DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION
Amendment
A-2012/3
Planning instrument
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Planning Authority
Clarence City Council
Date of decision
13 May 2013
Delegates
Mr Peter Fischer and Mr Peter Curtis
Date of Commission’s delegation
3 December 2012
Description of draft amendment
The certified draft planning scheme amendment A-2012/3 consists of the following:
Amendments to Planning Scheme maps
1.
2.
To rezone parts of 50 Minno Street, Howrah from:
•
Rural to Residential;
•
Landscape & Skyline Conservation to Residential; and
•
Rural to Landscape & Skyline Conservation.
The inclusion of the area subject to Part 50 Minno Street Development Plan (DPO 17) at
50 Minno Street, Howrah.
Amendments to Planning Scheme ordinance
1.
2.
To update the Strategic Land Use Framework Plan – Settlement by extending the Urban
Growth Boundary to encompass the area proposed to be rezoned to Residential as
shown on the Amendment A-2012/3 (UGB) plan;
To insert the following line into clause 7.12.3 – Development Plans Table:
Map Reference
Name of Plan
Location
Date
Incorporated
into the scheme
DPO 17
Part 50 Minno Street,
Howrah
Western side of Pass
Road, Howrah
(insert approval date)
Page 1 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Decision
Pursuant to section 41(a) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 the Commission requires
the Planning Authority to modify the draft amendment as set out in Annexure A and Annexure B and
gives its approval to the draft amendment as modified pursuant to section 42 of the Act.
Mr Peter Fischer
Chair
Mr Peter Curtis
Delegates
Tasmanian Planning Commission
Page 2 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Reasons for decision
Amendment
The certified draft planning scheme amendment A-2012/3 (draft amendment) consists of the
following:
Amendments to Planning Scheme maps
1.
2.
To rezone parts of 50 Minno Street, Howrah from:
•
Rural to Residential;
•
Landscape & Skyline Conservation to Residential; and
•
Rural to Landscape & Skyline Conservation.
The inclusion of the area subject to Part 50 Minno Street Development Plan (DPO 17) at
50 Minno Street, Howrah.
Amendments to Planning Scheme ordinance
1.
2.
To update the Strategic Land Use Framework Plan – Settlement by extending the Urban
Growth Boundary to encompass the area proposed to be rezoned to Residential as
shown on the Amendment A-2012/3 (UGB) plan;
To insert the following line into clause 7.12.3 – Development Plans Table:
Map Reference
Name of Plan
Location
Date
Incorporated
into the scheme
DPO 17
Part 50 Minno Street,
Howrah
Western side of Pass
Road, Howrah
(insert approval date)
Representations
The draft amendment was placed on public exhibition from 24 September 2012 to 15 October 2012
in accordance with section 38(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (the Act) and
section 6 of the Land Use Planning Regulations 2004 (the Regulations).
Four (4) representations were received by the Planning Authority, including one (1) received outside
the public exhibition period.
No
Name
1
Anthony Reid, Policy Conservation Assessment Branch, Department of Primary Industries,
Parks, Water and Environment
2
Julie Syrett
3
Julie Alexander, Howrah Hills Landcare Group Inc.
4
Wendy Andrew, Tranmere-Clarence Plains Land and Coastcare Inc. (outside exhibition period)
Issues raised in the representations
Representations received raised the following issues:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
substantially the same as a previous planning application (A-2011/7)
contrary to intent of Clarence Planning Scheme 2007 (the Scheme) and Landscape &
Skyline Conservation zone
contrary to previous Clarence City Council (Council) advice that large scale residential
development would not be approved
loss of rural views enjoyed by residents in the Glebe Hill Estate
should provide a Low Density Residential zone as buffer to agricultural land to north
threat to threatened flora
predation of native species by domestic pets
Page 3 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
•
•
need for weed management
discharges to watercourses
Southern Water provided a response to a referral from the Planning Authority in accordance with
section 56S of the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008 on 5 September 2012, before the public
exhibition. Southern Water did not object to the draft amendment.
Southern Water advised that the maximum road frontage elevation is about 105 m (Australian Height
Datum, AHD) and all prospective lots will receive adequate service pressure conforming to the current
water pressure standards from the existing water main in Pass Road provided a small link water main
in the Glebe Hill Estate subdivision is constructed. In addition, the Rokeby Sewage Treatment Plant
has sufficient capacity for the new lots arising from the rezoned land.
Planning Authority’s response to the representations
At its meeting of 19 November 2012, the Planning Authority considered a report on the merits of each
of the representations and resolved:
A.
B.
That Council resolves, under Section 39(2)(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals
Act, 1993 to advise the Tasmanian Planning Commission that it considers the merits of
the representation do not any warrant any modification to draft Amendment A2010/12.
That Council resolves, under Sections 39(2)(c) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals
Act, 1993 to advise the Tasmanian Planning Commission that the following
modifications are required to the Draft Part 50 Minno Street Development Plan:
Clause 4. PC4.1 (a) should remove the words “to the” from Line 2.
An additional Clause should be inserted into Section 5 as follows:
“AS5.3
Stage 1 is to include a vegetation buffer in the area identified as Stage 4. This buffer
must be a minimum 40m wide from the northern boundary and should include a variety
of plantings to provide adequate screening between the rural and the residential uses.
The Title is to be registered with a Part V Agreement requiring the retention and
maintenance of the vegetated buffer until such time as the adjacent land to the north is
no longer zoned and used for rural purposes”.
Date of hearings
Tuesday, 29 January 2013
Tasmanian Planning Commission
144 Macquarie Street, Hobart
Reconvened
Thursday, 11 April 2013
Tasmanian Planning Commission
144 Macquarie Street, Hobart
Attendance at the hearings
Planning Authority:
Andrew Walker of counsel represented Clarence City Council and called
evidence from Helen Ayers (planning), Evan Boardman (consultant planner)
and Ross Mannering (traffic consultant).
Applicant:
Mat Clark (consultant planner) of JMG Pty Ltd represented Raadas Property
and gave evidence on planning on 29 January 2013, and called evidence
from Milan Prodanovic (traffic consultant), John Paul Cumming (geoenvironmental consultant) and Andrew Welling (ecological consultant).
Penelope Ikedife (Simmons Wolfhagen Lawyers of counsel) represented
Raadas Property Pty Ltd on 11 April 2013 and gave evidence on planning,
and called evidence from Milan Prodanovic (traffic consultant) and John
Paul Cumming (geo-environmental consultant).
Representors:
Richard Doedens and Kevin Rogers represented Raadas Property Pty Ltd.
Page 4 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Wendy Andrew, represented Tranmere-Clarence Plains Land & Coastcare
Inc.
Julie Alexander represented Howrah Hills Landcare Group Inc.
Others:
Peter Ralph and Abdulla Jaradat represented Southern Water and gave
evidence on water and sewerage servicing.
Commission’s assessment of the draft amendment
Site and locality
The subject site (the site) is known as 50 Minno Street, Howrah, and consists of a single title (Folio of
the Register Volume 1564061 Folio 1) and is owned by J D and E M Cannon. It measures 19.22 ha and
is located on the western side of Pass Road, Howrah. It adjoins the existing Glebe Hill Estate to the
south and an established vineyard to the north.
The site adjoins private land to the north, south and east and adjoins private land and a Council
reserve to the west. There is an isolated lot contained within the western end of the site, the bulk of
which is approximately 250 m from the western end of the site.
The site is part of the area known as Rokeby Hills, with an elevation of between 50 m to 130 m AHD
and slopes varying from gentle (1 in 19 or 3 degrees) at Pass Road frontage, rising to steep (I in 3 or 18
degrees) towards Glebe Hill located on the west of the site. The land generally drains to the east
towards the Clarence Plains Rivulet, with approximately one third of the site draining to the west
towards Minno Street.
The eastern end of the site contains pasture which is largely clear of standing vegetation. Woodland is
established on the higher slopes and ridge. The western end of the site is vegetated with a healthy
Eucalypt forest. Black peppermint (Eucalyptus amygdalina) is the dominant species, white gum
(Eucalyptus viminalis) is a co-dominant or sub-dominant species, and Risdon peppermint (Eucalyptus
risdonii) is an occasional species. The western portion of the site is subject to a conservation covenant
registered on the land under section 34 of the Nature Conservation Act 2002.
The surrounding land is generally used and developed for residential purposes to the south and the
west, productive rural land (a vineyard) is located to the north and a block of cleared rural land is
located to the east.
Access to the site is potentially available from the collector road, Pass Road, to the east, from Minno
Street to the west by means of a right-of-carriageway, and from Glebe Hill Road via Lumsden and
Glenfern Streets to the south. All roads are local roads, of which the Council is the road authority.
Page 5 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Zoning
The site is located within the Clarence municipality. Refer to Figure 1 below.
Site
Figure 1: Existing zoning map
The site is zoned Rural (light yellow), with Landscape & Skyline Conservation (light green) on the
higher land to the west. Land to the north is similarly zoned, while land to the south is zoned
Residential (magenta), Recreation (dark green) and Landscape & Skyline Conservation.
The site is beyond the urban growth boundary (UGB) of the indicative Strategic Land Use Framework
Plan – Settlement plan of clause 2.2.2(e) of the Scheme and the draft amendment seeks to expand
that boundary.
A vegetation management overlay applies to the site that generally accords with the Landscape &
Skyline Conservation zoning. Refer to Figure 2 below.
New area to be included
within DPO 17
Figure 2: Vegetation management overlay and area to be covered in DPO 17
Development Plan Overlay Map
The site is currently zoned part Rural (10.4 ha) and part Landscape & Skyline Conservation (9 ha). The
draft amendment proposes to rezone the site to part Residential (10.8 ha) and part Landscape &
Skyline Conservation (8.6 ha). The draft amendment proposes DPO 17 as shown in Figure 3 below.
Page 6 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
New area to be included
within DPO 17
Figure 3: Proposed zoning and area to be covered in DPO 17
DPO 17 primarily seeks to control the road layout and future staging of subdivision of part of the site.
It does not provide design guidelines for future development of the site. Refer to Figures 4 and 5
below.
Figure 4: Road layout
Figure 5: Development staging
Consideration of issues
Preliminary matters
The Delegates raised a number of preliminary matters at the hearings concerning the nature of the
draft amendment.
The Delegates queried whether DPO 17 is to be incorporated into the Scheme, due to the lack of
detail provided on the instrument of certification. They also queried the development plan overlay’s
purpose to guide use and development. There was also some doubt whether the maps presented
with the instrument of certification formed part of the amendment.
Council accepted that there were errors to the instrument of certification but submitted that they
were administrative only and no person would be disadvantaged as the intent was clear in the
advertising of the draft amendment. Council agreed that the instrument of certification should be
modified to reflect the decision of the Planning Authority and also submitted that the Development
Plan should be referred as ‘DPO 16’ not ‘DPO 17’.
Evidence at the hearings submitted by Council and later confirmed in writing advised that
development plan overlays sit inside the Scheme and override the provisions of the Scheme.
Page 7 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
The Delegates accepted the advice of Council that the documents are incorporated as part of the
ordinance.
The Delegates directed that the instrument of certification be corrected including a description of the
proposed map changes; the correct numbering of the Development Plan; and the purpose of the
Development Plan.
Council modified the instrument of certification and the Development Plan (Part 50 Minno Street,
Howrah DPO 16) and re-submitted the documents to the Tasmanian Planning Commission (the
Commission) on 15 February 2013. This report hereafter refers to Part 50 Minno Street Development
Plan (DPO 16) as amended by Council.
Strategic issues
Regional Land Use Strategy
The Minister for Planning declared the Southern Tasmania Regional Land Use Strategy (STRLUS) by
special gazettal on 27 October 2011, pursuant to section 30C(3) of the Act. Section 30E of the Act
requires that draft interim planning schemes and interim planning schemes be consistent with, and
likely to further, the objectives and outcomes of a declared regional land use strategy.
There is no statutory requirement for an existing planning scheme to be consistent with or further the
outcomes of the STRLUS. In this case, the site proposed to be rezoned is identified in the declared
1
STRLUS as being within the Pass Road Greenfield Development Precinct .
Although the STRLUS identifies the need to provide a suitable mix of housing which meets the future
needs of the City and optimise the use of supporting infrastructure, it also identifies the need to avoid
further fettering of productive agricultural land from residential development areas by setting a
minimum buffer distance of 200 m to manage land use conflicts.
Representations from the consultant planner, Mr Mat Clark (the applicant acting on behalf the
property owners) at the hearings submitted that the proposed rezoning from Rural to Residential also
meets the STRLUS given that the site will be developed at a higher dwelling density than 15 dwellings
per hectare (net density).
Clarence City Council strategic directions
The settlement strategy for Clarence is defined in Part 2 of the Scheme. The major strategic directions
identify new residential areas being focused, at least in part, on the serviced Howrah/ Tranmere/
Droughty Point corridor, and Howrah, Rokeby and Clarendon Vale, in addition to optimising the use of
supporting infrastructure.
Although the site proposed to be rezoned is identified in the STRLUS as being within the Pass Road
Greenfield Development Precinct, it is outside the UGB of the indicative Strategic Land Use
Framework Plan - Settlement of clause 2.2.2(e) of the Scheme.
The applicant report submits that the draft amendment will bring the Scheme into greater conformity
2
with the UGB provided by in the STRLUS .
The strategic directions for Clarence described in Part 2.2 of the Scheme are outlined below
[emphasis added]:
2.2.1
(a)
Key Influences
Overview
The development of this planning scheme has been guided by Council’s understanding of
the critical land-use issues which are likely to challenge the City’s future growth and
development to 2050. A brief summary of the key land-use issues are provided below.
(b)
Future housing needs
1
Southern Tasmanian Councils Association (2011): Southern Tasmanian Regional Land Use Strategy 2010-2035.
Southern Tasmanian Councils Association, Hobart.
2
Johnstone McGee & Gandy (2012): S33 Application, 50 Minno Street, Howrah. Johnstone McGee & Gandy,
Hobart.
Page 8 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Clarence’s population is continuing to age and this is likely to sustain the trend towards
smaller household size. The new suburbs and rural residential areas will continue to be
seen as preferred areas for families seeking new homes. The need to provide a suitable
mix of housing which meets the future needs of the City, and to optimise the use of
supporting infrastructure, will continue to be the focus of residential land-use planning
in the City.
…
(e)
Protecting and enhancing ecological values
There will continue to be a need to enhance the quality and ecological value of natural
environments through the management of urban stormwater, land-use and resource
management and integrated catchment planning, along with other initiatives which
recognise and conserve indigenous flora and fauna habitats.
…
(f)
Management of non urban land
The management of the City’s rural resource is a key influence on the growth of the City.
Specific issues affecting this area include:
…
Urban / Non-urban interface: Land on the urban fringe is often seen as land in a state of
transition from non-urban to urban uses. However, acceptance of this proposition
creates uncertainty and instability for landowners and the community alike and can
frequently result in inefficient provision of infrastructure and services along the urban/
non-urban interface and negative impacts on natural environments and on rural
industries. The creation of a hard urban growth boundary will be an important planning
outcome of future structure planning in the City’s non-urban areas.
Skyline: The City’s forested skylines, which provide a natural backdrop to the City and to
the Hobart Metropolitan area, are of particular landscape significance. Clarence has
recognised the value of these areas through its planning controls and it is important that
these controls be retained and enhanced.
(g)
Physical infrastructure
Existing capacity deficiencies in several areas cause difficulties in long term planning as
well as short term traffic management of the City. In particular, the following issues are
to be resolved:
…
Walking paths, bicycle networks and bridal links have progressively been developed and
ongoing development of this infrastructure is planned.
The provision of reticulated water and sewerage are also key determinants of
sustainable future growth. The Howrah/Tranmere/Droughty Point development corridor
and Rokeby areas are therefore the focus for future growth, as they have the greatest
potential to supply housing with reticulated services within the capacity of the Rokeby
Treatment Plant which was completed in 1999.
2.2.2
(e)
Vision – Strategic Framework
…
Strategic Land Use Framework Plans
The major strategic directions identified in the Strategic Land Use Framework Plans
include:
•
•
Locations for new housing opportunities in residential areas within the
Howrah/Tranmere/Droughty Point corridor, Howrah, Rokeby and the key rural
residential living areas, including Acton Park.
Identification of the urban growth boundary of suburbs and villages.
Page 9 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Identification of a growth boundary for rural residential areas.
Recognition of the retail centre hierarchy.
Location of industrial estates, where growth is encouraged.
Sites of identified environmental significance for future protection and
enhancement.
Key rural areas, including the significant intensive agricultural area within the
Coal River Valley.
The Hobart Airport Environs Area which requires long-term protection of flight
paths.
Major public land and open spaces.
The major transport links.
Opportunities to best utilise significant existing infrastructure as part of the
management of urban growth.
…
Clause 2.2.3(a)(i) of the Scheme provides that the settlement spatial patterns are to be implemented
by:
Consolidation of existing urban areas, including the continuation of urban growth within
designated corridors is appropriate to ensure that the Clarence community has
adequate housing choice with cost efficient use of infrastructure. To this end, the
Howrah/ Tranmere/ Droughty Point corridor, Howrah, Rokeby and Clarendon Vale will
be the primary sources of new residential development in the future.
An urban growth boundary around the urban areas, including the development corridor
will ensure that the key location criteria are met, while non-urban areas are protected
from inappropriate fragmentation.
Clause 2.2.3(b)(i) of the Scheme provides that natural environments are to be protected from the
impacts of development encroachment, including the spread of pest animals and plants. Specific
strategies will be implemented by:
•
•
•
•
•
Applying the Clarence Plains and Coal River Catchment Strategies in determining
land use and development applications.
Applying techniques for catchment and land protection, wildfire management,
skyline and ridge top protection, steep land, pest animals and plant
management, roadside conservation and water supply catchments.
Applying the State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997.
Encouraging development that is environmentally sustainable, using techniques
including land suitability analysis and environmental management plans.
Controlling the removal in areas of native vegetation identified in the report "City
of Clarence Natural Assets Inventory" (Inspiring Place Pty Ltd, November 1999).
Clause 2.2.3(C)(iii) of the Scheme provides goals and objectives for rural industry use as below
[emphasis added]:
(iii)
Rural Industry
Overview
The City contains areas of farmland where agricultural production should be encouraged
and encroachment by other land uses avoided. The application of policies which
encourage the diverse use of agricultural land and restrict the intrusion of conflicting
land uses and non-farm residential development, are required.
…
Key Issues
Tasmania has a good reputation for primary products, and the Coal Valley in particular
has special sustainable competitive advantages, including the capacity of the land for
intensive agriculture, access to irrigation and proximity to Hobart and the Airport. There
Page 10 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
is considerable scope for growth in intensive agricultural as well as aquaculture
products, in local and export markets.
Substantial benefits from the growth of intensive primary industries, including increased
economic activity, tourism and employment.
Potential conflicts between agricultural and aquaculture activities and residential areas,
particularly around the urban fringe and where residential uses have encroached into
agricultural areas.
The need to comply with State Coastal and Protection of Agricultural Land policies.
The rural landscape is a unique attribute of the City, which is attractive to residents and
tourists.
The need to ensure a viable supply of building and road making materials.
Objectives
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
To ensure that agricultural land as defined in the State Policy on the protection of
Agricultural Land remains available for agricultural production.
To continue to promote agriculture as a primary focus in the CambridgeRichmond area.
To maintain and enhance the landscape character of the rural areas and
encourage both the retention of existing vegetation and revegetation.
To provide for agricultural and aquaculture value added industries within the City
to enable products to reach a range of markets.
To promote agricultural activities which apply land capability, soil conservation
and water management to their farm practices.
To protect farmland from fragmentation into non-productive units including rural
residential living or hobby farms.
To provide for soil removal and extractive industries in appropriate locations in
the non urban areas.
Strategies
•
•
•
•
Protect agricultural land as defined in the State Policy on the Protection of
Agricultural Land and prevent encroachment by residential uses, especially in the
Coal River, Richmond and Cambridge areas.
Protect aquaculture from the downstream effects of inappropriate residential or
rural residential development.
Support the development of down stream processing of agricultural and
aquaculture products.
Identify strategic location criteria for assessing any rural residential
encroachment into rural areas.
…
These strategies will be implemented by:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Implementing State Agricultural Land Policy through the planning scheme.
Ensuring urban development or premature subdivision does not alienate the
agricultural resources of the City.
Implementation of the Coal River Catchment Management Plan 1999.
Implementing the Pipe Clay Precinct Environmental Management Plan 2000.
Developing a South - East Coastal Management Strategy.
Identifying areas where environmental management plans and agreements are
required to provide for land management practices associated with rural
development.
In addition, Council has adopted the Strategic Plan 2006 – 2011 and, through this the Clarence
Residential Strategy.
Page 11 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
The major strategic directions of the Scheme identify new residential areas being focused, at least in
part, on the serviced Howrah/ Tranmere/ Droughty Point corridor, Howrah, Rokeby and Clarendon
Vale and optimising the use of supporting infrastructure. This is because these areas are considered as
having the greatest potential to supply housing with reticulated services within the capacity of the
Rokeby Treatment Plant which was completed in 1999.
The draft amendment proposes that the UGB of the indicative Strategic Land Use Framework Plan Settlement of clause 2.2.2(e) of the Scheme be amended to include part of the site.
Landscape & Skyline Conservation Zone
The draft amendment seeks to amend the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone.
The purpose of the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone is set out in clause 6.10.1 of the Scheme as
below [emphasis added]:
6.10.1 Purpose
(a)
To implement the Planning Policy Framework.
(b)
To identify and protect areas of landscape or conservation significance, including
forested skylines, prominent ridgelines and hills that contribute to important vistas or
provide a natural backdrop, and a contrast to the urban development in the Hobart
Metropolitan area.
(c)
To encourage development and the use of the land which is in accordance with sound
management and land capability practices, and which takes into account the
environmental sensitivity and the bio-diversity of the locality.
(d)
To ensure use or development is in accordance with sound management and land
capability practices and which protects the environmental sensitivity and bio-diversity of
the locality.
(e)
To manage areas that are unsuitable for future urban development due inherent
physical and environmental constraints and the need to avoid the inefficient provision
and utilisation of urban services.
At the hearings, the Delegates questioned the key basis for amending the Landscape & Skyline
Conservation zone on the western boundary to establish a straight line between the proposed
Residential and Landscape & Skyline Conservation zones and continue a consistent ‘straight line’
boundary with the Glebe Hill Estate. Council and the applicant submitted that a ‘straight line’ at the
zone boundary provides the most efficient mechanism to maximise the number of lots potentially
available in any future subdivision of the land.
To achieve a ‘straight line’ boundary between the proposed Residential and Landscape & Skyline
Conservation zones, it is proposed that a segment of land currently zoned Landscape & Skyline
Conservation be rezoned to Residential and another segment of land currently zoned Rural be
rezoned to Landscape & Skyline Conservation.
Ms Julie Alexander, representing the Howrah Hills Landcare Group, submitted at the hearings that the
draft amendment is not consistent with the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone, in that future
development may not protect the environmental sensitivity and biodiversity of the locality.
Council submitted at the hearings that the establishment of the Landscape & Skyline Conservation
zone was originally based upon the natural contour of the land. Council also submitted in writing that
from the Council’s GOA Datum dated 17 September 2012, the zone along this section of Pass Road
follows the 106 m contour, at least along the extent of the vineyard developments.
Ms Wendy Andrew, representing the Tranmere-Clarence Plains Land & Coastcare Inc., submitted at
the hearings that if the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone was to be amended, there was merit
in establishing a Low Density Residential zone on the western boundary of DPO 16 to provide a
sensitive zone buffer between the proposed Residential zone from the existing Landscape & Skyline
Conservation zone. The Delegates noted that Glebe Hill Estate does not have a Low Density
Residential zone as a buffer. In addition, the Delegates support the strategic directions of the Scheme,
Page 12 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
which specifies that the creation of a hard UGB is an important planning outcome of future structure
planning in the non-urban areas of the municipality.
Council submitted in writing that it does not support any proposal to modify the draft amendment to
include a Low Density Residential zone on the western boundary of DPO 16. This is because a Council
review of the zoning maps indicates that there is little Low Density Residential zoned land in this
general area. The Delegates accepted the advice from Council that almost all the boundaries between
Residential and Landscape & Skyline Conservation zones in this part of the Clarence municipality, and
along most of Tranmere Road, does not include Low Density Residential zone.
Ms Andrew considered that if the current boundary of the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone
was to be retained, the environmental concerns raised by the group would be significantly addressed.
The Delegates do not accept the applicant’s submission that amending the boundary of the Landscape
& Skyline Conservation zone to provide an efficient mechanism to maximise the number of lots
potentially available in any future subdivision of the land is sufficient justification for amending this
zone. Rezoning a segment of the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone would be inconsistent with
the purpose of the zone.
With respect to the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone being defined by the 106 m contour,
Council submitted in writing that it would not oppose a direction to modify the draft amendment by
changing the western boundary of the site that is proposed to be rezoned Residential to accord with
the existing Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone boundary. The applicant also indicated no
objection to maintaining the existing boundary of the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone.
Council also submitted that a small triangular piece of land identified in Stage 1 of DPO 16 that is
currently zoned Rural and is proposed to be rezoned Landscape & Skyline Conservation, should be
rezoned as proposed. The applicant submitted a preference for this land to be rezoned Residential.
The Delegates accept that the land zoned Landscape & Skyline Conservation has been set aside to
protect the areas landscape and conservation significance and Council has recognised the value of the
area through its planning controls. In addition, the land zoned Landscape & Skyline Conservation is
generally excluded from the UGB of the indicative Strategic Land Use Framework Plan - Settlement of
clause 2.2.2(e) of the Scheme. To ensure that environmental, biodiversity and landscape values of the
locality are protected and future use and development is in accordance with sound management and
land capability practises, the draft amendment should retain the zoning boundary of the land zoned
Landscape & Skyline Conservation. It should also include the small triangular piece of Rural zoned land
identified in Stage 1 of DPO 16 in the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone.
Ms Alexander also raised concerns about the intention to create a subminimal lot in the Landscape &
Skyline Conservation zone where the Scheme stipulates a minimal lot size of 20 ha.
Council submitted at the hearings that the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone is proposed to be
amended in a minor way. Although the draft amendment proposes the creation of a subminimal lot at
the top of the ridge, Council considers that there is no requirement to modify the planning application
because a single dwelling is already a discretionary development.
The Delegates note that Clause 3.6.1 of the Scheme specifies that land may be subdivided along zone
boundaries although any subminimal lot so created may not be the subject of residential
development. The Delegates accept, however, that the owners of the lot could currently lodge a
development application with Council to build a dwelling within the Landscape & Skyline Conservation
zone and that Clause 3.3 of DPO 16 simply continues that right.
Road layout
The Part 50 Minno Street Development Plan (DPO 16) as amended by Council provides for a road
layout, which is characterised by grid-like road alignments, a collector road of greater width that is
intended to support a bus route, access streets and a number of four-way cross roads.
Representations by Council at the hearings were to the effect that the intention of the road layout
specified in DPO 16 is to ensure that any future development on the site follows the ‘indicative’
subdivision road layout plan and the connections to the roads at the boundary of the Glebe Hill
Estate.
Page 13 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
DPO 16 also expressly makes provision for road connections on the northern boundary of the site
where further development may occur on the currently zoned Rural land if it were to be rezoned in
the future. The road connections on the northern boundary are to provide a high level of connectivity
for future residential development through the site and the Glebe Hill Estate. The road connections to
the north were also considered by Council as being critical for delivering the future development
staging plan.
Evidence was heard to the effect that the road layout specified in DPO 16 is required to provide
certainty for the developer, to ensure that use and development on the site is not hindered in the
future, and to meet the requirements of the STRLUS in terms of meeting an efficient maximum lot
yield for the site.
The applicant submitted at the hearings that because the site is narrow and thin, and further reduced
by the proposed vegetated buffer, there are constraints with regard to future development on the
site. Therefore, the potential to establish ‘organic’ road layouts is constrained although a small
curvature could be accommodated in the road design layout to meet the requirements of the lot
density. However, the constraint with the access requirement for the land to the north makes any
repositioning of the road layout difficult. Although DPO 16 shows the road layout in a straight
configuration, it is possible to vary the road layout under the Performance Criteria. It was also
submitted at the hearings that the applicant would not object to the road layout plan being omitted
from DPO 16.
Council further submitted in writing that it is necessary to identify a road layout in DPO 16. In the
past, the Planning Authority has not supported rezoning from Rural to Residential in this area of the
Clarence municipality without there being certainty that important road connections will be provided
in any subsequent development.
Further evidence was submitted at the hearings to the effect that if the Rural zoned land to the north
of the site is developed in the future, additional connections to Pass Road will be required. The
Delegates noted the Paranville Development Plan (that applies to land north of the site) specifies that
a roundabout is to be provided on Pass Road (and which would provide access to the currently zoned
Rural land to the north). If the adjoining Rural zoned land to the north was rezoned in the future, it is
anticipated that the roundabout would, to some degree, reduce traffic volumes on Glebe Hill Road.
The Delegates noted that the road connections on the northern boundary of the site are strategic
because there is a possibility that the Rural zoned land to the north may be rezoned in the future. The
Delegates also noted that the 2008 Clarence Residential Strategy shows this land as being affordable
3
fringe land that is "reserved residential and reserved urban" in the 30+ year supply segment .
The Delegates consider that it is good strategic planning practise to identify the need for strategic
road connections on the northern boundary of the site. Connectivity is an important component of
strategic planning outcomes and in this case, it is important to achieve connectivity with any potential
future development to the north.
The Delegates also recognised that while it is more difficult to achieve a similar ‘organic’ or
‘curvilinear’ development outcome similar to that of Glebe Hill Estate because the size, aspect and
slope of the site is prohibitive, there is merit in retaining some flexibility with the road layout design
and ultimately any future subdivision through the application of the Performance Criterion 4.1.
102 Pass Road
There is an isolated Rural lot contained on the eastern boundary of the site at 102 Pass Road.
Evidence provided by Council submitted that a future design option is being considered for this title
although the final intention for the site has yet to be determined.
Council also advised that the road layout plan in DPO 16 provides a connection to 102 Pass Road.
However, an additional connection from 102 Pass Road onto Pass Road would not be supported by
the Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources (DIER).
3
Connell Wagner Pty Ltd (2008): Clarence Residential Strategy. Connell Wagner Pty Ltd, Melbourne.
Page 14 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
It is the Delegates’ view that although DPO 16 identifies a connection to 102 Pass Road, it does not
identify a sufficient access street width. The Delegates consider that the road layout plan must specify
an access street width of 15 m connecting to 102 Pass Road. This would result in the access road
currently identified in DPO 16 being widened by 7.5 m to ensure an adequate access street width to
102 Pass Road.
Council and the applicant agreed to a modification in DPO 16 to specify an access street width of 15 m
from the site to 102 Pass Road.
Buffer area
Evidence submitted in writing and at the hearings identified the need to establish a vegetation and
noise buffer to ensure that Rural zoned agricultural land to the north located at 202 Pass Road was
not fettered by future residential development.
Dr John Paul Cummings, the applicant’s geo-environmental consultant, identified that future
development of the site has the potential to fetter the intensive vineyard operations to the north and
states in his Geo-environmental Assessment Report that:
Whilst previous developments in the local area (glebe hill estate) apparently
ignored potential conflicts with adjoining agricultural land I believe this was
erroneous and not good development precedent. Therefore it is recommended
that the design of the proposed development include an adequate buffer area in
4
accordance with best practise guidelines … (Report, page 16) .
It was not disputed by Council or the applicant that a vegetation and noise buffer is required on the
northern boundary of the site to avoid the fettering of productive agricultural land. The proposed
buffer area specified in DPO 16 includes the most northern road identified in the proposed road
layout and the area marked as Stage 4. It comprises a 40 m vegetated buffer and an additional 20 m
northern road noise buffer.
The purpose of the buffer area is to manage the interface between the existing agricultural use to the
north and potential residential land use at the site, and in particular, to minimise the impacts from
agricultural spray drift (fungicides, herbicides and insecticides) and noise from the intensive vineyard
operations. The buffer area is proposed to be zoned Residential.
Evidence provided at the hearings indicated that the proposed vegetated buffer would be established
prior to future development commencing as part of Stage 2 and Stage 3, in accordance with DPO 16.
The applicant’s intent for the land marked as Stage 4 is, ultimately, for subdivision and development
for dwellings. This much is clear from:
•
•
•
identifying the buffer area as ‘temporary’;
the DPO 16 including the buffer in the Residential precinct; and
inclusion of the buffer in Stage 4 of DPO 16 that shows potential future road
connections to the north.
Further evidence was provided in writing and at the hearings by the applicant’s geo-environmental
consultant on the design of the buffer area. The consultant referred to the Queensland Department of
Natural Resources publication Buffer Areas – Minimising conflicts between Agricultural and
5
Residential Areas , the CSIRO publication Spray Drift Management Principles, Strategies, and
4
Cumming, J P (2012): Geo-environmental Assessment, proposed rezoning – Mino Street Howrah for Raadas
Property. Geo-environmental Solutions Pty Ltd (Unpublished report 2012 p:16).
5
Queensland Department of Natural Resources (2006): Buffer Areas – Minimising conflicts between agricultural
and residential areas. Queensland Department of Natural Resources (QLD DNR), Brisbane.
Queensland Department of Natural Resources (2007) Planning Guidelines: Separating agricultural and residential
land. QLD DNR, Brisbane.
Page 15 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
6
Supporting Information 2002 and the Cessnock City Council Vineyards District Specifications for
7
Vegetation Chemical Spray Drift Buffers 2008 when providing his advice on the buffer design.
The Delegates noted that the CSIRO publication recommends a vegetated buffer height of at least two
times the spray release height. The vineyards district specification lists a minimum buffer width of 30
m and also recommends a buffer height of two times the spray release height of the chemical (i.e. 4 m
height for a 2 m release height from large tractor boom spray).
The applicant’s geo-environmental consultant drew on current best practice and recommends a 40 m
8
wide buffer with a 30 m wide vegetated strip bounded by a 5 m maintenance strip either side . The
consultant also recommends that the vegetated buffer contain random plantings of a variety of low
flammability species of differing growth habits, at a spacing of 4-5 m, where the mature height of the
tall plantings is approximately 15 m (to allow for two times the spray release height or target
9
vegetation height whichever is greater) . The species recommended by Mr Andrew Welling, the
applicant’s ecological consultant, comprise a mix of fast growing Acacia and Allocasuarina medium
tree species and other smaller shrubs.
The Delegates accept the advice of the geo-environmental and ecological consultants that the buffer
area is required to ensure public health and safety from spray drift and noise that might arise from
the intensive viticulture activities. The Delegates also accept that the species need to be maintained
and monitored to ensure their establishment, functionality and survival.
The Delegates also consider that although the vegetated buffer is currently required to minimise the
impacts of spray drift from intensive viticulture operations, other agricultural activities could
potentially occur on the Rural zoned land to the north.
It is the Delegates view that the establishment of the vegetated buffer could take some time to
become fully functional. In addition, the Queensland Guidelines do not provide any grounds for
applying a graduation of the specified 300 m buffer distance. Therefore, all three stages of
development specified in DPO 16 require the same level of protection from the vegetated buffer. Any
future development of the site must only occur after the vegetated buffer is fully functional. The
Delegates note Council must determine when the buffer is fully functional under DPO 16.
As stated earlier in this decision, the STRLUS recommends avoiding further fettering from residential
development areas by setting a minimum buffer distance of 200 m (cleared land) to manage potential
land use conflicts. The Delegates consider that the establishment of the buffer area will avoid the
fettering of the productive agricultural land to the north.
Council submitted at the hearings and later confirmed in writing that it intends to protect the
vegetated buffer by a Part 5 agreement that requires the maintenance of the buffer and its retention
until the land to the north is both no longer zoned Rural or used for rural purposes. The Part 5
agreement provides a mechanism for enforcement and will be registered on the title of the
development lot (currently 156406/1). Alternatively, if any proposal includes specific lots comprising
Stage 4, all of those lots will have the Part 5 agreement registered. Any Part 5 agreement will be
between the developer and Council.
The Delegates acknowledge that the land that abuts Pass Road and marked as part of Stage 1 in DPO
16 is intended for stormwater retention. This land is not proposed for residential purposes and is not
included in the buffer area.
Bushfire prone land
The vegetated buffer area is calculated by the applicant as being 2 ha. As detailed above, it is
proposed to establish the vegetated buffer with dense plantings to 15 m in height. Whilst the
6
CSIRO (2002): Spray Drift Management Principles, Strategies, and Supporting Information, PISC (SCRAM) Report
82. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.
7
Cessnock City Council (2008): Vineyards District Specifications for Vegetation Chemical Spray Drift Buffers.
Cessnock, NSW.
8
Cumming, J P (2012): Additional Information – Proposed Vegetation Buffer – Mino Street Howrah. Geoenvironmental Solutions Pty Ltd (Unpublished advice February 2013).
9
See also the additional information provided by Ecological Consultant Andrew Welling with regards to species
selection (Unpublished advice 13 February 2013).
Page 16 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
plantings may be classified as moderate and low flammability species they still pose a bushfire hazard
under the Scheme, and therefore require management to reduce the risk to human life and property.
The Scheme defines a bushfire-prone area as follows [emphasis added]:
Land with standing vegetation one hectare or larger in extent, or land within 100
metres of an area of standing vegetation of 1 hectare or larger.
For the purpose of this definition, standing vegetation means all forms of
vegetation as well as regrowth after clearing, as well as all plantations and any
other continuous vegetation in the form of trees and scrub that grows to a
height of 2 metres or greater.
The applicant advised at the hearings that the Tasmanian Fire Service (TFS) has provided advice with
regard to bushfire management in the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone, but it has yet to assess the
potential for bushfire with respect to the vegetated buffer. It is intended that a Bushfire Management
Plan be developed for the site that includes the proposed vegetated buffer in the area marked as Stage 4
in DPO 16 and the land located on the western boundary in the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone.
Given the fire hazard, the Delegates consider that a key component of DPO 16 should be the requirement
to manage the interface between the rural and residential land uses and reduce any bushfire risk to
human life and property.
Accordingly, the Delegates require the inclusion of the Acceptable Solution 6.1 in the modified DPO 16
that specifies that all applications for subdivision must be accompanied by a certified Bushfire
Management Plan.
Geotechnical risk
10
A geotechnical investigation of the site and surrounding area was carried out in 2012 .
The report identifies that the overall geotechnical risk associated with development on the site is very
low to low. However, a number of geotechnical hazards (surface erosion, tunnel/gully erosion, soil
creep, shallow landslide and deep clay sediments) are identified at the site, although they are rated as
presenting a very low to low risk to property. The report advises there is a moderate risk of
foundation movement for subsequent development, but noted that this can be treated through
appropriate foundation design. Flooding and inundation risks were also rated as very low.
The Delegates accept the findings of the geotechnical investigation, which concluded that from a
geotechnical perspective the risk to any future development on the site is low and therefore
acceptable.
Environmental impact
The goals and objectives for natural heritage are specified in clause 2.2.3(b)(i) of the Scheme, which
include [emphasis added]:
(a)
Environment
(i)
Natural Heritage
Objectives
•
•
•
•
•
To enhance the environment of Clarence, ensuring it remains attractive to
residents and tourists.
To protect natural environments from the impacts of development
encroachment, including the spread of pest animals and plants.
To ensure that land use planning and development is consistent with catchment
management strategies.
To ensure sustainable natural resource management practices.
To protect and enhance bio-diversity on public land, including road reserves and
vegetated private land, where those values are recognised as important.
10
Geo-Environmental Solutions Pty Ltd (2012): Geo-environmental Assessment: proposed rezoning – Minno
Street, Howrah. Geo-Environmental Solutions Pty Ltd. (Unpublished report August 2012).
Page 17 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
•
•
•
To ensure that environmentally acceptable techniques for disposing wastes and
sewerage are facilitated.
To protect biodiversity and important conservation values.
To ensure that the use and development of coastal areas does not increase risk
from natural processes.
Strategies
•
•
•
•
•
Limit the removal of important native vegetation within the City.
Maintain urban growth boundaries to ensure that ad hoc growth does not
prejudice important natural values.
Protect sensitive foreshore environments from the effects of development.
Protect water quality for domestic purposes, aquaculture and marine species.
Ensure proposals are located, designed and constructed to avoid damage caused
by natural processes. Where appropriate, future land management practices may
be incorporated to avoid damage associated with these processes and to
rehabilitate land where possible.
11
An environmental values assessment was prepared for the site and surrounding land in 2012 .
The report identifies that the western part of the site within the Landscape & Skyline Conservation
zone contains one vegetation community listed and ‘rare’ under the Nature Conservation Act 2002.
This Eucalyptus risdonii vegetation community, along with a number of threatened species, are mostly
already contained in a covenanted area.
The report notes that only scattered native species are present on the rural land proposed to be
rezoned and that overall; the development of the rural land would have minimal impacts on the
natural values of the site and would lead to the removal of significant infestations of declared weed
species. The rural land contains some specimens of the rare gentle rush (Juncus amabilisI) along the
watercourse that would be disturbed by development.
The report notes that no threatened fauna species were recorded on or within 500 m of the site. The
western slopes of the site provides limited habitat for threatened fauna species. It concludes that the
draft amendment and any subsequent development will not have any impact on the habitat of any
threatened fauna species. The report does, however, note that additional dwellings are likely to lead
to an increase in disturbance and predation by domestic pets that may impact the native fauna that
utilise the bushland on the western part of the site.
The report recommends that the loss of 30 gentle rush specimens along the watercourse be offset by
replanting the same species in any stormwater retention ponds that may be required as part of any
future residential development on the site.
That action will require a ‘permit to take’ under the Threatened Species Protection Act 1995.
Evidence presented by the applicant’s ecological consultant at the hearings confirmed that gentle
rush specimens are found along the watercourse. The consultant advised that although the gentle
rush is listed as rare’ under the Threatened Species Protection Act 1995, more recent surveying of the
species has found it to be widespread across the State.
The environmental values report also recommends the development and implementation of a weed
management plan to control all declared weed species that occur on the site.
The Delegates support the proposed offset whereby gentle rush specimens will be relocated around
the proposed stormwater retention basin that forms part of Stage 1 in DPO 16, and also support the
development and implementation of a weed management plan to control declared weed species that
occur on the site.
Heritage
12
An Aboriginal heritage assessment was prepared for the site in 2012 .
11
Welling, A (2012): Environmental Values Assessment for 50 Minno Street, Howrah, for Raadas Property Pty Ltd.
(Unpublished report 2012).
Page 18 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
A single isolated Aboriginal artefact (TASI 11405) was found in a disturbed context on the southwestern side of the study area.
The report identifies that the remainder of the site has poor ground visibility and has been disturbed
by modern land clearing and farming. It concludes that given the land is unlikely to have substantial
Aboriginal sites, and if small sites or isolated artefacts were present, they would be in a disturbed
condition and the land has low archaeological potential.
The Delegates note that if any Aboriginal sites or artefacts are discovered on site, a permit to disturb
the artefacts is required under section 14 of the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975. The Delegates also note
the recommendation in the Aboriginal heritage assessment that a permit be obtained to allow
artefact TASI 11405 to be moved to an area of public open space.
Infrastructure - traffic
The site has frontage to Pass Road, however, no vehicular access to Pass Road is proposed. Vehicular
access is proposed from Glebe Hill Estate along Lumsden Road and Glenfern Street.
A Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) was prepared by the applicant’s traffic consultant, Mr Milan
Prodanovic, for the site and surrounding area in 2012 that bases its assessment on an estimated
13
eventual 87 lot subdivision .
The traffic study found that the proposed development will generate up to 75 vehicle trips per hour
(vtph) or 746 vehicle trips per day (vtpd), increasing traffic on Glebe Hill Road to some 3,000 vtpd,
which was within the traffic capacity of the existing road system. The TIA report identifies that
although the site is not currently served by public transport, there is potential for the extension of
existing services through the site, subject to more detailed planning and assessment. The TIA report
concludes that the development can be supported on traffic grounds with attention given to the
inadequacies with the current traffic management for the area such as minor improvements to
signage and line markings.
The Delegates note that the TIA report states that:
… the traffic volume on Glebe Hill Road will be at the top end of a minor collector
14
road [once the proposed 50 Minno Street subdivision has been fully developed] .
The Delegates also note that an additional TIA report, that was prepared by the Council’s traffic
consultant, Pitt&Sherry, and presented at the hearings, identifies that the:
… estimated volume on Glebe Hill Road slightly exceeds the desirable
environmental capacity of a collector street” once the proposed 50 Minno Street
15
subdivision has been fully developed .
A supplementary TIA report prepared by the Council’s traffic consultant further clarifies that:
The estimated peak hourly volume on Glebe Hill Road between Pass Road and
Hance Road is close to the desirable environmental capacity of 300veh/hr
recommended in Table 4.6 of the Roads and Traffic Authorities Guide to Traffic
Generating Developments [once the proposed 50 Minno Street subdivision has
16
been fully developed] .
The consultants agreed at the hearings that while traffic volumes of some 3,000 vtpd are at the upper
limit for environmental capacity, the impact on residential amenity on Glebe Hill Road would be
12
Kayandel Archaeological Services (2011): Aboriginal Heritage Investigation Report for the proposed residential
development, 50 Minno Street, Howrah. (Unpublished report 2011).
13
Prodanovic, M (2012): Traffic Impact Assessment, Proposed Residential Subdivision Development, Pass Road,
North of Glebe Hill Estate, Howrah. (Unpublished report July 2012).
14
Prodanovic, M (2012): Traffic Impact Assessment, Proposed Residential Subdivision Development, Pass Road,
North of Glebe Hill Estate, Howrah. (Unpublished report July 2012).
15
Pitt&Sherry (2012a): 50 Minno Street, Howrah: Proof of evidence. Pitt&Sherry, Hobart. (Unpublished report
January 2013).
16
Pitt&Sherry (2012b): 50 Minno Street – Traffic Impacts of Proposed Development. Pitt&Sherry, Hobart.
(Unpublished report April 2013).
Page 19 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
acceptable. They explained that determining the environmental capacity of the road infrastructure is
based upon quantitative and qualitative factors. It is not an exact science and depends on other
factors such as the perception of property owners, amenity and pedestrian traffic.
The Delegates accepted this assessment and that the existing road system was adequate to service
the future development at 50 Minno Street.
However, the Delegates were concerned about the impact of additional traffic volumes on the
existing road system if, or when, the land to the north was developed for residential purposes. The
Delegates questioned how the road connections on the northern boundary of the site were justified
when the desirable environmental capacity of Glebe Hill Road would be exceeded once the proposed
50 Minno Street subdivision was fully developed.
The traffic consultants were both of the view that while there is potential for traffic volumes resulting
from the development of land to the north to further impact upon the environmental capacity of
Glebe Hill Road, such a result cannot be expected with any certainty in this case. The consultants
explained that the land to the north would have to be serviced by an additional connection to Pass
Road. This connection would also provide alternative access to 50 Minno Street. In addition, any
increase in through-traffic on Glebe Hill Road arising from the development of the land to the north,
could be offset by traffic from 50 Minno Street subdivision accessing Pass Road to the north.
The Delegates accepted the views of Council and the traffic consultants that the impact on
environmental capacity of Glebe Hill Road may not be any greater than that resulting from the
development of 50 Minno Street. The Delegates also accepted that should any traffic issues arise they
could be successfully managed through appropriate traffic calming measures.
Page 20 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Infrastructure – water and sewage
The site is currently serviced with reticulated water from the Mornington Reservoir, with a top water
level (TWL) of 164 m AHD. The Mornington Reservoir has adequate volume for the new lots but is a
significant distance from the development.
The report by Southern Water advises that all potential lots at the site (with a road frontage at 105
AHD) will receive adequate service pressure conforming to current water pressure standards for the
existing water main in Pass Road provided that a small link water mains in the Glebe Hill Estate
subdivision is constructed. The report also advises that the New Pass Road trunk mains (DN375 and
DN300) required for the nearby Paranville development will boost the pressure for the future
subdivision of the site.
At the hearings, Southern Water advised that also only the subminimal lot located in the Landscape &
Skyline Conservation zone will not have adequate water pressure. This lot will be connected to a
smaller gauge pipe; and it will require its own water tank to meet bushfire management
requirements.
Further evidence provided by Southern Water at the hearings submitted that a new Pass Road Water
Supply Zone, which includes the site, will be created as more development proceeds in the Pass Road
area. This will ultimately require a new 4.5 Ml reservoir at Tunnel Hill with the same TWL as the
existing Mornington Reservoir. The water district is proposed to be supplied from the new Tunnel Hill
Reservoir by new DN375 and DN300 trunk mains located in Pass Road.
Southern Water further advised that a small area of water mains piping will be upgraded and linked
from the bottom of Glebe Hill Estate with the site to boost water pressure.
Southern Water confirmed that the Rokeby Sewage Treatment Plant has sufficient capacity to service
the site. Any future development is capable of being serviced by gravity via the Glebe Hill Estate.
The Delegates consider that the approach to water and sewerage infrastructure is consistent with
objective 1(b) of the Act, which provides for the fair and orderly development of land, and objectives
2(a) and 2(h) of the Act, which requires coordinated action by State and local governments and the
orderly provision and co-ordination of public utilities.
Development Plan
One of the strategies identified in clause 2.2.3 of the Scheme is:
(a)
Strategies
(i)
Spatial Patterns
Strategies
…
•
•
Ensuring there is adequate supply of residential land in preferred locations,
supported by the Clarence Residential Strategy 2007 and the Strategic Land Use
Framework Plan - Settlement.
Prior to initiating any amendments to rezone land for residential purposes in or
around activity centres or in growth areas within the urban growth boundary,
Council will require the development of structure plans to substantiate the
proposed zones and to guide appropriate subdivision and development.
The Delegates note that DPO 16 aims to ensure an efficient road layout that provides a high level of
connectivity, safety and amenity for future residents and to ensure that land release is staged in
accordance with available infrastructure. As stated earlier in this decision, it contains objectives and a
road layout plan that is characterised by grid-like road alignments, a collector road of greater width
that is intended to support a bus route, access streets and a number of four-way cross roads.
Page 21 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Along with other matters for clarification that are detailed in the revised DPO 17 (DPO 16 as revised
by Council) that is included in Annexure B; the modifications that were agreed at the hearings by all
17
parties are as follows .
2. Application of the Development Plan
Amend Figure 1
Figure 1 identifies the area of land to which DPO 17 applies. As stated earlier in this decision, Council
has submitted that the number reference of the Development Plan is incorrect. In Figure 1, the
number of the Development Plan is absent and there is slippage in the Development Plan marked
area that requires correction.
Comment:
It is important that the area in the Development Plan is correctly referenced and placed on Figure 1 to
ensure that future developments occur in the intended location.
Decision:
Amend Figure 1 to identify the Development Plan as DPO 16 and correct the ‘slippage’.
Amend Clause 2.3
Clause 2.3 states that Council may consider the relevant intent in an applicable standard to help
determine whether a “use” or “development” complies with the performance criterion for that
standard.
Comment:
The Development Plan only applies to development and as such, a reference to “use” is inappropriate.
The insertion of the word “criteria” is also necessary because Clause 2.3 applies any performance
criterion for that standard, in accordance with the recommendation made by Council.
Decision:
Modify the wording of Clause 2.3 to read as follows: Council may consider the relevant intent in an
applicable standard to help determine whether a use or development complies with the any
performance criterion criteria for that standard.
4. Future Roads
Amend Acceptable Solution 4.1
Acceptable Solution 4.1 provides for road layouts being “generally” consistent with Figure 2 of the
Development Plan and the maintenance of access to 52 Minno Street.
Comment:
It is not the usual practise to include qualifying terms such as “generally” in an Acceptable Solution.
The deletion of the word “generally” makes no change to the Acceptable Solution because subdivision
and development of the land is discretionary.
It is also an important strategic planning principle that appropriate connection to 102 Pass Road is
provided for as part of the Development Plan. This is because there is a possibility that this Rural
zoned land may be rezoned for residential use in the future and additional connection directly onto
Pass Road would not be supported by DIER.
Decision:
Modify the wording of Acceptable Solution 4.1 to read as follows: Road Llayouts are generally
consistent with Figure 2 and appropriate connection to 102 Pass Road is provided and access to 52
Minno Street is maintained.
Amend Performance Criteria 4.1 (c)
17
Where textual modifications are proposed to the Development Plan, deleted wording is crossed out and
additional wording is underlined.
Page 22 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Performance Criteria 4.1 (c) states that development of future roads must provide for linkages to Pass
Road.
Comment:
Evidence was provided at the hearings that access to Pass Road is necessary for emergency purposes
and maintenance vehicles accessing the stormwater management area. The Delegates supported this
view.
Decision:
Modify the wording of Performance Criteria 4.1 (c) to read as follows: provide for linkages to Pass
Road for emergency purposes and maintenance vehicles to the stormwater management area;
Include Performance Criteria 4.1 (d)
Include additional Performance Criteria 4.1 (d) to provide appropriate connection to 102 Pass Road.
Comment:
As stated above, it is important that appropriate connection to 102 Pass Road is provided for as part
of the Development Plan because there is a possibility that this Rural zoned land may be rezoned for
residential use in the future and additional connection directly onto Pass Road would not be
supported by DIER.
Decision:
Modify the wording of Performance Criteria 4.1 to read as follows: (d) provide appropriate connection
to 102 Pass Road (CT 114229/2);
Amend Acceptable Solution 4.2
Acceptable Solution 4.2 provides that road widths are to be in accordance with Figure 2 of the
Development Plan, which shows an indicative road layout plan that is characterised by grid-like road
alignments.
Comment:
The Acceptable Solution requires certain road widths be provided within the development in
accordance with Figure 2 of the Development Plan. For clarity, the words “within the development”
should be included in the clause.
Decision:
Modify the wording of Acceptable Solution 4.2 to read as follows: Road widths within the
development are in accordance with Figure 2.
Amend Figure 2
Figure 2 identifies a road layout plan that applies to the Development Plan. As stated earlier in this
decision, Council has submitted that the intention of the road layout plan is to ensure that any future
development on the site follows the ‘indicative’ subdivision road layout plan and the connections to
the roads at the boundary of the Glebe Hill Estate.
Comment:
It is necessary that Figure 2 be modified to show an appropriate 15 m wide road access street to 102
Pass Road on the road layout plan. As previously noted, there is a possibility that this Rural zoned land
may be rezoned for residential use in the future and additional connection directly onto Pass Road
would not be supported by DIER. Therefore, as an important strategic planning principle, it is
necessary to identify an appropriate 15 m wide road access street to this title.
The Delegates also agree with the view of Council and the applicant, that it is necessary to remove the
road marked as “Access Place 12m wide” from the road layout plan because the retention of the
Landscape & Skyline Conservation zoning boundary has resulted in an Access Place transecting into
this zone area not being required.
Decision:
Page 23 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Amend Figure 2 to show an appropriate 15 m wide road access street to 102 Pass Road on the road
layout plan and remove the 12 m wide Access Place from the road layout plan and legend.
5. Staging
Amend Acceptable Solution 5.1
Acceptable Solution 5.1 provides that staging is “generally” to be in accordance with Figure 3, but
Stage 4 is to be sealed as a single lot at the same time as Stage 1.
Comment:
As previously noted, qualifying terms are not usually used in acceptable solutions. It is the Delegates’
view that the Development Plan be modified to remove the qualifying term “generally”.
Decision:
Modify the wording of Acceptable Solution 5.1 to read as follows: Staging is generally in accordance
with Figure 3, but sStage 4 is to be sealed as a single lot at the same time as sStage 1.
Amend Acceptable Solution 5.2
Acceptable Solution 5.2 states that no development is to be undertaken in Stage 4 except the
vegetation of the buffer referred to in Acceptable Solution 5.3, until the adjacent Rural zoned land to
the north is no longer zoned and used for rural purposes.
Comment:
Reference is required to identify the establishment and maintenance of the vegetated buffer in the
Acceptable Solution. The Delegates agree with the view of Counsel for the applicant that ‘minor
utilities’ be included in the Acceptable Solution as being exempt. In addition, to ensure consistency in
the wording of the Development Plan, it is necessary to refer to the vegetation buffer as the
“vegetated” buffer.
Decision:
Modify the wording of Acceptable Solution 5.2 to read as follows: No development is to be
undertaken in stage Stage 4 except minor utilities and the establishment and maintenance of the
vegetation of the vegetated buffer referred to in AS 5.3, until the adjacent land to the north is no
longer zoned and used for rural purposes.
Amend Acceptable Solution 5.3
Acceptable Solution 5.3 relates to the establishment of the vegetated buffer. It identifies that
development Stage 4 must contain a vegetated buffer for its entire length and a minimum width of
40 m. In addition, the vegetation must include a variety of plantings to provide adequate screening
between the rural and residential uses. Acceptable Solution 5.3 also states that a vegetation plan for
Stage 4 is required and it must be approved in writing by the Tasmania Fire Service or an accredited
person for the purpose of bushfire management, and must be provided to Council before
commencing vegetation of Stage 4.
Comment:
The Delegates agree with Council that it is necessary to manage the bushfire hazard created by the
establishment of the vegetated buffer at the subdivision stage. Accordingly, it is necessary to amend
the Development Plan to require that all applications for subdivision must be accompanied by a
certified Bushfire Management Plan. This is to ensure that any risk arising from the plantings is
managed to the satisfaction of the Tasmania Fire Service and Council. With the criterion, it is not
necessary to require a bushfire management vegetation plan for Stage 4 before commencing the
planting of vegetation as currently provided for in the Development Plan.
Note that bushfire management in the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone is already managed
through the provisions in the Scheme.
Decision:
Modify the wording of Acceptable Solution 5.3 to read as follows:
Page 24 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
AS5.3
Development must comply with all of the following:
(a) Stage 4 is to contain a vegetated buffer for its entire length and a minimum
width of 40 metres. The vegetation must include a variety of plantings to
provide adequate screening between the rural and residential uses;.
(b) A vegetation plan for Stage 4 must be approved in writing by the Tasmania Fire
Service or an accredited person for the purpose of bushfire management, and
must be provided to Council before commencing vegetation of Stage 4;
Amend Acceptable Solution 5.4
Acceptable Solution 5.4 proposes that before stages 2 or 3 are sealed, the “vegetation” buffer must
be implemented to Council’s satisfaction. It also necessitates the establishment of a Part 5 agreement
that requires the retention and maintenance of the vegetated buffer until the adjacent Rural zoned
land to the north is no longer zoned and used for rural purposes. The Part 5 agreement requiring the
retention and maintenance of the vegetated buffer must be registered on the title which contains
“from time to time” the entire area contained in Stage 4.
Comment:
As stated earlier in this decision, the vegetated buffer is required to avoid the fettering of the
agricultural land to the north of the site and to protect public health and safety from spray drift
arising from the agricultural activities.
Accordingly, the Delegates consider that it is essential to ensure that the vegetated buffer is
established and functional prior to the subdivision of any stages identified in the Development Plan,
including Stage 1.
The Delegates also consider that the clause should include a reference to “accepted guidelines and
standards” for buffers to ensure that the buffer design is appropriate. A footnote should also be
included that refers to the Queensland Department of Natural Resources publication Buffer Areas –
Minimising conflicts between Agricultural and Residential Areas and the CSIRO publication Spray Drift
Management Principles, Strategies, and Supporting Information 2002 to make clear that the
vegetated component of the buffer area is to be established to minimise the impacts from agricultural
spray drift from the adjacent vineyard to the north of the site.
Decision:
Modify the wording and format of Acceptable Solution 5.4 to read as follows:
AS5.3
Before stages 1, 2 or 3 are sealed, the vegetation vegetated buffer must be
implemented:
(a) according to accepted guidelines and standards;
(b) to Council’s satisfaction;
(c) and with a Part 5 agreement requiring the retention and maintenance of the
vegetated buffer until such time as the adjacent land to the north is no longer
zoned and used for rural purposes;
(d) with a Part 5 agreement that must be registered on the title which contains
from time to time the entire area contained in Stage 4.
Attach a footnote to Acceptable Solution 5.4 (a) to read as follows: For example, the Queensland
Department of Natural Resources guidelines Buffer Areas – Minimising conflicts between Agricultural
and Residential Areas and the CSIRO guidelines Spray Drift Management Principles, Strategies, and
Supporting Information 2002.
Amend Acceptable Solution 5.5
Acceptable Solution 5.5 identifies that an area in Figure 3 of the Development Plan as being set aside
and only being “used” and “developed” for stormwater management.
Comment:
Page 25 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Counsel for the applicant considered that the meaning of the word “used” is ambiguous and
confusion might arise with regard to whether the word is used in a generic or planning context. The
Delegates agree that the word “used” be removed from the Acceptable Solution to ensure that no
confusion arises.
Decision:
Modify the wording of Acceptable Solution 5.5 to read as follows: The area identified in figure Figure 3
as stormwater management may only be used or developed for that purpose.
Amend Figure 3
Figure 3 identifies a staging plan that comprises four stages to which DPO 16 applies. The staging plan
also shows an area in Stage 1 that adjoins Pass Road. As stated earlier in this decision, Council has
submitted that this land is intended as being set aside for stormwater management.
Comment:
It is necessary to amend Figure 3 to identify that the staging plan is for subdivision development. It is
also necessary to identify on the staging plan that the land in Stage 1 that adjoins Pass Road is to be
set aside for stormwater management. Furthermore, it is necessary to identify the width (in metres)
of the Stage 4 land that is intended to be set aside for the establishment of the vegetated buffer, in
accordance with the recommendation made by Council.
As stated earlier in this decision, the draft amendment should retain the zoning boundary of the land
zoned Landscape & Skyline Conservation and include the small triangular piece of Rural zoned land
identified in Stage 1 of DPO 16 in the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone. Given the retention of
the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone, the rezoning of the section of Rural zoned land to
Landscape & Skyline Conservation, and the removal of the 12 m wide Access Place, the Delegates
accept that the staging plan diagram needs to be modified to take into account the changes in land
use.
Decision:
Amend Figure 3 to identify that the Stage 1 land that adjoins Pass Road is to be set aside for
stormwater management; and the width (in metres) of the Stage 4 land.
Amend Figure 3 to ensure the staging of development accords with the retention of the Landscape &
Skyline Conservation zone, the rezoning of the section of Rural zoned land to Landscape & Skyline
Conservation and the removal of the 12 m wide Access Place.
Modify the title of Figure 3 to read as follows: Figure 3: Staging Plan for Development.
Page 26 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Application of State Policies
State Coastal Policy 1996
The land subject to the draft amendment is not within 1 km from the High Water Mark and is not
defined as ‘coastal land’ as defined by the State Coastal Policy 1996. Therefore, the Coastal Policy is
not applicable to the draft amendment.
State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997
The State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997 (Water Quality Policy) applies to all surface
waters, including coastal waters, and groundwaters, other than privately owned waters that are not
accessible to the public and are not connected to, or flow directly into, waters that are accessible to
the public, or, waters in any tank, pipe or cistern.
Clause 31.5 provides that:
Planning schemes must require that a use or development be consistent with the
physical capacity of the land so that the potential for erosion and subsequent
water quality degradation is minimised.
The Delegates note that natural drainage from the eastern portion of the site flows from the ridgeline
towards Pass Road. This catchment has an area of approximately 15.4 ha. The 3.8 ha to the west of
the ridgeline drains towards Minno Street and will not be developed.
The Delegates support the construction of the proposed stormwater retention basin that forms part
of Stage 1 in DPO 16, noting that the area of the stormwater retention basin is intended as a future
Council reserve which will hold runoff from major rainfall events and release outflow at a controlled
flow under Pass Road.
The Delegates are satisfied that the planning application complies with the provisions of the Water
Quality Policy.
State Policy on the Protection of Agricultural Land 2009
The State Policy on the Protection of Agricultural Land 2009 (Agricultural Land Policy) applies to all
agricultural land in Tasmania. The purpose of the Agricultural Land Policy is to conserve and protect
agricultural land so that it remains available for the sustainable development of agriculture,
recognising the particular importance of prime agricultural land.
The Agricultural Land Policy defines ‘agricultural land’ as:
… all land that is in agricultural use or has the potential for agricultural use, that
has not been zoned or developed for another use or would not be unduly
restricted for agricultural use by its size, shape and proximity to adjoining nonagricultural uses.
The site is currently largely zoned Rural. The geo-environmental report provides a summary of the
agricultural capability of the site based on the land capability has been mapped in accordance with
18
the class definitions and methodology adopted by the Land Capability Classicisation System (LCCS) .
19
The land is classified as predominantly a mix of Class 4 and Class 5 land . Areas of the site on the
upper steep slopes were also classified as Class 6 land. The Class 4 and Class 5 land is identified as
being suitable for limited cropping, perennial horticulture such as viticulture and grazing. However,
given that the agricultural capability of the land is assessed as being generally low, it is not defined as
prime agricultural land in accordance with the Agricultural Land Policy.
The Delegates agreed with the applicant that the site is restricted by its size and proximity to
Residential zoned land adjoining the site to the south. In addition, the site is not within a declared
irrigation district, and does not have a history of intensive agricultural production.
18
Ed. C J Grose (1999): Land Capability Handbook: Guidelines for the Classification of Agricultural Land in
Tasmania, second edition. Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment (DPIWE), Hobart, Australia.
19
Geo-Environmental Solutions Pty Ltd (2012): Geo-environmental Assessment: Proposed rezoing – Minnio Street,
Howrah. Geo-Environmental Solutions Pty Ltd. (Unpublished Report August 2012).
Page 27 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
The site is also identified as being in the Howrah/Tranmere/Droughty Point development area, in the
metropolitan UGB and within the Pass Road Greenfield Development Precinct. As noted earlier in this
decision, it is accepted by the STRLUS that at some time before 2030 it may become appropriate for
the site to be zoned from Rural to enable urban expansion.
However, the Delegates note the existence of the adjacent vineyard at 202 Pass Road is a substantial
long-term intensive agricultural development. Consequently, this productive agricultural land is
deserving of some consideration and protection from foreseeable fettering of productive agricultural
land that might arise from agricultural activities generating dust, noise, odours, spray drift and
possible runoff. Alternatively, residential development may lead to run-off or sedimentation from
activities that affect agricultural land.
A key principle of the Agricultural Land Policy is that:
Agricultural land is a valuable resource and its use for the sustainable
development of agriculture should not be unreasonably confined or restrained by
non-agricultural use or development.
In this context, the Delegates consider that any undue fettering of the adjacent vineyard from future
development on the site must be avoided. It is also important to ensure that future development
does not lead to run-off or sedimentation from activities that affect the productivity of the vineyard.
As noted earlier in this decision, the proposed buffer area identified as Stage 4 in DPO 16 will be
established to ensure that future development does not confine or restrain agricultural use on the
land to the north of the site that supports the vineyard.
On the above basis, the Delegates are satisfied that the planning application complies with the
provisions of the Agricultural Land Policy.
National Environmental Protection Measures (NEPMs)
National Environmental Protection Measures (NEPMs) are broad framework setting statutory
instruments made under the National Environment Protection Council (Tasmania) Act 1995. Seven
NEPMs have been made to date and none are considered relevant to the planning application.
Objectives of the Resource Management and Planning System
Schedule 1 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993
In making its decision in relation to this draft amendment, the Commission is obliged to do so in such
a manner as to further the objectives set out in Schedule 1 of the Act. In that context, the Delegates
consider that the draft amendment as it applies to the rezoning of land from Rural to Residential
generally fulfils that obligation.
As discussed above, the land zoned Landscape & Skyline Conservation has been set aside to protect
the areas landscape and conservation significance and it is important that the natural and physical
resources of this area are sustained to meet the needs of both present and future generations.
It is the Delegates’ view that the proposed rezoning of land for residential purposes that forms part of
the Landscape & Skyline Conservation zone (without modification) does not further the objectives of
the Resource Management and Planning System of Tasmania and the Land Use Planning and
Approvals Act 1993, contrary to section 32(1)(a) of the Act in that it does not:
(a)
promote the sustainable development of natural and physical resources and the
maintenance of ecological processes and genetic diversity, contrary to Objectives 1(a)
and 2(a), (b) and (c) of Part 1 of Schedule 1 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act
1993;
(b)
provide for the fair, orderly or sustainable use and development of land, contrary to
Objective 1(b) of Part 1 of Schedule 1 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993;
(c)
deliver a secure a pleasant and safe living and recreational environment, contrary to
Objective (f) of Part 2 of Schedule 1 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993;
and
Page 28 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
(d)
contribute to a planning framework that fully considers land capability, contrary to
Objective (i) of Part 2 of Schedule 1 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993.
Conclusion on draft amendment
The draft amendment should be approved as modified in Annexure A and Annexure B.
Attachments
Annexure A – Modifications to draft amendment A-2012/3
Annexure B – Modifications to Part 50 Minno Street Development Plan (DPO 16)
Page 29 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Annexure A
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Amendment A-2012/3
MODIFICATIONS TO PLANNING SCHEME ORDINANCE
The modified draft amendment consists of the following:
To amend the Clarence Planning Scheme 2007 as follows:
1.
2.
To update the Strategic Land Use Framework Plan – Settlement by extending the Urban
Growth Boundary to encompass the area proposed to be rezoned to Residential as
shown on the Amendment A-2012/3 (UGB) plan;
To insert the following line into clause 7.12.3 – Development Plans Table:
Map Reference
Name of Plan
Location
Date
Incorporated
into the scheme
DPO 16
Part 50 Minno Street,
Howrah
Western side of Pass
Road, Howrah
10 June 2013
Page 30 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
MODIFICATIONS TO ZONING MAPS
The modified draft amendment consists of the following modifications to the three planning scheme
plans:
1.
Zone Map to rezone pasts of 50 Minno Street from:
•
•
Rural to Residential; and
Rural to Landscape & Skyline Conservation.
Page 31 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
2.
Amendment A-2012/3 (DPO) Plan to refer to Amendment A-2012/3 DPO 16
Page 32 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
3.
Amendment A-2012/3 (Strategic Land Use Framework Plan) to reflect the Urban Growth
Boundary as being consistent with the Residential zone as it applies to DPO 16.
Page 33 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
Annexure B
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
MODIFICATIONS TO PART 50 MINNO STREET DEVELOPMENT PLAN
(DPO 16 AS MODIFIED BY COUNCIL)
The Part 50 Minno Street Development Plan (DPO 16) as modified by the Commission is attached
below.
The modifications made by the Commission are to the revised Development Plan dated
14 February 2013 that Clarence City Council (Council) submitted to the Commission on
15 February 2013. The modifications consider Council’s and the applicant’s recommended
modifications, along with matters raised by the Delegates at the hearings. Other matters for
clarification are made to the Development Plan to provide consistency in the text and explain specific
issues.
Each modification of the Part 50 Minno Street Development Plan (DPO 16 as modified by Council) for
the site that forms part of draft amendment A-2012/3 has been considered on an individual basis and
included in the revised Development Plan.
Page 34 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
CLARENCE CITY COUNCIL
PART 50 MINNO STREET DEVELOPMENT PLAN
DPO 16
Page 35 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
1. PURPOSE OF DPO 16
The purpose of the Part 50 Minno Development Plan (DPO 16) is to:
1.1
1.2
1.3
guide development to ensure an efficient road layout providing a high level of
connectivity, safety and amenity for future residential development occupying
the area subject to this Development Plan;
ensure the staging of subdivision development is consistent with the available
infrastructure provision for the area subject to this Development Plan; and
manage the interface between rural and residential land uses and any
resulting land use conflicts.
2. APPLICATION
This Development Plan applies to development within the area shown in Figure 1
below.
DPO 16
Figure 1: Development Plan Application Area
2.1
Development within the area subject to this Development Plan is to be
consistent with the provisions of this Development Plan, which override the
requirements of the Clarence Planning Scheme 2007 to the extent of any
inconsistency.
2.2
A development must comply with each applicable standard in this
Development Plan. Compliance for the purpose of this clause consists of
complying with the acceptable solution or the performance criterion for that
standard.
Page 36 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
2.3
Council may consider the relevant intent in an applicable standard to help
determine whether development complies with any performance criteria for
that standard.
3. PERMIT REQUIREMENT
3.1
A permit is required for any development that is not generally consistent with
the Road Layout Plan in Figure 2 of this Development Plan.
3.2
All subdivision is discretionary development.
3.3
Notwithstanding Clause 3.6.1 of the Scheme, land subject to this
Development Plan may be subdivided along the zone boundary between the
Residential and Landscape and Conservation zones to create a subminimal
lot in the Landscape and Skyline Conservation Zone, and development of a
single dwelling on that subminimal lot can be applied for subject to Clause
3.1.6 of the Scheme.
4. FUTURE ROADS
Intent
To guide development to ensure an efficient road layout providing a high level of
connectivity, safety and amenity for future residential development.
Acceptable Solution
Performance Criteria
AS4.1
PC4.1
Road layouts are consistent with Figure 2 Development must satisfy all of the
and appropriate connection to 102 Pass following:
Road is provided and access to 52 Minno
(a) provide connections to the existing
Street is maintained.
roads abutting the site along the southern
boundary;
(b)
provide
appropriate
future
connections
along
the
northern
boundary;
Page 37 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
(c) provide for linkages to Pass Road for
emergency purposes and maintenance
vehicles to the stormwater management
area;
(d) provide appropriate connection to 102
Pass Road (CT 114229/2);
(e) maintain vehicular access for 52
Minno Street (CT 125198/1).
AS4.2
PC4.2
Road widths within the development are Road widths within the development
in accordance with Figure 2.
must comply with all of the following:
(a) achieve a hierarchy
development;
within
the
(b) be consistent where practical with
the roads adjoining the site;
(c) not present a traffic hazard.
Figure 2: Road Layout Plan
Page 38 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
5. STAGING
Intent
To ensure the staging of development is consistent with the available infrastructure
provision.
Acceptable Solution
Performance Criteria
AS5.1
No performance criteria
Staging is in accordance with Figure 3,
but Stage 4 is to be sealed as a single lot
at the same time as Stage 1.
AS5.2
No performance criteria
No development is to be undertaken in
Stage 4 except minor utilities and the
establishment and maintenance of the
vegetated buffer referred to in AS 5.3,
until the adjacent land to the north is no
longer zoned and used for rural
purposes.
AS5.3
No performance criteria
Stage 4 is to contain a vegetated buffer
for its entire length and a minimum width
of 40 metres.
The vegetation must
include a variety of plantings to provide
adequate screening between the rural
and residential uses.
Page 39 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
AS 5.4
No performance criteria
Before stages 1, 2 or 3 are sealed, the
vegetated buffer must be implemented:
(a) according to accepted guidelines
and standards 20;
(b) to Council’s satisfaction;
(c) with a Part 5 agreement requiring
the retention and maintenance of
the vegetated buffer until such
time as the adjacent land to the
north is no longer zoned and
used for rural purposes;
(d) with a Part 5 agreement that must
be registered on the title which
contains the entire area contained
in Stage 4.
AS 5.5
No performance criteria
The area identified in Figure 3 as
stormwater management may only be
developed for that purpose.
Figure 3: Staging Plan for Development
20
For example, the Queensland Department of Natural Resources guidelines Buffer Areas –
Minimising conflicts between Agricultural and Residential Areas and the CSIRO guidelines
Spray Drift Management Principles, Strategies, and Supporting Information 2002.
Page 40 of 41
Clarence Planning Scheme 2007
Draft amendment A-2012/3
6. BUSHFIRE MANAGEMENT
Intent
To ensure that bushfire risk from the vegetated buffer is minimised.
Acceptable Solution
Performance Criteria
AS6.1
No performance criteria
All applications for subdivision must be
accompanied by a certified Bushfire
Management Plan that manages the
bushfire risk from the vegetated buffer
area in Stage 4.
Page 41 of 41