NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

 

 

 

 

AGENDA                                                                                                   Page

 

1        APOLOGIES

 

 

 

2        DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

 

 

 

3        Director Environment and Planning Report

8.1     Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant    

 

 

 

 


NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST AT MEETINGS

 

 

Name of Meeting:

 

Meeting Date:

 

Item/Report Number:

 

Item/Report Title:

 

 

 

I

 

declare the following interest:

          (name)

 

 

 

 

Pecuniary – must leave chamber, take no part in discussion and voting.

 

 

 

Non Pecuniary – Significant Conflict – Recommended that Councillor/Member leaves chamber, takes no part in discussion or voting.

 

 

Non-Pecuniary – Less Significant Conflict – Councillor/Member may choose to remain in Chamber and participate in discussion and voting.

 

For the reason that

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signed

 

Date

 

 

 

 

 

Council’s Email Address – council@nambucca.nsw.gov.au

 

Council’s Facsimile Number – (02) 6568 2201

 

(Instructions and definitions are provided on the next page).

 


Definitions

 

(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)

 

 

Pecuniary – An interest that a person has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to the person or another person with whom the person is associated.

(Local Government Act, 1993 section 442 and 443)

 

A Councillor or other member of a Council Committee who is present at a meeting and has a pecuniary interest in any matter which is being considered must disclose the nature of that interest to the meeting as soon as practicable.

 

The Council or other member must not take part in the consideration or discussion on the matter and must not vote on any question relating to that matter. (Section 451).

 

 

Non-pecuniary – A private or personal interest the council official has that does not amount to a pecuniary interest as defined in the Act (for example; a friendship, membership of an association, society or trade union or involvement or interest in an activity and may include an interest of a financial nature).

 

If you have declared a non-pecuniary conflict of interest you have a broad range of options for managing the conflict.  The option you choose will depend on an assessment of the circumstances of the matter, the nature of your interest and the significance of the issue being dealt with.  You must deal with a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in at least one of these ways.

 

·        It may be appropriate that no action is taken where the potential for conflict is minimal.  However, council officials should consider providing an explanation of why they consider a conflict does not exist.

·        Limit involvement if practical (for example, participate in discussion but not in decision making or visa-versa).  Care needs to be taken when exercising this option.

·        Remove the source of the conflict (for example, relinquishing or divesting the personal interest that creates the conflict or reallocating the conflicting duties to another officer).

·        Have no involvement by absenting yourself from and not taking part in any debate or voting on the issue as if the provisions in section 451(2) of the Act apply (particularly if you have a significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest).

 

          


Special General Purpose Committee                                                                                       5 May 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 8.1      DA2008/139      050511         Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:     Greg Meyers, Director Environment and Planning         

 

Summary:

 

Applicant:                      Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd

 

Proposal:                       Pre Cast Concrete Plant

 

Property:                        Lot 16 DP 1140719, 2 Centra Park Street, Macksville

 

Zoning:                           Zone IN1 General Industrial (NLEP 2010)

                                      (Formerly Zone 4(a) General Industrial NLEP 1995)

 

Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd, originally sought a modification to their Pre-cast Concrete Plant in Macksville (approved via DA 2008/139). The plant is operated by one of Abigroup's subsidiary companies - Australian Precast Solutions (APS), it was originally proposed to delete external cladding to the existing Stage 1 Shed, deletion of the external cladding to the northern, southern and western elevations of the proposed Stage 2 Shed and extend the length of the Stage 2 shed 20m to 126m long as opposed to the "typical Shed" of 100m as originally approved.

 

The original modification was submitted to address an unresolved issue with the existing Stage 1 Shed not being enclosed, contrary to that originally approved. APS also proposed to seek a modification to remove the cladding from 3 of the 4 walls of the proposed Stage 2 Shed plus add one extra 20m section to the Stage 2 shed making it 126 m long. In addition, site boundary setbacks need to be ratified with Stage 1 and modified with Stage 2.

 

The progression to the second stage of the original approved development has been brought about due to ongoing contracts and the need to increase output over the next few years. The modification also enabled Council to require APS to address the ongoing noise issues that have been encountered with the operations associated with the uncladed Stage 1 Shed.

 

The Modification was notified to a large number of residents in Wallace Street, as previously resolved by Council. From this, 13 submissions were received. All objecting to the excessive noise and operations allegedly being undertaken outside approved operational hours. Each submission has raised other matters including need for vegetation, screening, loss of land values and Council's lack of enforcement for compliance. The submissions are outlined in Table R2, in the discussion section of this report and copies of each submission are attached.

 

Council staff were also concerned with the ongoing noise issues and this was confirmed in the acoustic report submitted with the Modification Application.

 

As a consequence of the submissions and Council's concern regarding noise, further information was sought from the applicants as outlined in the attached letter dated 7 December 2010.

 

After lengthy discussions with the applicant a revised plan and noise modelling has now been undertaken to address the concerns and bring the operation into compliance with the Industrial Noise Policy (copies circularised). Site Plan attached at end of document.

 

The proposed noise attenuation works are a result of the matters raised and the revised noise modelling, and it is considered that the proposal is "Substantially the Same" with an improved environmental and amenity outcome, as such it was determined that the amendments did not require renotification.

 

NOTE: This matter requires a “Planning Decision” referred to in Section 375A of the Local Government Act 1993 requiring the General Manager to record the names of each Councillor supporting and opposing the decision.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1          That in accordance with Section 96 of the EP&A Act, development consent for DA 2008/139 be modified subject to the conditions attached to this report.

 

2          Those persons who made submission to the modification application be notified of Council’s decision.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council could choose not to approve the proposed modification, or include additional conditions relevant to the modification.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The original application was approved by way of a "deferred commencement" consent by Council at its 20 March 2008 meeting. At that time it was anticipated that the development would generate many positive benefits for the local economy, both directly and indirectly. The operations proposed to employ 50 full time staff as well as providing employment for equipment operators and associated service personnel. The development also having the real potential to support the growth and long term viability of the area by attracting further interest and development of complementary industries within the industrial estate.

 

It was considered that the proposal was an efficient and appropriate use of industrial zoned land and worthy of Council’s support. However, a "deferred commencement" approval was granted subject to the finalisation of a Voluntary Planning Agreement that Abigroup had put forward for the replacement of the timber rail overpass bridge by a concrete bridge. The deferred commencement condition was complied with and an endorsed consent was issued on 11 August 2008.

 

The concrete pre-casting yard has been in operation now for some 16 months and as originally identified, some 50 jobs have been created. The operations have been through several phases of production which has been aligned to contracts that APS has won. Operations have increased since October 2010 to meet contract deadlines. Proceeding with Stage 2 will enable APS to meet new and additional contracts into the future.

 

The Modification originally submitted, proposed to amend and clarify the originally approved "Typical" plans for the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Sheds (Stage 1 already constructed). The proponents originally sought to modify the "Typical" design to a specific design which did not include external walls to the existing Stage 1 Shed, to eliminate walls to the northern, southern and western walls of the Stage 2 shed and extend the Stage 2 Shed by 20m in length to 126m. In addition, a site boundary setback variation from the northern boundary to the Site 1 sheds need to be ratified with Stage 1 and modified with Stage 2.

 

The constructed Stage 1 shed is described as an open freestanding, steel portal framed shed with an iron roof and a 1-2 metre drop wall (eave curtain) around all four sides with the remaining sections of the walls open. The original modification sought to exclude the external walls and leave the Stage 1 Shed as is. A specific plan was provided for the proposed Stage 2 Shed which showed the building as a freestanding, steel portal framed shed with iron roof and with the eastern wall enclosed and the other three elevations open except for a 1-2 metre drop wall (eave curtain). In addition, it is proposed to extend the length of the Stage 2 Shed to 126 m as opposed to the "Typical Shed" being 100m long.

 

The non enclosure of the Stage 1 Shed has been an ongoing compliance matter between Council and APS (Abigroup) since 3 November 2008, when the non-compliance was identified. Confusion then followed as an Occupation Certificate was issued for some aspects of the Construction Certificate (Workshop Facilities & Roof Structure), however the Occupation Certificate did not include the Stage 1 Shed (Super "T" work area).

 

The original Modification application was the final outcome of these discussions and APS were advised that a detailed Noise Assessment Report would be required to accompany the application due to the ongoing issues with noise complaints from nearby residents in Wallace Street due to the shed being an open structure.

The modification application was lodged on 22 November 2010 and was accompanied by a Noise Investigation Report prepared by Renzo Tonin & Associates dated 17 September 2010 and the revised Stage 1 Shed plans and plans for the proposed Stage 2 Shed.

 

The Noise report has referenced the NSW Industrial Noise Policy (INP) which is an industry guideline for assessing the impacts of industry on the environment and receivers near the industry. It was considered that the Renzo Tonin report whilst identifying the steps to be followed in the INP, did not meet all the requirements or considered a number of critical matters with the existing operations.

 

A letter was sent to APS on 7 December 2010 seeking further information and noise modelling as outlined below:

 

2        The Statement of Environmental Effects and the Acoustic Report submitted with the Modification clearly demonstrate that the current operations at the site exceed the provisions of the Industrial Noise Policy (INP). The reports also identify some differences between the Heggies Pty Ltd report commissioned by Council and the report undertaken by Renzo Tonin & Associates in regard to the established background noise at the nearest receptor dwellings.

 

3        These anomalies do have an impact on the "intrusive" noise goals and as such, Council has sought some clarification and comment from Heggies Pty Ltd in regard to the matters raised by Renzo Tonin & Associates in their report.

 

4        Council is concerned that Renzo Tonin & Associates has taken the view that Chapter 10 – Applying the Policy to Existing Industrial Premises of the Industrial Noise Policy applies and that the setting of "achievable" goals is difficult. It is Council's view that the operations do not fall into this category of the INP, and the operations need to achieve the "intrusive" noise goal 47dB(A) at the nearest receptor dwelling.

 

5        The Renzo Tonin & Associates report also makes the comment (pp16) that "the daytime noise goal is 47dB(A) and that is not met, even with the double skin cladding (scenario 4). This is mainly due to contributions from the noise transmitting through the roof of the Stage 2 shed".

 

6        Renzo Tonin & Associates do not provide any justification in the report for the roof of the Stage 2 shed not to be treated or the outcomes if it were. Similarly, there is no mention of the acoustic benefits or achievement of the "intrusive" noise goal 47dB(A) if the Stage 1 Shed was enclosed as shown in the plans of the original approval.

 

The processing of the application will continue. However, finalisation of the matter will not be possible until the matters, outlined above in paragraphs 3 & 4, are resolved and additional information and response is received from you in regard to paragraph 6.

 

Due to the concerns identified above, the matters raised in the submissions received from nearby residents, the ongoing noise management issues with operations and the anomaly raised by Renzo Tonin, Council engaged Heggies to undertake a peer review of the Renzo Tonin report to ensure that the noise issues were adequately and correctly addressed. Heggies confirmed the concerns that Council raised with the application of the INP. In particular the consideration that this modification was being considered as an existing industry and the noise generated by its operations were included in the establishment of the background noise levels by Renzo Tonin. This is why there is a considerable difference between the Heggies background noise level and the higher background noise level obtained by Renzo Tonin.

 

Heggies specific response to the claimed anomaly is repeated below:

 

In addition to the background noise monitoring results from Renzo, Table 2.1 of the APS Report refers to noise levels measured by SLR Heggies at 197 Wallace Street during February 2009.

 

The noise levels recorded by SLR Heggies were 6 dBA lower than those recorded by Renzo during the daytime period. This has a significant impact when it comes to the setting of noise criteria and the assessment of noise impacts.

 

With respect to the SLR Heggies noise monitoring, the APS report dismisses the SLR Heggies noise levels as invalid stating that:

 

The L90 day and evening background noise levels from the Heggies report were noted to be lower than the night-time L90 noise levels. This is considered unusual and was not explained further in the Heggies report. As such it is suggested that the daytime and evening noise monitoring may not have adequately captured all noise sources.

 

In response to this, it is well documented that the above is not an unusual occurrence; indeed it is accounted for and referred to in the DECCW INP Application Notes as follows:

 

The results of long term unattended background noise monitoring can sometimes determine that the calculated Rating Background Level (RBL) for the evening or night period is higher than the RBL for the daytime period. These situations can often arise due to increased noise from, for example, insects or frogs during the evening and night in the warmer months or due to temperature inversion conditions during winter. The objective of carrying out long-term background noise monitoring is to determine existing background noise levels at a location that are indicative of the entire year.

 

Furthermore, during the same time period, SLR Heggies conducted noise monitoring at two (2) additional locations in the vicinity of the Macksville Industrial Estate (Northwood Close and Laura Place) with similar noise levels recorded at all locations. The SLR Heggies measured noise levels are provided in Table 1 below.

 

Table 1 Summary of Existing Ambient Noise Levels

 

Location

Period

Rating Background Level (RBL)

Measured Existing LAeq(15minute) Noise Level

Estimated Existing Industrial Contribution LAeq

Location 1

 

5 Northwood Close

Day

38

52

50

Evening

37

52

50

Night

40

51

<50

Location 2

 

197 Wallace Street

Day

36

53

50

Evening

35

53

50

Night

37

52

<50

Location 3

 

14 Laura Place

Day

35

49*

43

Evening

36

55

43

Night

42

56

<43

 

Therefore, it is considered that the SLR Heggies noise monitoring on Wallace Street provides a good representation of the background noise levels in the vicinity of the proposed APS expansion and is typical of long term background noise levels in the area.

 

It should also be noted that the noise monitoring conducted by SLR Heggies was based on the requirements of the INP and was conducted over a period of 11 days from Monday 9 February 2009 to Friday 20 February 2009. This gave approximately 8 days of valid data (after the exclusion of data during rainfall or periods when wind speeds were in excess of 5m/s) in comparison to the one (1) day captured by Renzo Tonin.

 

The INP outlines the steps that must be followed when determining the relevant noise levels which are as follows:

 

·              establish existing Rating Background Noise Levels (RBL);

·              determine the Intrusive Noise Criterion RBL + 5dB(A);

·              compares the Amenity Criterion from Table 2.1 of the INP;

·              determines the project-specific criterion;

·              models the noise impacts from the development on nearby receivers;

·              identifies feasible and reasonable mitigation measures and resulting receiver impacts;

 

The following Table R1 outlines the RBL, Intrusive Noise Criterion and Project Specific Criterion from these two noise reports.

 

Table R1

Time of Day

Rating Background Level (RBL)

Intrusive Noise Criterion (RBL+5dB(a))

Amenity Criterion

Project Specific Criterion

 

Renzo

Heggies

Renzo

Heggies

Renzo

Heggies

Renzo

Heggies

Day (7am–6pm)

42

36

47

41

55

55

47

41

Evening (6pm–10pm)

40

35

45

40

45

45

45

40

Night (10pm–7am)

35

37

40

40*

40

40

40

40*

*The DECCW INP Application Notes state that where the RBL for the evening or night-time period is higher than the RBL for the daytime period the intrusive noise level for the evening be set at no greater than the intrusive noise level for the daytime. The intrusive noise level for the night-time should be no greater than the intrusive noise level for day or evening.

 

In an attempt to resolve the noise issues a meeting was held on 27 January 2011 which included the Mayor, General Manager, Manager Business Development, Director Environment and Planning, Mr Mark Palmer (Abigroup - General Manager Central Region), Mr Bogdan Gregory (Abigroup), Mr Mark Trudgett (Abigroup), Mr Phil Noakes (Abigroup).

 

This meeting charted out the way forward for Abigroup (APS) to progress the matters identified in Council's letter of 7 December 2010. Abigroup have been reviewing their Macksville operations, undertaking further noise modelling and identifying noise attenuation works and onsite activities in an attempt to meet the design noise criteria for the operation of the Macksville plant.

 

A revised Noise and Mitigation report and amended plans were submitted with Council on Friday 15 April 2011. The noise modelling has resulted in some modifications required to the existing Stage 1 Shed and the proposed Stage 2 shed as well as other onsite management and process refinement.

 

The Noise report concludes that subject to the implementation of a range of noise mitigation works, changes to onsite management practices and relocation of the reinforcing manufacturing activities to another shed further to the west, compliance will be achieved with the 41dB(A) project design noise criteria for the major part of operations as it identifies a normal operation level of around 40dB(A). The noise report does identify that during the periods when the form vibrators are in use (approximately 1-2 hours per day and then, only during the 10.00 am–4.00 pm period), noise levels up to 47dB(A) may be received at the nearest dwellings. It is identified that investigations will continue into how to further minimise the noise from the form vibrators. However, the proponents state that "all reasonable and feasible noise mitigation measures have been considered and are to be implemented"

 

Section 8 of the INP (Negotiation Process) does provide opportunity for the proponent and the regulator (Council in this instance) to work through any potential non compliance in an attempt to negotiate an outcome where it is "demonstrated that all feasible and reasonable mitigation measures have been applied".

 

Under clause 8.2 of the INP it states:

 

Where, in the final analysis, the level of impact would still exceed the project-specific noise levels, the economic and social benefits flowing from the proposed development to the community should be evaluated against the undesirable noise impacts.

 

Where it can be demonstrated by the proponent that the development offers net benefits, a regulator/consent authority may consider these grounds for applying the achievable noise levels, rather than the project-specific noise levels, as the statutory compliance limit

 

It is therefore quite reasonable, for Council to apply the above provision as the noise levels expected to be received at the nearest receptor dwellings will, for most of the operations be at or below the "intrusive noise criteria" and the "project specific criterion" of 41dB(A) with only the form vibrators exceeding this level to approximately 47dB(A) for a maximum of 1-2 hours per day and during the mid part of the day. It is also noted that once all the noise mitigation works are completed there will be an overall reduction in noise levels being received by the nearby residents in the order of 10dB(A) or greater.

 

After reviewing each of the submissions, there is no doubt that two main issues exist, the noise emanating from the operations and the intrusiveness of that noise in the early morning and late evening (including the alleged before and after hours activities).

 

Based on the additional noise modelling work and provided all the identified noise mitigation works are implemented, the impact on the adjoining residents are likely to be considerably reduced and for most in compliance with the Industrial Noise Policy.

 

Considering the economic benefits provided by this modified proposal and the potential for increased economic and employment outcomes generated by this development, Council is in a position to accept the implementation of the identified noise mitigation works and conditionally approve the modification subject to the specific noise performance conditions recommended in the draft amended conditions of consent.

 

The proposed modification was notified to some 40 adjoining and nearby residents for a period of 21 days from 26 November to 17 December 2010. During this period Council received 13 submissions all objecting to the excessive noise and operating outside approved operational hours. Each submission has raised other matters including need for vegetation, screening, loss of land values and Council's lack of enforcement for compliance. The submissions are outlined in the following Table R2, and copies of each submission are attached.


 

Table R2: Submissions

SUBMISSION

ISSUES

RESPONSE

Ms Leone Warr

Wallace Street Macksville

·      Noise impact due to open shed contrary to the originally approved shed being enclosed.

 

 

·      Exceedance of approved operational hours.

 

 

 

 

 

·      Lack of cooperation from plant operators after raising concerns.

 

·      Concerned that the operators will continue to disregard the rules

 

·      Does not support the modification

·      It is agreed that the originally approved shed was identified as "typical shed" and was an enclosed shed. Council staff have been working with Abigroup to address this matter.

·      Council had received advice that the operational hours were being exceeded resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday.

·      Council staff have been working through several compliance issues with the operators.

·      Compliance and regulation issues have led to the Section 96 Modification currently before Council.

Ms Helen Murphy

Wallace Street Macksville

·      Significant costs to ratepayers for Council staff to pursue compliance.

 

 

 

·      Noise impact due to open shed contrary to the originally approved shed being enclosed.

 

 

·      Lack of cooperation from plant operators after raising concerns.

 

·      Exceedance of approved operational hours.

·      Diarised account of early morning starts and late evening finishes.

·      The volume, duration and consistent presence of noise is a serious problem

·      Request that Council move to enforce conditions of consent.

 

·      Why cant activities be better planned.

 

 

 

 

·      Requests that Council consider the interests of all stakeholders.

 

 

 

 

 

·      Expected that the proposal will increase noise levels not reduce them.

 

 

·      Requests that any future modification be brought to the attention of all affected landowners.

 

 

·      Does not support the modification.

·      Attending to compliance issues regarding development consent conditions does have an impact on resources with staff having to attend to complaints and allegations of breaches.

·      It is agreed that the originally approved shed was identified as "typical shed" and was an enclosed shed. Council staff have been working with Abigroup to address this matter.

·      Council staff have been working through several compliance issues with the operators.

·      Council had received advice that the operational hours were being exceeded resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday.

·      Compliance and regulation issues have led to the Section 96 Modification currently before Council.

·      Council staff have requested the operators to review their operations and timing of processes. The processes are difficult to alter due to the moulds needing to be ready each morning.

·      Council is required to consider all applications on their merits against a range of criteria and guidelines. Social and amenity issues are one of those criteria.

 

 

·      Noise modelling provided by the applicant indicates that the proposed modification is likely to reduce the noise at the nearest receivers by up to 10dB(A)

·      Any future modification or new development applications are required to follow a process of notification which Council previously resolved which includes approximately 40 near residences.

Mr Paul Laverty &

Ms Rhonda McAuliffe Wallace Street Macksville

·      Was under impression that tree planting and rehabilitation of site was to be undertaken.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·      Site is an unsightly.

 

 

 

 

·      Exceedance of approved operational hours.

·      The requirements of the vegetation and rehabilitation relate to the original Subdivision unrelated to APS (Abigroup). The drainage reserve between the subject site and the railway is still under construction due to ongoing slumping and soft soil issues. The Vegetation Management Plan does require considerable revegetation to the drainage reserve prior to Council accepting the reserve.

·      The Precast yard is a large industrial site with a vast area of exposed land. Once the whole operation is completed some visual improvement will be achieved.

·      Council had received advice that the operational hours were being exceeded resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday.

B.A. & A.J Laverty

Wallace Street

Macksville

·      Misdescribed the modification as a proposal for a Concrete Batching Plan.

 

 

 

·      Exceedance of approved operational hours.

 

 

 

 

 

·      As well as noise lights are on all night.

 

 

·      Good case for industrial deafness for a lot of residents

·      Mrs Laverty was contacted to confirm that their submission was in relation to the Modification. This was confirmed and reference to a Concrete Batching Plan is actually in regard to the Pre-cast Concrete Plant.

·      Council had received advice that the operational hours were being exceeded resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday.

·      The lights are on at the site during the night as this is when the curing processes occur. No noise is associated with this activity.

·      Council is unable to comment on this matter as Industrial Deafness usually relate to occupational hazards in the workplace . However, the matter should be taken into account with the exposure that near residents indicate they are exposed to.

Ms Rhona Vickoce

Wallace Street

Macksville

·      Does not support the modification due to ongoing non-compliance

·      Requests Council to enforce compliance before any changes.

 

 

·      Compliance and regulation issues have led to the Section 96 Modification currently before Council.

 

Ms Ruth Tideman

Wallace Street

Macksville

·      Does not support the modification due to ongoing non-compliance

·      Requests Council enforce compliance before any changes.

 

·      Exceedance of approved operational hours.

 

 

 

 

 

·      The comfort or residents should be engendered.

 

 

 

·      It appears that Council has condoned the non compliance issues and action of Abigroup.

 

 

·      Compliance and regulation issues has led to the Section 96 Modification currently before Council.

·      Council had received advice that the operational hours were being exceeded resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday.

·      Council is required to consider all applications on their merits against a range of criteria and guidelines. Social and amenity issues are one of those criteria.

·      Council staff have been working through the noncompliance issues with the operators. Council has not condoned the activities of APS (Abigroup).

Mr S Colahan

Wallace Street

Macksville

·      Does not support the modification due to ongoing non-compliance

·      Noise emitted when forms are being agitated is very loud and uncomfortable.

 

·      States that the residents were there first and this must be taken into account.

 

 

·      Claims that the steel sheds will act like a drum unless insulated.

 

 

 

·      Requests Council enforce compliance before any changes.

 

 

·      Exceedance of approved operational hours.

 

 

·      This comment is aligned to several other complaints that Council has received in regard to particularly noisy activities.

·      Council is required to consider all applications on their merits against a range of criteria and guidelines. Social and amenity issues are one of those criteria.

·      One of the scenarios considered in the noise report is a double skinned external eastern wall to the Stage 2 Shed which provides the best acoustic outcome.

·      Compliance and regulation issues has led to the Section 96 Modification currently before Council.

·      Council had received advice that the operational hours were being exceeded resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday.

Ms Fay Walters

Wallace Street

Macksville

·      Does not support the modification due to noise emanating which impacts on their everyday living.

·      Exceedance of approved operational hours.

 

 

 

 

 

·      Was under impression that tree planting and rehabilitation of site was to be undertaken.

 

 

 

 

·     Council had received advice that the operational hours were being exceeded resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday.

·      The requirements of the vegetation and rehabilitation relate to the original Subdivision unrelated to APS (Abigroup). The drainage reserve between the subject site and the railway is still under construction due to ongoing slumping and soft soil issues. The Vegetation Management Plan does require considerable revegetation to the drainage reserve prior to Council accepting the reserve.

 

G & L Humphreys

Wallace Street

Macksville

·      Does not support the modification due to ongoing non-compliance

·      Exceedance of approved operational hours.

·      Has submitted 11 written complaints and 6 verbal complaints to Council regarding noise over the past 3 months.

 

·      Was under impression that tree planting and rehabilitation of site was to be undertaken.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·      Concerned with the proposed opening doors in the eastern wall of the stage 2 shed as they could be open during operations.

 

 

·      Raised issue with dust from the site.

 

 

·      Requests Council to stand up for the residents.

 

 

 

·      Extends invitation to Staff and Councillors to spend some time at their residence to witness what they are exposed to.

 

 

·     Council had received advice that the operational hours were being exceeded resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday.

·   The requirements of the vegetation and rehabilitation relate to the original Subdivision unrelated to APS (Abigroup). The drainage reserve between the subject site and the railway is still under construction due to ongoing slumping and soft soil issues. The Vegetation Management Plan does require considerable revegetation to the drainage reserve prior to Council accepting the reserve.

·   Discussions with APS confirm that the sliding doors would only be opened when the plant is not in production as they acknowledge that if they were open impacts would be felt by adjoining landowners.

·   The site is generally unsealed due to the large areas of storage and current undeveloped areas. This will be further considered and investigated.

·      Council is required to consider all applications on their merits against a range of criteria and guidelines. Social and amenity issues are one of those criteria.

·   Staff have attended the property and it remains a matter for Councillors to determine if they wish to attend their property.

Mr D Gosson

Wallace Street

Macksville

·      Objects to the level of noise emanating from the plant.

 

 

 

 

 

·      Suggests the enclosing of the eastern side of the sheds

·    Council had received advice that the operational hours were being exceeded resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday.

·    The modification is to enclose only the eastern wall of the Stage 2 Shed keeping the Stage 1 Shed open.

PH & VA Lane

Wallace Street

Macksville

·      Exceedance of approved operational hours.

 

·    Council had received advice that the operational hours were being exceeded resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday

Green & McKay Solicitors and  Attorneys on behalf R & BM McWilliam

Fairway Cove off Wallace Street

Macksville

 

·      Does not support the modification as the development currently unreasonably impacts upon their amenity, enjoyment and value of their clients' residence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

·      Does not support the modification as the noise currently exceeds acceptable standards and the proposed modification will exacerbate the impacts on their clients' residence and surrounding property.

 

 

 

·      Visual impact on clients residence is not in keeping with surrounding residential zoning.

 

 

 

 

 

·      As a result of original development consent their clients have suffered loss and damage claiming lost cost of their residential subdivision (Fairway Cove DA    ) diminution in the value of their clients residential land and inability to sell the affected property and the modification will cause further loss and damage.

·      The proposed modification is unsupported by appropriate environmental impact studies including competent social impact assessment and noise pollution studies.

 

 

 

 

·      Recommending that Council should refuse the modification in light of the social and environmental matters raised in their submission.

·      In closing Green and McKay on behalf of Mr and Mrs McWilliam have stated that "Our clients foreshadow proceedings in the Land and Environment Court of NSW, and proceedings for compensation, in the event that our clients' interests are further adversely affected by approval of the proposal"

·      Council is required to consider all applications on their merits against a range of criteria and guidelines. Social and amenity issues are one of those criteria. In regard to devaluation of property it is difficult to determine that the APS development has caused any loss of value as the McWilliam property backs onto the North Coast Railway and overlooks the Macksville Industrial Estate.

·      It is acknowledged that the originally approved "typical shed" was enclosed and had this enclosed shed been constructed the noise impacts would be less then what is being experienced. The modification relates to the non enclosure of the existing shed. Council will asses the noise impacts with the non enclosure of the existing shed.

·      The Precast yard is a large industrial site with a vast area of exposed land. Once the whole operation is completed some visual improvement will be achieved. It is noted that the land east of the railway is zoned residential and the area west of the railway is zoned industrial.

·      Claiming the devaluation of property attributable to the APS development is difficult to determine, especially with the coincidence with the Fairway Cove subdivision, local and global real estate pricing and economic impacts. Notwithstanding Council will need to carefully consider noise impacts and amenity issues when assessing the proposed modification.

 

·      APS submitted a Statement of Environmental Effects and an independent Noise Report by Renzo Tonin & Assoc. A social impact assessment was not required noting that the development had previously been approved after due process and notification which included the Mr and Mrs McWilliam who at that time raised no objection to the development.

Council is required to consider a range of matters including social and environmental issues.

 

 

·    The closing advice of possible L&EC action is noted. However, Council is fully aware that such action is available to third parties where they are dissatisfied with Council's determination. As such Council always applies due consideration to all submissions received through its assessment process.

Scott McWilliam

River Street

Macksville (partner in the Fairway Cove subdivision)

·      Is not against development for employment which is needed in this valley.

·      Is concerned with exceeding approved operational hours and noise level standards.

 

 

 

 

·      Requests a conditions for concrete tilt-up walls to the eastern elevation of the stage 2 shed and the planting of fast growing foliage to the eastern boundary as required in the first DA.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·      The above suggested conditions are to soften the impact, as it is considered that the APS development has had a negative monetary impact of 25% on land prices in their Fairway Cove subdivision.

·      The APS site is untidy and has a visual impact on them and other residents in the vicinity. Suggesting that storage should be in the south eastern corner area.

 

 

·      Suggests that operations should be better managed to ensure concrete pours and other activities are undertaken within operational hours.

·      Suggests that Council regulate the activities to ensure compliance with approvals.

 

 

 

 

 

·    Council had received advice that the operational hours were being exceeded resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday

·   Council will consider the eastern wall shed treatment as concrete tilt-up walls is one solution. Scenario 4  outlined in the noise report with double clad and insulated air gap can give similar acoustic benefits as tilt-up walls. The requirements of the vegetation relate to the original Subdivision unrelated to APS (Abigroup). The drainage reserve between the subject site and the railway is still under construction due to ongoing slumping and soft soil issues. The Vegetation Management Plan for the original subdivision does require considerable revegetation to the drainage reserve prior to Council accepting the reserve.

·      The suggested conditions will be taken into consideration.

 

 

 

 

 

·      The Precast yard is a large industrial site with a vast area of exposed land. Once the whole operation is completed some visual improvement will be achieved. It is noted that the south east corner is identified for storage however this is unlikely to be used until stage 3 is completed.

·      If Council resolves to approve the modification it is proposed that condition be imposed which clearly identifies approved operational hours.

 

·    Council does monitor and regulate activities when non-compliance is identified. This activity has been monitored resulting in a Noise Abatement Order being issued on Monday 7 December 2010 prohibiting offensive noise prior to 7am Monday – Saturday and prior to 8am Sunday.

 

 

The original application was lodged and approved pursuant to Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 1995. Since the initial approval, Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010 (NLEP2010) has been gazetted and now applies to the modification.

 

The new zone under NLEP2010 for the Macksville Industrial Estate is IN1-General Industrial which permits with the consent of Council, the current industrial operation of this Pre-Cast Concrete Plant. The Modification therefore is considered pursuant to the NLEP2010.

 

 

MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION – SECTION 79C(1) EP&A ACT

 

In its assessment of a development application, Council is required to take into consideration the following matters:

 

(a)        the provisions of

 

(i)         any environmental planning instruments

 

Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010

 

The subject land is zoned IN1 General Industrial pursuant to the provisions of Nambucca Local Environmental Plan 2010. The development is permissible with Council’s consent in the zone. It is also considered that the proposed modification complies with the objectives of the zoning.

 


North Coast Regional Environmental Plan

 

The North Coast Regional Plan no longer applies to the Nambucca Shire Local Government area following gazettal of the NLEP 2010.

 

(ii)        any proposed instrument that is or has been the subject of public consultation

 

There are no proposed instruments that are or have been the subject of public consultation.

 

(iii)       any development control plan (DCP)

 

The Nambucca Development Control Plan 2010 applies to the proposal. The development is consistent with the requirements of the DCP.

 

(iiia)     any planning agreement

 

A VPA applied to the original approval for the replacement of the railway bridge and associated works.

 

(iv)       any matters prescribed by the regulations

 

Traffic generating developments

 

The original application was considered pursuant to SEPP 11. This SEPP has been repealed and all traffic generating development must be considered under SEPP(Infrastructure) 2007. The original application considered that an average of 40 traffic movements per day is likely in this existing industrial area. The Modification is likely to increase the number of employee vehicle movements to approximately 80 per day. The current additional 20 vehicle movements per day for the delivery of pre-mixed concrete, which will be sourced locally and other deliveries is also likely to increase to approximately 40 per day. It should be noted that the majority of pre mixed concrete is sourced from the ready mixed concrete plan within the Macksville industrial site some 400 m from the site. In the event that the nearby plant is unable to supply the concrete the alternative sources will be from Macksville (McKay Street) or Nambucca Heads.

The development is not listed on Schedule 3 of SEPP(Infrastructure) 2007 and therefore the modification is not required to be referred to the RTA.

 

SEPP 55 – Remediation of land

 

The original application was considered pursuant to clause 7(1) of SEPP 55. Council was satisfied that the development site was not contaminated. This has not changed with the modification.

 

SEPP 71 - Coastal Protection

 

The original proposal was considered against the provisions of SEPP 71 as the site is contained within the coastal zone. The proposal was not listed as significant development (Schedule 2) or within a coastal sensitive location. Therefore there was no requirement for a master plan to be prepared, nor for Council to refer the proposal to the Department of Planning.

 

Clause 8 of the SEPP was however relevant to the original applications and also for the Modification. However, as there is very little change from the originally approved development it is not considered that there will be any change from the original assessment.

NSW Coastal Policy

 

The Coastal Policy was prepared to co-ordinate the management of the coast by identifying, in a single document, the State’s various management policies, programs and standards as they apply to a defined coastal zone. The NSW Coastal Policy has as its central focus the ecologically sustainable development (ESD) of the NSW coastline. This is in recognition of the fact that the coast is the focus of intense pressures from human activity and that there are a large range of competing interests for its resources.

 

Although the Modification does occur within the coastal zone the proposed modification is not inconsistent with the NSW Coastal Policy.

 

Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000

 

It is expected that the modification will not exceed the maximum amount of 25,000 tonnes of concrete product being manufactured each year. This is below the threshold of 150 tonnes per day or 30,000 tonnes per year of concrete products. APS have been advised that with the Stage 2 Shed they need to be aware that should production exceed 30,000 tonnes in any 12 month period, further modification would be required as it would then become a Designated Development and a new raft of matters will need to be addressed.

 

APS have also advised that they will be intending to submit a further modification to exceed the 30,000 tonnes pa for a period of 9 months and that a new Designated Development application will be prepared for permanent output above 30,000 tonnes pa

 

b          the likely impacts of the development

 

Access and Traffic Impacts

 

Pre-mix concrete and other steel reinforcing products used in the production method will be delivered to the site from the nearby ready mix concrete batching plant and all other deliveries via the Pacific Highway and over the new concrete Upper Warrell Creek Railway Bridge.

 

It is expected that a maximum of 120 vehicle movements a day would occur during peak production. Given that the old timber Upper Warrell Creek Bridge has now been replaced, the noise impact over the bridge has been considerably reduced. Current traffic volumes on local roads are already influenced by the township and the industrial estate, these volumes are unlikely to have any discernable impact.

 

Concrete products will exit the site via Yarrawonga Street and over the new railway bridge typically during plant operational hours. Deliveries will likely also occur outside of normal operating hours depending on the requirements of the RTA, destination of the product and the availability of vehicle escorts.

 

Water consumption

 

Water usage since the operations began has been well under the 4,000kl pa as predicted. The commissioning of Stage 2 is not likely to exceed the 4,000 kl pa however, the original condition regarding water usage will be retained which identifies that should they exceed 4,000kl pa Council reserves the right to increase the water contribution.

 

Notwithstanding, mains supply town water is used for potable use and some production use. Recycled water (from storage pits) and captured storm water is used in the production process for concrete casting. Waste water (concrete wash area) is reused continuously to wash the concrete truck chutes. Excess of waste water will be used for dust control over the gravel surface of the yard where necessary. Periodically the waste water sediment not able to be recycled, will be removed from the site using a licensed contractor.

 

Due to ongoing concerns with Council's water security it is proposed to condition the modification that roof water harvesting is to be investigated and implemented for use in operations on the site such as wash down, concrete casting, dust repression and toilet flushing etc.

 

Water Quality/Stormwater

 

A Stormwater strategy and plan was submitted with the original application indicating that all stormwater from the site will be collected and treated in stages to prevent contamination from various pollutants including nutrients and suspended solids which has been working satisfactorily.

 

Council considered that the Water Quality and Stormwater management process was acceptable when the development was originally approved. The Modification will be incorporated into the system as outlined in the original approval.

 

Noise and Vibration

 

The nearest sensitive noise receivers not associated with the proposal is an area of low density housing on the eastern side of the North Coast Railway in Wallace Street. Council has been dealing with numerous noise complaints since the operations commenced. These noise issues are directly related to the non enclosure of the Stage 1 Shed.

 

Operations are alleged to have occurred outside the general 7.00 am – 6.00 pm hours leading to a Noise Abatement Order being issued on 7 December 2010.

 

APS engaged Renzo Tonin & Associates to undertake further noise modelling and identify noise attenuation works to ensure activities and operations meet acceptable noise levels outlined in the Industrial Noise Policy.

 

The further Noise report dated 14 April 2011 has identified a range of mitigation works necessary to reduce noise levels to 41dB(A). The works include insulation treatment to the ceiling of the existing Stage 1 Shed, insulated roofing and wall cladding (2 sides) of the Stage 2 Shed, installation of an insulated roof between the Stage 1 & 2 Sheds, installation of an insulated wall to part of the existing Stage 1 shed, relocation of the reinforcing manufacture area from within the existing Stage 1 Shed to a new fully enclosed shed further to the west, planting selected screen vegetation along the eastern boundary, and time managing the use of the form vibrators to 1 – 2 hours per day and then during the mid morning to mid afternoon.

 

In addition, a noise mitigation strategy has been prepared and will be implemented during the daily operations. This strategy refers to such activities as , use of new operational alarms for the gantry cranes, ready mix delivery truck, improved plant and equipment maintenance programs and managing non necessary banging and clanging on site (see page 12 Renzo Tonin & Associates - Macksville Precast Facility - April 2011).

 

It is proposed that a noise performance condition be applied to the modified consent requiring APS to provide Council with a statement from Renzo Tonin & Associates confirming that all identified noise mitigation measures have been implemented as outlined in their 14 April 2011 report prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate for the modified Stage 1 & Stage 2 Sheds. Further, that a full noise assessment report be undertaken once operations commence in the Stage 2 Shed which includes an 11 day noise monitoring at the properties (195, 205 and 215 Wallace Street Macksville). The results of the outcome of this report are to be submitted to Council demonstrating that the actual receiver noise is in accordance with the modelled noise levels outlined in the 14 April 2011 report. Where normal operations exceed 41dB(A) and 47dB(A) when the form vibrators are in use, recommendations for further mitigation works are to be provided. In such an event, further noise monitoring will be required after the additional mitigation measures are carried out.

 

Air Quality

 

The Study Area is located in an Industrial subdivision and as such some very localised impacts to air quality could be expected from this use. Emissions to air during operations would be limited to exhaust from concrete delivery trucks, reinforcing bar delivery trucks, general trucks, low-bed segment transporters and staff vehicles Emissions from plant and machinery are expected to be low and unlikely to be of nuisance to any sensitive receivers.

 

Concern has been raised through a submission that residential neighbours are being affected by dust during windy periods. The site is a large area much of it used for storage of the large concrete beams. The site is compacted earth/clay which in normal situations would not generate unreasonable amounts of dust. However, as outlined in the submission there are circumstances where this can be a problem.

 

The requirement to consider and implement roof water harvesting will assist with the availability of water for dust suppression. APS have undertaken further site works utilising decomposed granite and road base materials over compacted clay which will further minimise dust.

 

Flora and Fauna

 

Impacts on flora and fauna from the Modification are not considered relevant as the site is already clear and altered. However, with the planting of selected screenery vegetation adjacent to the natural drainage line, it is expected that this will offer harbourage and habitat for a range of species.

 

Waste and Chemicals

 

Waste generated by the proposal is mainly from the following activities:

 

·              Concrete sludge from the wastewater holding tanks;

·              Liquid waste from concrete washing;

·              General waste such as plastic, cardboard and machine parts (eg oil filters and drums).

 

All liquid waste as a result of concrete washout is either reused for further washing operations or disposed of via a licensed liquid waste facility. Concrete sludge is allowed to dry and either recycled for use in road base or disposed of at a licensed landfill.

 

There is potential for a chemical spill, however secure storage and bunding minimises the risk of a spill.

 

c          the suitability of the site for the development

 

The site is already approved for the operations and stage 2 will be generally in accordance with the original approval subject to this Modification.

 

d          any submissions made in accordance with the Act or the regulations

 

The application has been extensively notified to adjoining landowners as Council did for the original application. The notification attracted 13 submissions objecting to the proposal, copies of which are attached for Council’s information. . A precise of each submission and staff responses are outlined in the Table R2 of this report.

 

Whilst the proposal was not renotified or readvertised, each of the originally notified residents were again advised of the further noise modelling and noise mitigation works. They were advised that the matter is to be dealt with by Council at a Special General Purpose Committee meeting on 5 May 2011, offering them the opportunity to view the revised noise report and additional noise mitigation works as well as attending the special GPC and the Council meeting at Bowraville on the 5th May 2011.

 

e          the public interest

 

It is evident that the original proposal and this Modification has raised interest from the public in relation to the performance of the operators in the past. Council has the responsibility of balancing competing interests to prevent unacceptable impact on the community, while allowing this development which has considerable economic benefit for the Nambucca Valley.

 

The development is considered an appropriate land use within the industrial area, however the operators are committed to improving their operating performance and compliance with conditions of consent to provide an improved and acceptable outcome for the community. As such the proposed noise performance conditions are considered appropriate to ensure that compliance is achieved and maintained.

 

 


SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The environmental risks and impacts were assessed for the original application and the risks and impacts associated with the Modification have been further assessed.

 

Social

 

The project has caused local amenity issues in regard to noise. These matters have been taken into account in the assessment of the Modification and the formulation of the recommended draft conditions.

 

Economic

 

The development has had positive impacts for the local economy directly through employment generation and indirectly through further investment. The progression with Stage 2 will further enhance these economic benefits.

 

Risk

 

The past performance of the operators in regard to managing noise from the site is the main matter for contention. The modification if approved and carried out immediately will address the noise issues and reduce the risk of regulation and compliance monitoring by Council.

 

The biggest risk though is the modification being approved and the noise issues increase if not carried out in accordance with the recommendations and requirements.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Regulating compliance of this development has incurred considerable resources. Whilst these costs are generally absorbed in the day to day operational costs of staff it does reduce their activities in other areas.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Staff costs are covered by General Fund for Health and Building Surveyors or through the Environmental Levy for the Environmental Compliance Officer

 

DETAILS OF PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR THE MODIFICATION

 

1        "Deferred Commencement" consent is granted pursuant to Clause 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 subject to Condition No 2 being addressed to Council's satisfaction before the consent can operate. This matter must be addressed within 12 months from the date of this notice.

 

          Reason:  To ensure development proceeds only after certain specified matters are addressed to Council’s satisfaction.

 

Deferred Commencement Condition

 

2        "Deferred Commencement" consent is granted, subject to satisfactory resolution of the following matter:

 

          Pursuant to Section 80A(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, a planning agreement in accordance with the offer made by Abigroup (letter dated 27 February 2008) that relates to the development application the subject of this consent, shall be prepared, publicly exhibited and entered into by respective parties.

 

          Reason:  To ensure development proceeds only after finalisation of the Planning Agreement.

 

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

 

3        The development shall be carried out generally in accordance with the application and the documents lodged with Council on 24 December 2007 and plan Nos 607119-D-102 Rev 1, 607119-D-103 Rev 2, 607119-D-104 Rev 1, the revised water consumption figures dated 6 March 2008, as amended by the Modification Application submitted 19 November 2010, Renzo Tonin & Associates – Macksville Precast Facility – Noise Mitigation of Stage 1 & 2 Operations dated 14 April 2011, plans Nos 7702001-RDA-01, 7702001-RDA-02, 7702001-RDA-03, 7702001-RDA-04, 7702001-RDA-05, 7702001-RDA-06, & 7702001-RDA-07 all dated 14/4/2011, stamped and returned with this consent, or modified by any of the following conditions of consent requiring submission of amended plans for Council approval.

 

          Reason:  To ensure development proceeds in accordance with approved plans and documentation.

 

3a      Operational hours for this Pre-cast Concrete plant are as identified in the original Statement of Environmental Effects which are 7.00 am–6.00 pm Monday–Saturday. No work shall take place on Sundays or Public Holidays.

 

          Reason:  To ensure development proceeds in accordance with approved plans and documentation.

 

4        Building works in accordance with this development consent, must not be commenced on-site until a Construction Certificate has been issued by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

          Reason:  To satisfy the relevant statutory requirements.

 

5        The building is not to be occupied until all conditions of Council’s consent have been complied with to the satisfaction of Council and an Occupation Certificate has been obtained.

 

          Reason:  To ensure satisfaction of Council’s conditions of consent prior to occupation.

 

Prescribed Conditions

 

6        The work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

 

          Reason: To satisfy the statutory provisions of the Building Code of Australia 2007.

 

 

PRIOR TO RELEASE OF CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

 

Section 138 Approvals

 

7        A separate application and consent under The Roads Act 1993 is required for any proposed construction work taking place within a Public Road Reserve (this includes construction involving machinery working on the development from an adjacent Public Road Reserve). This consent is to be obtained  prior to issue of the construction certificate.

 

          A copy of the form enclosed with the Development Application Determination is to be completed and returned to Council along with the application and inspection fee of $91.

 

          Reason: To ensure traffic safety and Council’s infrastructure is protected

 

Section 68 Approvals

 

8        Approvals under section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 for the following activities to be applied for by the applicant and issued by Council:

 

          a        Install a temporary structure on land – Part A.

 

          b        Install, alter, disconnect or remove a water meter connected to a service pipe – Part B.

 

          c        Carry out stormwater drainage work – Part B.

 

d        Connect a private drain or sewer with a public drain or sewer under the control of Council or with a drain or sewer which connects with such a public drain or sewer – Part B.

 

          e        Dispose of waste into a sewer of the Council (trade waste) – Part C.

 

          Reason:  To ensure compliance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993 and Regulations and provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

9        Any approved vehicle wash bay to service the proposed development must be approved and all water used in the car wash bay must drain to Council’s sewer following treatment in an oil plate separator or other system as approved by Council. Full details of the proposal must be submitted to Council for approval prior to the Construction Certificate being issued.

 

          Reason:  To maintain water quality of downstream drainage system.

 

10      The aboveground fuel and LPG tank(s) must meet the requirements of the Work Cover Authority and comply with the relevant Australian Standards. Full details of how these requirements are met, must be included on the Construction Certificate application and plans.

 

          Reason: To satisfy relevant environmental standards

 

Erosion and Sediment Control

 

11      Effective erosion and sediment control measures must be installed within the boundaries of the site prior to and during construction and be maintained until the site has been efficiently rehabilitated, turfed or landscaped.

 

          Should Council be the Principal Certifying Authority, details as to the method of complying with the above must be submitted prior to the release of the Construction Certificate. These measures may consist of sediment fences, hay bales and/or sandbags. Care should be taken in locating material stockpiles ie sand, soil, etc, and the number of vehicular movements should be restricted during inclement weather.

 

          Reason:  To ensure erosion and sediment control.

 

 

TO BE COMPLIED WITH DURING CONSTRUCTION

 

12      All erosion and sediment control measures/works, other pollution control and rehabilitation measures undertaken on the site shall conform to or exceed the specifications and standards contained in the current versions of:

 

          Managing Urban Stormwater, Soil and Construction Guidelines (Landcom 2004)

          Nambucca Shire Council Code of Practice for Erosion and Sediment Control Works

 

          Reason:  To ensure that control of erosion, sedimentation, other forms of pollution and site rehabilitation, are carried out to an acceptable standard as recommended by State Government Authorities.

 


Disabled Access

 

13      Provision must be made for access to the commercial floor space for people with disabilities in accordance with AS1428.1 2001 "Design for Access and Mobility Part 1: General Requirements for Access - Buildings".

 

          Reason:  To ensure satisfactory means of access for disabled persons.

 

 

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

 

Developer Contributions

 

14      The applicant shall pay to Council, prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, the following contributions for water and sewerage augmentation works, at the current rate of payment. The contribution rates are those that apply at the date of issue of this consent. Rates are adjusted annually on 1 July. Contributions will only be accepted at the rate applying at the date of payment. Council's  Corporate Services Department should be contacted prior to payment to confirm the required development rate. Should water consumption exceed 4,000 kL per annum then Council reserves the right to adjust its Section 64 contributions accordingly:

 

a        Council's water supply system and sewerage treatment works, pump stations and rising mains, a contribution of $72,793. (Water Contribution = $53,708 and Sewerage contribution = $19,085).

 

          Reason:  To ensure the development contributes towards the cost of augmenting Council’s services pursuant to Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

Engineering

 

15      The provision by the applicant, at his expense, of the following works and services in accordance with Council’s Aus-Spec #1 Design and Construction Specifications and its Water and Sewerage Construction Specifications prior to release of the occupation certificate.

 

a        Installation of a meter cock, water meter and backflow prevention device to each lot by Council at a cost of $120 each. (Cost is adjusted annually on 1 July. Cost will only be accepted at the rate applying at the date of payment.);

 

b        Sewer junction installation by Council to the development site at the developer’s cost;

 

c        Water service installation by Council to the development site at the developer’s cost;

 

d        Construction of Council's standard heavy duty industrial crossing to suit the access to the site with a minimum width of 6m. The crossover shall be constructed of concrete a minimum 200mm thick and reinforced with SL82 mesh.

 

e        All stormwater run-off from the development to be collected within the property and discharged to an existing drainage system approved by Council in accordance with the requirements of Council’s Aus-Spec #1 Design and Construction Specifications.

 

          Runoff detention/retention and sediment interception measures shall be installed and maintained to reduce flow velocities and to prevent sand, aggregate, road base, spoil, or other sediment from entering any downstream watercourses or water bodies.

 

          Details to be provided, together with supporting calculations for the sizing of ponds, outlets and overflow structures.

 

          Details to be provided in relation to the potential for water storage from roof runoff including location of tanks, storage capacity and reuse.

f         Stormwater runoff from the gravel sealed car park shall be collected and treated in a oil and grit trap prior to discharge to council’s stormwater system unless developer can demonstrate that an appropriate alternative treatment will be adopted.

 

g        Submission of certified engineering plans detailing work and services specified by this consent, for approval by Council prior to release of the Construction Certificate.

 

h        Supervision and inspection fees for engineering works associated with the development in accordance with Council’s Fees and Charges;

 

          Reason:  To ensure the development is undertaken in accordance with accepted service and Engineering standards.

 

Title Restrictions

 

16      Pursuant to Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 easements shall be created to achieve the following purposes:

 

a        All requisite sewerage easements;

 

b        All requisite drainage easements;

 

c        Provide a 5m wide right-of-carriageway access to drainage reserve for maintenance purposes.

 

          Reason:  To ensure public utility services, access and restrictions are legalised over the land.

 

Car Parking/Vehicles

 

17      Provision of a minimum 60 vehicle spaces on-site sealed, marked and drained in accordance with Council’s Aus-Spec #1 Design and Construction Specifications and Council’s Off-Street Parking Code”.

 

          Reason:  To ensure adequate on-site car parking is provided.

 

18      All internal roadways must be constructed to an all-weather gravel or bitumen surface in accordance with Council’s Aus-Spec #1 Design and Construction Specifications.

 

          Reason:  To ensure a satisfactory standard of internal access is achieved.

 

Liquid Trade Waste

 

19      Proponent to submit relevant detail of trade waste generation and proposed pre-treatment of Trade waste (where required) via Council’s approved form (Application for Approval to Discharge Trade Waste to Sewer).

 

          Reason:  To ensure adequate disposal of trade waste.

 

20      Discharge of trade waste to Council’s sewer will not be permitted until formal approval for the discharge has been received from Council.

 

          Reason:  To ensure adequate disposal of trade waste.

 

Landscaping

 

21      Storage areas fronting the public road shall be suitable screened from view with landscaping.

 

21a    The select screen planting along the eastern boundary shall be completed prior to the issue of an occupation certificate.

 

Reason: To improve the amenity of the area and minimise unsightly visual impacts.

 

TO BE COMPLIED WITH AT ALL TIMES

 

Storage/Wastes Disposal

 

22      Provision of adequate storage facilities for industrial and domestic wastes to the requirements of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

          Reason:  To ensure reasonable standards of health and amenity to the occupants and neighbouring properties.

 

Hazardous Materials

 

23      All waste oil, grease and associated products must be stored in suitable containers and be transferred to a waste disposal depot or recycling facility, approved for the reception of such materials. Full details and proof of disposal must be kept on the premises for perusal by Council.

 

          Reason: To maintain water quality of downstream drainage system.

 

24      To ensure hazardous and toxic materials are not a threat to the environment they must be stored in accordance with Work Cover Authority requirements. All tanks, drums and containers of toxic and hazardous materials shall be stored in a bunded area. The bund walls and floor shall be constructed of impervious materials and shall be of sufficient size to contain 110% of the volume of the largest tank plus the volume displaced by any additional tanks within the bunded area.

 

          Reason:  To minimise threat to the environment from hazardous and toxic materials.

 

Car Parking

 

25      All vehicles associated with the industrial building or the use therein shall be located wholly within the site.

 

          Reason:  To ensure parking associated with the development does not affect traffic use of the adjoining road.

 

26      All loading and unloading in connection with the use must be carried out wholly within the property.

 

          Reason:  To ensure free-flow of vehicular and pedestrian traffic on public road reserves.

 

Amenity

 

27      The development shall be conducted in such a manner so as not to interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood, in respect of noise, vibration, smell, dust, waste water, waste products or otherwise.

 

          Reason:  To prevent damage or nuisance to neighbours and adjoining property.

 

28      The use of the premises, building services, equipment, machinery and, ancillary fittings shall not give rise to an "offensive noise" as defined under the provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act, 1997.

 

          Reason:  To protect the amenity of adjoining occupations.

 

28a    A compliance report from Renzo Tonin & Associates is to be prepared and submitted prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate confirming that all identified noise mitigation measures have been implemented as outlined in their 14 April 2011 report.

 

          Reason:  To confirm compliance with noise modelling report.

 

28b    A full noise assessment report is to be undertaken by Renzo Tonin & Associates once operations commence in the Stage 2 Shed which includes an 11 day noise monitoring (at the properties 195, 205 and 215 Wallace Street Macksville). The results of the outcome of this report are to be submitted to Council demonstrating that the actual receiver noise is in accordance with the modelled noise levels outlined in the Renzo Tonin & Associates 14 April 2011 report. Where normal operations exceed 41dB(A) and 47dB(A) when the form vibrators are in use, recommendations for further mitigation works are to be provided. In such an event, further noise monitoring will be required after the additional mitigation measures are carried out as required under condition 28a above and this condition.

 

          Reason:  To protect the amenity of adjoining occupations..

 

Water Consumption

 

29      The pre-cast plant shall incorporate a water boiler with a closed circuit water system as well as sufficient water recycling capability to ensure that total water usage from the town supply does not exceed 4,000 KL per annum.

 

          Reason:  To ensure water consumption does not exceed agreed figures.

 

29a    A strategy and implementation program to harvest and use roof water for operations is to be prepared and submitted to Council prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate demonstrating reduced reliance on the use of potable town water supply for activities not requiring potable water such as, toilet flushing, dust suppression, concrete casting, fire protection etc.

 

          Reason:  To minimise reliance on potable water for non potable water use.

 

ADVISORIES

 

Developer Contributions

 

a        Developer contributions will be indexed and adjusted annually as from the date the consent became effective, in accordance with the Consumer Price Index applicable to each year ending 30 June, commencing 1 July for the duration of the development consent and the said adjustment to the contribution shall take effect from and including July each year, commencing 30 June for the duration of the consent.

 

Building

 

b        Prior to any inspections being carried out Council requires confirmation that the site to be visited including access and egress, is a safe place of work in accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000.

 

          Note:  Council staff have discretion to refuse to enter unsafe sites.

 

c        Refusal to enter a site will require rescheduling of the inspection and additional fees paid. Continual failure to provide a safe work site will be reported to Work Cover.

 

Building

 

d        Hours of operating power machinery are set by the Environment Protection Authority. In general, these hours are between 7.00 am and 6.00 pm on weekdays and between 8.00 am and 6.00 pm on weekends and public holidays. Council seeks your co-operation in adhering to these hours when working near residential premises.


SITE PLAN

 


 

Attachments:

1View

 - CIRCULARISED DOCUMENT - Noise Mitigation Report of Stage 1 and 2 Operations Pre-Cast Concrete Plant and Plans

 

2View

30254/2010 - Letter regarding modification to DA2008/139 - AbiGroup

 

3View

30452/2010 - Submission in relation to proposed modification to DA 2008/139 - L Warr

 

4View

30453/2010 - Submission in relation to proposed modification of DA2008/139 - H Murphy

 

5View

30725/2010 - Submission in relation to DA 2008/139 - P Laverty and R McAuliffe

 

6View

30742/2010 - Submission in relation to DA 2008/139 - B and A Laverty

 

7View

30753/2010 - Submission in relation to DA 2008/139 - R Vickoce

 

8View

30755/2010 - Submission in relation to DA 2008/139 - R Tidemann

 

9View

30897/2010 - Submission in relation to DA 2008/139 - S Colahan

 

10View

30951/2010 - Submission in relation to DA 2008/139 - F Walters

 

11View

31098/2010 - Submission in relation to DA 2008/139

 

12View

31260/2010 - Submission in relation to DA 2008/139 - D Gosson

 

13View

31310/2010 - Submission in relation to section 96 application to modify DA2008/139 - P & V Lane

 

14View

31354/2010 - Submission objection to proposed modification to DA2008/139 - Green & McKay Solicitors acting on behalf of R & B McWilliam

 

15View

31360/2010 - Submission in relation to modification of DA2008/139 - S McWilliam

 

  


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 

 

 

 

 

Placeholder for Attachment 1

 

 

 

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 

 

 

CIRCULARISED DOCUMENT - Noise Mitigation Report of Stage 1 and 2 Operations Pre-Cast Concrete Plant and Plans

 

  Pages

 


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 

Enquiries to:     Mr Meyers

Our Ref:          DA2008/139 & LF2806

 

 

 

7 December 2010

 

 

 

AbiGroup Contractors Pty Limited

Level 20, Tower B, The Zenith

821 Pacific Highway

CHATSWOOD  NSW  2067

 

ATTENTION: Mr Mark Trudgett

 

 

Dear Mr Trudgett

 

MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 2008/139

 

1.   I refer to the Modification Application currently with Council for changes to the existing building Stage 1 – non cladding of external walls and for the proposed Stage 2 Shed – non cladding of the north and south ends.

 

2.   The Statement of Environmental Effects and the Acoustic Report submitted with the Modification clearly demonstrate that the current operations at the site exceed the provisions of the Industrial Noise Policy (INP). The reports also identify some differences between the Heggies Pty Ltd report commissioned by Council and the report undertaken by Renzo Tonin & Associates in regard to the established background noise at the nearest receptor dwellings.

 

3.   These anomalies do have an impact on the "intrusive" noise goals and as such, Council has sought some clarification and comment from Heggies Pty Ltd in regard to the matters raised by Renzo Tonin & Associates in their report.

 

4.   Council is concerned that Renzo Tonin & Associates has taken the view that Chapter 10 – Applying the Policy to Existing Industrial Premises of the Industrial Noise Policy applies and that the setting of "achievable" goals is difficult. It is Council's view that the operations do not fall into this category of the INP, and the operations need to achieve the "intrusive" noise goal 47dB(A) at the nearest receptor dwelling.

 

5.   The Renzo Tonin & Associates report also makes the comment (pp16) that "the daytime noise goal is 47dB(A) and that is not met, even with the double skin cladding (scenario 4). This is mainly due to contributions from the noise transmitting through the roof of the Stage 2 shed".

 

6.   Renzo Tonin & Associates do not provide any justification in the report for the roof of the Stage 2 shed not to be treated or the outcomes if it were. Similarly, there is no mention of the acoustic benefits or achievement of the "intrusive" noise goal 47dB(A) if the Stage 1 Shed was enclosed as shown in the plans of the original approval.


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 

2

 

8 December 2010

Modification to Development Application 2008/139

 

 

7.   I understand that there has been discussion between Mr Bogdan Gregory and Council's General Manager in regard to a further modification of operational hours to commence prior to 7am and to work on Sunday's. If this proceeds I advise that you will need to have the Acoustic report reviewed to address the operational hours and the INP.

 

The processing of the application will continue. However, finalisation of the matter will not be possible until the matters, outlined above in paragraphs 3 & 4, are resolved and additional information and response is received from you in regard to paragraph 6.

 

Paragraph 7 will need to be addressed if a further modification is sought in regard to operational hours.

 

Should you require further information in relation to this matter please contact the undersigned on 02 6568 0227.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

 

G Meyers

DIRECTOR ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING

 

GM:tmb


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 




Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 



Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 


Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant

 



Special General Purpose Committee - 5 May 2011

Modification to DA 2008/139 Australian Precast Solutions (Abigroup) - pre-cast concrete plant