11/05/2017 A7291 104 (Lot 291) Illawarra Avenue, Margaret River
Dwelling Additions (Boundary Fencing)
P217301
12/05/2017 A1490 75 (Lot 9) Bussell Highway, Cowaramup Liquor Store Additions (Drive Through Facility)
P217302
BUILDING LICENCE APPLICATIONS RECEIVED Date Rec’d
Assess No.
Address Proposal BLDG No.
12/05/2017 A8948 4 Hakea Lane, Margaret River Shed 217202 12/05/2017 A12042 66 (Lot 581) Tunbridge Street, Margaret
River Ancillary Accommodation 217203
12/05/2017 A12372, A7425
661 (Lot 2224) Treeton Road, Cowaramup
Farm Shed 217204
12/05/2017 A7386 58 (Lot 10) Orchid Ramble Margaret River
2 Storey Dwelling 217205
11/05/2017 A3245 21 Coronation Street Margaret River Single Dwelling 217201 10/05/2017 A8053 317 (Lot 2281) Bramley River Road
Osmington Chalet 217156
10/05/2017 A2930 240 (Lot 19) Tanah Marah Road Margaret River
Farm Shed 217199
SUBDIVISIONS DETERMINED
Date Rec’d
Officer DA No. Address Description of Matter Recommendation
LEVEL 1 APPLICATIONS determined under delegation
Date Rec’d
Officer Address Proposal Outcome DA No.
30/01/2017 Lara Hoole
11 (Lot 76) Georgette Way Prevelly
Holiday House
Approve P217079
09/03/2017 Lucy Gouws
18 (Lot 1631) Hill Road Forest Grove
Winery Additions
Approve P217168
23/03/2017 Lucy Gouws
85 (lot 125) Woodland Drive Burnside
Holiday House
Approve P217197
LEVEL 2 APPLICATIONS for determination under delegation Date Rec’d
Officer Address Proposal Outcome of DAU Meeting
DA No.
30/08/16 AS 19 (Lot 241) Illawarra Avenue Margaret River
Shed outside building envelope
Approve P216465
N/A LH Lot 14 & 284 Fearn Avenue, Margaret River
Concept plans for Child Care Centre & Medical Centre
For Discussion Only
N/A
13/02/2017 MS 26 The Boulevard, Margaret River
Dwelling Additions Approve P217107
09/12/2016 JP Lot 61 Warner Glen Road, Forest Grove
Extractive Industry – Amendment to Planning approval P215404
Approve P216728
LOCAL LAW PERMITS Date Rec’d Officer Address Proposal Outcome DA No.
OTHER APPLICATIONS determined under delegation
Date Rec’d
Officer Address Proposal Outcome DA No.
COMPLIANCE
Date Rec’d
Officer Address Proposal Outcome DA No.
11/04/2016 Matt Slocomb
104 (Lot 291) Illawarra Avenue Margaret River
Unapproved Fence
Matter Concluded
P216263
ELECTED MEMBERS ATTENTION
Date Rec’d
Officer Address Proposal Outcome of DAU Meeting
DA No.
CLOSURE OF MEETING
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ASSESSMENT (DAU) Report to Manager Planning and Development Services
Proposed Dwelling Additions (Outbuilding) at 19 (Lot 241) Illawarra Avenue Margaret River
Major (Level 1) P216465; PTY/8188 REPORTING OFFICER : Angela Satre DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST : A member of the owner’s family is known to the Planning
Officer. This association has not had an implication to the processing of this application.
General Information Lot Area 9995m2 Zone Rural Residential Proposed Development Demolition of existing 13m2 shed and proposed shed to be
constructed outside the building envelope as follows: 77m2 (11m x 7m); 4.1m wall height; 4.8m ridge height; & setback 30m from the front & 10m from the side
boundaries. (The application was amended from the original proposal to locate the shed centrally on the site in the cleared are fronting Illawarra Avenue & Merino Way)
Permissible Use Class ‘P’ permitted with approval Heritage/Aboriginal Sites No Encumbrance Nil Date Received 30/08/2016
Policy Requirements Is the land or proposal referred to in any Council Policy? √ Yes ☐ No If yes, state the Policy/Policies Local Planning Policy 1 – Outbuildings, Farm Buildings & Swimming
Pools (LPP1) Officer Comment
The site is developed with two sheds totalling 105m2 in area. The proposal is to remove the 13m2 shed and redevelop this site with the proposed 77m2 shed making the total area of shed on site 169m2. The proposal involves variations to the wall height guideline of 3.5m and the 80m2 floor area guideline for sheds in the Rural Residential zone. The variations have been assessed and have been found to meet the relevant performance criteria in relation to the following:
While the shed will not be screened from view, it will be suitably setback from the front street and side boundaries and is of a suitable scale (it complies with the 4.5m ridge height guideline under LPP1) for the locality.
The exterior colours of the shed are recommended to be non-reflective and to complement the landscape.
The proposed variation to the wall height is considered minor and given the shed would be setback 30m from the road, the variation is not considered to have an adverse impact to the streetscape in terms of its form and scale.
Although the shed would be located outside the building envelope (which is only 811m2) the shed would be located on site such that it is grouped with the main residence while also being sensitively located to avoid the need to clear mature trees on site. Potential adverse visual impacts arising from the proposal are considered to have been mitigated with the location of the shed in proximity to the dwelling, screening being provided by existing vegetation to the south and west, and the shed being located suitable distances from boundaries.
The proposed variation to the floor area guideline is significant however the extent of sheds on the site is not out of character with the nature of development in the locality. Furthermore, the sheds (existing and proposed) are located such that they are suitably screened by existing vegetation.
The proposed variation to the wall height and the floor area guideline meet the relevant performance criteria and are considered acceptable.
Structure Plans and Local Development Plans (DAP) Is the land in any Structure Plan Area or subject to a DAP? √ Yes ☐ No If yes, state the Policy/Policies Subdivision Guide Plan for Basildene Landowners Association (SG)
Officer Comment
The SGP for the locality shows building envelopes and landscape protection areas. In this case neither the envelope or landscape protection areas are impacted by the proposal.
Advertising/Agency Referrals Has the application been referred to adjoining landowners/agency?
√ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
Has a submission been received by Council? One submission of support was received to the original application. The amended proposal shows the shed located on the southern boundary of the site & replacing an existing shed. The amended proposal was referred to the southern and western affected neighbours and one objection was received.
√ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
No. received: ____2_________
Have agency or authority comments been received? ☐ Yes √ No ☐ N/A Name Nature of Submission Officer Comment
Nearby neighbour
Objection to proximity to the adjoining dwelling and adverse impact to the view from that dwelling. Concern about noise impacts from tractors being stored and maintained in the shed at early hours of the day and late at night. Concern about fire risk.
The shed would be located within the setback guidelines under LPS1. The owner has committed to providing a vegetation buffer to the south and western boundaries to soften the visual impact of the structure. The shed is located outside the envelope to ensure that the stand of trees to the west of the dwelling is retained; their inclusion in the envelope could result in their removal. Concerns about noise are noted. The owner will be reminded of their obligations regarding noise as an advice to any approval granted.
Has the application been referred to internal departments?
☐ Yes √ No ☐ N/A
Assessment of Application Is the land referred in the Heritage Inventory? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any Contributions applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any compliance issues in relation to existing development?
☐ Yes √ No
R Codes Are R Codes applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Development Standards (Schedule 9) Are the development Standards applicable? √ Yes ☐ No
Officer Comment
The proposal complies with the development standards under schedule 9 of the Scheme.
Building Height Scheme / Policy Requirement Wall - 7 m Roof - 8m State the proposed building height
Wall – 4.1m Roof – 4.8m
√ Complies ☐ Doesn’t Comply
Clause 67 A. In the opinion of the officer, would approval of the planning consent be appropriate under Clause
67 of the Deemed Provisions of the Scheme? Officer Comment
Yes – the proposal involves variations to the provisions of the Scheme in relation to development being outside the building envelope. The Scheme, at clause 4.22.2, specifies that all development must be contained within the approved building envelope unless otherwise approved by the local government. In this case the development is outside the envelope and consideration must be given to the need for the Shire to exercise its discretion to vary a standard of the Scheme at clause 5.5 in this regard. It is not uncommon for development to be considered outside the envelope in the locality. The existing shed in the south east of the site is outside the existing envelope. The envelope on site is also very small (811m2) and it is not realistic to consider the shed within this envelope. Given the considerable stands of vegetation surrounding the existing dwelling that could potentially be removed with expansion of the existing
envelope, it is in the interests of the preservation of the amenity of the vegetation on site & the preservation of the amenity of the area to consider the shed outside the existing envelope. In this case the shed is suitably located such that it is grouped with the main dwelling. The location of the shed complies with the setback standards under the Scheme. The shed would be screened by vegetation to its east and landscaping screening is proposed to be installed to the south and east. With removal of the existing shed at this location, the proposal would involve rationalisation of some shed space on the site. The proposal for the shed outside the envelope is recommended to be supported, subject to conditions requiring landscape screening, and pursuant to LPS1 clause 5.5.
B. In the opinion of the officer: i. Are utility services available and adequate for the development? Yes ii. Has adequate provision been made for the landscaping and protection for
any trees or other vegetation on the land? Yes
iii. Has adequate provision been made for access for the development or facilities by disabled persons?
n/a
iv. Is development likely to cause detriment to the existing and likely future amenity of the neighbourhood?
No
v. Is the development likely to comply with AS3959 at the building permit stage? n/a Other Comment Any further comments in relation to the application? Officer Comment
The original proposal showed the shed located centrally on the site and within the paddock in the north west of the property and a considerable distance from the existing dwelling. This original location was not preferred due to the adverse visual impact this site would have when viewed from outside the property and from adjoining roads. The proposal was amended after considerable negotiation. The amended proposal was referred to the affected neighbours for comments. One objection was received. The issues raised are considered to have been adequately addressed with provision of landscape screening. The application is recommended to be conditionally supported.
OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That the Manager Planning and Development Services GRANTS Planning Consent under Delegated Authority Instrument No. 16 pursuant to Clause 68(2) of the Deemed Provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for Dwelling Additions (Outbuilding) at 19 (Lot 241) Illawarra Avenue Margaret River subject to compliance with the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. The development is to be carried out in compliance with the plans and documentation listed below
and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent.
Plans and Specifications
P1 received at the Shire offices on 13 March 2017 and P2 received at the Shire offices on 30 August 2016.
2. If the development, the subject of this approval, is not substantially commenced within two (2)
years from the date of this letter, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect. Where an approval has lapsed, development is prohibited without further approval being obtained. (P)
3. All stormwater and drainage run-off from the development shall be contained within the lot
boundaries or disposed offsite by an approved connection to the Shire’s drainage system in accordance with the Shire of Augusta Margaret River Standards & Specifications. (I)
4. The outbuilding(s) shall be used solely for purposes incidental and ancillary to the authorised use
of the land. 5. The outbuilding shall not be used for human habitation. (P) 6. The walls and roof of the building shall be clad in a non-reflective material and painted in a colour
of natural or earth toning consistent with the existing landscape and existing development. To this end, reflective materials (including but not limited to 'silver' sheeting) or reflective colours as cladding/external painting (including but not limited to white, cream, off white or pale grey) are prohibited. (P)
7. A Landscape Plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Shire and shall be submitted to the Shire prior to the commencement of development. The Landscape Plan shall be drawn to scale and show the location, name and mature heights of existing and proposed trees and shrubs and ground covers to screen the development to the west and south.
8. Landscaping shall be implemented in accordance with the approved Landscape Plan prior to
occupation/use of the development and shall be maintained at all times. ADVICE NOTES a) You are advised of the need to comply with the requirements of the following other legislation:
(i) This is not a Building Permit. A Building Permit must be issued by the relevant Permit Authority before any work commences on site as per the Building Act 2011;
(ii) Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1911 and Department requirements in respect to the development and use of the premises; and
(iii) The Bush Fires Act 1954 as amended, Section 33(3), Annual Bush Fires Notice applies to this property.
b) The proponent is reminded of their obligations under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997 and that they must ensure that noise generated does not affect the amenity of neighbours.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ASSESSMENT (DAU) Report to Manager Planning and Development Services
Proposed Dwelling Additions – 26 (Lot 76) The Boulevard, Margaret River Major (Level 2) P217107; PTY/7135
REPORTING OFFICER : Matt Slocomb DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST : Nil
General Information Lot Area 2046m² Zone Residential R5 Proposed Development Proposed single storey addition to the southern side of the existing
dwelling. Permissible Use Class Dwelling - ‘P’. Planning is required as a variation is proposed to
the 5m setback requirement in accordance with 4.21.2(f) of Local Planning Scheme No.1.
Heritage/Aboriginal Sites Nil. Encumbrance Restrictive Covenant (Not Impacted) Date Received 13/02/2017
Policy Requirements Is the land or proposal referred to in any Council Policy? ☐ Yes √ No Structure Plans and Local Development Plans (DAP) Is the land in any Structure Plan Area or subject to a DAP? ☐ Yes √ No
Advertising/Agency Referrals Has the application been referred to adjoining landowners/agency?
√ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
Has a submission been received by Council? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Have agency or authority comments been received? ☐ Yes √ No ☐ N/A Has the application been referred to internal departments? ☐ Yes √ No ☐ N/A Name Nature of Submission Officer Comment
Submitter 1
1. The proposal does not comply with 5m minimum side boundary setback as stipulated under Clause 4.21.2 (e) of Council's Scheme:
2. While Clause 4.21.2 (e) of the
Scheme States 'side boundary setbacks shall be 5 metres unless the local government, following consultation with affected adjoining owners, otherwise approves' the proposed reduced side boundary setback in this instance is not supported for the following reasons:
a) The proposal is not in keeping
with the low-density residential character and amenity of the area as outlined under Clause 4.21.2 (d) — especially given that the significant majority of dwellings developed in the R5 locality accord with the 5m minimum side boundary setback stipulated in the Scheme. The 5 metre minimum side setback maintains the existing low density residential amenity enjoyed by the adjoining landowner and provided for within the locality;
b) The proposed setback variation is not consistent with the purpose and objective for the Residential zone set out under Clause 4.2.4.1 in Council's Scheme whereby it will not conserve and enhance the low density residential amenity and sense of place with the adjoining landowner's residence;
c) Solid fencing to screen the proposed development is not supported as it will be visibly intrusive and more so reflects an outcome that is achieved
Noted. It is inferred that the submitter is referring to clause (f) which relates to the side setback requirement. The side setback variation is discussed further in the planning comment section of the report below. Refer to planning comment section below. Fencing compliant with the Local Planning Policy 4 – Boundary Fencing can be constructed to a height of 2.3m without requiring planning approval.
on higher density residential lots - which is not characteristic of the locality;
d) Will impact privacy of adjoining properties;
e) Any suggestion to screen the proposed development with landscaping is also questionable in this location on the grounds that it raises increased fire risk between each house, which may not comply with fire management requirements.
3. The Council's endorsed Local
Planning Strategy identifies the land to be centrally located in a residential cell developed to accommodate low density Residential R5 coded development. Low density residential development therefore responds to, and is sympathetic with the high visual landscape values and spacious character of the area. Development as proposed will erode the low density visual amenity. The 5 metre minimum setback is considered to be the absolute minimum requirement that must be adhered to in this instance so as to maintain the spacious environment between the existing dwellings — which is characteristic of the locality.
AS-3959 provides exclusions under clause 2.2.3.2 for low threat vegetation including cultivated gardens. Notwithstanding this has been considered through the BAL assessment which has rated this elevation at a BAL19. Refer to comment below.
Assessment of Application Is the land referred in the Heritage Inventory? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any Contributions applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any compliance issues in relation to existing development?
☐ Yes √ No
R Codes Are R Codes applicable? √ Yes ☐ No
Design Element Policy / R Codes Req
Provided Officer comment
Sides Setback 5m 1.654m (at closest point)
Complies
Rear Setback 6m >6m Complies Open Space Requirement 80% 88.6% (232m²) Complies Upgrade Landscaping ☐ Required √ Not Required Overlooking ☐ Yes √ No – See comment below Street surveillance √ Yes ☐ No Street Walls and Fences ☐ Yes √ No Overshadowing ☐ Yes √ No Energy efficiency/solar access
☐ Yes √ No
Other Variations ☐ Yes √ No Officer’s Comments against performance criteria
Side Setback LPS1 requires a 5m side setback on R5 lots. The location of the development involves a setback of 1.65m at its closest point to that
southern end of the addition, increasing to 3.95m towards the northern end. It is to be noted that the majority of the western elevation is setback less than the required 5m under the local planning scheme, which includes the existing elevation. The existing dwelling is not aligned parallel to the boundary; rather it is angled towards the western boundary. In this respect, an addition to this part of the dwelling irrespective of design/layout would result in a variation to the 5m setback requirement. On this basis, the proposal has been assessed in respect to its impact on the adjoining property and streetscape. In respect to the impact on the adjoining property, the adjacent (eastern) elevation of the dwelling at Lot 77 is comprised of two bedrooms, neither of which contain openings orientated towards the subject site. Accordingly, impacts will be limited when considered from inside the dwelling. The outdoor area adjacent to the proposed addition is currently used as a vehicle parking and access for the Outbuilding located at the rear of the site. This is not considered to have the same level of sensitivity when compared to an outdoor living area, and there is already a considerable amount of screen vegetation established in the area where development is intended to occur (refer to image below). The proposed addition is to have a roof colour of woodland grey and the walls will be clad in cedar, both of which are low reflectivity and will reduce the visual impact. If screen vegetation is maintained in this area as a condition of planning approval then impacts on the adjoining property are not anticipated to be significant.
Above: Screening Vegetation on boundary adjacent to addition. In respect to the streetscape, by virtue of the topography (dwelling site is higher than the street) and the extent of vegetation located in the front setback, the development will have a limited visual impact on the streetscape. Visual Privacy It is noted that a visual privacy variation is not proposed (applicant has confirmed that the FFL of the bedroom is less than 0.5m above natural ground level). This will be reinforced through a condition of planning approval. As demonstrated in the image below, the eastern elevation of the neighbouring property does not contain major openings, there are north and north east facing windows but these are either screened by existing vegetation along the fence line, have a considerable separation or are not orientated in such a manner that promotes direct
overlooking. As can be seen below the issue is more associated with the ‘existing window’ as there is currently a gap in the vegetation and screening which has created privacy issues. Given that this window does not form part of the proposal there is limited action that can be taken in response to this. The proposed additions are largely screened from the existing vegetation on the fence line and do not involve a variation to the visual privacy requirements of the R-Codes. Notwithstanding, the proponent has agreed to an extension of the existing trellis and passionfruit screen to address the overlooking issues in relation to the existing window. The applicant has also agreed to extent the height of the existing trellis and passionfruit screen. The height of an effective privacy screen, under the provisions of the Residential Design Codes, is 1.6m from finished floor level. Notwithstanding, the applicant has agreed to a screen well in excess of 1.8m, which is the height of a standard dividing fence. A condition is proposed, which that requires the submission of a landscaping plan. The landscaping plan is to show the screening vegetation that is being retained adjacent to the western elevation, and detail replacement planting where existing vegetation is being removed.
Development Standards (Schedule 9) Are the development Standards applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Car Parking LPS1 / R Codes Requirement
Car Bays Required - 2 Car Bays Proposed - 2
Dimensions 2.5 x 5.5m √ Complies ☐ Doesn’t Comply Turning Bay/Circles and vehicle manoeuvring
√ Complies ☐ Doesn’t Comply
Disabled Bays Disabled Bays – N/A ☐ Complies ☐ Doesn’t Comply Building Height Scheme / Policy Requirement Wall - 7m Roof - 8m State the proposed building height
Wall – 2.97m Roof – 4m
√ Complies ☐ Doesn’t Comply
Clause 67 C. In the opinion of the officer, would approval of the planning consent be appropriate under Clause
67 of the Deemed Provisions of the Scheme? Officer Comment
Yes.
D. In the opinion of the officer: vi. Are utility services available and
adequate for the development? Yes.
vii. Has adequate provision been made for the landscaping and protection for any trees or other vegetation on the land?
Yes.
viii. Has adequate provision been made for access for the development or facilities by disabled persons?
N/A
ix. Is development likely to cause detriment to the existing and likely future amenity of the neighbourhood?
No.
x. Is the development likely to comply with AS3959 at the building permit stage?
Yes. A BAL assessment has been submitted which has rated the additions at a BAL-19.
Other Comments Any further comments in relation to the application? Officer Comment
The proposal is considered to be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Shires Local Planning Scheme No.1 and is not anticipated to have an adverse impact on adjoining properties or the streetscape. Accordingly the proposal is recommended for approval subject to conditions.
OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That the Manager of Planning and Development Services GRANT Planning Consent under Delegated Authority Instrument No. 16 pursuant to Clause 68(2) of the Deemed Provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 for Dwelling Additions at 26 (Lot 76) The Boulevard, Margaret River subject to compliance with the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. The development is to be carried out in compliance with the plans and documentation listed below
and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent.
Plans and Specifications
P1 – P4 received at the Shire Offices on the 13 February 2017 and P5 received at the Shire Offices on the 24 May 2017
2. If the development, the subject of this approval, is not substantially commenced within two (2)
years from the date of this letter, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect. Where an approval has lapsed, development is prohibited without further approval being obtained. (P)
3. All stormwater and drainage run-off from the development shall be contained within the lot
boundaries or disposed offsite by an approved connection to the Shire’s drainage system. (I)
4. A Landscape Plan (for establishing privacy screening along the western boundary of the site) shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Shire, implemented prior to occupation of proposed development and maintained thereafter. The screening shall be of a 75% solid surface area to a minimum height of 1.6 metres above the floor level but not exceeding 2.3m in accordance with clause 5.4.1 C1.2 of the Residential Design Codes.
5. The finished floor level of ‘Bed 3’ shall not exceed 500mm above natural ground. ADVICE NOTES a) You are advised of the need to comply with the requirements of the following other legislation:
(i) This is not a Building Permit. A Building Permit must be issued by the relevant Permit Authority before any work commences on site as per the Building Act 2011;
(ii) Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1911 and Department requirements in respect to the development and use of the premises; and
(iii) The Bush Fires Act 1954 as amended, Section 33(3), Annual Bush Fires Notice applies to this property.
b) In respect to condition 4, the landscaping plan is to show the screening vegetation that is being
retained adjacent to the western elevation, and detail replacement planting where existing vegetation is being removed.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ASSESSMENT (DAU) Report to Manager Planning and Development Services
Proposed Amendment to Planning Approval P215404 (Extractive Industry) -
Lot 61 Warner Glen Road Forest Grove
Major (Level 2) P216728; PTY/11336 REPORTING OFFICER : Johan Pienaar DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST : Nil
General Information Lot Area 30.9 ha Zone Priority Agriculture Proposed Development The following amendments are proposed to planning approval
P215404:
Site Plan - Reduce the front setback from approximately 60m to 20m. Higher quality gravel, suitable for road construction, was found to be closer to the front boundary. The 60m setback was initially proposed to stay clear of the overhead power lines that run through the site.
Condition 5 - Change truck-operating times to be the same as the as the approved pit (extraction works) operating times i.e. 7am to 5pm Monday to Friday. The truck operating time is currently approved to be 9am to 5pm Mondays to Fridays.
Condition 13 – landscaping plan to be submitted after commencement of works instead of prior to commencement of works.
Condition 14 – Expand on the condition to include provisions limiting the duration of extraction works within 70m of the front boundary (cells 1-3.) To address potential off site impacts on an adjoining dwelling, it is proposed to limit extraction works within 70m from the street boundary to a maximum period of 1 month from the commencement of extraction works in cells 1-3.
Condition 20 – amend to refer to cells 1, 2, 4 and 5 (due to proposed amendments to the cells).
Permissible Use Class “A” use. Heritage/Aboriginal Sites Nil listed Encumbrance Nil Date Received 09/12/2016
Policy Requirements
Is the land or proposal referred to in any Council Policy? √ Yes ☐ No If yes, state the Policy/Policies Statement of Planning Policy No. 2.5 – Agricultural and Rural
Land Use Planning (SPP2.5); State Planning Policy 4.1 (State Industrial Buffer) (SPP4.1); Local Planning Policy 3 - Extractive Industries (LPP3)
Officer Comment
The proposed use was assessed in detail against the relevant policies in the original assessment report. It was concluded that the use is capable of being supported under the provisions of the relevant policies. No changes have occurred to any of the policies since the issuing of planning approval P215404. The proposed change to the truck operating times is consistent with the operating times supported in LPP3. LPP3 supports 7am-7pm weekday operating times. LPP3 does not distinguish between truck and pit operating times.
The proponent accepted under the original application a 9am start for truck movements as suggested in a public submission. The request for trucks to start operating at 7am was advertised to the previous objector. An objection was registered on the basis of additional noise impacts. Notwithstanding the objection, a 7am start of trucks is considered appropriate for the following reasons:
It is consistent with operating times under LPP3. Heavy vehicles will mainly travel in a westerly direction (to Bussell
Highway). The majority of heavy vehicles will therefore travel in an opposite direction from the objector’s property, which is situated 1.5km east of the Site. The 7am start will not cause any additional noise impacts.
Warner Glen Road is suitably designed to accommodate heavy vehicles.
The proponent has obtained written support from the landowners to the south (dwelling within 500m of the pit area) in relation to the proposed amendments.
Structure Plans and Local Development Plans (DAP) Is the land in any Structure Plan Area or subject to a DAP? ☐ Yes √ No
Advertising/Agency Referrals Has the application been referred to adjoining landowners/agency? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A
Has a submission been received by Council? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A No. received: 1
Have agency or authority comments been received? √ Yes ☐ No ☐ N/A Name Nature of Submission Officer Comment
Nearby neighbour
Agree with smaller cells. Disagree with :
Changes to operating hours due to noise factor
Reduced setback to Warner Glen Road. It will be an eyesore on a tourist route.
The objector’s property is situated 1.5km east of the Site. This is more than 3 times the acceptable separation distance under the EPA Guidance Note 3 (separation distances between industrial uses and sensitive land uses). The proposed 7am start for trucks will not cause additional noise impacts. Pit operations are approved to start at 7am. The smaller cells will mitigate visual impacts. Screening in the form of bunding and landscaping along the Warner Glen Road boundary and landscaping screening along the the western boundary of the site is proposed. The reduced setback is not a concern in the context of proposed bunding and landscape screening. The proponent agreed to a 3m height limit for stockpiles as an additional visual impact mitigation measure. Stockpiles are required to be setback at a minimum distance of 50m from the front boundary.
Western Power
Highlighted the requirements for working in high risk areas near transmission or communication assets.
Cells 1-3 are traversed by overhead power lines. The proponent was informed of Western Power’s comments and requirements.
Has the application been referred to internal departments? ☐ Yes √ No ☐ N/A
Assessment of Application Is the land referred in the Heritage Inventory? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any Contributions applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Are there any compliance issues in relation to existing development?
☐ Yes √ No
R Codes Are R Codes applicable? ☐ Yes √ No Development Standards (Schedule 9) Are the development Standards applicable? √ Yes ☐ No
Officer Comment A 30m setback applies to front boundaries in the zone. The proposed 10m variation (20m setback of extraction works from the front boundary) is considered acceptable for the following reasons:
Temporary nature of the use (5 year approval). The proposed 20m setback is sufficient to establish an effective visual
buffer in the form of bunding and vegetation screening. Require rehabilitation works as soon as excavation in each cell is
completed. The trees that exist in the 30m setback area are blue gums. Blue
gums are not native and are not protected under the provisions of the Scheme.
It is recommended to limited in height of stockpiles to 3m and require stockpiles to be setback at least 50m from the front boundary as further visual impact mitigation measures.
Car Parking N/A Building Height N/A
Officer Comment
Clause 67 E. In the opinion of the officer, would approval of the planning consent be appropriate under Clause
67 of the Deemed Provisions of the Scheme? Officer Comment
Yes. The Scheme allows for applications to amend planning approvals under clause 77 of the deemed provisions of the Scheme.
F. In the opinion of the officer: xi. Are utility services available and
adequate for the development? Yes
xii. Has adequate provision been made for the landscaping and protection for any trees or other vegetation on the land?
Yes. The trees along Warner Glen Road are blue gums. Non-native trees are not protected under the Scheme.
xiii. Has adequate provision been made for access for the development or facilities by disabled persons?
N/A
xiv. Is development likely to cause detriment to the existing and likely future amenity of the neighbourhood?
Impacts mitigated through small cells of extraction, appropriate rehabilitation and visual screening.
xv. Is the development likely to comply with AS3959 at the building permit stage?
N/A
Other Comments Any further comments in relation to the application? Officer Comment
The proposed amendments to the front boundary setback and staging is supported as shown on the amended site plan. The proposed amendments to conditions 5, 14 and 20 are supported. The proposed amendment to condition 13 (landscaping plan to be submitted after commencement of extraction) is not supported. A Landscaping Plan was received through this application process. To mitigate visual and potential noise impacts, due to the reduced front setback, it is proposed to add a new condition limiting the height of stockpiles to maximum height of 3m with a minimum 50m setback from the Warner Glen boundary. The proponent agreed to this requirement. Also, the proponent is proposing a 1 month imitation on extraction works (for each cell) within 70m of Warner Glen. In addition to the proponents proposal it is considered appropriate to add a specific timeframe for the completion of rehabilitation works within each cell. The applicant accepted a two month timeframe if any approval allows for rehabilitation works on Saturdays. This request is considered reasonable. Saturday works should be restricted to rehabilitation works only between 7am and 1pm, as per the provisions of LPP 3. The Shire has adopted a different approach/requirements in relation to road maintenance and site rehabilitation since the issuing of approval P215404. The applicant agreed to an amendment to conditions 10 and 15 to reflect the Shire’s current requirements. The proponent accepted this approach. The recommended changes to the conditions of planning approval P215404 are set out below. A strikethrough is deleting words, underline is replacement words and bold indicates additional wording or new conditions. Recommended amendments: Conditions 4 and 5 The proposed amendment for truck operating times to be the same as the pit operating times is supported. There is therefore no need for a separate condition specifying truck operating times. It is recommended that condition 5 be deleted and that condition 4 be amended to reflect that the operating hours include truck movements. A new condition is recommended to allow for rehabilitations works to be undertaken on Saturdays. 4. The extractive industry (including site construction and truck movements)
shall not operate outside the hours of 7:00am and 5:00pm Monday to Friday. The extractive industry shall not operate on weekends or public holidays. Trucks must avoid driving on Warner Glen Road during School Bus operating times. (P)
5. Operating hours of trucks are restricted to between 7am 9am and 5pm Mondays to Fridays. Trucks must avoid driving on Warner Glen Road during School Bus operating times. (P)
New Condition
Rehabilitation works are permitted to be carried out on Saturdays between 7am and 1pm.
Condition 10 Proposed changes to reflect the Shire’s latest requirements: 10. The proponent shall be responsible for the cost of repairs of any Shire
managed roads and infrastructure damaged as a direct result of the approved extractive industry use on the site.
An agreement shall be entered into with the local government for the payment of an annual road maintenance contribution to be used towards expenses incurred by the local government in repairing damage to Warner Glen Road (between Bussell Highway and the access point to the gravel pit) caused by heavy vehicles traffic associated with the gravel pit. The contribution will be adjusted annually in accordance with CPI.
Condition 13 No change recommended. 13. A Landscape Plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Shire by a
suitably qualified and/or experienced landscape consultant for the visual buffer required under condition 12. The Landscape Plan shall be submitted to the Shire for approval prior to the commencement of works. The Landscape Plan shall be drawn to scale and show the following:
a) The location, name and mature heights of existing and proposed trees
and shrubs and ground covers as recommended in the Cape to Cape Landcare Companion.
Condition 14 Recommended changes are as follows: 14. Extraction is limited to one cell at a time. Rehabilitation of a cell shall
commence prior to moving on to the next cell and shall be completed within a reasonable time two months from the commencement date to the satisfaction of the Shire.
New condition as recommended by proponent
Within cells 1-3, extraction within 70m from the Warner Glen Road boundary shall not exceed a period of 1 month (for each cell). The topsoil bund, as indicated on the approved site plan, shall be installed prior to the commencement of any extraction works. The topsoil bund shall be maintained at all times to the satisfaction of the Shire.
Condition 15 Propose a new condition that is linked to condition 15. This new condition is to reflect the Shire’s latest requirements for the payment of a rehabilitation bond. It is recommended that the rehabilitation bond be based on an exposed footprint of 3.5ha, which is the average combined size of two cells.
15. All excavation areas shall be rehabilitated to the satisfaction of the Shire
within 12 months from the expiry date of this approval or within 12 months of depletion of the recourse. (see advice note g') (P)
New condition
The proponent shall pay a rehabilitation bond prior to the commencement of any works to be held against satisfactorily completion of rehabilitations works required as a condition of this approval. The rehabilitation bond will be calculated on an exposed footprint of 3.5ha. The proponent shall enter into a deed with the Shire to detail the rights of the Shire to call upon or retain the bond.
Condition 20 The proposed changes are due to new cell design. 20. Crushing and screening activities in cells 3 and 4 1, 2 and 3 shall be undertaken in a location within the cells to maximize the separation distance between the processing activities and the dwelling on Lot 2 Warner Glen Road.
OFFICER RECOMMENDATION That the Manager Planning and Development Services GRANTS Planning Consent under Delegated Authority Instrument No. 16 pursuant to Clause 68(2) of the Deemed Provisions of Local Planning Scheme No. 1 to Amendment Planning Approval P215404 for an Extractive Industry (Gravel Extraction) at Lot 61 Warner Glen Road Forest Grove as follows: CONDITIONS 1. The development is to be carried out in compliance with the plans and documentation listed below
and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent.
Plans and Specifications
P1 received at the Shire on 14/12/2016; and P2 – P3 received at the Shire on 2 September 2015.
2. This approval is valid for a period of five (5) years starting on 19 April 2016. 3. This approval does not include blasting activities. (P) 4. The extractive industry, including site construction and truck operations, shall not operate
outside the hours of 7:00am and 5:00pm Monday to Friday. The extractive industry shall not operate on weekends or public holidays. Trucks must avoid driving on Warner Glen Road during School Bus operating times. (P)
5. Operating hours of trucks are restricted to between 9am and 5pm Mondays to Fridays. Trucks
must avoid driving on Warner Glen Road during School Bus operating times. (P)
New condition Rehabilitation works are permitted to be carried out on Saturdays between 7am and 1pm.
6. The Proponent shall implement, to the satisfaction of the Shire, all measures necessary to prevent erosion or airborne transmission of soil (dust control) from the development.
7. Surface water runoff from the site shall be contained onsite and appropriate measures shall be
put in place, to the satisfaction of the Shire, to avoid sediment mobilisation to any open watercourse or public drainage system. (see advice note ‘b’ ). (P)
8. Where in the opinion of the Shire the emission of noise, and vibration from the approved development is considered to cause annoyance or nuisance to occupants of neighbouring buildings or members of the public the owner/occupier of the approved development shall immediately cease operations and submit a noise management plan to address the annoyance or nuisance to the satisfaction of the Shire. (see advice notes ‘d’, ‘e’ and ‘f’)
9. Vehicle crossovers shall be constructed to minimum standard two coat bitumen seal and
designed, constructed and drained in accordance with the Shire’s crossover standards and specifications, prior to the commencement of the development.
10. The proponent shall be responsible for the cost of repairs of any Shire managed roads and
infrastructure damaged as a direct result of the approved extractive industry use on the site.
An agreement shall be entered into with the local government for the payment of an annual road maintenance contribution to be used towards expenses incurred by the local government in repairing damage to Warner Glen Road (between Bussell Highway and the access point to the gravel pit) caused by heavy vehicles traffic associated with the gravel pit. The contribution will be adjusted annually in accordance with CPI.
11. Areas of native vegetation shall be retained and must not be damaged by any works including
the placement of fill, rubble, rubbish or any other material, nor is any removal, clearing or damage to occur to any vegetation. A minimum 5m buffer from tree crown drip zones shall be provided to prevent damage to roots and accidental machinery damage.
12. A visual screen/buffer shall be planted along the Warner Glen Road and the western boundary
of the site, as shown on the approved plan P1. The vegetation screen/buffer shall be established in accordance with an approved landscaping plan and planting of the buffer shall be completed within 60 days of the approval of the Landscape Plan. New condition Stockpiling is not permitted within 50m from the front (Warner Glen Road) boundary of the Site. Stockpiles shall not exceed a height of 3m.
13. A Landscape Plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Shire by a suitably qualified and/or
experienced landscape consultant for the visual buffer required under condition 12. The Landscape Plan shall be submitted to the Shire for approval prior to the commencement of works. The Landscape Plan shall be drawn to scale and show the following:
a) The location, name and mature heights of existing and proposed trees and shrubs and
ground covers as recommended in the Cape to Cape Landcare Companion.
14. Extraction is limited to one cell at a time. Rehabilitation of a cell shall commence prior to moving on to the next cell and shall be completed within a reasonable time two months from the commencement date to the satisfaction of the Shire.
New condition as recommended by proponent Within cells 1-3, extraction within 70m from the Warner Glen Road boundary shall not exceed a period of 1 month (for each cell). The topsoil bund, as indicated on the approved site plan, shall be installed prior to the commencement of any extraction works. The topsoil bund shall be maintained at all times to the satisfaction of the Shire.
15. All excavation areas shall be rehabilitated to the satisfaction of the Shire within 12 months from
the expiry date of this approval or within 12 months of depletion of the recourse. (see advice note ‘g’) (P)
Additional condition The proponent shall pay a rehabilitation bond prior to the commencement of any works to be held against satisfactorily completion of rehabilitations works required as a condition of this approval. The rehabilitation bond will be calculated on an exposed
footprint of 3.5ha and on the basis that that the site will be returned to pasture. The proponent shall enter into a deed with the Shire to detail the rights of the Shire to call upon or retain the bond
16. The finished slope of the restored landform shall be no more than 1:6. (P) 17. This approval allows for excavation to an average depth of 750mm below natural ground level. 18. The excavation shall not intercept the water table and must be a minimum of 300mm above the
seasonal ground water table as determined by the Department of Water. (see advice note ‘c’) 19. There shall be no standing water occurring at the end of the extractive operation. (see advice
note ‘c’) 20. Crushing and screening activities in cells 3 and 4 1, 2 and 3 shall be undertaken in a location
within the cells to maximize the separation distance between the processing activities and the dwelling on Lot 2 Warner Glen Road.
21. No Hydrocarbons shall be stored on-site.
22. No major repairs or maintenance of vehicles and machinery is permitted on the site.
ADVICE NOTES a. You are advised of the need to comply with the requirements of the following other legislation:
(i) Health Act 1911 and Department requirements in respect to the development and use of
the premises; and (ii) The Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972
b. The proponent is also advised to refer to the principles of best practice drainage design as
described in the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Australia. (P) c. The Department of Water (DoW) has advised as follows:
The extractive industry shall not intercept the water table; Excavation is permitted only to a depth that is 0,3m higher than the maximum seasonal
groundwater level, as agreed by DoW; Dewatering of the extraction area is not permitted; If any interception of ground water occurs, the Shire shall be advised within 72 hours
followed by agreed remedial action. d. The Proponent is required to ensure that ongoing operational activities associated with the
approved development including processing and transportation, and any other works that cannot be considered as construction site work complies with the standard prescribed under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.
e. Noise monitoring required at the request of the Shire is to be undertaken by a person authorised
under the Environmental Protection Act 1986.
f. As a noise control measure it is advised that it is considered to install ‘broadband’ reversing alarms on all mobile plant (including transport vehicles) instead of ‘tonal’ alarms. Care must be taken to ensure that a safe work place is maintained when choosing those alarms.
g. In regards to rehabilitation of the site the ‘Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans’,
Department of Mines and Petroleum and Environmental Protection Authority, June 2011’ provides a useful reference.
h. Any proposed trucks entering signs on Warner Glen Road shall be funded by the Applicant and
will require the prior approval of the Shire.
i. The proposed crushing operations may be prescribed and as such require a Works Approval,
License or Registration under Part V of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The proposal may be prescribed under Category 70.
