18 October 2018 - HLPP

Pardon me. Good afternoon, everybody. I would like to welcome you to today's meeting of the Hawkesbury Local Planning Panel. The date is the 18th of October 2018.

The panel consists of myself, Steve Kennedy, as Chair, Julia Grant, David Boyd, Paul Rogers. I'd like to begin by acknowledging the traditional custodians of the land, the Darug people, their elders past and present. A few housekeeping things immediately for everybody. In terms of emergency procedures, members of the public attending the meeting are advised that in the event of an emergency, you will be asked to proceed in an orderly manner to the nearest exit following the guidance of our warden.

I would also like to advise members of the public that Hawkesbury Local Planning Panel meetings are recorded. In the terms of the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act, this may involve the recording of personal information provided at the meeting. The recordings are made to assist staff in compiling the minutes of the meeting. The provision of any information that is recorded is voluntary. If any person does not wish to be recorded, they should not address or request to address the meeting. The recordings may be made available to other persons where such access is in accordance with relevant regulations. The recordings are stored in Council's record management system. For the benefit of those persons who will be addressing the Hawkesbury Local Planning Panel, it is expected that you will refrain from making any insult, allegation or personal reflection against any person present or not at this meeting.

This request relates to both your address to the meeting and any answers given in response to questions from the panel. Finally, it is also requested that if any person in the council chambers has a mobile phone, they either turn it off or turn it to silent.

There are five items on the agenda for today. The first item regards the return of pecuniary interest. Returns by all members of this panel and the broader Hawkesbury Local Planning Panel. For information of those who don't know, the panel actually consists of a pool of people, not just the people at the table today. And all of those people have now completed pecuniary interest forms in accordance with the regulations of the planning panels, and they have, and I am tabling those today.

The second thing I need to tell you is that there are four items that we are being asked to consider today. One of those items is a development application. Three of those items are planning proposals. Planning proposals are, in short form, a seek to change the planning regulations affecting a piece of land. This panel has the authority to determine the development application, but its role in terms of the planning proposals is to provide advice to Council on the planning proposal. As such, the development application forms part of a public meeting which anybody is able to attend, whereas the consideration of the planning proposals are closed meetings where only this panel, the applicant and council staff attend.

Due to an administrative issue, it is easier for us as a panel to remain in this room today in order for the minutes of what we are saying to be typed through the system onto this screen. So we're going to do this in a slightly complicated way, but I hope you will bear with me. We will hear the development application now in public. We will then ask everybody to leave the room. We will make a determination about the development application. We will ask anybody who's interested to return, and we will then tell the room what our decision is in the public forum.

We will then move to the planning proposals. One of those planning proposals has one applicant separately. The other two planning proposals, I understand there is a relationship, so between certainly with the applicant is my understanding. So what we will do is we will hear the development application. Then we will go to the first of the planning proposals and we will deal with that. And we'll ask everybody to leave except for the relevant people. We'll ask them to leave. We'll make a decision. We'll call them back. It's going to be a bit of a back and forth. In other panels, we would leave the room and leave you all sitting here, but due to logistics, you're the ones who are going to be doing the dancing this afternoon. So I hope you will bear with us. We'll make that clear. Okay.

The final thing I have to do before we commence this is just to confirm that now, in accordance with the regulations, prior to any planning panel, all the members of the panel have to complete a conflict of interest form with relation to each matter, and that all the members of the panel have completed those forms and all have advised that they have no real or perceived conflict of interest associated with any of the matters we're dealing with this afternoon. Okay. Having done that, I would like to move to item 008, 152 Mountain Road, Yerramundi, development application. I understand there were three people.

I'll register to speak: Kim Ford, George Stockton and Sally Hatcher.

Are you all in the room?

Yeah.

You could all... do you... let me ask this this way. Do you all know each other, and do you all know what each other's going to be

Saying?

Right. I was going to suggest that if you wanted, all three of you could come to the table and talk to us one at a time, rather than individually. It's up to you. If you'd like to just come down each, that's fine. If you are speaking to us, please be advised that we have first read the report. Secondly, we have visited the site. What we're asking you to do is advise us on any matters that you think we need to understand, but please don't repeat each other. So if somebody says something, it's perfectly comfortable to come down and say, Since Kim's the first speaker, I agree with what Kim said. I'd like to add this. Okay. I don't know if we have a timer, but we basically were giving you three minutes each.

Okay.

Five. You were told five? Well, then I'll tell you five too. Okay. Kim, if you'd care to come to us.

Come down here, and

Whichever you like, mate. Take your pick.

So, thank you. My name's Kim Ford. I live at 146 Mountain Avenue at Yarramundi. I'd like to thank the panel for allowing us to address you today. Also I'd like to thank the council staff for the preparation of the report, and thank you to those who attended the meeting this morning. I'm speaking for the resolution, that is the refusal of the truck depot at 152 Mountain Avenue. I'm sure the panel's had an opportunity to look at the objections, of which there was quite a few. Some of them repeated a bit, but most of them showed the concerns of the community. As one of the owners— Of the homes most affected by the application, I'm just here to present my personal views and the views of my family and how that the proposal has affected already and may continue to affect the amenity that I've enjoyed for some 40 years there.

To me, it's an industrial development, nothing more, nothing less. And on that basis, I'm here to sort of endorse the council's report, I suppose. I did notice in the report that one of the most telling points expressed by the council's environmental health officer was regard to noise, and they quoted, It is considered the proposal recommendations in Section 6 are difficult to monitor and regulate, and that's mentioned a couple of times on page 16 and then again in the middle of page 19. The policing and regulation also include truck movements, I think, times, dust, light and all things pertaining to the actual site. In my opinion, council's got a poor record for enforcing compliance, especially in DA conditions over the years, and I have very little confidence in conditions that may be in place.

Only last night there was a mud-laden layer of water running through my tennis area. There wasn't a big storm; it was everywhere else in Sydney, I think, but Yaramundi, it usually goes around us, and that was just an example, a current example of some of the difficulties we've undertaken. In the dry period, which we have had a dry period, the dry weather has led to dust in the drinking water, on the roof, in the pool, on the tennis court, in the house. You can't leave windows open on the western side because it comes dust and everything running around. So it requires the use of a lot more air conditioning, perhaps, than what we're used to. On the report, I agree with nearly every page of the report.

The only, I suppose, conflict or difference that I see is the top of page 20 in item number six, where it said that there was no unauthorised clearing of vegetation since 2016. Well, in my opinion, and someone who lives next door, that's just been incorrect. To my eye or to my appearance, and I'm a dry cleaner, not an engineer, but it looks like that the slab for the shed has already undergone the preparation of the earthworks because there's been a lot of earthworks done in that particular area. The regrowth that was there from the clearance by a different owner back in 2016 was for a house and also a garage and a pool, I think it was. All that area and regrowth has been mulched and destroyed and turned back to desert-like and compacted down to what you see there this morning.

And the goats have been employed to make sure that nothing grows back either there or on the riverbank and around those areas. So it's really changed the aspect of where I look, where my house was surrounded by virgin bush just about, now one side of it's a desert. So I'm, as you can, well aware, I'm not real happy about. Further to the application, the truck movements—they've got, well, the truck movements of one per week is laughable. There's more than that there now, but I'm happy to finish there if you like.

Yeah, no, sorry. Yeah, no, and from the community point of view, it's the loss of virgin bush, loss of habitat, Yarramundi and particular Mountain Avenue on that lower side. The yellow-belly glider was a colony next door. That's disappeared. Red-crowned toad habitat's gone. The Cumberland snails, you wouldn't find a shell there now if someone was paying you. Loss of amenity to the area. The community up and down the street is affected because most houses are within 25 metres, so truck movements at all funny hours tend to destroy the sleep. So, sorry to go over. Great,

Thank you. Questions?

No questions.

I have one, which is that you've referred to the changes in the vegetation and the apparent clearing You referred to the council saying there had been no apparent recent clearing. You do live next door. Are you able to give us more clarity? Are you aware of clearing that has specifically happened in recent times?

Yeah, I mean, in recent times, the regrowth was taken away. There's been a lot of trees removed as well over that period. And we're

Not talking about goats, we're talking about

Machinery No,

We're talking machinery.

Yeah, machinery. I mean, I think my daughter had one of the objections, and at the time she wrote there was six excavators next door.

And when was that?

That was probably when it was out for public comment the second time. Okay. So it's not all that long ago.

Just seeking some clarification on

That. Yeah. Some of the other speakers may have some photos.

Sure, sure.

Goat and land clearing, but I kept away from that. Oh,

Thank you very much, Kim.

No worries. Thank you.

Okay. The second speaker is George Stockton.

Right. Thank you, Mr Chairman. I'd also like to thank council for the opportunity to object to this proposal, and I'd also like to thank Kim Ford for covering a lot of the things I had to point out.

I'd like to point out too that— Can I just interrupt, Mr— Yes. Just tell us your relationship to the site. Oh, my apologies. My name's George Stockton. I live at 136 Mountain Avenue, and I'm one of the bordering properties to— The proposal on 152. We are basically on the eastern boundary of that property. Okay. Regarding E4 planning, I'd like to point out that with council consent, you can apply to put up a caravan park, a food and drink premises, a heliport, an intensive plant agriculture, a passenger transport facility, a truck depot, a helipad, plant nursery, a hospital, or a land care landscape supply material supply depot. There are approximately 25 properties on Mountain Avenue. If they were all successful in applying to develop one of the above businesses, where does the environment go?

And what's the point of having an area zoned E4? I thought the very name, environmental living, suggested the environment was being cared for.

So, taking out the rest, on behalf of my wife and myself, we would like to support council staff and also in also refusing this application.

Thank you.

Any questions? No

Thank you

Very much. Okay. So the third person who is asked to address the panel is Sally Hutcher. Hi,

I'm Sally Hutcher. I've got a few photos to share, so...

Thanks to council and the panel.

Sally, there's a— actually, yeah, Kim's going to turn that button off and turn yours on

Thanks, Kim. Yeah, this development has not been low impact from the start. Clearing of the property and earth moving hasn't stopped on the property since it was purchased, and that's the photo of what you saw this morning on your tour. Originally the environmental damage to the woodland area where the truck depot is proposed was that the house site had been cleared without a DA by the previous owner, and this had regrowth on it up to about six metres high. An aerial view of the property back then looked like it was fully vegetated, not anymore, unfortunately.

Page seven. The list of vehicles and equipment that could be stored on the— I've gone through the report. The list of vehicles and equipment that could be stored on the property is 16, without including the utes. They say that over holiday time there would be six to 10 only. There's a discrepancy there. Page eight. Description. The property is predominantly cleared at the front of the northeast part, only because the current owners have cleared it to bare earth, apart from some trees along the road frontage that are over 100 metres in diameter. The rear of the land, which is that photo, sorry, along the Grosvenor River is flood affected. Yes, it is, but it has also been cleared to bare earth.

If we do get a real flood, much of it will be washed downstream with the water eddies. The land is identified as bushfire prone. Not at the moment. Bare earth doesn't burn. Even the steep area is not yet mechanically cleared, are fully cleared up to browsing height by a large herd of goats. Page 10. Sydney Regional Environment Plan. Protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River system. These landowners have cleared so much of the property that there is much more water runoff into adjoining properties and the Grosvenor River. Kim's talked about his side. No strategies have been put in to stop it. The same down the bottom where the runoff goes straight into the river. Page 11, Hawkesbury LEP.

The last two points to promote conservation and enhancement of local nature. They've decimated the place without absolutely, with absolute no regard for any flora or fauna, they've removed habitat and trees and cleared it to bare earth. So much so that this is the house over 500 metres away across the bottom, and I could get a clear photo of it. And standing 180 degrees looking into my place, that's where it went to. You can hardly see it at all anywhere.

Clause 6.2, earthworks. A new driveway located on the unsealed section of Mountain Avenue would be very costly to council, which you've already worked that out. Clause 6.4, terrestrial biodiversity. No vegetation removal is required for the proposed construction. No, they've already removed all the vegetation possible on the entire block. Anything that tries to grow back is nipped off by the goats or dug up by the pig. The Greater Region Plan, Objective 27, biodiversity is protected. The property is affected by biodiversity on terrestrial BD map, not anymore, mainly bare earth, only large trees left. Page 14, insufficient info submitted to assess impact on biodiversity, not much left. Hard to get any proposed landscaping to actually grow.

Will they put in the effort, as they are not living on site. Development Control Plan, Part C, Chapter 4. All the earthworks on the property so far have been done without DA approval, and no sediment control has been implemented. Part C, Chapter 2, car parking. Unfortunately, even more vegetation will need to be removed for this. Page 15B, likely inputs . Any impacts could be hardly any worse than the current position. Bare earth for most, lack of understory for the rest, and goats to get rid of any regrowth. Noise. The noise for the closest neighbours has already been unbearable at times, going from a bush setting where often the noisiest things are the lyrebirds to hours of the groaning and clashing of heavy vehicles.

Any unnatural noise here is disturbing. Page 17, dust has been covered. Visual impact. Unfortunately, the landowners have cleared all the understory vegetation that would have helped screen this development from the road. Hard to screen from neighbours too. There are already many machines and equipment stored on the property. The whole property is now an eyesore due to the lack of vegetation. Page 18, security lighting would be horrible. We cannot see another light at night from our place, and any such lighting would be visible to us, let alone the closer neighbours. The property is fully enclosed with a sturdy electric fence. Isn't that enough? We have a fairly good neighbour watch type system here where we look out for each other, but unfortunately, the owners of this property are not trying to become part of our community.

Instead, they are pulling it apart. Community of impact. Mountain Avenue is only narrow, no place for constant truck movements. They're breaking up the edges of our road. Page 19, dust impact. Yep, we know about that.

Sorry, I'm going to interrupt and say you've made a series of points very, very clearly. Are there any last key points that you want to

Give to us? I'll go to the one on page 20. The river flat has been sculpted into huge motorbike jumps. I can see straight through to the next property. And public interest. The owners of this property are not becoming real members of our local community as they are not going to live here. They have already destroyed the environmental scenic and living feel of the area. It'll never be the same again. Our children all say, thank goodness we grew up here when we did. We used to be able to hear three male lyrebirds in each of the valleys. We can only hear two now. The other one's had to go. And the barn owl too. Used to see him every night coming home, and not there anymore. Thank you for your time.

Any questions? Oh,

I didn't get the other. That's some of the earthworks down the bottom that are horrific.

Sally, the assertions you made about clearing and the biodiversity impacts, et cetera, have they been subject of formal complaints by yourself to the council or by any other? They have been. Over what period of time, please? Roughly? Well

Every, possibly done one a year or something since they, like right from when they moved in.

Okay.

But the answer we get back is always there's no difference from when they were acquired originally.

Just for information, when did they start occupying the site?

From the time they bought it,

Which was

Around Christmas one year. They basically moved..

No, I was asking which year it was. Oh

What year did they—do you know, Kim, what year they bought it? Sixteen , yeah. Sixteen.

Okay.

Yeah.

Thank you. All right. Another question. Yes, thank you, Ms. [unclear]. How long have you lived in the street, and roughly where are you located in your street?

Oh, we're on the western—we're the western border. Didn't I finish?

Western side.

Yeah, yeah, we're the full western border. So this is the first time I've actually gone and taken photos.

Right. I've got one here that's called Just Some of the Earthworks and Log Splitter,

That

One there. And we were there today for a site inspection. We weren't able to get onto the property. There was no consent, and we had a walk around out of the front. We couldn't see that. Is that still there? Is that a current—

That's—I took them yesterday afternoon. Right, that's—I'm standing right next to my fence taking that one

And

That's just what's there.

So you could see it from your fence line So where we were standing, like at the end of the cul-de-sac, the cars parked there, we did a bit of a walk down through a gate, couldn't see anything like that at all Okay. So you'd have to either go onto your property to see that or onto the property itself. Is it down the slope? If where we were, was it over the edge or the lip down towards the creek?

Yeah, they basically haven't cleared the slope. All the stuff that was too steep, they've let the goats do that.

Right And so the land that was there before this was cleared was consistent to other photographs?

Yep. All I've done is turned around 180 degrees and took where, as it says, oh, I don't know whether it says all of that, but we've cleared our lantana and noxious weeds using grants from local land services. We've got over forty, nearly fifty thousand dollars' worth of grants now to help us.

Did you also just say that the mounds of dirt, I'm looking at a mound here, are used by what, push bikes or motorbikes?

Motorbikes.

Pardon?

Multiple motorbikes, very noisy.

In that valley. For weekend racing.

Yeah. Right

Right.

Yeah, they're super noisy. Look, we're a motorbike family, and we've got lots of motorbikes at home, but they are just so noisy. Right.

Thank you for coming today, and thank you for the photographs. They are very helpful

You're quite welcome to come down through our place and have a look if needed.

Thank you very much, Sally. Is there anybody else here to speak to this matter?

All right. Well then this is where I have to— I'm going to

I

Didn't put my name down to speak.

I know. So is it appropriate that I say a few words

If you'd like to, you may, yeah.

Whichever one No, just press the button first, please, Bob, and then it goes into the recording.

Yeah, my name's Bob Marshall. I'm a bit further down the road at 34 Mountain Avenue. I've had that property for about 30 years.

We're quite concerned about the fact that trucks are coming into the area. My main point that I would like to raise is I researched a number of LEPs. I researched Bathurst , Wollongong, Blacktown, Hills, and in all of those LEPs, they don't have truck depo listed in an environmental living zone. Now , I find that quite peculiar that that's in there. If you look at

The generic state LEP, it basically says that E4 is for environmental living, not for industry, and it actually bans industry in an E4 zone. That's the generic LEP. So what I'm saying is that I think Hawkesbury's LEP has somehow , it's gone over the top in terms of what you can do in an E4 zone. And as you all know, the Grosse River is a wild river. It's got wild river status. It's a protected river. And at the moment, there is nothing on that Grosse River from its source up near Blackheath and those areas, right through the Blue Mountains National Park, which the border is just about— A kilometre or so to the west of me, upstream, and the river is very much protected. And the way to protect the river is also to protect the riparian zone of the river.

And on this particular property, I've been out to other people's places and had a bit of a look at it, and I don't think there's due respect shown for the protection of the riparian zone. On my property, for example, there's wombats along the riverbank. I've also got sugar gliders there. Now, once you take out the understory, those kind of animals, sugar gliders, yellow-bellied gliders, they just can't survive . If you know anything about the way they feed, they live up in very tall trees. They've got to have a nice slope to glide across. And underneath that, they've got to have the understory. They've got to have all the banksias, the hakeas, the bottlebrush, and those kind of trees. They eat insects.

They feed on nectar. And when there's nothing else to eat, they bite down on the little branches of the trees and suck the sap out of them. All I'm saying is, once you take that understory away, that's the end of them. So most of us around there try to protect the understory. We have pockets of it on our land that we don't go into, we don't touch it, and just see goats roaming around eating everything . It's really doing a lot of damage to the environment.

Thank you very much, Bob. Very useful. Any questions? No questions.

Thank

You very much indeed.

Can you just press that red button, please?

Thank you. All right, apologies, ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to ask if everybody could go outside. We will discuss this matter. We'll call you back in when we have prepared our determination.

No, it's not. I didn't know that it needed. I didn't

Know

That we needed to record this bit.

Sorry,

No problem. Okay, so it seems to me that there are two issues that we have to deal with. One is the reasons for refusal as they pertain to the application, and then the other is the very apparent and evident breach of everything related to the use of the land. Now, I'm

Really, at this point, I'm somewhat in the hands of

David and Juliet, but I would think that we deal with the application per se, and then I suggest that we would probably add a note to our minutes to Council, expressing our concerns about the use of the land and the lack of— I'm just, the

Word

Yeah, actions, fine. Lack of action that's been taken by lack of compliance and lack of— yeah, that's the word I

Was looking for. Yes, my question for Linda is, what would be the most helpful for you if we minute it as part of a recommendation? Does that — Causing more grief, or you've clearly heard and clearly understand our view Do we actually need to tie it then into this process, or do we just hand that file to you and say, you're aware there's an issue

Well, we're aware there's an issue, but what would actually be useful then is any photos. Oh

Yes,

We'll leave We'll

Leave you

With those. The only comment I would be annexed to any report. But we

Can't. Yeah

I think the compliance issue has some implications where you can recommend approval of the DA in the end anyway, because some of the land's been illegally cleared as part of the DA. So what I was going to say was, Council give priority to investigating alleged breaches of the Murmullan Planning Assessment Act and gives priority to that investigation. Is that okay? Because I think we need to formalise it because it's integral to the DA if it comes back here in the future.

Okay. Okay, so that suggestion is slightly different to Juliette's

Well, yeah, I mean, I just— you've got an entire LGA to undertake compliance monitoring on. Yes, it would appear there is a problem. I don't disagree. But are we forcing a priority on something that, in the whole scheme of the LGA, may not in fact be Linda's priority? And, you know, there is no doubt. Absolutely those photos are now on the public record. They need to come to you to deal with. So

I

Would anticipate compliance follow-up whether we wrote anything or not. I don't have an issue with if we want to minute it. I'm just not sure that it's actually needed.

Well, would it— can I suggest something then? Would it be that we, because we have to say, I don't know if that's in the minutes yet, that we were addressed by... Four people who were opposed to the... Okay, so you have to add the last guy, whose name was Bob Marshall.

So we could summarise the issues of concern and that

They raised a series of issues, and that Ms Harcher handed the panel a series of photographs showing the impacts of recent activities on the site. Are you typing this, please, on the site which the panel took note of.

Can I just make a comment? You raised a valid point in relation to the

Local government area. Paul

You raised valid points in relation to the addressing of compliance issues and the regulatory controls of the total local government area. But this panel, our role, my role in particular, has had notice of something that is happening now. And I believe my contribution can be to bring it to the panel's attention and seek council's active engagement of inquiry to address this particular issue. We may not be able to save all the starfish, but we can certainly go out and work on this one. And so that's where I would be coming from here, because otherwise we just necessarily say it's all too much. We really are leaving

This

Unattended to.

Just to clarify, I still think that that becomes an advisory note after the determination, rather than part of it, because the determination is the application in itself, and then we can add that in our minutes as a note to council.

I'm happy with that. I'm guided by the formal process. That's appropriate, but I don't think... Leaving this without some priority of action is appropriate, because much is happening without our knowledge. This is within our knowledge and needs to be dealt with. And

As part of a final comment before the resolution, are you happy if we say the panel notes that Council will take priority action to investigate the alleged breaches of legislation on this site?

The panel requests that Council—we can't note that they're going to because we don't know

They

Are.

Well, I'm just taking what Linda's intending to do. In

Respect of this conversation, I appreciate what you're trying to do, but in respect of this conversation, I also... I think this

Is more basically to give you strength with council laws, you know, that you're saying, right, okay.

And if the application comes back to us, we have it on record, that's a priority for investigation.

Okay. Now, some of what's just been typed, and thanks, please do, will get moved to another part of the report in a minute. Okay. So it says the panel inspected the subject site and context prior to the public meeting.

Just the panel—they've given their names in public, that's fine—handed the panel photographs of the site. Okay.

Do we want to put a couple of dot points about what their key issues were, because they were all consistent?

And the last four words just are not part of that first sentence. Don't lose them. Just say they become something else. Right. So it will be somewhere in the advisory note down the bottom, which we could almost go to straight away if you want.

Yeah, the panel took note of

The comments

And photographs

Provided

By the— no, no, no, by the speakers

At the meeting,

And the concerns raised by—

You guys can change all this in a sec— concerns raised by those speakers

With respect to

Non-compliances

And alleged illegal works.

Yeah

And alleged illegal clearing.

And earthworks.

Yep

Yeah, yeah. Happy with that. Illegal clearing and earthworks

On the subject side.

Yeah, please

Illegal earthworks, illegal clearing, earthworks and activities

On the subject site. Can

I just ask clarification? Why not more specific?

Illegal activity, other activities including motorbikes.

You could put, okay, and activities, and then I would do it something like a bracket, bracket, motorbike, motorbike racing.

Yeah

Because it's been observed.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, no, no, that's fine. Can it

Show that's not necessarily illegal?

No. Yes. On the subject site. This is going to have, item nine is going to have at the front in capitals advisory note.

Steve, do you want to say, and the panel requests council to...

Yes, that's what I'm coming to. Yeah. Yeah.

Great.

Okay, so this is six at the moment, so seven, just it's a new point.

I'm sorry, Steve. Do you want to make it one and two, because they're separate? Yeah

Yeah, quite fair enough. Yeah. I'll renumber them, yeah.

That's great. To the panel

Requests

That Council give immediate priority

To

Investigating

The

Alleged

Activities

The authorised

The alleged items in point one.

Full stop.

Yep. Okay with it? Yep.

Okay, good. Thank you. You happy with that, Paul? Thank you. All right, now we can go to the application itself.

Does that give you, the Council officers, enough teeth to get out there and do something? Good. Thank you.

All right.

Sorry.

Yeah. So now we go back up the top. Thank you. So, do you still want to list the—

Yep. Do you want to first go, Juliet, or shall I go? Okay

So number one

So reasons for refusal.

No, go down. Go down. Yep. Below. That's it. That number one there. Okay, so the proposed development fails to adequately demonstrate consistency with

The objectives of

The

Capital

E4. E, the E4 Yep. Environmental living, capital E, capital L. The only potential addition I would put on the table for discussion is whether we should say, the panel should say, the panel seeks Council to

Give priority to considering an LEP amendment at the appropriate time to make truck depots prohibited in the E4 zone. Well , that's an interesting comment . So that would be down in advisory note . So that would be then advisory note number three. Yep .

You don't? Because

We've heard that

The —

The justification originally for this was that anybody with two trucks, so we're potentially having massive impacts across the LGA that we haven't even thought about.

Yeah, I don't know about that. Would it be that we are saying consider, or we say that Council review?

Well, I think, isn't that, you know, our role as a separate exercise, this would be our role to give advice to the officers as they're progressing with their standard business along the way. Add it to the bottom of your list of notes when you're doing the standard instrument LEP truck depot? We're just waiting for the, we've just prepared a set of minutes and a resolution, and that's been printed, and as soon as that appears in front of me, I'll read it to you. Okay, so it's coming up on the screen as well. For this development, the panel inspected the subject site and context prior to the public meeting. Mr. Kim Ford, Mr. George Stockton, Ms. Sally Hutcher, and Mr. Bob Marshall speaking for the recommendation addressed the panel.

Ms. Sally Hutcher handed the panel photographs of the site. The panel understands that key issues include unauthorised clearing, runoff and sediment control, loss of habitat and biodiversity, impact on amenity such as dust and noise, impacts on water quality and the riparian zone. Resolution. The panel unanimously resolved that development application DA 0539/17 for a truck depot and associated driveway and manoeuvring area be refused for the reasons below. Reasons for refusal. The development application at number 152 Mountan Yarramundi for a truck depot and associated driveway and manoeuvring area is refused for the following reasons. The proposed development fails to adequately demonstrate consistency with the objectives of the E4 Environmental Living Zone in Hawkesbury Local Environment Plan 2012.

The proposed development fails to demonstrate that development will operate in a

Way that will have a low impact on the locality and will not create or contribute to rural land use conflicts. Insufficient information has been submitted to allow the full and proper assessment of the application. Particulars. The submitted noise impact assessment has not taken into consideration the maximum movements of vehicles associated with the use of the truck depot during Christmas and holiday seasons. The submitted noise impact assessment report has failed to provide a detailed noise management plan and mitigation measures to the affected neighbouring properties. The submitted documentation does not provide a plan of management for the proposed operation of the truck depot. The submitted documentation does not detail the proposed works within the unformed section of Mountain Avenue and the road reserve.

No details are provided as to whether any vegetation removal is required for the proposed construction of vehicular access. The submitted documentation does not provide a detailed landscaping plan demonstrating the minimisation of amenity impacts. The submitted documentation does not provide any detailed waste management plan, including the collection and spillage of any waste associated with the truck depot operation. The submitted documentation does not provide adequate information to allow the full and proper assessment under Sydney Regional Environmental Plan Number 20, Hawkesbury-Nepean River. 1997. The submitted documentation does not provide adequate information to allow the full and proper assessment under State Environmental Planning Policy Number 44, Koala Habitat Protection.

The proposed development would have an adverse impact on the amenity of residents in the immediate locality in terms of noise, dust and visual amenity. Approval would not be in the public interest. The panel has also provided some advisory notes to Council. The panel took note of the comments and photographs provided by the speakers at the meeting and the concerns raised by those speakers with respect to non-compliances and alleged illegal clearing, earthworks and activities, in brackets, motorbike racing, on the subject site. The panel requests that Council give immediate priority to investigating the alleged items in point one. The panel recommend that Council consider reviewing the permissibility of truck depots within E4 zones.

So that's our decision plus the advice we're offering Council . I just ask the voting all in favour. No, the voting was four-nil in favour of

The refusal of the application. That closes this matter.

Thank you.

We

Are now moving to three planning proposals, and as I said at the—

Beginning of the meeting. But this panel is not empowered to determine a planning proposal; it's empowered to advise Council on a planning proposal on the merits.

As such, the meeting that we are now entering is not a public meeting; it is a closed meeting. And the only people to participate in that meeting are the relevant applicant and Council officers. So I have to ask anybody else if they wouldn't mind heading outside, because that was the end of the public part of this particular meeting.

Thank you.