DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL

3.3 PROPOSED CLEARING OF LAND - LOT 63 SAUNDERS STREET, HENLEY BROOK (DA667/12)

Ward: (Swan Valley/Gidgegannup Ward) (Statutory Planning) Disclosure of Interest: Nil

Authorised Officer: (Executive Manager Planning)

KEY ISSUES

• The application is to clear 4.5 hectares (i.e. the entire lot) of native vegetation on Lot 63, for the purpose of house construction and horticulture (market garden). No details were provided with the application regarding the future house or market garden, other than basic details about the garden being a hobby and for personal use only. It is thus best considered as a use incidental to the ordinary residential use of the lot.

• The Department of Environment and Conservation has refused an application for a clearing permit on the basis that it was not consistent with the clearing principles. Their report included advice that that the vegetation proposed to be cleared comprises a high level of biological diversity; the area proposed to be cleared includes a conservation category wetland, which supports a high level of ecological values and functions; that the western portion of the application area provides feeding habitat for endangered black cockatoo species, and is important as part of an ecological linkage; and that the vegetation on site is significant remnant native vegetation, in an area which has been extensively cleared.

• The subject lot is zoned Rural under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and Rural Residential under the City’s Local Planning Scheme No.17.

• The proposed wholesale clearing of the land is inconsistent with the City’s building and developments standards for rural zones, which seeks to limit vegetation clearing for building envelopes, access ways and firebreaks, or where trees are dangerous.

• The Swan Valley Planning Committee, at their meeting on 7 July 2014, resolved that the application was not consistent with the Swan Valley Planning Act 1995, and to recommend that the City of Swan refuse the development application.

• The proposal accordingly is not considered to be consistent with the planning objective of the Rural Residential zone that seeks to ensure development and use of land in this zone recognises the environmental characteristics of the land.

It is recommended that the Council refuse the application as it will have a detrimental impact on the environmental characteristics of the land in a manner considered to be entirely contrary to the objectives for the Rural Residential zone applicable to the property.

AUTHORITY/DISCRETION

Council has discretion in accordance with Clause 10.3 of Local Planning Scheme No.17 (LPS17) to approve (with or without conditions) or refuse to approve the application. If the applicant is aggrieved with the decision of the Council, a right of appeal may exist in accordance with Part 3 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 and Part 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2005.

BACKGROUND

Applicant: Van Vuong Dong

Owner: Van Vuong Dong and Thi Thuy Hong Dinh Zoning: LPS17 - Rural Residential

MRS - Rural

Strategy/Policy: TP-126 - Building and Development Standards, Rural Zones

Local Biodiversity Strategy

Sustainable Environment Strategy Development Scheme: NA

Existing Land Use: Undeveloped land (bushland)

Lot Size: 45,704m²

Lot Area: Henley Brook

Use Class: Considered incidental to normal residential use (Single House), therefore 'P'

DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL

The application is to clear the whole (4.58 hectare) lot of vegetation, in order to allow development for a market garden (for hobby / personal use) and a family house. No details were provided of these proposed future uses, other than that the garden would be for fruit and vegetables, and would use standard fertiliser and pesticides for fruit and vegetables.

DESCRIPTION OF SITE

The subject lot is approximately 4.58 hectares in area, rectangular in shape, and covered with bush. Tree and shrub cover is thicker along the eastern and western boundaries than in the middle of the site. There are a number of dirt tracks crossing the site, but no buildings.

The lot is located in Saunders Street, Henley Brook (Swan Valley Area A), which is dominated by rural residential properties, including many horse properties. In their midst, there are a number of contiguous lots which remain primarily as uncleared bush.

The subject lot forms the eastern edge of this area, which is approximately 32 hectares in area. There is also another smaller area of bushland connected to the north, across

The subject lot is surrounded by horse properties to the west, an agriculture-intensive property and horse properties to the south and south east, and rural residential properties to the north.

The bushland is not identified as a Bush Forever site, and there are no mapped waterways nearby (within 250 metres). The applicant provided a survey of the vegetation on the property, which showed that the native vegetation proposed to be cleared comprises species including Banksia, Paperbark, Jarrah, Blackbutt, Marri, and Bottle-brush, among others.

The lot gently slopes from its low point in the north east corner, up to a rise in the south west corner (approximately a 2% slope).

SITE HISTORY/PREVIOUS APPROVALS

No other applications on record.

OTHER RELEVANT PREVIOUS DECISIONS OF COUNCIL

Nil

APPLICANT'S SUBMISSION

Nil.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

None undertaken.

CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND/OR CONSULTANTS

Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC)

The application was referred to the Department of Environment and Conservation for comment, which advised the City that they had requested further information to be provided, addressing the significant environmental impacts identified during a preliminary assessment.

The DEC later advised that they had refused the application for a clearing permit (Permit 5050/1). The decision sheet relating to that decision (available online) states that the application was refused, as it was not consistent with the clearing principles. The 6 page report is quite comprehensive but includes advice that:

o The vegetation proposed to be cleared comprises a high level of biological diversity;

o The area proposed to be cleared contains a conservation category wetland, which supports a high level of ecological values and functions. This wetland area may contain significant habitat for local fauna;

o The western portion of the application area (2.5 hectares) provides feeding habitat for threatened black cockatoo species, and is important as part of an ecological linkage.

o The vegetation proposed to be cleared is significant as a remnant of native vegetation, in an area that has been extensively cleared.

Swan Valley Planning Committee

The subject lot sits within Area A of the Swan Valley Planning Act 1995.

The application was referred to the Swan Valley Planning Committee. At their meeting of 7 July 2014, the Committee resolved to:

o Note that the application was not consistent with the objectives of Area A of the Swan Valley Planning Act;

o Note the DEC's recommended [sic] refusal of the clearing permit; and to o Recommend that the City of Swan refuse the development application.

DETAILS

LPS 17 and City of Swan Policy TP-126 (Building and Development Standards for Rural zones)

The subject lot is zoned Rural under the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and Rural Residential under the City of Swan Local Planning Scheme No.17.

The applicant has advised that the clearing of the land is to facilitate the building of a residence on the property, inclusive of areas in which to practice domestic horticulture.

Accordingly the application is considered to be classified, for the purposes of the Scheme, within the category of 'Single House', which is a ‘P' use within the Rural Residential zone.

The objectives of the Rural-Residential zone are to:

o Provide for low density residential development and associated rural-residential activities;

o Recognise the environmental characteristics of the landscape, including landform, water resources, remnant vegetation, and native fauna, and to ensure as far as practicable, that these characteristics are not compromised by development and use of the land;

o Encourage the rehabilitation of degraded areas through selected replanting of indigenous flora, and the creation and enhancement of habitat for indigenous fauna.

Wholesale clearing of the land as proposed seemingly has no regard for the environmental significance of much of the existing vegetation onsite, the identified wetland and the native fauna this might support.

The City’s building and development standards for rural zones states: "In the Rural Residential and Landscape zones, remnant vegetation shall not be removed, or modified in any way, except with the approval of the Council and where, in its opinion, the removal is necessary in the following circumstances:

o For the purpose of building envelopes and access ways;

o Trees are considered to be a hazard;

o For fire fighting purposes or construction of strategic firebreaks; and

o Control of weed infestation."

The extent of clearing goes well beyond the above limitations such that it sits entirely contrary to the objectives of this zone which is for environmentally responsive development.

Accordingly refusal is recommended.

OPTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Option 1 Council may resolve to refuse the application for clearing of the land on the basis that it is considered to be contrary to the objectives of the Rural Residential zone which is to ensure that development and use of land does not compromise the environmental characteristics of the landscape.

This is the recommended option.

Implications This option will not allow the applicant to clear the land. The applicant will have the right of a review of the decision by the State Administrative Tribunal.

Option 2: Council may resolve to approve the application for the clearing of vegetation on Lot 63 Saunders Street, Henley Brook.

This is not the recommended option.

Implications: Where a decision of the Council is in conflict with a recommendation of the Swan Valley Planning Committee or another Government agency, the application is to be referred to the West Australian Planning Committee for determination pursuant to the Metropolitan Region Scheme.

This is not the recommended option.

CONCLUSION

The application is to clear 4.5 hectares (i.e. the entire lot) of native vegetation on Lot 63, for the purpose of house construction and future horticulture (market garden / hobby farm).

The Department of Environment and Conservation has refused an application for a clearing permit, on the basis that it was not consistent with the clearing principles. Their report included advice that that the vegetation proposed to be cleared comprises a high level of biological diversity; the area proposed to be cleared includes a conservation category wetland, which supports a high level of ecological values and functions; that the western portion of the application area provides feeding habitat for endangered black cockatoo species, and is important as part of an ecological linkage; and that the vegetation on site is significant remnant native vegetation, in an area which has been extensively cleared.

It is considered that the extent of the proposed clearing is not consistent with the principles of the City's Building and Development Standards for Rural Zones. Further it is considered contrary to the Objectives for the Rural Residential zone which is to ensure that development does not compromise the environmental characteristics of the landscape.

It is recommended that the Council refuse the application.

ATTACHMENTS

• Aerial photos (of lot, and of the vicinity)

• Survey identifying flora species

STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

Biodiversity Strategy

Sustainable Environment Strategy

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS

Nil

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Nil

VOTING REQUIREMENTS

RECOMMENDATION

That the Council resolve to:

1) Refuse the application for Clearing of Land for Lot 63 Saunders Street, Henley Brook for the following reason:

1. The proposed wholesale clearing of the property will have a detrimental impact on the environmental characteristics of the land in a manner considered to be entirely contrary to the objectives for the Rural Residential zone applicable to the property.

2) Advise the applicant of the Council's decision accordingly.

CARRIED