20240510_NSC_Cover letter_M1717P_ Civil OPW minor change (2) · OPW12/0095.03

Page 2

.




The original civil operational works (engineering works) approval (Council ref; OPW 12/0095) was issued by Council on 23
July 2012.

On 3 April 2018, Council endorsed a generally in accordance request (Council ref: OPW12/0095.01) which sought to update
the approval operational works plans (engineering works) to recognise a recent change to the higher order MCU approval
(Council ref: 12004.5744.09).

The latest change to MCU approval was issued on 24 February 2021 (Council ref: 132004.5744.11). This change involved
relocating 20 car spaces associated with Building B, which resulted in further changes to the approved plans.

Subsequently, it was identified that some of the internal carparks had not been constructed in accordance with the
approved plans listed in the higher order development approval. To reconcile these minor discrepancies, a generally in
accordance request was made to both the Civil and Landscape Operational works approvals to capture the ‘as constructed’
works on site. Council endorsed the proposed amendments as being generally in accordance in the related approvals,
resulting in the following approvals:
     Civil Op works – OPW12/0096.02 dated 1 September 2021
     Landscaping Op works – OPW12/0110.02 dated 18 October 2021

The development is now complete and operational in accordance with the requirements of the related approvals. However,
a recent site inspection by Council identified that some of the site’s car parking was not located in accordance with the
higher order MCU approval (ie for reasons outlined above) and an additional 7 visitor spaces have been constructed (refer
to Figure 1 below). Accordingly, Council advised that a minor change was required to address these inconsistencies between
the related approvals over the site, despite most of these changes having been previously being endorsed by council.




Figure 1 – the location of the 7 additional visitor spaces


A review of Council’s PD online identifies that there is no record of the Civil operational works GIA (OPW12/0096.02). This
may have contributed to the confusion relating to the past approvals over the site.




JFP Ref: M1717E                                                                                                Page 2


[OCR of page images]
The original civil operational works (engineering works) approval (Council ref; OPW 12/0095) was issued by Council on 23
July 2012.

On 3 April 2018, Council endorsed a generally in accordance request (Council ref: OPW12/0095.01) which sought to update
the approval operational works plans (engineering works) to recognise a recent change to the higher order MCU approval
(Council ref: 12004.5744.09).

The latest change to MCU approval was issued on 24 February 2021 (Council ref: 132004.5744.11). This change involved
relocating 20 car spaces associated with Building B, which resulted in further changes to the approved plans.

Subsequently, it was identified that some of the internal carparks had not been constructed in accordance with the
approved plans listed in the higher order development approval. To reconcile these minor discrepancies, a generally in
accordance request was made to both the Civil and Landscape Operational works approvals to capture the ‘as constructed’
works on site. Council endorsed the proposed amendments as being generally in accordance in the related approvals,
resulting in the following approvals:

= Civil Op works — OPW12/0096.02 dated 1 September 2021

= Landscaping Op works — OPW12/0110.02 dated 18 October 2021

The development is now complete and operational in accordance with the requirements of the related approvals. However,
a recent site inspection by Council identified that some of the site’s car parking was not located in accordance with the
higher order MCU approval (ie for reasons outlined above) and an additional 7 visitor spaces have been constructed (refer
to Figure 1 below). Accordingly, Council advised that a minor change was required to address these inconsistencies between
the related approvals over the site, despite most of these changes having been previously being endorsed by council.

ie zy |
ye
is —s 4 ae
~~, Kie
|

spaces
mm

 

Figure 1— the location of the 7 additional visitor spaces

A review of Council’s PD online identifies that there is no record of the Civil operational works GIA (OPW12/0096.02). This
may have contributed to the confusion relating to the past approvals over the site.

JFP Ref: M1717E Page 2

Page 3

.




This minor change to the civil operational works approval seeks to reconcile the previous endorsed ‘generally in accordance’
changes to the car parking layout and incorporate the additional 7 visitor car spaces, as shown in Figure 1 above.
Accordingly, the approved engineering plan package endorsed as part of the generally in accordance plans has been
updated to include the 7 additional visitor car spaces.

It should also be noted that the applicant is also updating the approved plan package for the related MCU and Landscaping
operational works approvals.

Requested change and justification
To assist council with the assessment of the proposed minor change to the development approval, we have outlined the
consequential changes to the existing endorsed GIA plan package (the most recent set of plans) to reflect the proposed
change to development approval. For completeness, a copy of the original decision notice is attached for Council’s
reference (Refer to Attachment D).
.
The proposed amendments to conditions are shown as strike throughs (deletions) or bold - type (additions).

The following table identifies the latest amendments to the latest set plans endorsed as generally in accordance with the
approval (Council ref: OPW12/0095.02) and to be incorporated into section 5 Approved Plans of the decision notice.

    Plan No.               Rev      Plan/Document Name                            Date
    M1717E5-L01            A        Construction Staging Plan, prepared by        28 February 2018
                                    JFP Consulting Engineers
    M1717E5-EW01           C        Earthworks Layout Plan, prepared by JFP       4 May 2018
                                    Consulting Engineers
    M1717E5-EW02           B        Earthworks Details Plan, prepared by JFP      27 April 2018
                                    Consulting Engineers
    M1717E5-R01            DF       Roadworks Layout Plan, prepared by JFP        8 June 2021 18
                                    Consulting Engineers                          April 2024
    M1717E5-R02            A        Roadworks Details Plan, prepared by JFP       28 February 2018
                                    Consulting Engineers
    M1717E5-R03            FH       Roadworks Intersection Details Plan,          8 June 2021 18
                                    prepared by JFP Consulting Engineers          April 2024
    M1717E5-R04            A        Roadworks Longitudinal Sections Swallow       28 February 2018
                                    Street, prepared by JFP Consulting
                                    Engineers
    M1717E5-R05            A        Roadworks Cross Sections Swallow Street,      28 February 2018
                                    prepared by JFP Consulting Engineers
    M1717E5-R06            B        Roadworks Longitudinal Sections Blue          10 January 2020
                                    Gum Street, prepared by JFP Consulting
                                    Engineers
    M1717E5-R07            A        Roadworks Cross Sections Blue Gum             28 February 2018
                                    Street, prepared by JFP Consulting
                                    Engineers
    M1717E5-R08            B        Roadworks Sections Silver Gull Boulevard,     27 April 2018
                                    prepared by JFP Consulting Engineers




JFP Ref: M1717E                                                                                                 Page 3


[OCR of page images]
This minor change to the civil operational works approval seeks to reconcile the previous endorsed ‘generally in accordance’
changes to the car parking layout and incorporate the additional 7 visitor car spaces, as shown in Figure 1 above.
Accordingly, the approved engineering plan package endorsed as part of the generally in accordance plans has been
updated to include the 7 additional visitor car spaces.

It should also be noted that the applicant is also updating the approved plan package for the related MCU and Landscaping
operational works approvals.

Requested change and justification

To assist council with the assessment of the proposed minor change to the development approval, we have outlined the
consequential changes to the existing endorsed GIA plan package (the most recent set of plans) to reflect the proposed
change to development approval. For completeness, a copy of the original decision notice is attached for Council’s
reference (Refer to Attachment D).

The proposed amendments to conditions are shown as strike throughs (deletions) or bold - type (additions).

The following table identifies the latest amendments to the latest set plans endorsed as generally in accordance with the
approval (Council ref: OPW12/0095.02) and to be incorporated into section 5 Approved Plans of the decision notice.

Plan No. Rev Plan/Document Name Date

M1717E5-L01 A Construction Staging Plan, prepared by 28 February 2018
JFP Consulting Engineers

M1717E5-EW01 Cc Earthworks Layout Plan, prepared by JFP_ | 4 May 2018
Consulting Engineers

M1717E5-EW02 B Earthworks Details Plan, prepared by JFP_ | 27 April 2018
Consulting Engineers

M1717E5-RO1 BF Roadworks Layout Plan, prepared by JFP SJune2024 18
Consulting Engineers April 2024

M1717E5-RO2 A Roadworks Details Plan, prepared by JFP 28 February 2018
Consulting Engineers

M1717E5-RO3 FH Roadworks Intersection Details Plan, Stune 2024 18
prepared by JFP Consulting Engineers April 2024

M1717E5-R04 A Roadworks Longitudinal Sections Swallow | 28 February 2018
Street, prepared by JFP Consulting
Engineers

M1717E5-ROS A Roadworks Cross Sections Swallow Street, | 28 February 2018
prepared by JFP Consulting Engineers

M1717E5-RO6 B Roadworks Longitudinal Sections Blue 10 January 2020
Gum Street, prepared by JFP Consulting
Engineers

M1717E5-RO7 A Roadworks Cross Sections Blue Gum 28 February 2018
Street, prepared by JFP Consulting
Engineers

M1717E5-RO8 B Roadworks Sections Silver Gull Boulevard, | 27 April 2018

prepared by JFP Consulting Engineers

JFP Ref: M1717E Page 3

Page 4

.




    M1717E5-R09                   A          Roadworks Details, prepared by JFP         28 February 2018
                                             Consulting Engineers
    M1717E5-D02                   E          Drainage Layout Plan, prepared by JFP      27 September 2018
                                             Consulting Engineers
    M1717E5-D03                   C          Drainage Longitudinal Sections, prepared   04 June 2018
                                             by JFP Consulting Engineers

No further changes to the development approval are sought.

Assessment against the applicable provisions of the Planning Act 2016 (the Act)

In accordance with s.81 and Schedule 2 of the Act, please find below an assessment of the proposed change to approval
against the ‘minor change’ criteria of the Act.
  Criteria                                                     Response
  Minor change means a change that—
    ….
    (b) for a development approval—

         i)       Would not result in ‘substantially different        Complies refer to Table 2 below.
                  development’; and
         ii)      If a development application for the
                  development, including the change, were
                  made when the change application is made
                  would not cause -
                       a) The inclusion of prohibited                 Complies – The proposed does not introduce prohibited
                           development in the application; or         development.
                       b) Referral to a referral agency, other        Complies – The proposed development does not require
                           than to the chief executive, if there      the development to be referred to a referral agency nor
                           were no referral agencies for the          additional matters prescribed by a regulation under
                           development application; or                section 55(2).
                       c) Referral to extra referral agencies,
                           other than to the chief executive; or
                       d) A referral agency to assess the
                           application against or have regard to
                           matters prescribed by the regulation
                           under section 55 (2), other than
                           matters the referral agency must have
                           assessed the application against, or
                           have had regard to, when the
                           application was made; or
                       e) public notification if public               Complies – The proposed amendment is minor in nature
                           notification was not required for the      and will not trigger the requirement for public
                           development application.                   notification.
Table 1 – ‘Minor change’ criteria (Schedule 2 - Dictionary)


The proposed change represents a minor change under Schedule 1 of the Development Assessment Rules, as the
outcome does not result in ‘substantially different’ development as outlined below.




JFP Ref: M1717E                                                                                                     Page 4


[OCR of page images]
 

 

 

 

M1717E5-RO9 A Roadworks Details, prepared by JFP 28 February 2018
Consulting Engineers

M1717E5-D02 E Drainage Layout Plan, prepared by JFP 27 September 2018
Consulting Engineers

M1717E5-D03 Cc Drainage Longitudinal Sections, prepared | 04 June 2018
by JFP Consulting Engineers

 

 

 

 

 

No further changes to the development approval are sought.

 

Assessment against the applicable provisions of the Planning Act 2016 (the Act)

In accordance with s.81 and Schedule 2 of the Act, please find below an assessment of the proposed change to approval
against the ‘minor change’ criteria of the Act.

Minor change means a change that—

(b) for a development approval—

 

i) Would not result in ‘substantially different
development’; and
ii) If a development application for the
development, including the change, were
made when the change application is made
would not cause -
a) The inclusion of prohibited
development in the application; or
b) Referral to a referral agency, other
than to the chief executive, if there
were no referral agencies for the
development application; or
c) Referral to extra referral agencies,
other than to the chief executive; or
d) Areferral agency to assess the
application against or have regard to
matters prescribed by the regulation
under section 55 (2), other than
matters the referral agency must have
assessed the application against, or
have had regard to, when the
application was made; or

Complies refer to Table 2 below.

 

Complies — The proposed does not introduce prohibited
development.

Complies — The proposed development does not require
the development to be referred to a referral agency nor
additional matters prescribed by a regulation under
section 55(2).

e) public notification if public
notification was not required for the
development application.

 

 

Complies — The proposed amendment is minor in nature
and will not trigger the requirement for public
notification.

 

Table 1 — ‘Minor change’ criteria (Schedule 2 - Dictionary)

The proposed change represents a minor change under Schedule 1 of the Development Assessment Rules, as the

outcome does not result in ‘substantially different’ development as outlined below.

JFP Ref: M1717E

Page 4

 

Page 5

.




    Substantially Different Criteria                              Response
    A change may be considered to result in a substantially different development if the proposed change:
        a) involves a new use                                     Complies – the change does not involve a new use
        b) results in the application applying to a new parcel Complies – the proposed change will not result in any
           of land; or                                            new parcels of land being included as part of the
                                                                  application
        c) dramatically changes the built form in terms of        Complies – the proposed change does not involve any
           scale, bulk, and appearance; or                        changes to the approved built form
        d) changes the ability of the proposed development Complies – the proposed change does not change the
           to operate as intended; or                             ability for the development to operate as intended
        e) removes a component that is integral to the            Complies – The proposed change does not remove a
           operation of the development; or                       component that is integral to the development
        f) significantly impacts on traffic flow and the          Complies – The proposed amendments will not result in
           transport network, such as increasing traffic to       any additional impacts not already addressed as part of
           the site; or                                           the original approval
        g) introduces new impacts or increase the severity of Complies – The proposed amendment will not result in
           known impacts; or                                      increased severity of known impacts.
        h) removes an incentive or offset component that          Complies – the proposed change does not remove any
           would have balanced a negative impact of the           incentive or offset component of the proposed
           development; or                                        development.
        i) impacts on infrastructure provisions.                  Complies – the proposed minor change does not result in
                                                                  any adverse impacts on infrastructure provisions.
Table 2 – Substantially different criteria (Schedule 1 – Development Assessment Rules)


Affected Entities
Not applicable

Summary

As demonstrated above, the proposed minor change to the existing development approval represents a minor change
under s78 of the Planning Act 2016 and Schedule 1 of the Development Assessment Rules, as the proposed change does
not result in ‘substantially different development’, require any additional referral agencies, or changes the level of
assessment in the event the application was to be re-lodged. The change to approval also does not trigger any
requirement for public notification.

The applicable application fee for a minor change to a development approval – minor matters (as determined by
Manager, Development Assessment) is $2516.00 in accordance with Council’s fees and charges register 2023/2024. This
fee will be paid upon receipt of Council’s payment advice.

In support of our request, please find enclosed the following:
     Attachment A: DA Form 5
     Attachment B: Owner’s Consent
     Attachment C: Proposal plans (Civil OPW’s) plans prepared by JFP Urban Consultants
     Attachment D: Endorsed GIA plans (Council ref: OPW12/0095.02)




JFP Ref: M1717E                                                                                                Page 5


[OCR of page images]
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Substantially Different Criteria | Response
A change may be considered to result in a substantially different development if the proposed change:

a) involves a new use Complies — the change does not involve a new use

b) results in the application applying to a new parcel | Complies — the proposed change will not result in any
of land; or new parcels of land being included as part of the

application

c) dramatically changes the built form in terms of Complies — the proposed change does not involve any
scale, bulk, and appearance; or changes to the approved built form

d) changes the ability of the proposed development | Complies — the proposed change does not change the
to operate as intended; or ability for the development to operate as intended

e) removes a component that is integral to the Complies — The proposed change does not remove a
operation of the development; or component that is integral to the development

f) significantly impacts on traffic flow and the Complies — The proposed amendments will not result in
transport network, such as increasing traffic to any additional impacts not already addressed as part of
the site; or the original approval

g) introduces new impacts or increase the severity of | Complies — The proposed amendment will not result in
known impacts; or increased severity of known impacts.

h) removes an incentive or offset component that Complies — the proposed change does not remove any
would have balanced a negative impact of the incentive or offset component of the proposed
development; or development.

i) impacts on infrastructure provisions. Complies — the proposed minor change does not result in

any adverse impacts on infrastructure provisions.

 

 

Table 2 — Substantially different criteria (Schedule 1 — Development Assessment Rules)

Affected Entities
Not applicable

Summary

As demonstrated above, the proposed minor change to the existing development approval represents a minor change

under s78 of the Planning Act 2016 and Schedule 1 of the Development Assessment Rules, as the proposed change does

not result in ‘substantially different development’, require any additional referral agencies, or changes the level of

assessment in the event the application was to be re-lodged.

requirement for public notification.

The change to approval also does not trigger any

The applicable application fee for a minor change to a development approval — minor matters (as determined by

Manager, Development Assessment) is $2516.00 in accordance with Council’s fees and charges register 2023/2024. This

fee will be paid upon receipt of Council’s payment advice.

In support of our request, please find enclosed the following:

= Attachment A: DA Form 5
= Attachment B: Owner’s Consent

= Attachment C: Proposal plans (Civil OPW’s) plans prepared by JFP Urban Consultants
= Attachment D: Endorsed GIA plans (Council ref: OPW12/0095.02)

JFP Ref: M1717E

Page 5

 

Page 6

.




We look forward to receiving Council’s changed approval package for the application. Should you require any clarification
on any of the above issues please do not hesitate to contact me.




Yours faithfully,




TIMOTHY BALCOMBE
SENIOR URBAN PLANNER
JFP URBAN CONSULTANTS

CC/- Country Club Living Pty Ltd




JFP Ref: M1717E                                                                                               Page 6


[OCR of page images]
We look forward to receiving Council’s changed approval package for the application. Should you require any clarification
on any of the above issues please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours faithfully,

{ / f

W) [aheooe pos

TIMOTHY BALCOMBE
SENIOR URBAN PLANNER
JFP URBAN CONSULTANTS

CC/- Country Club Living Pty Ltd

JFP Ref: M1717E Page 6