motor repair station (business), and also to construct an advertisement (freestanding sign) at 30 Miller Road, Truro. This motor repair station is intended to provide mechanical services through the supply of parts and labour to the local and surrounding areas. There will be no panel beating/spray painting/crash repairs occurring on the site. As such uses may impact on neighbouring properties and the environment, a condition to restrict such uses is proposed to be applied to this approval. In accordance with Schedule 1 of the Development Regulations 2008, a motor repair station is defined as:

‘any land or building used for carrying out repairs (other than panel beating or spray painting) to motor vehicles.

The existing shed to be converted is positioned approximately 195 metres from the front (eastern) boundary, 102 metres from the rear (western) boundary, 149 metres from the northern (side) boundary and 1.50 metres from the southern (side) boundary, and is situated about 15.0 metres behind the associated dwelling on the site. The structure subject to the proposed change of land use is 24.4 metres in length, 12.0 metres in width for a total floor area of 292.80 square metres. The wall height is 4.88 metres and the total height of the current outbuilding is 6.26 metres, with a roof pitch of 13 degrees. The structure is fully of Colorbond material, in Classic Cream colour (or similar). This includes the roof cladding, wall cladding, gutters, downpipes and openings. The proposed change in use includes converting the current shed into two sections – the 2 outer bays will be for storage purposes and the 2 inner bays will be for the motor repair station. There will be 6-9 car parking spaces and the driveway is of an all-weather material, in order to access the site. There will be no further changes to the elevations, floor layout, materials or colours of the existing structure. The subject development application also includes an advertisement, consisting of one freestanding sign, to advertise the onsite motor repair business. This sign itself will have dimensions of 891mm by 594mm, and will have a total height of 1.5 metres. The sign will include the business name (Bosto’s Garage), a traffic directional logo and some minor site conditions (ie. Shared Zone, Please Drive with Care).



CLASSIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT The site is located within the Township (Deferred) Zone of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan. Principles of Development Control 19 and 20 of the Township (Deferred) Zone state the following: 19 Complying developments are prescribed in Schedule 4 of the

Development Regulations 2008. 20 Development (including building work, a change in the use of land, or

division of an allotment) for the following is non-complying:

Advertisement Advertising hoarding Amusement machine centre Commercial forestry Community centre except where urban infrastructure (including

power, reticulated water supply, stormwater and a common wastewater disposal; scheme) are provided

Consulting room Crematorium Dairy Dwelling except a detached dwelling that does not result in more

than one dwelling on an allotment Educational establishment except where urban infrastructure

(including power, reticulated water supply, stormwater and a common wastewater disposal scheme) are provided

Fuel depot Horticulture Hospital Hotel Indoor recreation centre Industry Intensive animal keeping Land division except where no additional allotments are created

partly or wholly within the zone or where urban infrastructure (including power, reticulated water supply, stormwater and a common wastewater disposal scheme) are provided for each allotment

Motel Motor repair station Nursing home Office Prescribed mining operations Residential flat building Road transport terminal Service trade premises Shop Stock sales yard Stock slaughter works Store Tourist accommodation except where urban infrastructure

(including power, reticulated water supply, stormwater and a common wastewater disposal scheme) are provided

Warehouse



The proposed development application is for an advertisement, and a change in use from a domestic shed to a motor repair station. As such, these types of development are listed as non-complying forms of development in accordance with Principle of Development Control 20 of the Township (Deferred) Zone, the application will be a non-complying form of development. REFERRALS This application required no referrals to any external referral agencies, however as the development application is non-complying, should the Council Assessment Panel decide to support this proposal, the development application will need to be sent to the State Commission Assessment Panel (formerly the Development Assessment Commission) to gain concurrence with the Panel’s decision to approve the development application. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Principle of Development Control 21 of the Township (Deferred) Zone states the following: 20 Categories of public notification are prescribed in Schedule 9 of the

Development Regulations 2008. Given that the development application is a non-complying form of development in accordance with Principle of Development Control 20 of the Township (Deferred) Zone, the application must be a Category 3 form of development in accordance with Schedule 9 of the Development Regulations 2008. The Category 3 public notification took place, involving Council posting an advert in The Leader (newspaper) and also informing adjoining properties owners, allowing 10 business days for concerned parties to lodge a representation. The public notification period finished on 6 September 2017 and no representations were received. RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE MID MURRAY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Council Wide Objective: 25 Principles of Development Control: 5, 87, 88, 93, 334 & 335 Township (Deferred) Zone Objectives: 1, 2, 3 & 4 Principles of Development Control: 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 & 20



ASSESSMENT The Desired Character Statement for the Township (Deferred) Zone states:

The zone has been delineated to enable future infrastructure requirements to be planned for in advance of need to ensure compact, orderly and economic expansion in the future for the town expansion of Truro and Tungkillo. The land has been identified as appropriate for supporting residential land use, once infrastructure issues such as stormwater and wastewater have been addressed. In the interim it is essential that the land continue to be used for rural purposes and that development of the land concerned not be undertaken.

A detailed assessment of the proposal has taken place against the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 31 July 2014), as provided below under headings. Zoning Objective 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Township (Deferred) Zone state the following: 1 Land preserved to accommodate future town growth when the existing

townships of Truro and Tungkillo have been substantially developed and infrastructure services are available.

2 The prevention of development likely to be incompatible with long term

urban development, or likely to be detrimental to the orderly and efficient servicing and conversion of land to urban use.

3 A zone accommodating a restricted range of rural uses that are not

prejudicial to development of the land for urban purposes and maintain the rural appearance of the zone.

4 Development that contributes to the desired character of the zone. Objective 1 above makes mention that land within the Township (Deferred) Zone shall be set aside for ‘future town growth’. Whilst the proposed development will contribute to the expanding services for the township of Truro, infrastructure such as stormwater and wastewater are currently not available. Objective 4, in conjunction with the Desired Character Statement advises that the area shall only be developed once essential infrastructure services are available. However this is only in regards to residential development only and does not make mention of a commercial business, such as a motor repair station. The proposed development is able to satisfy Objective 3, as there will be no external building work associated with the change in use, and maintenance of the existing rural appearance of the overall site will be achieved. However in regards to the long term view for the current Township (Deferred) Zone, while the proposed change of use is not likely to have any detrimental impacts on the Zone and area, it is a non-complying form of development, as detailed in Principle of Development Control 20 of the Zone. The rationale behind such listing is to prevent commercial activities prejudicing future residential development in this area, either by virtue of occupying what could be residential land in the future, or through the nuisance caused by a commercial activity on future residential land.



In order to pragmatically address the above issue, Council staff have sought legal advice and have drafted a condition to ensure that this proposed change of use doesn’t prejudice any future residential development within the area. Further, as attached in the documentation submitted by the applicant, the applicant now only seeks this change of land use to be ‘temporary’. This will allow the proposal at hand to operate until such time as residential dwellings are planned on allotments immediately adjacent to or abutting the subject land. The rationale behind this approach is to allow this business to establish in its current location, which at this point in time will not impact on residential properties, and create a trigger for either the relocation of the business, or the reassessment of the location of the business, at a time when residential development is proposed close to the site. Land Use Principles of Development Control 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 of the Township (Deferred) Zone state the following: 1 A zone accommodating low impact agricultural and pastoral activities until

required for residential development. The conversion from rural to urban use should only occur once urban infrastructure services are available.

2 Development should not prejudice the future orderly, compact and proper

extension of the townships of Truro and Tungkillo. 4 The following forms of development are envisaged in the zone until

infrastructure is available for urban development:

- Broad-acre cropping - Grazing

6 Development listed as non-complying is generally inappropriate. 7 Development should not be undertaken if it will be prejudicial to the

orderly and economic development of future urban land uses within the zone.

8 A zone accommodating low impact agricultural and pastoral activities until

required for residential development. All land within the Township (Deferred) Zone should generally be used for agricultural and pastoral activities only, including broad-acre cropping and grazing, until such time that infrastructure services become available (in accordance with Principles of Development Control 1, 4 and 8 stated above). The proposed development does not appear to fit in with this requirement, nor does it achieve the future desired character of residential development, however given the land holding is too small for viable agricultural pursuits, it is considered that the proposed land use is suitable in a temporary manner.



Principles of Development Control 2 and 7 as mentioned above explicitly talk about future development being undertaken in an economic and orderly fashion. The proposed conversion of the existing shed into a motor repair station does assist in providing greater economic benefit to the township of Truro. However it should be noted that this proposal can not be considered as forming part of the orderly process to convert the land from rural farming into a residential development, hence the rationale behind the proposal being for a ‘temporary’ development, as requested by the applicants and reinforced by a condition. In terms of the non-complying status of this proposal, whilst Principle of Development Control 6 states that non-complying forms of development within the Township (Deferred) Zone are generally inappropriate, the key word to take note of within this Principle is the word ‘generally’. While the proposed motor repair station is not a typically envisaged use within the locality, it does demonstrate merit, given that it will contribute to the economic development of the township of Truro, and by virtue of this proposal being for a limited period of time, it will not impact upon or prejudice the future orderly growth of the town. Council Wide Objective 25 states the following: 25 Development located and designed to prevent adverse impact and conflict

between land uses. Objective 25 stated above makes mention of the need for Council to ensure that development avoids adverse impacts and conflicts between land uses. This proposal doesn’t appear to fit in with the current envisaged rural land use, nor the future envisaged residential land use. The proposed development however is for a temporary land use, and combined with the absence of existing agricultural pursuits on the subject land, is therefore deemed to not offend this Council Wide Objective. Further, given that neighbouring dwellings are well setback (255m to nearest neighbouring – situated at 23 The Esplanade, Truro) and as no representations were received from neighbouring properties, it is considered that land use conflict will not be an issue with respect to this temporary change of land use proposal. Council Wide Principles of Development Control 87 and 88 state the following: 87 Development should not detrimentally affect the amenity of the locality or

cause unreasonable interference through any of the following:

(a) The emission of effluent, odour, smoke, fumes, dust or other airborne pollutants;

(b) Noise; (c) Vibration; (d) Electrical interference; (e) Light spill; (f) Glare; (g) Hours of operation; or (h) Traffic impacts.

88 Development should be designed and sited to minimise negative impact

on existing and potential future land uses considered appropriate in the locality.



In regards to Principle of Development Control 87, the components which are applicable to the proposed change in land use are noise, hours of operation and light spill. Whilst the land currently has an envisaged rural use, the future long-term development of the land will be for residential development. Depending on the degree of impact from these factors, there could be conflict with the future residential land use of the area (i.e. noise nuisance from a motor repair station being located right next to a dwelling). However, as discussed earlier, this proposal is for a temporary approval, and when combined with the proposed condition, the land use in question will have to cease and/or apply for a new approval upon residential development occurring near the subject land. Character and Form of Development Council Wide Principle of Development Control 5 states the following: 5 Development which is incompatible with other uses within the locality of

the proposed development should not be undertaken. Whilst the locality for this development is considered to be largely the rural living land immediately surrounding the subject land at 30 Miller Road, Truro, the proposed development is also considered to be appropriate within the broader context of the Truro township. This is as the development in question, due to its temporary nature, will not at this juncture be incompatible with any existing use in the immediate locality. The Township (Deferred) Zone, while not currently a residential development, is envisaged to be residential development once essential services become available, and therefore whilst Council needs to take into account the impact of the change of use on future development, these impacts have been mitigated through the applicants desire to operate the change of land use as a ‘temporary’ operation. Principles of Development Control 10 and 11 of the Township (Deferred) Zone state the following: 10 Development should not be undertaken unless it is consistent with the

desired character for the zone. 11 Development should not prejudice the future orderly, compact and proper

extension of the township. In accordance with Principle of Development Control 10, the proposed development is not only listed as a non-complying form of development, but is also not outlined within the envisaged uses section of the Desired Character Statement. This is logical, given that the land is essentially for small scale farming activity which will remain in-site until the subject zone is converted into a Residential Zone. Given the proposed ‘temporary’ nature of this proposal, it is considered to not prejudice the future orderly, compact and proper extension of the township, as outlined in Principle of Development Control 11. Council Wide Principle of Development Control 92 states the following: 93 Development should be designed, constructed and sited to minimise

negative impacts of noise and to avoid unreasonable interference.



While the subject land is currently suitable for rural activities such as broad-acre cropping and grazing, albeit noting that the landholding size would impact on the viability of such a use, the impacts of noise and other unreasonable interferences that could be caused by the proposed land use are not likely to have a detrimental impact. However as the Zone is designed to accommodate residential development in the future, this aspect also needs to be taken into consideration during the assessment of this proposal. In this case, the impacts of a motor repair station may lead to conflicts with future residential development, and elements such as noise would impact negatively impact on the future zoning regime of the area. In order to overcome this, the applicant is proposing this land use change to be ‘temporary’ and will only operate until such time as future dwellings are proposed on neighbouring land. Council Wide Principles of Development Control 334 and 335 state the following: 334 Development should be sited and designed to prevent or minimise the

generation of waste (including wastewater) by applying the following waste management hierarchy in the order of priority as shown below:

(a) Avoiding the production of waste; (b) Minimising waste production; (c) Reusing waste; (d) Recycling waste; (e) Recovering part of the waste for re-use; (f) Treating waste to reduce the potentially degrading impacts; and (g) Disposing of waste in an environmentally sound manner.

335 The storage, treatment and disposal of waste materials from any

development should be achieved without risk to health or impairment of the environmental.

In regards to Principles of Development Control 334 and 335 above, the proposed development will have minimal waste, given its small scale. Waste will be managed via normal means e.g. residential waste disposal for general waste and specialised waste removal for oils and chemicals etc. As the nature of development is a motor repair station, it is envisaged that there will be some degree of waste associated with the business. The applicant will need to ensure that this is managed in an effective or efficient manner, and will be subject to a condition, should the application gain the Council Assessment Panel’s support. Further to the assessment of the development application against the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 31 July 2017), it is worthy to note that the existing structure was approved as a domestic outbuilding (shed) back in 2014. A condition of this approval was that the structure not be used for human habitation, industrial or commercial purposes. Therefore this condition will be varied through any approval issued as part of this current development application.



CONCLUSION Despite its non-complying status, this application appears to satisfy many of the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 31 July 2014), primarily due to the ‘temporary’ nature of the proposal. It is due to this that land use conflicts will be avoided and the future township expansion will not be prejudiced. Consequently, I recommend that Development Plan Consent be granted, subject to the concurrence of the State Commission Assessment Panel (SCAP). RECOMMENDATION Moved __________________ Seconded __________________ that pursuant to Section 35(2) of the Development Act 1993 that the proposed development is not “Seriously at Variance” with the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 31 July 2014) and that pursuant to Section 33(1)(a) of the Development Act 1993, Development Plan Consent be granted to Development Application 711/205/17, subject to the concurrence of the State Commission Assessment Panel and the following conditions and notations: Conditions 1. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details

submitted with the application and the following approved plans, other than where required to be varied by conditions 2 - 9 inclusive:

Plan Number Plan Type Dated Prepared By N/A Statement of

Support 7 August 2017 Ryan Moyle, URPS

17ADL-0255 Statement of Effect, site plan and signage plan

7 August 2017 Ryan Moyle, URPS

N/A Olympic Industries Shed Specification

14 October 2013 Colin Douglas, Olympic Industries

G443564 Specification and Fee Sheet

14 October 2013 Colin Douglas, Olympic Industries

N/A Email and photos 22 November 2017 12:43pm

Ryan Moyle, URPS

N/A Letter re nature of development

17 October 2017 Craig and Anita Boston

N/A Letter providing overview of development

9 May 2017 Craig Boston

N/A 4 x Google Maps images

5 May 2017 Craig Boston

N/A Site plan on graph paper

Undated Craig Boston

2. The sign and its supporting structure shall be kept in a state of good repair

at all times. Any future change to the sign will require consent of Council. 3. The development shall be screened by landscaping. All plants, shrubs

and trees shall be planted within four months of practical completion of the structure and watered and maintained thereafter.



4. All stormwater emanating from the building/structure shall be managed

such that it does not flow onto, or cause nuisance to, adjoining privately owned land.

5. That upon the subject land and/or any land that abuts the subject land

being re-zoned to a zone that encourages or envisages its immediate development for residential purposes, the motor repair station herein approved will cease upon a land division application being lodged on one of those said pieces of land and the building within which the motor repair station is conducted will revert to use as an outbuilding in association with the continuing residential use of the land.

6. That upon condition number 5 being enlivened, within 3 months of the

abovementioned trigger coming into effect, the person with the benefit of the development must remove all elements of the development (such as signage and infrastructure) associated with the motor repair station use from the land and subject to condition 5, restore the use of the land to the state in which it existed immediately before the development.

7. No panel beating or spray painting shall occur on the site at any time

without the express prior written consent of Council. 8. The proposed operating hours of the hereby approved use shall only be

from 8:30am – 5pm Monday to Friday. No alterations to such hours can occur without the express prior written consent of Council.

9. All waste generated by the proposed use shall be stored away from public

view and shall disposed of on a regular basis via a private waste collection service to the satisfaction of Council.

Notations 1. This approval does not imply compliance with the Electricity Act 1996 (as


You are advised to contact appropriate authorities including ETSA, Telstra, SA Water and Council’s Environmental Services (CWMS) Department in relation to the location of supply lines and other requirements prior to commencing work.

2. Development Approval Required Before Commencement

No site works or construction can be undertaken on the land or building by an person unless Development Approval has been granted.

If this Decision Notification Form refers only to Development Plan Consent, Building Rules Consent must be granted before the Development Approval is obtained.




Approvals





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

by Section 25 of the Environment Protection Act, to take all reasonable and practical measures to ensure that the activities on the whole site, including during construction, do not pollute the environment in any way which causes or may cause environmental harm.

MID MURRAY COUNCIL – DEVELOPMENT REPORT 7.5 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 711/287/17 – D PORTER


Assessment Manager: Jake McVicar Reporting Officer: Jake McVicar Position: Acting Manager – Development Services Development No. 711/287/17 Applicant D Porter Subject Land 224 Cliff View Drive, Wongulla Proposal Demolition of existing dwelling and

construction of replacement single storey dwelling with attached alfresco (under main roof) (Non-Complying)

INTRODUCTION The applicant lodged the above development application with Council on 14 July 2017. Copies of the plans and details submitted with the application are attached. The Panel is requested at this stage to consider whether to: Refuse the application without proceeding to make an assessment OR Resolve to proceed with an assessment of the application. If the Panel does not wish to proceed with an assessment, the application will be refused. The applicant does not have any right of appeal. If the Panel wishes to proceed with an assessment, the application will be subject to the following process: a) Submitting a Statement of Effect; b) Category 3 public notification (letter to adjoining property owners and notice

in “The River News”); c) Referral to the Minister administering the River Murray Act 2003 under

Schedule 8(19)(g) of the Development Regulations 2008. d) Referral to the Environment Protection Agency under Schedule 8(10)(a)(ii) Following this process, the application would be presented again to the Panel for a final decision. If the Panel were to approve the application at this later stage, the State Commission Assessment Panel would need to concur with its decision. BACKGROUND In June 2017 Council staff were made aware that significant building work had been occurring on the subject land. The dwelling has been demolished and partial construction on a replacement dwelling (timber framing and roof) had been completed. As a result of the unlawful building work the owner was issued with a Section 84 notice (pursuant to the Development Act 1993), dated 27 June 2017. The applicant has submitted this development application in order to seek approval for the unlawful works which have already been partially undertaken.



SUBJECT LAND The subject land measures approximately 987 square metres in area, having a frontage to Cliff View Drive of 38.49 metres and a depth of 27.96 metres (at its greatest length). The site is separated from the main channel of the River Murray by a Crown Reserve and sits upon an escarpment which results in the majority of the site being located above the 1956 flood level. The site contains the dwelling (under construction and subject to this development application), a domestic outbuilding (shed) and associated retaining walls. Photos of the subject land, taken on 15 November 2017, have been attached for the benefit of the Panel. In addition, I have also attached photos of the previous dwelling (demolished) taken on 21 June 2007 so the Panel has an idea of what previously existed on the land. DESCRIPTION OF LOCALITY The general character of the locality comprises a mixture of dwelling types including elevated, two storey and ground level dwellings with attached verandahs, and freestanding outbuildings (sheds), carports, rainwater tanks, retaining walls and river structures (jetties and pontoons) on individual freehold allotments within the shack settlement of ‘Sabaruma’ which are separated from the River Murray by a thin strip of Crown land. Sabaruma is a small shack settlement comprising only 12 allotments, expanding over a distance of about 500 metres. Almost all of the allotments were affected by the 1956 flood event, however many of the building locations are above the flood level given the settlement sits upon an escarpment which provides for elevated views over the River Murray. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The application seeks approval for the demolition of the existing ground level dwelling and the construction of a replacement single storey dwelling with alfresco (under main roof). The setbacks of the proposed dwelling are somewhat unclear given the submitted site plan does not clearly identify the site boundaries, however the proposed dwelling is located in the same position as the dwelling it has replaced. An improved site plan will be submitted if further assessment of this application occurs. The dwelling will be single storey with a floor to ceiling height of 2.7 metres. The floor plan comprises three (3) bedrooms, bathroom, laundry, open plan living/dining, kitchen, storage room, alfresco and deck areas. The dwelling will have a maximum building height of 6.3m when viewed from east (river side). The total living area of the dwelling will be 184m2 with the decking/alfresco area measuring 64m2. The building will have a total footprint of 248.45 m2. The proposed dwelling is a considerable increase in size when compared to the previously existing dwelling which had a total footprint of 73.30m2 (living 23.67m2 and deck 49.63m2).



The dwelling will be relatively standard in design, having a Colorbond wall with Colorbond roof sheeting at a roof pitch of approximately 15 degrees, open deck areas and large windows facing toward the River Murray. CLASSIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT The site is located within the River Murray Zone and Shack Settlement Policy Area of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan. Principle of Development Control 30 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area states that: 30 The following forms of development are non-complying in the Shack

Settlement Policy Area:

... Dwelling, (including the replacement of an existing dwelling), except where the dwelling is an elevated dwelling (including the circumstances of development involving the replacement of a ground level dwelling on land outside of the 1956 flood plain) and where the development satisfies all of the following: … (a) the dwelling will either replace an existing dwelling on an allotment

or lease site, or will be a new dwelling on a vacant allotment or lease site, and not more than one dwelling will exist on the allotment or lease site at the completion of the development and where all of the following are satisfied:

… (iii) in a shack settlement identified in Figures Sh/1 to 49 where

there are 5 or more allotments or lease sites identified in the Residential Area of the shack settlement, the dwelling is connected or is proposed to be connected (as part of the application) to a Community Wastewater Management Scheme that complies with the relevant public and environmental health legislation applying to that type of system

… The proposed replacement dwelling is unable to connect to a Community Wastewater Management Scheme (CWMS) as it is to be located within a Shack Settlement Area (Sabaruma) that is not serviced by a CWMS. Therefore, the application is considered to be non-complying. REFERRALS The application triggers a referral to the Minister administering the River Murray Act 2003 under Schedule 8(19)(g) of the Development Regulations 2008 on the basis that building work is proposed on land within the River Murray Floodplain Area established under the River Murray Act 2003. The application also triggers a referral to the Environment Protection Agency under Schedule 8(10)(a)(ii) of the Development Regulations 2008 on the basis that the site is located within the River Murray Protection Area and is on land not connected to a common septic tank disposal scheme.



PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Principles of Development Control 31 and 32 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area state that: 30 All forms of development which are acceptable for the Policy Area are


for the Policy Area are assigned Category 2. Given that the application is a non-complying form of development, the application must be a Category 3 form of development. RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE MID MURRAY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT PLAN River Murray Zone Objectives: 1, 2, 3 & 4 Principles of Development Control: 19, 20 & 21 Shack Settlement Policy Area Objectives: 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 Principles of Development Control: 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 11, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31 & 32 ASSESSMENT As mentioned earlier, the Panel is only being asked at this stage to consider whether to proceed with the non-complying application. If the Panel is of the mind to proceed with the non-complying application, then a detailed assessment of the proposal against the relevant provisions of the Development Plan can take place. The information which has been submitted in support of the application is adequate in my view to enable a ‘general’ assessment of the key impacts of the proposal. However, further information will need to be requested from the applicant, if the Panel agrees to proceed with the non-complying application. It is not necessary at this point to consider every aspect of the development under review. Rather, it would appear to me that there are two key issues that warrant further consideration at this stage: a) Waste Management; and b) Size of replacement dwelling; I have provided further discussion of this proposal under key headings below.



Waste Management Principles of Development Control 4, 26 and 27 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area provide guidance on waste/effluent disposal, as follows: 4 Vacant allotments or lease sites can be used for the construction of a

dwelling provided the allotment or lease site is within the Residential Area identified in the relevant Figure as listed in the table below:

(a) the allotment or lease site has a connection to a community waste water management scheme that complies with the relevant legislation applying to that type of system; or

26 Sewage and sullage should be disposed in accordance with the

following:

(a) where the total number of allotments or lease sites in a Residential Area identified in a Figure for the relevant shack settlement is five or more, a community waste water management system that complies with the relevant Department of Health legislation;

(b) other authorised waste treatment and disposal systems that complies with the relevant Department of Health legislation where effluent is not stored or disposed on the flood plain;

(c) a septic tank holding tank where the total number of allotments or lease sites in a Residential Area identified in a Figure for the relevant shack settlement is less than five and there is no more than one holding tank per dwelling.

27 No effluent or sewage disposal area should be located in the Policy

Area. The applicant proposes to connect the new dwelling to a holding tank, which is similar to some other dwellings in the shack area (approximately 50% of dwellings are connected to holding tanks). No CWMS exists for Sabaruma. The requirements of Principle of Development Control 26(a) is that a dwelling is connected to a CWMS where 5 or more shacks exist. The dwelling will not be connected to a Community Wastewater Management Scheme (CWMS) and as such, the proposed method of wastewater management is at odds with this provision. Further to this, the Development Plan states that the following forms of development are unacceptable within the Shack Settlement Policy Area: - dwelling (other than an elevated dwelling in the Residential Area of a shack

settlement where the total number of allotments or lease sites is 4 or less) on a vacant allotment or lease site, or a replacement dwelling, not connected to an approved community wastewater management scheme;

The proposal, in its current form, is considered to be unacceptable. In addition, the Desired Character Statement for the Shack Settlement Policy Area re-iterates this point by stating ‘Replacement or new dwellings in a Residential Area is conditional on a connection to a community waste water management scheme’.



It is clear that the Development Plan, as currently written, determines this type of development as being unacceptable. With respect to the disposal of waste in a shack area, the proposal is at variance with Principles of Development Control 4, 26 and 27. Size of Replacement Dwelling In the absence of a CWMS, it is clear the intent of the Policy is to severely limit the extent of development within shack areas to protect the River Murray from pollution through the misuse or failure of individual systems. However, from a common sense approach, it may seem quite harsh and restrictive that a land owner cannot replace what they already have. Many dwellings along the river were built over 50 years ago and as such have deteriorated over time (storm damage, flood events, white ants etc.) and many are in need of upgrading or complete replacement. With the above in mind, the dwelling the applicant seeks to replace was approximately 73.30 square metres in area with only 23.67 square metres of this total dedicated to living space. It was a very modest dwelling. The proposed replacement dwelling will result in the floor area increasing to 160 square metres and a total footprint of 248.45 square metres. The affect of this significant increase (700% increase in floor area) is that more occupants are able to use the dwelling which increases the amount of waste generated. In my opinion, if the dwelling was a ‘like for like’ replacement or similar, the provisions relating to the control of on-site effluent may not hold as much weight given that what currently exists on site is not changing. However, where a significant increase in building size is being proposed I believe these provisions hold substantial weight given the amount of waste generated has the ability to substantially increase. If the Panel resolve to proceed with an assessment of the application, further clarification on this matter will be required as recent correspondence with the applicant suggests that the original dwelling had a floor area in the order of 150 square metres which is significantly at odds with the details on the submitted plans. What is an appropriate size for replacement is a matter that Panel members will need to consider. CONCLUSION The applicant seeks (retrospective) approval for the demolition of the existing ground level dwelling and the construction of a replacement single storey dwelling with alfresco (under main roof). Whilst I consider the form of development proposed to be appropriate ‘in-principle’ when taking into account its setbacks, height, bulk and scale and position above (subject to further information) of the 1956 flood level. The key issue for the Panel to consider is whether or not support should be given to a new dwelling that cannot appropriately accommodate effluent disposal in line with Development Plan Policy. Further, the footprint of the dwelling is considerably larger than the dwelling it seeks to replace – it could not be considered a ‘like for like’ replacement.



If the Panel do decide that the application warrants further consideration, the application will be referred to the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) who has the power to direct refusal under Schedule 8 of the Development Regulations 2008. While the dwelling would be able to satisfy some of the requirements of the Development Plan, it is clear that the proposal cannot adequately address the issue of effluent disposal when you consider the requirements in the Development Plan. This is a serious concern given the proximity of the building to the River Murray. Given all of the above, I recommend that the Panel resolve to proceed with an assessment of the application to allow the applicant the opportunity to provide additional information and receive direction from the Environment Protection Authority – with regard to waste disposal. It should be noted that resolving to proceed with an assessment of the application does not suggest that support for the proposal, by either Council staff or the Panel, will be forthcoming at a later date. RECOMMENDATION Moved __________________ Seconded __________________ that pursuant to Section 35(2) of the Development Act 1993, the Council Assessment Panel resolve to proceed with an assessment of Development Application 711/287/17 pursuant to Regulation 17(3)(b) of the Development Regulations 2008, and seek the following information from the applicant: (1) A plan clearly detailing the internal layout and floor area of the original

dwelling. (2) Confirmation of the Finished Floor Levels for the proposed dwelling

relative to the existing site levels, noting that the portions of land at 7.68 AHD or lower were affected by the 1956 flood event and all living area would need to be above this level.

(3) The applicant shall amend the design of the dwelling such that the area

beneath the deck/alfresco area remains open and unobstructed at all times in accordance with Principle of Development Control 15 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area.

(4) The applicant shall provide a detailed materials and colour schedule for

the proposed dwelling. (5) The applicant shall amend the site plan to clearly show the following

details: (a) Site boundaries; (b) Location of 10,000L rainwater tank and 5,000L fire fighting tank; (c) Location of existing driveway; (d) Location of proposed on site waste control system.

(6) The applicant shall submit a waste control application. (7) The applicant shall pay the additional development application fees

(including relevant non-complying, referral and public notification fees).

MID MURRAY COUNCIL – DEVELOPMENT REPORT 7.6 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 711/187/17 – BM MCGRANE


Assessment Manager: Jake McVicar Reporting Officer: Jake McVicar Position: Acting Manager – Development Services Development No. 711/187/17 Applicant BM McGrane Subject Land Allotment 12 in DP17795, Allotment 12 in

DP54853, 758 East Front Road, Five Miles, Hundred of Younghusband

Proposal Alterations and additions to existing dwelling (new roof design, verandah extension, new deck), domestic outbuilding (shed) with attached carport, retaining walls, jetty and associated excavation and filling in a flood plain (Non-Complying)

INTRODUCTION The applicant lodged the above development application with Council on 4 May 2017. The Development Application is being presented to the Council Assessment Panel (CAP) given that the proposal is for a non-complying form of development. As such, a more rigorous assessment process has occurred, and the development application is now being presented to the CAP for a decision, prior to the concurrence of the State Commission Assessment Panel (SCAP) sought. Copies of the plans and details submitted with the application are attached. SUBJECT LAND The subject site is 758 East Front Road, Five Miles and is a part of a shack group known as ‘The Peppers’. The site measures approximately 2355m2 in area, having a frontage to East Front Road of 20.38m and a depth of 117.81m (at its greatest length). The site rises significantly from the front property boundary to the rear in order of about 30 metres. As a result of the topography the site of the dwelling is in an elevated position offering generous views over the river valley. The site is currently occupied by a single storey dwelling with attached verandahs and retaining walls (noting that the roof, verandah and retaining walls have all partially been constructed). The site of the proposed replacement jetty sits opposite the subject land, on the northern side of East Front Road. The site is a strip of Crown land which extends downstream in front of another shack group (Five Miles) and ends at Kia Marina. Photos taken while on-site on 17 February 2017 are attached with written annotations confirming the viewing angle of the photos taken.



DESCRIPTION OF LOCALITY The site is located within the shack settlement of The Peppers, of which there are 22 allotments all comprising dwellings and associated outbuildings. The shack area is located on the southern side of East Front Road and as such, is separated from the main channel of the River Murray by both the road and a Crown Reserve. Portions of the shack area, toward East Front Road, are located within the 1956 flood plain, however the land rises steeply toward the rear (south) of all allotments. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The application proposes the following components: • Alterations and additions to existing dwelling (new roof, verandah extension,

new deck area); • Domestic outbuilding (shed) with attached carport; • Retaining walls; • Jetty; and • Associated excavation and filling in a flood plain. The existing roof comprises a central pitch, with attached lean-to sections front and rear. The existing roof suffered significant damage during storms in late 2016 and the applicant commenced work to replace the roof with a new pitched roof. The new roof will cover the entire footprint of the dwelling and be 450mm higher than the existing roof at each end, whilst the central pitch will be 900mm higher than the existing pitched roof. The roof will be Colorbond, coloured ‘Paperbark’. The dwelling will have an overall height of 4.25 metres to the highest point of the roof. The existing verandahs on each side of the dwelling will be replaced by new verandahs, with the total floor area increasing by 21 square metres, from 50 square metres to 71 square metres. The verandah located on the eastern side of the dwelling will have a setback of 500mm from the side boundary. The verandahs will be finished in Colorbond roof sheeting, coloured ‘Sandbank’. The new deck will be located at the front of the dwelling facing north. The deck will have a total floor area of 69 square metres and be elevated 1.3m above the natural ground level at its highest point. The deck will be finished using ‘jarrah’ timber and galvanised posts/framing. The domestic outbuilding (shed) with attached carport will measure a total of 90 square metres (54m2 shed and 36m2 carport) with a wall height of 3.2 metres. The shed will be to the rear of the dwelling with a setback of 1m from the eastern side boundary. The building will be finished in Colorbond ‘Paperbark’. The jetty, will replace an existing river structure and be located on the Crown Reserve opposite the site of the dwelling. The jetty will extend 8 metres out into the main channel and have a width of 1.4 metres. The jetty will be constructed using ‘Jarrah Modwood’ and galvanised posts/framing.



The retaining walls will measure 1m in height and require approval given they will be located within the 1956 flood plain. The walls will be standard in design and coloured ‘Stirling stack stone’. CLASSIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT The site is located within the River Murray Zone and Shack Settlement Policy and Flood Plain Policy Area of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan. Principle of Development Control 30 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area assigns the following forms of development as non-complying: 30 The following forms of development are non-complying in the Shack

Settlement Policy Area:

... Alterations or additions to an existing dwelling (including elements such as a staircase, balcony, deck or verandah), except where the development satisfies all of the following: (a) within a shack settlement identified in Figures Sh/1 to 49 where there

are 5 or more allotments or lease sites identified in the Residential Area for the relevant Shack Settlement Policy Area and the existing dwelling is connected or proposed to be connected (as part of the application) to a Community Wastewater Management Scheme that complies with the relevant public and environmental health legislation applying to that type of system

The dwelling is a non-complying form of development under Principle of Development Control 30 as the dwelling is not connected to a CWMS. This particular shack group ‘The Peppers’ does not have a CWMS. REFERRALS The application triggered a referral to the Minister administering the River Murray Act 2003 under Schedule 8(19)(g) of the Development Regulations 2008 on the basis that building work is proposed on land within the River Murray Floodplain Area established under the River Murray Act 2003. The Minister’s delegate has provided a referral response, dated 14 November 2017, advising that it has no objections with the development, subject to Council imposing conditions and notations on the Development Plan Consent. A copy of the Minister’s referral response is attached. In addition, the application triggered a referral to the Environment Protection Authority under Schedule 8(10) of the Development Regulations 2008 on the basis that the application is non-complying and is proposed on land within the River Murray Water Protection Area established under the Environment Protection Act 1993. A referral response has been received (see attached) with two (2) conditions being directed to be attached to any approval along with two (2) notations being requested to be attached to any approval.



PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Principles of Development Control 31 and 32 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area state that: 31 All forms of development which are acceptable for the Policy Area are


for the Policy Area are assigned Category 2. The following forms of development are listed as being “Acceptable” in the Shack Settlement Policy Area as follows:

… • Alterations and additions to an existing dwelling (in accordance with total

floor area and site coverage restrictions) including elements such as a staircase, balcony, deck or verandah; …

Whilst the proposal is considered ‘acceptable’, the application is a non-complying form of development and as such was treated as a Category 3 form of development. The Category 3 public notification took place, involving Council posting an advert in The Murray Valley Standard and also posting letters to adjacent properties, inviting comment on the proposal within a 10 business day period. One (1) representation was received from the following: • Annette Genuth 760 East Front Road, Five Miles

The representor did not express a desire to be heard by the Panel. A summary of the concerns raised by representor is given below as well as a summary response from the applicant. Copies of the representations and the applicant’s reply are also contained as attachments. Items/issues raised by Annette Genuth (neighbouring site to the east)

• Concerns over roof design/height • Wants the existing spa to be removed • Wants confirmation of common site boundary • Shed, carport and rainwater tanks appear to be acceptable • General comments provided on proposed jetty.

Response from Brendan McGrane (applicant)

• Provided clarification on roof structure • Provided photos to support argument that no loss of view will occur as a

result of the roof design. • Spa will be removed. • Original survey pegs already exist in the ground to show site boundary.



I have considered the above issues under the “Assessment” section of this report. In particular, the discussion is given under sub-headings “appearance of development” and “view impact”. RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE MID MURRAY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT PLAN River Murray Zone Objectives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 & 22 Principles of Development Control: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 & 25 Shack Settlement Policy Area Objectives: 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 Principles of Development Control: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14,

15, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 & 32 ASSESSMENT Land Use The following forms of development are listed as being ‘acceptable’ in the Shack Settlement Policy Area:

… • Alterations and additions to an existing dwelling (in accordance with total

floor area and site coverage restrictions) including elements such as a staircase, balcony, deck or verandah;

• An enclosed outbuilding which is a garage or shed, or open sided structure such as a carport, pergola, garden shelter or gazebo (in accordance with total floor area and site coverage restrictions);

• Filling or excavation (or excavation and filling) of land where it is in direct consequence of and is reasonably incidental to building work for an acceptable form of development where it does not involve any excavation or filling (or excavation and filling) exceeding a vertical height of 1 metre;

• A jetty or a floating pontoon provided there is not more than one river structure per dwelling; …

The proposal comprises the alterations and additions to the existing dwelling in the form of a new roof, new verandahs, deck addition and retaining walls. In addition, a shed with an attached carport and a replacement jetty are proposed. All components of the proposal are considered to be ‘acceptable’ in accordance with the Shack Settlement Policy Area list of acceptable development. Appearance of Development “Appearance of Development” is taken here to refer to the height, setbacks, bulk and scale and design of the dwelling additions. All of these issues are to some extent inter-related and so are difficult to separate into distinct elements. For ease of understanding, they have been grouped under sub-headings below.



Building Height Principle of Development Control 10 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area states that: 10 A dwelling should be in accordance with the following:

a) One elevated habitable storey with a maximum floor to ceiling height of 2.7 metres;

b) A maximum ceiling to roof height of 1.8 metres; c) An average underfloor clearance of 2.5 metres and in any case not

less than 2.3 metres and not more than 2.7 metres; and d) A total combined building maximum height of 7.5 metres. (my

underlining) As a result of the new roof the dwelling will have a maximum height, above the existing ground level, of 4.25m at its highest point and a ceiling to roof height of less than 1.8 metres. I note that the representor questioned the exact height of the new roof and whether it would affect the current view from their property. As stated above, the proposed roof design is well within the parameters of the Development Plan and as such, it is my opinion that the new roof would not unreasonably impact upon the adjoining land owner through loss of view. Given the above, I am satisfied that the new roof not only meets the requirements of the Development Plan, but will also enhance the overall appearance of the existing dwelling. The proposal meets the requirements of Principle of Development Control 10. Side Building Setbacks Principle of Development Control 9 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area states that: 9 Buildings, including alterations and additions involving building work

(other than fencing, river structures and retaining walls) such as carports and verandahs or similar, should be set back at least 1.0 metre from side boundaries.

The proposed replacement verandah and deck on the eastern side of the dwelling will be setback 500mm from the side boundary. I note this is only half of the recommended setback. Given the verandah and deck will be open in nature I consider this reduced setback to be appropriate given the structure will be open sided and that this area is already heavily screened by landscaping. All other aspects of the proposal meet the required 1 metre setback.



Bulk and Scale Principles of Development Control 6 and 7 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area state: 6 On allotments or lease sites in a Residential Area, the total ground area

covered by buildings should not cover greater than 70% of the allotment or lease site. Buildings include but are not limited to:

a) A dwelling (floor area including all additional roofed area); and b) Outbuildings including a garden shed, carport, garage, pergola,

gazebo or other roofed structure (including permeable or semi-permeable roofing material such as shade sails) and other open sided structures (but not including a rainwater tank or other water storage tank or tank stand).

7 A dwelling should not exceed the following:

a) In the case of an elevated dwelling, a maximum elevated floor area of 300 square metres (ie. excluding any permitted underfloor enclosure and ground level wet area and not including any deck, verandah or balcony); and

b) In the case of a ground level dwelling, a maximum total floor area of 90 square metres but not including the floor area described in part (c) and not including any deck, verandah or balcony;

c) In any case, a maximum total floor area of 15 square metres at ground level for use as a wet area (a bathroom, toilet or laundry or any combination).

The footprint of the building is only increasing due to a new deck and verandah extension. The site has an area of 2339m2, meaning the proposed site coverage will be about 10%, which I note is well below the maximum permitted of 70%. It is my opinion that the proposed size and in particular design of the additions/alterations make best use of a site which is quite restrictive in terms of its topography, insofar that there is limited level building area to work within without undertaking significant earthworks. Building Design The Desired Future Character Statement for the Shack Settlement Policy Area states that:

The Policy Area has and will continue to exhibit a unique residential character and physical form of development that seeks to achieve the following: (h) Buildings of individual designs (but not including designs that are

identified as inappropriate in Table MiMu/4) which contribute to a consistent architectural theme through external building colours that blends with the natural environs. Design and floor plans for buildings of individual design should have an absence of fussy architectural detailing, inclusion of verandahs, appropriate pitch and forms of roof, limits on building height and building envelopes and appropriate use of materials.



The proposed roof design is very simple and will incorporate a pitched roof with skillion or lean-to verandah on each side. I regard the design as being appropriate when considered against all relevant provisions of the Policy Area given that: a) As mentioned above, the building’s height, floor plate size, site coverage

and setbacks from the side boundaries and road are generally consistent with the quantitative standards contained in the Policy Area; and

b) The building design is in keeping with the standard desired for the Policy Area, having regard to its simple pitched roof, lightweight roof cladding and verandah’s under the main roof, avoidance of fussy detailing and use of natural tones;

I believe the external appearance will be appropriate, when considered in the context of all relevant provisions applicable to the development. View Impact Principle of Development Control 8 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area states that: 8 The construction, alteration or addition to a dwelling should not occur

where one or more of the following is achieved:

a) The principal facade of the proposed dwelling is sited forward (in the direction of the river) of the principal facade of a dwelling on an adjoining allotment on either side as illustrated in the following figure:

b) The development encloses an existing verandah or deck or similar outdoor area on the river side of the existing dwelling;

c) A verandah, pergola, deck or balcony exceeds a depth of 3.0 metres forward (towards the river) of the notional principal facade line relevant to a development site (the notional principal facade line as illustrated in Figure 8.1);

d) The development will result in the requirement for increased capacity of a septic tank holding tank or the provision of a septic tank holding tank where one does not exist (but not including development in a Residential Area in a shack settlement comprising less than five allotments or lease sites identified in the relevant Figure, or on an allotment or lease site in a Residential Area that is outside of the 1956 floodplain of the River Murray);

e) The dwelling, or the alteration and addition, will be located partly or wholly within the canopy drip line of a tree that has a circumference (measured at a point 300mm above the base of the tree) of two metres or more.

The proposed deck extension will extend some 4.5 metres out from the primary (front) façade of the dwelling. I note this is well beyond the ‘notional façade line’ however the large setbacks between the deck and adjoining dwellings offset the need to strictly apply this Principle. The deck will be open sided so as not to obstruct views from either adjoining neighbour. It should also be noted that significant vegetation already screens this area from the neighbour to the east. For the reasons mentioned above, I regard this aspect of the development as acceptable.



Domestic Outbuilding (Shed) with Attached Carport Principles of Development Control 17, 18 and 19 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area provide guidance for the construction of outbuildings within shack areas, as follows: 17 Outbuildings or open sided structures (but not including a water storage

tank, a tank stand or a pump shed) should be limited in accordance with the following:

(a) one enclosed outbuilding for domestic storage per allotment or

lease site, provided the total floor area does not exceed 54 square metres;

(b) one open sided structure (whether free standing or attached to the enclosed outbuilding) per allotment or lease site such as a pergola, gazebo or other similar type roofed structure, provided the total floor area does not exceed 36 square metres.

18 An outbuilding or open sided structure (whether freestanding or attached

to one another) should not: (a) be in the form of shipping containers or other similar portable

structures; (b) be attached to or closer than 1.0 metre to the dwelling; and (c) include a wet area.

19 An outbuilding or open sided structure (whether freestanding or attached to one another) should: (a) be located behind the dwelling, not the river side of the dwelling,

so as not to detract from the character of the waterfront; (b) be substantially smaller in building envelope, height and scale

than the dwelling; (c) have a roof pitch between 15°-25°; (d) have a maximum roof span of 6 metres and a maximum

wall/post height of 3.2 metres; (e) in the case of an enclosed outbuilding, be fitted with roller doors,

openings, or similar on two ends or sides (whichever elevations face the direction of the river flow); and

(f) in the case of an open sided structure, remain open on all sides. The proposed outbuilding with attached carport will meet all of the above Principles with respect to floor area, wall height and location. It will not be fitted with openings in the direction of river flow given the site of the building is located well above the 1956 flood plain. The proposed building will be the only outbuilding on the subject land. The proposal is consistent with Principles of Development Control 17, 18 and 19 of the Shack Settlement Policy Area.



Jetty River Murray Zone Principle of Development 4 states that a river structure shall only be developed in the following circumstances: 4 A river structure in the form of a jetty or floating pontoon should only be

developed where one of the following apply:

(a) in association with a dwelling in the Shack Settlement Policy Area (whether or not the river structure is located in the Shack Settlement Policy Area or Flood Plain Policy Area) where any of the following is achieved:

(i) the river structure is on the same allotment as the

dwelling, provided the development will not result in more than one river structure constructed in association with the dwelling;

(ii) the allotment (or lease site) containing the dwelling is separated from the river front by a public reserve or a public road (but not both) and provided the development will not result in more than one river structure constructed in association with the dwelling.

(b) in the Flood Plain Policy Area where any of the following is

achieved:

(i) the development is for the repair, maintenance or replacement of an existing licensed river structure;

(ii) the river structure is on the same allotment as an existing dwelling, provided the development will not result in more than one river structure constructed in association with the dwelling;

(iii) the river structure is in association with an existing dwelling and only where the river structure is located on an allotment (or lease site) separated from the river front by a public reserve or a public road (but not both) and provided the development will not result in more than one river structure constructed in association with the dwelling.

The proposed river structure will be constructed in association with the existing dwelling located across the road, which is not dissimilar to other river structures in the locality. It is generally not appropriate to build a river structure where the dwelling is separated from the river by both a road and reserve to ensure the public reserve is kept free and unrestricted for use by any member of the public. However, the proposed jetty seeks to replace an existing jetty and in addition, a number of jetties already exist along the reserve. Whilst a new jetty may not be looked upon favourably, considering the proposal seeks to replace an existing, dilapidated jetty I find the proposal appropriate. Flood Impact Both the jetty and one of the retaining walls will be located within the 1956 flood plain. These structures are standard in design and will be designed in accordance with the Building Code of Australia such that they can withstand the flow of flood waters. This aspect of the proposal is acceptable.



Native Vegetation Impact The site is devoid of any vegetation where the development is proposed. The Department for Environment, Water and Natural Resources in their referral response also noted that the application does not propose any clearance of native vegetation. Stormwater Discharge Principle of Development Control 22 of the River Murray Zone states that: 22 Site drainage should:

a) include, where practicable, on-site stormwater detention, retention and use, including the collection and storing of water from roofs and communal car parks in appropriate devices;

b) provide on-site infiltration where practicable, having regard to:

i. the availability of unbuilt upon or unsealed areas; ii. the ability of soils to absorb water; iii. the ability of building footings on and adjacent to the site to

withstand the likely effects of retained water; and iv. potential adverse impacts on the level and quality of

groundwater;

c) allow convenient access to all components of the drainage system for maintenance purposes;

d) not cause damage or nuisance flows on-site or to adjoining properties; and

e) not cause contamination of surface water. (my underlining) Stormwater from the new roof of the dwelling, verandah and shed is proposed to be directed via gutters, downpipes and stormwater pipe into three (3) rainwater tanks having a capacity of at least 38,500 litres which will be located between the dwelling and proposed shed. Overflow from the tanks, in the event that they are full, will follow the natural topography of the site toward the River Murray. Overall, this aspect of the development is considered to be acceptable, subject to condition. Bushfire Impact The site is located within a “general” bushfire risk area. Council Wide Principles of Development Control 389 and 395 state that: 389 Residential, tourist accommodation and other habitable buildings

should:

a) be sited on the flatter portion of allotments and avoid steep slopes, especially upper slopes, narrow ridge crests and the tops of narrow gullies, and slopes with a northerly or westerly aspect;

b) be sited in areas with low bushfire hazard vegetation and set back at least 20 metres from existing hazardous vegetation; and



c) have a dedicated water supply available at all times for fire fighting

which:

i. is located adjacent to the building or in another convenient location on the allotment accessible to fire fighting vehicles;

ii. comprises a minimum of 5,000 litres in areas shown as General or Medium Bushfire Risk on Bushfire Protection Area figures; or

iii. comprises a minimum of 22,000 litres in areas shown as High Bushfire Risk on Bushfire Protection Area figures.

395 Development in a Bushfire Protection Area should be in accordance with

those provisions of the Minister’s Code: Undertaking development in Bushfire Protection Areas that are designated as mandatory for Development Plan Consent purposes.

The applicant has incorporated provision for a supply of water for fire fighting in the form of a 17,000 litre fire fighting tank. This tank is to be located in a position where it may be accessed by a fire fighting truck, parked within the driveway of the property. The tank is compliant with Council Wide Principle of Development Control 389, quoted above. Effluent Disposal The existing dwelling is not connected to a CWMS given such a communal system does not exist for this particular shack area. In this instance, this is of little consequence given the existing dwelling is not being increased or altered with respect to its living area nor are any additional wet area fixtures proposed. CONCLUSION The proposed development seeks to upgrade the existing dwelling through a new roof, verandahs and deck as well as retaining walls, shed/carport and replacement jetty. It is clear that all of the proposed aspects are acceptable when considering the Mid Murray Council Development Plan. The one representation received did not have any fundamental concerns with the proposal, but did seek clarification on a number of aspects of the proposal. The applicant through their response and submitted plans adequately addressed the queries of the representor in my opinion. The new roof and verandahs/deck area will enhance the overall appearance of the existing dwelling through the use of new building materials and simple design techniques. It will also improve the functionality of the dwelling and provide the occupants with a useable ‘open space’ area. All other components will be standard in design and typical of many other outbuildings, retaining walls and jetties throughout the River Murray corridor. Overall, the proposed development satisfies the majority of the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan. Given the above, I recommend that Development Plan Consent be granted, subject to the concurrence of the State Commission Assessment Panel.



RECOMMENDATION Moved __________________ Seconded __________________ that pursuant to Section 35(2) of the Development Act 1993 that the proposed development is not “Seriously at Variance” with the relevant provisions of the Mid Murray Council Development Plan (Consolidated 31 July 2014) and that pursuant to Section 33(1)(a) of the Development Act 1993, Development Plan Consent be granted to Development Application 711/187/17, subject to the concurrence of the State Commission Assessment Panel and the following conditions and notations: Conditions 1. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details

submitted with the application and the following approved plans, other than where required to be varied by conditions 2-19 inclusive:

Plan Number Plan Type Dated Prepared By N.A Statement of Effect Received by

Council 11 September 2017

Brendan McGrane

1/12 Site Plan Received by Council 11 September 2017

Brendan McGrane

2/12 Floor Plan Received by Council 11 September 2017

Brendan McGrane

2A/12 Vegetation Screening

Received by Council 11 September 2017

Brendan McGrane

3/12 Elevation 1 Received by Council 11 September 2017

Brendan McGrane


Brendan McGrane


Brendan McGrane


Brendan McGrane

10/12 Retaining Wall Plan Received by Council 11 September 2017

Brendan McGrane

11/12 Jetty Received by Council 11 September 2017

Brendan McGrane

12/12 Shed and Carport Details

Received by Council 11 September 2017

Brendan McGrane

N/A Statement of Support

Received by Council 24 July 2017

Brendan McGrane

N/A Materials & Colour Schedule

Received by Council 24 July 2017

Brendan McGrane



2. The domestic outbuilding (shed) shall not be used for human habitation,

commercial or industrial purposes, at any time.

3. Except where otherwise approved, all exterior surfaces of the dwelling (including deck and verandah’s), shed, carport, retaining walls and jetty shall:

a) Be of new, non-reflective materials; and b) Be of natural tones, in accordance with the approved plans in

Condition 1; and c) Be maintained in good and reasonable condition at all times.

4. In the event of damage being caused to Council infrastructure, the

damaged infrastructure shall be repaired and/or reinstated, at the applicant’s cost, to the satisfaction of Council’s Director – Infrastructure Services:

a) To it’s original condition; or b) Where (a) is not achievable, in accordance with the relevant

Australian Standard (applicable to that particular type of infrastructure).

5. Stormwater shall be managed on the site at all times, such that:

a) All roof water from the dwelling (including attached covered deck) is directed into rainwater tanks having a total capacity of at least 10,000 litres; and

b) Any rainwater tank overflow, in the event that the tank (or tanks) are full, is directed toward landscaped areas within the site, at all times; and

c) Any surface stormwater collected by impervious areas constructed on-site, shall be directed away from the dwelling and from adjoining privately owned land at all times; and

d) Stormwater (roof water and/or surface stormwater) does not flow onto, or cause nuisance to adjoining privately owned land at any time.

6. Except where otherwise approved, the freestanding sides of the attached

deck, verandahs and carport shall remain open at all times. No walls being permanent or semi-permanent shall be attached to these sides of the attached balcony and/or steps at any time.

7. Except where otherwise approved, the underside area of the deck shall

remain open and unobstructed at all times. This means that no material or object shall be fixed or placed permanently or temporarily to enclose any part of the underside area of the deck at any time.

8. A dedicated water supply for fire fighting purposes of at least 5,000 litres

shall be available at all times for bushfire fighting purposes, in accordance with the approved Site Plan, prepared by Brenda McGrane, received by Council dated 11 September 2017.



9. All cutting to size and trimming of timber and metal materials must be

done on land where sawdust and off-cuts can be collected and disposed of in an environmentally responsible manner at all times, such that no material enters the River Murray system at any time.

10. No pergola, shade structure or any other form of structure shall be fixed to

the jetty at any time. 11. No vessel shall be tethered, tied or attached to the jetty for more than 48

consecutive hours at any time. Conditions as required by the Minister for Water and the River Murray 12. During construction activities the subject land must be managed in a

manner as to prevent erosion and pollution of the site and the environment, including keeping the area in a tidy state and ensuring any waste materials are appropriately contained to ensure no pollutants (including excavation or fill materials) enter the River Murray system.

13. Any fill material brought to the site must be clean and not contaminated by

construction or demolition debris, industrial or chemical matter, or pest plant or pathogenic material.

14. Any excavation or fill material surplus to the requirements of the

development must be disposed of such that it will not:

a. be located within the 1956 floodplain; b. impede the natural flow of any surface waters; c. allow sediment to enter any water body; d. adversely impact native vegetation; e. facilitate the spread of pest plant and pathogenic material.

15. Any exposed areas created or exacerbated during the works must be

appropriately stablished to minimise the potential for erosion and the entry of sediment into the River Murray.

16. Appropriate measures must be undertaken to minimise water quality

impacts during works on or near the riverbed. The use of silt curtain, coffer dam or similar may assist in complying with this condition.

17. Stormwater run-off from new roof areas must be managed to prevent

erosion or pollution of the site and the environment, and diverted away from wastewater disposal areas, such as septic tanks and aerobic systems. Connection to water storage tanks would assist in complying with this condition.

Conditions as required by the Environment Protection Authority 18. Prior to removal of the existing jetty and the construction of the new jetty,

a silt curtain or similar sediment control device must be installed to contain all sediment, silt and pollutants. The device must remain in place until the turbidity within the controlled area returns to normal.



19. Prior to off-site disposal, any construction wastes that are temporarily

stored on-site must be contained, covered or set back as far from the water’s edge as is practicable so as to prevent them being carried by stormwater or wind into the River Murray.

Notations 1. The underside of the elevated dwelling shall not be enclosed without the

approval of Council. 2. The storage of bulk fuels, oils and hazardous chemicals, shall not occur

below the 1956 flood level. 3. This approval does not imply compliance with the Electricity Act 1996 (as


You are advised to contact appropriate authorities including SA Power Networks, Telstra, SA Water and Council’s CWMS department in relation to the location of supply lines and other requirements prior to commencing work.


Approvals





5. The Council also advises that the proposed development will be located

within the “River Murray Floodplain” which is subject to periodic flooding, which may cause extensive or total loss. Neither the Council or any of its Servants, Agents or officers accept any responsibility for any such loss which may occur. Any conditions are imposed so as to maintain the natural character of the River valley and to attain the Objectives of the River Murray Zone.

6. Any conditions are imposed so as to maintain the natural character of the

River Valley and to attain the Objectives of the River Murray Zone



7. The applicant is reminded that the shed has been approved for Class 10

use only, and as such cannot be used for human habitation, industrial or commercial purposes at any time.




materials associated with the building work is to be secured and contained within the site. Upon completion of the development all wastes are to be removed and appropriately disposed of.

10. All building work shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements

of the Development Act 1993 as amended and its Regulations. 11. All existing trees on the site are to be retained wherever practicable. 12. The applicant is responsible for the correct siting of the development and

shall ensure that the buildings/structures are sited on the allotment in accordance with the approved plans.

13. The applicant is advised that Council will instigate appropriate action

should the shed be used for anything other than domestic storage. 14. The granting of this consent does not absolve the applicant from obtaining


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

by Section 25 of the Environment Protection Act 1993, to take all reasonable and practical measures to ensure that the activities on the whole site, including during construction, do not pollute the environment in any way which causes or may cause environmental harm.

16. You are advised to contact other authorities such as Telstra, SA Water

etc. in relation to the location of their supply lines and requirements prior to commencing work on-site.

17. Please note that a rainwater tank (and any support structure) requires

Council Development Approval where it does not comply with the following criteria:

a) is part of a roof-drainage system; and b) has a total floor area not exceeding 10 square metres; and c) is located wholly above ground; and d) has no part higher than 4 metres above the natural surface of the

ground.



18. The applicant is advised of their obligation under the Electricity Act 1996

and Regulations to comply with relevant safe working procedures, including legislated distances between persons or machinery and powerlines. Given this, it is recommended that you have regard to the “Working Safely near Overhead Powerlines” Brochure, prepared by the Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure. For further information, you can contact the Office of the Technical Regulator on 8226 5500.

19. A building owner who proposes to carry out any excavation and/or filling

of a nature prescribed in Regulation 75 of the Development Regulations 2008 is required to serve upon the owner a notice of their intention to perform that work at least 28 days prior to commencing work as required by Section 60 of the Development Act 1993.

20. The applicant is reminded of its general environmental duty, to take all

reasonable and practical measures to ensure that the activities on the site, including during construction, do not pollute the environment including the River Murray.

Due to the high sensitivity of the site particular attention should be paid to all aspects of waste management particularly during the construction phase. The following suggestions are relevant:-

• the generation of dust, litter and debris should be controlled; • all hard waste produced during construction should be placed in

covered bins or enclosure for off site disposal; • all residues and waste, including that from concreting, brick cutting,

plastering, painting, cleaning etc. is to be contained for off site disposal, and not allowed to enter the River by soakage, rain or wind.

21. Wastes need to be managed to prevent their entry into the river. This can

be effected by:-

• Placing all hard waste produced on site in covered bins and disposing to a licensed waste depot.

• Ensuring that all residues, including waste generated by concrete works, do not wash off site.

• Containing all wastewater from any brick cutting on a bundled, flat, grassed area which is protected from intrusion by rainfall runoff, for subsequent drying by soakage.

• Containing all paint waste and waste water used in washing painting equipment for treatment (by filtering) and disposal of the solid waste and oil-based solvents (where applicable) to a licensed waste depot.

• Containing all other wastes, such as plastering and cleaning wastes, such that they are not transported, by rain or wind, into the river.

Notations as required by the Minister for Water and the River Murray 22. The applicant is advised of their general duty of care under the River

Murray Act 2003 to take all reasonable measures to prevent any harm to the River Murray through his or her actions or activities.



23. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the replacement jetty is

constructed entirely within the projected boundaries of the adjacent privately held land, in accordance with the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR) Crown land – River Structures Policy. In the event that the site of the jetty structure needs to be relocated to meet the policy, the applicant will be required to seek the approval of the Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation in the form of an application for an Amendment to Licence to Occupy Crown land (RL000849) to enable continued occupation of Crown land, pursuant to the Crown Land Management Act 2009. In addition, Native Title notification may be required as a pre-requisite to the issue of any licence, pursuant to the provisions of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). If required, the notification process is a minimum of 8 weeks – in addition to the assessment of the licence application – and will not commence until the licence application has been submitted. For further information please contact the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (Crown Land Unit, Berri) on telephone 8595 2111 and quote the Development Application number, or visit: http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/managing-natural-resources/Land/Crown_lands.

24. The applicant is advised that in order to mitigate the adverse effects of

wash caused by river traffic, any vessels moored to the jetty structure should where possible, be aligned perpendicular to the riverbank. This will also avoid the potential for other vessel operators to commit an offence under the Harbors and Navigation Act 1993 (r168), which requires vessel operators to not exceed a speed of 4 knots within 30 metres of any vessel that may be adversely affected by the wash of vessel.

25. If there is an intention to clear native vegetation on the land at any time,

the applicant should consult the Native Vegetation Council to determine relevant requirements under the Native Vegetation Act 1991 and its Regulations, which may include the provision of a Significant Environmental Benefit. Note that ‘clearance’ means any activity that could cause any substantial damage to native plants, including cutting down and removing plants, burning, poisoning, slashing of understorey, removal or trimming of branches, severing roots, drainage and reclamation of wetlands, and in some circumstances grazing by animals. For further information contact the Native Vegetation Council on telephone 8303 9777 or visit: http://www.nvc.sa.gov.au.

26. The River Murray and many of its tributaries and overflow areas have

abundant evidence of Aboriginal occupation and Aboriginal sites, objects or remains may be present on the subject land. Under section 20 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1988 (the Act), an owner or occupier of private land, or an employee or agent of such an owner or occupier, must report the discovery on the land of any Aboriginal sites, objects or remains to the Minister responsible for the administration of the Act, as soon as practicable, giving the particulars of the nature and location of the Aboriginal sites, objects or remains. It is an offence to damage, disturb or interfere with any Aboriginal site or damage any Aboriginal object (registered or not) without the authority of the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation (the Minister). If the planned activity is likely to damage, disturb, or interfere with a site or object, authorisation of the activity must be first obtained from the Minister under Section 23 of the Act. Penalties may apply for failure to comply with the Act.

http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/managing-natural-resources/Land/Crown_lands

http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/managing-natural-resources/Land/Crown_lands

http://www.nvc.sa.gov.au/



27. The applicant is encouraged to incorporate locally indigenous plant

species into any landscaping, screen planting or revegetation activities on the privately held land to enhance the natural character of the locality, stabilise soils and provide habitat for native species. For information on appropriate species to be planted, please contact State Flora at Bremer Road, Murray Bridge on telephone 8539 2105, or within Belair National Park on telephone 8278 7777 or visit: http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/our-places/State_Flora.

28. This approval does not obviate any considerations that may apply to the

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth). For further information visit: http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc.

Notations as required by the Environment Protection Authority 29. The applicant is reminded of its general environmental duty, as required

by Section 25 of the Environment Protection Act 1993, to take all reasonable and practicable measures to ensure that the activities on the whole site, including during construction, do not pollute the environment in a way which causes or may cause environmental harm.

30. All reasonable and practicable measures must be taken to minimise the

potential for pollution from sediment and waste generated on-site during construction. Further guidance can be sought from the EPA’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Code of Practice for the Building and Construction Industry and the EPA Handbook for Pollution Avoidance on Commercial and Residential Building Sites (http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/fiels/47790_bccop1.pdf.

31. EPA information sheets, guidelines documents, codes of practice,

technical bulletins etc. can be accessed on the following web site: http://www.epa.sa.gov.au.

http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/our-places/State_Flora

http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/fiels/47790_bccop1.pdf

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/

council assessment panel - mid murray council · council assessment panel 1 agenda 18 december 2017...

Documents