development application · • the drive through coffee shop will utilise both lanes to increase...

PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

Proposed Take Away Food and Drink Premises (Drive Through Coffee Shop)

133 Lords Place, Orange

Prepared for Travis Kerry August 2019

Ref: DA1LCB19044

343 Summer St, PO Box 1827, Orange NSW 2800 telephone 02 6361 2955 facsimile 02 6360 4700 mobile 0409 821 016 email [email protected] abn 91 558 813 035

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1.0 1

INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 OVERVIEW 1 1.2 APPLICANT 1 1.3 OWNER 1 1.4 DOCUMENTATION 1

Section 2.0 3

EXISTING CIRCUMSTANCES 3 2.1 LOCATION AND TITLE 3 2.2 GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION 3 2.3 SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT 4 2.4 ROADS AND ACCESS 5 2.5 SERVICES 5 2.6 CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES 5

Section ;.0 1

THE PROPOSAL 7 3.1 OVERVIEW 7 3.2 PROPOSED COFFEE SHOP 7 3.3 ADVERTISING SIGNAGE 8

Section +.0 9

TOWN PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 9 4.1 PROVISIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS 9

4.1.1 Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011.. 9 4.1.2 SEPP No. 64 -Advertising and Signage 15

4.2 PROVISIONS OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS 20 4.3 PROVISIONS OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS 20

4.3.1 Orange Development Control Plan 2004 - 8 Development in Business Zones 20 4.3.2 Orange Development Control Plan 2004 -15 Car Parking 22

4.4 MATIER PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS 24 4.5 THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT 24

4.5.1 Visual Amenity/Streetscape 24 4.5.2 Traffic 25 4.5.3 Noise 27 4.5.4 Heritage 28 4.5.5 Flood Planning 31 4.5.6 Overshadowing 31 4.5.7 Privacy 31 4.5.8 Lighting 32 4.5.9 Waste Management 32 4.5.10 Social and Economic Impacts 32

4.6 THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT 33 4.6.1 Physical Attributes 33 4.6.2 Availability of Utility Services 33

4.7 SUBMISSIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACT OR REGULATIONS 33 4.8 THE PUBLIC INTEREST 33

Section 5 .0 34

CONCLUSION ....................................•.....•.••••••.....................................•..••••.•...••..•........................ 34

Annexure A Land Plans by Peter Basha Planning & Development

Annexure B Drawings by McKinnon Design

ii

Section 1.0

INTRODUCTION

1.1 OVERVIEW

This development application seeks approval to operate a take away food and drink premises within an existing building at 133 Lords Place, Orange.

The proposal includes converting a garage into a drive through coffee shop in the south western section of the building.

This report provides an assessment of the proposed development as required under Section 4.15 ofthe Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

1.2 APPLICANT

Travis Kerry c/- Peter Basha Planning & Development PO Box 1827 ORANGE NSW 2800

1.3 OWNER

Ophir Tavern Pty Ltd Glenroi Avenue ORANGE NSW 2800

1.4 DOCUMENTATION

This development application consists of this report; a completed development application form; and the following plans and documentation:

Annexure A - Land Plans by Peter Basha Planning & Development

Figure 1 Location of subject land

Figure 2 Existing boundaries and proposed site plan

Peter Basha Planning & Development

Proposed Food and Drink Premises (drive through coffee shop) 113 Lords Place, Orange Page 2

Annexure B - Architectural Drawings McKinnon Design

Drawing 01 Site Plan

Drawing 02 Existing Floor Plan

Drawing 03 Proposed Floor Plan

Drawing 04 Detail Floor Plan

Drawing 05 Section and Detail


Section2.0

EXISTING CIRCUMSTANCES

2.1 LOCATION AND TITLE

The subject land is located on the north wester corner of the Lords Place and Moulder Street (refer Figure 1). The street address is 133 Lords Place, Orange.

The Real Property description is Lot 50 in DP 817766, Parish of Orange, County of Bathurst.

2.2 GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION

The existing boundaries and site detail are depicted below and in Figure 2.

,_..,. t

Olr'ERHEADPOIWILJ~ES

The land has a total area of 2,562m2 and a rectangular shape. It has a frontage of approximately 41 metres to Lords Place and a frontage of approximately 63 metres to Moulder Street.

The site contains a drive through bottle shop and car park. The remainder of the building is a pub, gaming room, restaurant, bar, function room and courtyard, but is currently not operational.

The site is fully fenced. The terrain is flat with a mostly concrete surface. Vehicle access is provided to the site via accessways off both Moulder Street and Lords Place.



2.3 SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT

The surrounding development pattern is depicted below and in the attached Figure 1.

The subject land is at the southern fringe of the Orange CBD. Generally, commercial development lies to the north and east; Wade Park lies to the south east; and residential neighbourhoods lie to the south and west.

Development in the immediate vicinity of the subject land includes:

• Commercial development to the north along Lords Place.

• Commercial development in converted dwellings to the east on the opposite side of Lords Place.

• The Wade Park sports facility to the south east on the opposite side of Moulder Street.

• Residential development to the south on the opposite side of Moulder Street.

• Commercial development in converted dwellings to the west, and then parkland.



2.4 ROADS AND ACCESS

The subject land is serviced by Lords Place and Moulder Street. Both Lords Place and Moulder Street are local roads with SOkm/h speed limits, with Moulder Street being subject to 40km/h speed limit during school hours.

The intersection of Lords Place and Moulder Street is roundabout controlled with pedestrian refuge islands.

There is an accessway to the subject site from both Lords Place and Moulder Street. The site is arranged so that ingress occurs from Lords Place and egress occurs to Moulder Street so all traffic moves in a forward direction.

The access to and from the property is not subject to refuge islands or double lines allowing vehicles to ingress and egress the site from any direction.

2.5 SERVICES

The subject land is connected to Council's sewer, water and stormwater drainage systems along with telephone and electricity.

The position of existing service mains is depicted in Figure 2.

2.6 CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES

There are certain aspects ofthe site that present constraints and opportunities for the development. These are summarised as follows:

• The proposal presents little change to the existing and significance streetscape presence of the building. The proposal includes internal works that will not require changes to the building appearance,

• The subject land is identified in Council's LEP as a Flood Planning Area. However, there are no changes to the existing finished floor level and will generate no further impact in terms of flood effects.

• The proximity to residential properties nearby requires consideration but the nature and operating hours of the drive through coffee shop will not generate significant adverse impacts.



• The development can accommodate traffic movements in a drive through arrangement, as evidenced by the operation of the drive through bottle shop. The two uses operate at different times of the day so are unlikely to generate vehicle conflicts.

• The drive through nature of the takeaway food and drink premises involves only short stay customer visits and will have little to no impact on the parking on site or within the local street network.

• The food and drink premises is designed to be quick collection only, no tables and chairs are provided so limited long term noise is anticipated.

• The proposal will utilise a space within a non-original component of the building. The impact on the Heritage Significance is minimal given the curtilage, streetscape presence and character is maintained.


Section}.O

THE PROPOSAL

3.1 OVERVIEW

This development application seeks approval to fit out and operate a drive through takeaway food and drink premises, being coffee shop, within the existing garage space.

The pub, restaurant and associated facilities remain but are currently not operational. There are no changes proposed to the existing off-street car parking.

The use of the space for the drive through operation will work coherently with the remainder of the site. Smooth traffic flow is required and will be achieved by:

• One way traffic flow with single entrance off Lords Place and single exit to Moulder Street.

• Separate lanes for the coffee shop and bottle-shop.

• Peak times throughout the day vary for each use.

• The provision of relevant signage for directions.

3.2 PROPOSED DRIVE THROUGH COFFEE SHOP

The attached drawings by McKinnon Designs depict the proposed fit out. As indicated:

• The proposed food and drink premises has a total floor area of approximately 34.3m2 which includes washup and serving area.

• The operation of the drive through coffee involves staff walking to vehicles and taking orders, then returning with coffee (and food if necessary). At no time do customers leave their vehicles.

• The customers and staff will utilise existing facilities and amenities on site.



• The food and drink premises will retain the roller shutter door which will be opened during operation. There are no alterations to any other external facade treatment.

• No site works are required to be undertaken.

• The hours of operation proposed are 5:00am to 2:00pm.

• The food will be all pre-packaged with no cooking on site. There may be assembly of food (rolls with premade elements) but at no stage is preparation or cooking proposed.

• The drive through coffee shop will utilise both lanes to increase traffic movement and flow up to 10:00am, before the bottle shop opens.

3.3 ADVERTISING SIGNAGE

Advertising signage is proposed to assist with way finding and business identification. The plans at Annexure B demonstrate signage panels on both the Moulder Street and Lords Place facade. The advertising sign age scheme has considered the building scale and character and existing signage. The proposed signage is summarised as follows:

• Moulder Street elevation (southern elevation)

- One flush wall sign on the building facade, in line with the existing bottle shop signage, approximately 2.lm x 1.Sm (3.15m2).

- One free standing sign adjacent to the building and forward of the existing car park. This free standing sign will be 0.6m x 3.0m (1.8m2).

This sign will not be more than 1 metre in overall height.

• Lords Place Elevation (eastern elevation)

- One sign on the fence will replace the two existing banner signs in this location. The sign will be directly below an existing free standing sign. This sign will be 5.0m x .0.9 m (4.Sm2) and be attached to the fence.

The existing signage, with the exception of the two signs to be removed, in relation to the drive through bottle shop remains unaltered.


Section+.o

TOWN PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

In determining the application, Council must take into consideration the relevant matters under Section 4.15(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. These are assessed below.

4.1 PROVISIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

4.1.1 Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011

The land is subject to the provisions of Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 (the LEP). The relevant provisions are considered below.

Zoning

The subject land is zoned B3 Commercial Core. The zone objectives are:

• To provide a wide range of retail, business, office, entertainment, community and other suitable land uses that serve the needs of the local and wider community.

• To encourage appropriate employment opportunities in accessible locations.

• To maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling.

• To promote development that contributes to the role of the Orange CBD as the primary retail and business centre in the City and region.

The proposed development is not adverse to the zone objectives. In this regard:

• In consideration of the first stated objective, the proposal involves a use that is considered compatible with other land uses in this mixed use precinct.

• In consideration of the second stated objective, the proposal has the potential to generate additional employment opportunities.



• The proposal is not adverse to the third stated objective. The area is accessible by public transport, walking and cycling.

• In consideration of the fourth stated objective, the proposal supports the economic development of Orange CBD by providing a food and drink premises within an existing commercial building.

Permissibility

The proposed development represents permissible development as follows:

The proposed car wash is considered to represent take away food and drink premises which according to the Dictionary in the LEP, means premises that are predominately used for the preparation and retail sale of food or drink (or both) for immediate consumption away from the premises.

The development as described in this application satisfied the above definition.

The Land Use Table in Part 2 of the LEP indicates that takeaway food and drink premises are permitted in the B3 Zone subject to obtaining the development consent of Council.

Clause 1.2 -Aims of Plan

The particular aims of this Plan are as follows:

a) to encourage development that complements and enhances the unique character of Orange as a major regional centre boasting a diverse economy and offering an attractive regional lifestyle,

b) to provide for a range of development opportunities that contribute to the social, economic and environmental resources of Orange in a way that allows the needs of present and future generations to be met by implementing the principles of ecologically sustainable development,

c) to conserve and enhance the water resources on which Orange depends, particularly water supply catchments,

d) to manage rural land as an environmental resource that provides economic and social benefits for Orange,

e) to provide a range of housing choices in planned urban and rural locations to meet population growth,



f) to recognise and manage valued environmental heritage, landscape and scenic features of Orange.

In consideration of the general aims of the LEP, the following comments are provided in support of the development:

• There are no aspects of the proposal that detract from the character of Orange as a major regional centre [General Aim (a)].

• The proposal would have a neutral to positive effect in terms of the social, economic and environmental resources of the City. There are no aspects of the proposal that would compromise the principles of ecologically sustainable development [General Aim (b)].

• There are no aspects of the proposal that would represent a direct threat to the City's water resources [General Aim (c)].

• The management of rural land as an environmental resource is not relevant to this proposal [General Aim (d)].

• The proposal has no impact on the City's range and supply of housing choices [General Aim (e)].

• For the reasons outlined later in this report, the proposal would not adversely affect the value of heritage, landscape and scenic features of the City [General Aim(!)].

Clause 5.10 Heritage conservation

The subject land is not within a Conservation Area but is listed as a Local Heritage Item. The following Heritage Items are also identified within the vicinity of the site:

• Two cottages in Wade Park to the south on the opposite side of Moulder Street (Item 77, Local significance).

• Row of cottages to the south west on the opposite side of the street at 121 Lords Place to 131 Lords Place (Items 208 to 213, Local Significance).

Pursuant to Clause 5.10(4) and (5) Council is required to consider the potential impact of development within the vicinity of a conservation area.

Heritage matters are addressed later in this report at Section 4.5.4 Heritage. Peter Basha

Planning & Development


Clause 7.2 Flood planning

The subject land is identified in Council's LEP as a Flood Planning Area. As such, Clause 7.2 of the LEP applies as follows:

1) The objectives of this clause are as follows:

a) to minimise the flood risk to life and property associated with the use of land,

b) to allow development on land that is compatible with the land's flood hazard, taking into account projected changes as a result of climate change,

c) to avoid significant adverse impacts on flood behaviour and the environment.

2) This clause applies to:

a) land identified as "Flood planning area" on the Flood Planning Map, and

b) other land at or below the flood planning level.

3) Development consent must not be granted to development on land to which this clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that the development:

a) is compatible with the flood hazard of the land, and

b) is not likely to significantly adversely affect flood behaviour resulting in detrimental increases in the potential flood affectation of other development or properties, and

c) incorporates appropriate measures to manage risk to life from flood, and

d) is not likely to significantly adversely affect the environment or cause avoidable erosion, siltation, destruction of riparian vegetation or a reduction in the stability of river banks or watercourses, and

e) is not likely to result in unsustainable social and economic costs to the community as a consequence of flooding.



4) A word or expression used in this clause has the same meaning as it has in the Floodplain Development Manual (ISBN O 7347 5476 O), published by the NSW Government in April 2005, unless it is otherwise defined in this clause.

5) In this clause:

flood planning level means the level of a 1:100 ARI (average recurrent interval) flood event plus 0.5 metre freeboard.

Flood matters are considered later in this report at Section 4.5.5 Flood Planning.

Clause 7.3 Stormwater management

Clause 7.3 of the LEP applies to the proposal and provides as follows:

1) The objective of this clause is to minimise the impacts of urban stormwater on the land to which the development applies, and on adjoining downstream properties, native bushland and receiving waters.

2) This clause applies to all land in residential, business and industrial zones.

3) Development consent must not be granted to development on land to which this clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that the development:

a) Is designed to maximise the use of water permeable surfaces on the land having regard to the soil characteristics affecting on-site infiltration of water.

b) Includes, where practical, on-site stormwater retention for use as an alternative supply to mains water, ground water or river water; and

c) Avoids any significant impacts of stormwater runoff on adjoining downstream properties, native bushland and receiving waters, or if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided, minimises and mitigates the impact.

Stormwater drainage and water quality controls will be conducted in accordance with Council's normal requirements.



Clause 7. 6 Groundwater vulnerability

The subject land is defined on the Orange Local Environmental Plan 2011 - Groundwater Vulnerability Map as having groundwater vulnerability. Clause 7.6 of the LEP provides as follows:

1) The objectives of this clause are to maintain the hydrological functions of key groundwater systems and to protect vulnerable groundwater resources from depletion and contamination as a result of inappropriate development.

2) This clause applies to land identified as "Groundwater Vulnerability" on the Groundwater Vulnerability Map.

3) Before determining a development application for development on land to which this clause applies, the consent authority must consider:

a) Whether or not the development (including any on-site storage or disposal of solid liquid waste and chemicals) is likely to cause any groundwater contamination or have any adverse effect on groundwater dependent ecosystem, and

b) The cumulative impact (including the impact on nearby groundwater extraction for potable water supply or stock water supply) of the development and any other existing development on groundwater.

4) Development consent must not be granted to development on land to which this clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that:

a) The development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid any significant adverse environmental impact, or

b) If that impact cannot be reasonably avoided - the development is designed, sited and will be managed to minimise that impact,

c) If that impact cannot be minimised -the development will be managed to mitigate that impact.

The proposed development is unlikely to have an adverse impact on groundwater resources.



4.1.2 SEPP No. 64 - Advertising and Signage

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 - Advertising and Signage (SEPP

No. 64) applies. The relevant matters are considered below.

Clause 8 of the SEPP states that:

A consent authority must not grant development consent to an application to

display signage unless the consent authority is satisfied:

a) that the sign age is consistent with the objectives of this Policy as set out in

clause 3 (1) (a), and

b) that the signage the subject of the application satisfies the assessment

criteria specified in Schedule 1.

Clause 9 of the SEPP states that the provisions of Part 3 of the SEPP apply to all

sign age other than the following:

a) business identification signs,

b) building identification signs,

c) signage that, or the display of which, is exempt development under an environmental planning instrument that applies to it,

d) signage on vehicles.

The signage proposed by this application is defined as business identification signage. Therefore, it is not subject to the provisions of Part 3 of the SEPP.

Internal directional signage will be displayed and removed each day and is not subject to SEPP 64.

Schedule 1 of the SEPP requires the following criteria to be considered in regard to the proposed signage.



Character of the area

• Is the proposal compatible with the existing or desired future character of the area or locality in which it is proposed to be located?

• Is the proposal consistent with a particular theme for outdoor advertising in the area or locality?

The character of the area is that of a residential area on the fringe of a

commercial precinct; comprising medical centres, restaurants and retail. The land to the south-east is characterised by a large public open space.

The commercial land use pattern intensifies as one moves east along Moulder Street and north along Lords Place, towards the Orange CBD. Residential neighbourhoods exist to the south of the site (along Lords Place) and west of

the site (along Moulder Street).

Signage attributed to the commercial uses along the Lords Place and Moulder

Street comprises mainly of non-illuminated flush wall and fascia signage.

Existing sign age on the building consists of flush wall and freestanding sign age associated with the drive through bottle shop. The proposed signage for the

drive through takeaway food and drink premises is consistent with the existing sign age at the site and sign age characteristics of the wider commercial area.

Special areas

• Does the proposal detract from the amenity or visual quality of any environmentally sensitive areas, heritage areas, natural or other conservation areas, open space areas, waterways, rural landscapes or residential areas?

Whilst the subject site is a Local Heritage Item and within the vicinity of other Local Heritage Items, the proposal is not considered to detract from the amenity and visual quality.

The proposal involves flush wall signage on a non-original component of the building and is easily removable to maintain the integrity and fabric of the

heritage building. Further, the free standing sign is not attached to the building.

The proposal is consistent with the existing flush wall signage attached to the

Moulder Street fac;ade and represents permissible development. The signage complements the commercial nature of the building and site.



Views and vistas

• Does the proposal obscure or compromise important views?

• Does the proposal dominate the skyline and reduce the quality of vistas?

• Does the proposal respect the viewing rights of other advertisers?

There are no significant views or vistas around the subject land that are likely to be adversely affected by the proposed signage. The flush wall sign is below

the roof line and respects the viewing rights of other advertisers.

Streetscape, setting or landscape

• Is the scale, proportion and form of the proposal appropriate for the streetscape, setting or landscape?

• Does the proposal contribute to the visual interest of the streetscape, setting or landscape?

• Does the proposal reduce clutter by rationalising and simplifying existing advertising?

• Does the proposal screen unsightliness?

• Does the proposal protrude above buildings, structures or tree canopies in the area or locality?

Does the proposal require ongoing vegetation management?

The proposed sign age scheme is confined to the building fac;ade, existing fence and a free standing low sign adjacent to an addition to the original building. No sign age will be located outside the site boundary. The proposed flush wall signs

do not protrude above the building profile and is consistent with existing flush wall sign age both on the site and within the vicinity of the site.

The proposed sign facing Lords Place will be placed on a fence below an existing

sign, and results in the removal of the two lower signs that are currently

displayed. This approach rationalises the overall signage scheme and reduces

unnecessary clutter in the streetscape.



As such, the proposed signage scheme for the development would be

acceptable because:

• It would not obscure or compromise or disrupt views towards the subject site from nearby residential properties.

• It would not dominate the skyline and reduce the quality of vistas.

• It would not interfere with the viewing rights of other advertisers.

• The free standing sign is within the landscaped area of the site.

• The advertising is rationalised by the removal of two signs on the Lords

Place fac;ade and replacement with one single sign in this location.

Site and building

• Is the proposal compatible with the scale, proportion and other characteristics of the site or building, or both, on which the proposed signage is to be located?

• Does the proposal respect important features of the site or building, or both?

• Does the proposal show innovation and imagination in its relationship to the site or building, or both?

The proposed signage is considered to be compatible with the scale, proportion and other characteristics of the site and building. A judicious approach has been adopted to identify the various uses. The proposed level of

advertising signage is not unreasonable or unexpected for such a land use. In

this regard:

• The food and drink sign age is positioned next to the existing sign age for the

drive through bottle shop but does not introduce clutter. This signage will not extend beyond the horizontal or vertical profile of the building.

• All signage adopts a height lower than the building and is positioned in a suitable position not detracting from the heritage significance of the site.

• The flush wall sign on the Moulder Street fac;ade represents a small section of the overall facade and therefore is proportionate to the scale of the

building fac;ade.



• The proposed sign on the Lords Place facade will not be placed on the building, but on a fence and is compatible with the with the existing sign age

for the drive through bottle shop. This rationalises the signage on this facade requires removal of two signs and overall reduces clutter on this

facade.

• The sign age is characteristic to the commercial nature of the building and

the proposed use.

Associated devices and logos with advertisements and advertising structures

• Have any safety devices, platforms, lighting devices or logos been designed as an integral part of the signage or structure on which it is to be displayed?

The signage does not include any safety devices, platforms, lighting devices or logos that form an integral part of the signage or structure on which it is to be

displayed.

Illumination

• Would illumination result in unacceptable glare?

• Would illumination affect safety for pedestrians, vehicles or aircraft?

• Would illumination detract from the amenity of any residence or other form of accommodation?

• Can the intensity of the illumination be adjusted, if necessary?

Is the illumination subject to a curfew?

No illumination is proposed.



Safety

• Would the proposal reduce the safety for any public road?

• Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians or bicyclists?

• Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians, particularly children, by obscuring sightlines from public areas?

The proposed signage is considered satisfactory in terms of safety due to the following:

• The signage will not obstruct driver's, pedestrian's or cyclist's view of the adjacent roadway.

• The proposed signage will not obscure information about the road alignment or interfere with stopping sight distances.

• The sign age will be static and will not distract a driver's attention away from the road environment for an extended length of time.

• The proposed signage will not create hazardous headlight reflections.

• The proposed sign age will not obstruct views of the road or cause a physical obstruction or hazard for vehicles, pedestrians or cyclists.

4.2 PROVISIONS OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

There are no known draft environmental planning instruments applicable to the site.

4.3 PROVISIONS OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS

4.3.1 Orange Development Control Plan 2004-8 Development in Business Zones

Orange Development Control Plan 2004 - 08 Development in Business Zones is applicable to this proposal pursuant to Planning Outcome 8.2-1 Business

Service Areas. Peter Basha

Planning & Development


The DCP sets certain planning outcomes for development in the B3 Zone. These are considered below.

Planning Outcome 1- Buildings have a high level of urban design to contribute to the regional status of the Oty's Central Business District with attention given to ~e features, external materials, colour and advertising.

The proposed works do not involve alterations that would alter the existing building or the contribution it makes to this CBD precinct in terms of facade features, external materials, colour and advertising.

Planning Outcome 2 - Urban design demonstrates a clear reference to the CBD Strategic Action Plan.

This Planning Outcome is not relevant to the proposal as the subject land is not within the CBD area identified in the Strategic Action Plan.

Planning Outcome 3 - Provision of adequate fire safety measures and facilities for disabled persons (according to the BCA) is addressed at the application stage (relevant for all development but particularly important where converting residential buildings for business use).

The proposed food and drink premises will comply with the BCA in respect of fire safety measures and facilities for disabled persons.

Planning Outcome 4 - Land use complements the role of the CBD as a regional centre for commerce and services.

The proposal is consistent with this Planning Outcome. The proposed food and drink premises utilises existing space within a commercial floor space and will complement the role of the CBD as a regional centre for commerce and services.

Planning Outcome 5 - The reinstatement of verandahs on posts over footpaths is encouraged.

The proposal does not alter the existing verandah over the footpath.

Planning Outcome 6 - Car parking is provided to meet demand either as on site parking areas or through contributions towards public parking in and adjacent to the CBD.



The car parking requirements of the development are considered later in this report at Section 4.3.2.

Planning Outcome 7 - Advertising comprise business identification signs in accordance with SEPP 64.

The proposed signage has been assessed under SEPP 64 as satisfactory, refer to Section 4.1.2.

Adequate parking and loading areas is provided wholly within the site boundary and currently used by the bottle shop. Further, the food and drink premises is unlikely to generate the need for large trucks. As such the proposal will have minimal impacts on the pedestrian pathways.

4.3.2 Orange Development Control Plan 2004 - 15 Car Parking

According to Orange Development Control Plan 2004 - 15 Car Parking the minimum parking requirement is applicable to the parking demand from the proposed use. The minimum car parking spaces required for a fast food outlet required is as follows:

Developments with no onsite seating 12 spaces per 100m2 GFA or drive through facilities:

Developments with on-site seating 12 spaces per 100m2 GFA, plus the greater of: but no drive through facilities:

• 1 space per 5 seats (both internal and external seating)

• 1 space per 2 seats (internal seating)

Development with on-site seating and drive-through facUities, the greater of:

• 1 space per 2 seats (internal seating)

• 1 space per 3 seats (internal and externatseating)

Plus an extension area for queuing of cars for a drive-through facility is required (~ue length of 5 to 12 cars measured from pick-up point). There should also be a minkntlm of 4 car spaces for cars queued from the ordering point.



The proposed food and drink premises seeks to provide a drive through facility, but no on-site seating. The proposal does not neatly fit within the above mentioned descriptions so the following methodology is submitted:

• The total staff is between 1 and 4 persons. At any given time, staff is most likely to be between 1 and 2 persons. Nonetheless, off street carparking for four (4) vehicles can be accommodated in the existing off-street car park in the western end of the subject land.

• The drive through nature of the site means customers do not leave their vehicle and therefore do not require any off-street parking to visit the premises. In effect, the drive through queuing lanes represent the off street parking resource for the development and would accommodate 9 - 10 cars at any one time.

• Any loading vehicles can be accommodated within the drive through lanes.

Existing parking

The site currently has 38 off street car parking spaces. The pub and restaurant is currently not operational and as such does not require off street parking. However, should the pub and restaurant begin operating, the car parking provision for this use is not compromised.

Pursuant to Notice of Determination 112/2010 for Hotel (Alterations to Existing); Condition 18 requires the provision of 22 off street car parking spaces. Without specific rates for the proposed use, the assumed requirement is for 5 car parking spaces be available for the drive through food and drink premises. The site contains 38 car parking spaces and well in surplus. In the event that the pub and restaurant reopen, the site comfortably provides a surplus of parking spaces for each commercial use to independently operate.

Operation of drive through premises

The arrangement of the site and the drive through capacity allows for stacking of several cars and minimises long term vehicle parking. Additionally, several cars can stack within the site preventing potential for queuing to occur on Lords Place. It is therefore considered that minimal impact will be experienced in the local street network from traffic movement or parking.

The concurrent uses have different opening and peak times making it unlikely parking conflict will arise from the simultaneous operation of the drive through premises.



4.4 MATTER PRESCRIBED BY THE REGULATIONS

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 prescribes certain matters that must be considered by Council in determining a development application. The following information is provided in respect of the relevant prescribed matters:

Demolition of a Building (Clause 92)

Not applicable as the development does not involve demolition.

Fire Safety Considerations (Clause 93)

Applicable. This clause applies to a development application that involves a change of building use for an existing building, where the applicant does not seek the rebuilding, alteration, enlargement or extension of a building.

Buildings to be Upgraded (Clause 94)

Council is to take into consideration whether it would be appropriate to require the existing building to be brought into total or partial conformity with the National Construction Code of Australia. BASIX Commitments {Clause 97A)

BASIX does not apply to non-residential buildings.

4.5 THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT

The potential impacts of the development are considered below.

4.5.1 Visual Amenity/Streetscape

The visual impact of the development is considered satisfactory. The proposal utilises an existing space internal to the exiting building. There are therefore little changes to the external facade and existing visual amenity of the site.

The drive through food and drink premises will present minimal change to the streetscape. This is because:

• The heritage significance of the building will be maintained as minimal structural work will be undertaken, and there are no alterations to the original component of the building.



• The fit out of the space for a coffee shop can be wholly contained within the building and will not be easily detected in the streetscape.

• No changes are proposed to the existing hard stand areas or carparking arrangements.

• The streetscape benefits from a recognised heritage significant facade that encourages activation and engagement with the street. The building and its presence in the streetscape is retained due to the proposal not requiring any external alterations.

• No additional mechanical plant is required as part of the proposal.

• The sign age scheme is related to non-original fabric of the building and site. Such treatment indicates a judicious approach for existing and proposed advertising signage so that a proliferation of structures and signs does not occur.

• The nearby residential properties will have no alterations to the existing amenity and visual interest given the proposal utilises an existing commercial space within the building.

4.5.2 Traffic

Both the Orange DCP 2004 and RTA Guide to Traffic Generating Development

do not provide specific car parking or trip rates for drive through coffee. The proposal to convert a garage into a drive through food and drink premises within a commercial building is not considered to generate adverse traffic impacts on the vicinity based on the following:

• The estimated time frame for staff to take order, make coffee and deliver coffee (and pre-packaged food) is under 5 minutes.

• The peak time for the drive through food and drink is expected to be 5:00am to 10:00am as people are commuting to work etc. The bottle shop does not open until 10:00am after the peak period for drive through coffee has ended.

• The peak time for the drive through bottle shop is after midday resulting in minimal traffic conflict between uses.



• There are separate and designated lanes for the individual tenancies. However, the drive through coffee will utilise both lanes from 5:00am to 10:00am to move customers through as quickly as possible. After 10:00am the drive through coffee shop will use a single lane.

• There are no chairs and tables provided for long term patronage. Customers will remain in vehicles with orders and coffee delivery being conducted by staff.

Traffic Effect

The existing drive through is a well-established component of the local traffic regime. As such, the proposal does not introduce a new element to the locality. However, it is acknowledged that a minor increase in traffic may occur, particularly during the expected peak period. The following is submitted in relation to potential traffic effect:

• There are no aspects of the road network that indicate it would not be able to accommodate additional traffic generated by the proposed development. It is a CBD road network and carriageway widths, trafficable lanes, and intersection controls appear satisfactory to carry relatively large volumes of traffic. It is reasonable to submit that the traffic generated by this proposal would integrate reasonably with established traffic levels within Lords Place and Moulder Street, and the immediate CBD road network.

• The proposal does not alter vehicle access routes to the subject land.

• The site layout provides generous vehicle stacking off Lords Place having minimal traffic impact on the local street network.

Internal Layout and Servicing

The key issue in regard to internal traffic relates mainly to the need to provide a well depicted layout that encourages efficient circulation through the site with smooth transition from one area to another.

The proposal is satisfactory in terms of internal layout and servicing due to the following:

• The driveway and queuing arrangements allow generous space within the site to limit the potential for vehicles to obstruct traffic flow along the Lords Place. This is assisted by the following:



Provision of more than 5 stacked cars (30 metres) within the driveway of the site before turning into the drive-through lane.

Provision of four stacked cars within the drive-through lane for both the coffee and bottle shop.

- Separate lanes for coffee premises and drive through bottle shop to ease traffic movement.

• The modest floor areas of the coffee premises is unlikely to generate the need for delivery by larger trucks. In most circumstances, it is suggested that service vehicles will be of a size that are able to park within the parking bays to make their deliveries.

• Appropriate signage internal to the site will be provided to advise drivers of ingress and egress to ensure traffic movement is not obstructed.

• The proposed driveway width of 7 metres for both Lords Place and Moulder Street complies with the relevant Australian Standard (AS2890.l). The development represents User Class 3A.

Parking Provision

The proposed parking resources are considered satisfactory as explained in Section 4.3.3 of this report.

4.5.3 Noise

The ambient noise levels within and around the site would be typical of a CBD fringe and mixed use business precinct. The dominant source of noise is likely to be from traffic movement associated with food and drink premises. The proposed development does not introduce new noise sources.

The proposed development is not expected to cause adverse noise impacts due to the following:

• The site is relatively well separated from sensitive land uses by way of roadways;

• The loading areas are orientated to within the site;



• The food and drink premises is within an existing space of the commercial building and noise will be attenuated by the existing brick wall that forms the facade on Moulder Street;

• The food and drink premise is orientated away from the sensitive land uses on Moulder Street;

• The opening hours of 5:00am to 2:00pm result in no noise generation after 2:00pm.

• The food and drink premises is drive through whereby no long term patronage will generate noise.

• Any noise generated by the development will be due to the vehicle movement through the site. The exit of vehicles onto Moulder Street would have no greater effect on nearby dwellings than that currently experienced as a result of general traffic movement along Moulder Street.

4.5.4 Heritage

The subject land is not within a Heritage Conservation Area but listed as a Local Heritage Item (Kelly's Rugby Hotel 1214).

The State Heritage Inventory provides the following Statement of Significance:

A prominent two storey hotel, the building retains the original bulk and

character, complements the streetscape on this prominent corner and contributes to Orange as a heritage item.

The potential impacts of the development upon heritage values; streetscape; and visual amenity are interrelated. This inter-relationship can be assessed by considering the development according to the NSW Heritage Office publication Statement of Heritage Impact Guidelines {Table 7 - Relevant HIS Questions) as follows:

Statements of Heritage Impact

The following consideration is provided in response to the NSW Heritage Office publication Statement of Heritage Impact Guidelines (Table 7 - Relevant HIS Questions).



Question - The following aspects of the proposal respect or enhance the heritage significance of the item or conservation area for the following reasons:

The proposal respects the heritage conservation area as follows:

• The proposed works relate to a non-original component of the building having limited impact on the original core and fabric of the building;

• No demolition is proposed resulting in a positive outcome for adaptability;

• The proposal primarily relates to internal fit out having limited alteration to the facade and the significant presence within the streetscape.

• The proposed works enhance the Heritage Item by introducing a compatible use to the commercial nature of the building, consistent with its historic use over time. It also introduces a use that will have a positive outcome on general maintenance and preservation of the Heritage Item.

• The proposed works will not require alteration to the existing colour scheme, materials, building form or details.

Question - The following aspects of the proposal could detrimentally impact on heritage significance. The reasons are explained as well as the measures to be taken to minimise impacts:

For the reasons outlined above, the proposal has minimal potential to adversely affect the Local Heritage Item or nearby items of heritage significance. This is attributed to the proposed development being internal fit out to a non-original component of the building.

Question - The following sympathetic solutions have been considered and discounted for the following reasons:

There are no aspects of the proposal that are considered unsympathetic with the Heritage Item or place.



Question - Demolition of a building or structure. Have all options for retention and adaptive re-use been explored? Can all of the significant elements of the heritage item be kept and any new development be located elsewhere on the site? Is demolition essential at this time or can it be postponed in case future circumstances make its retention and conservation more feasible? Has the advice of a heritage consultant been sought? Have the consultant's recommendations been implemented? If not, why not?

No demolition is sought. The works relate to the fit out of an existing and non original component of the building.

Question - Major additions How Is the impact of the addition on the heritage significance of the item (conservation area) to be minimised? Will the additions tend to visually dominate the heritage Item? (conservation area) Are the additions sited on any known or potentially significant archaeological deposits? If so, have alternative positions for the additions been considered? Are the additions sympathetic to the heritage item? In what way (e.g. form, proportions, design)?

The proposal does not involve major additions.

Question - New landscape works and features (including car parks and fences). How has the impact of the new work on the heritage significance of the existing landscape been minimised? Has evidence (archival and physical) of previous landscape work been investigated? Are previous works being reinstated? Has the advice of a consultant skilled in the conservation of heritage landscapes been sought? If so, have their recommendations been implemented? Are any known or potential archaeological deposits affected by the landscape works? If so, what alternatives have been considered?

Not applicable as new landscape works are not proposed.

Question - Tree removal or replacement Does the tree contribute to the heritage significance of the item or landscape? Why Is the tree being removed? Has the advice of a tree surgeon or horticultural specialist been obtained? Is the tree being replaced? Why? With the same or a different species?

The proposal does not include the removal of any significant and mature vegetation on site. The site is void of any landscaping or vegetation that would contribute the significance of the Heritage Item or wider area.



Proximity to Heritage Items

There are no aspects of the new work that would impact on the appreciation or understanding of the heritage items in the vicinity.

The visual relationship between the subject dwelling and the identified items at Wade Park and the dwellings on both Moulder Street and Lords Place south of the site is not considered to be adversely impacted from the proposal. This is because the proposed development will have limited impact on the existing building, original core and fabric, and overall building presence in the streetscape.

The significance of the nearby heritage items is unlikely to be altered from the proposed development use of the space. The proposal is compatible with the long term commercial nature of the site and represents adaptability without compromising on scale and character.

4.5.5 Flood Planning

According to the LEP, the subject land is located just outside the Flood Planning Area, expect for a very small section in the eastern corner. However, the land is identified as being within a Low Flood Risk Precinct as defined in Council's Blackmans Swamp Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan.

There are no implications in terms of flood planning. The existing situation will be maintained in terms of floor levels and construction.

4.5.6 Overshadowing

The proposal will not generate any additional overshadowing impacts given it utilises an existing component ofthe building and all works are internal.

4.5. 7 Privacy

Impacts on privacy are not considered to be any greater than the existing situation generated by the operation of the drive through bottle shop. The proposal is wholly contained within the existing building walls and will be orientated away from the residential dwellings on the southern side.

The existing boundary fence will remain and continue to serve as privacy between the site and the development to the north and west.



4.5.8 Lighting

To ensure that lighting from the development does not cause adverse impacts upon neighbours or the road network, the lighting system will utilise the existing drive through lighting system. Additionally, internal lighting to the food and drink premises is unlikely to cause unnecessary glare.

4.5.9 Waste Management

The disposal of construction wastes and materials will be subject to a waste management plan.

The existing rubbish separation and collection system currently employed at the site will be maintained for the food and drink premises.

The waste generated by the operation of the food and drink premises is not considered to be substantial given the customers will typically take their rubbish away from the site after purchases.

The recycling and rubbish bins associated with the food and drink premises are to be stored in the existing locations.

4.5.10 Social and Economic Impacts

The proposed development has the potential to generate positive social and economic effects due to the following:

• The development will facilitate the establishment of a new business that increases supply and expand choices within existing commercial premises within the City of Orange.

• The proposal will complement and enhance the role of Orange as a major regional business centre.

• May assist to increase employment opportunities.

• The construction phase of the development will provide short term economic benefits due to the engagement of contractors and purchase of materials.

The development is unlikely to generate negative social or economic impacts.



4.6 THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT

4.6.1 Physical Attributes

Based on the information in Section 2 of this report, there are no physical aspects of the site or premises to indicate that it would not be suitable for the proposed development.

4.6.2 Availability of Utility Services

The premises are connected to all urban services. The extension of these services for the proposed development would be to the requirements of the relevant supply authorities.

4.7 SUBMISSIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACT OR REGULATIONS

Council is not required to formally advertise the development application.

4.8 THE PUBLIC INTEREST

The proposed development is considered to be only of minor interest to the wider public due to the relatively localised nature of potential impacts.


Sectionj.0

CONCLUSION

The proposal as submitted could be supported on the following grounds:

• The proposal can be demonstrated to comply with the relevant provisions of Orange LEP 2011.

• The proposal satisfies the relevant Planning Outcomes contained in Orange DCP 2004.

• The proposal is considered satisfactory in terms of Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The potential impacts of the proposal are considered to be minor and may be addressed by appropriate design, responsible management practices and relevant Conditions of Consent.

• There do not appear to be any issues that would warrant refusal of the development application.

We trust that this application will be given favourable consideration by Council. Any further enquiries may be directed to Lucie Barnett on 6361 2955.

Yours faithfully Peter Basha Planning & Development

Per: LUCIE BARNETT


development application · • the drive through coffee shop will utilise both lanes to increase...

Documents