Response to Information Request

With respect to part a), the proposed development meets this part given that the maximum floor area
does not exceed 50m² as shown on the proposal plans. With respect to part b), there appears to be an
anomaly in the planning scheme. This is because the above definition allows for 4 persons to be
associated with the business at any one time, but this part of the probable solution suggests that 3
persons are to be onsite at any one time (eg. operator, employee and client).

It can’t be the case that for code assessable development, that a use meets the definition, but then is in
conflict with a probable solution. The intent of code assessable development is that if the development
meets the relevant probable solutions then it should meet the specific outcomes and the purpose of
the code.

In this case the proposed development has 4 persons associated with the business at any one time, but
this is for a maximum period of 2 half days per week. Mostly, the development operates with 3 persons
on site at any one time. It is noted that this is the requirement for a Home Based Business Type 1 Limited
visibility (S38.2), which is self-assessable in the Detached Housing Zone.

Consequently, the proposed development meets both probable solutions S44 and S45.1. This being the
case it would be highly unusual if the proposed development did not meet specific outcomes O44 and
O45, given the nature of the use. This is particularly the case given the potential traffic impacts would
be marginally greater than that for a typical Home Based Business – Type 1 Limited visibility, such as a
hairdresser. A hairdresser would typically operate having on average half hour appointments or about
12 customers per day on average.

Planning Scheme Amendments

It is noted that planning scheme amendments are proposed to the Business Uses Code. In particular,
the following is to be amended:




                                                                                              4|Page