TABLE OF CONTENTS - Waratah-Wynyard Council

Planning Authority
There is a 15m high Telstra Monopole 60 metres from the subject site which NBN Co considered using as a colocation
site. According to the information lodged with the proposal, the co-location was not a viable option given
the upgrades needed and the impact they would have on Telstra services. Thus the subject site was chosen as
being a good alternative given its close proximity to the Telstra tower.
A second alternative site identified in the search area was considered, being 3 Lapoinya Rd. However, this site
would have required construction of a 200m access track and the landowner was unwilling to give consent thus
this site not was further progressed.
The subject site was selected due to the following attributes:
A local high spot, which provides line of sight to other planned sites in the NBN wireless network;
Sufficiently setback from adjoining properties and public view sheds as to not cause an unreasonable visual or
amenity impact.
Taking into account the above information, the use of a small portion of class 3 land on the subject site for a
utilities installation is considered acceptable. The proposal therefore complies with the performance
criteria.
9.4.1 Issue 3.0:- Infrastructure Provision
Objective: To ensure that the cost of providing infrastructure to uses or new developments is not unreasonably
borne by the community.
Acceptable Solution
Performance Criteria
3.1 Where a use or development involves more that
low-level use in the demand for infrastructure
service capacity, the entire cost of the added
burden on the service capacity of public
infrastructure, that will be imposed by that use
or development is to be paid for by the person
undertaking the use or development.
Planning Comments:
3.1 Where a use or development involves more than
low-level use in the demand for infrastructure
services capacity, the person undertaking the use
or development must demonstrate to the
planning authority that meeting the entire cost is
unreasonable and that a contribution towards
the cost of that infrastructure, commensurate
with the service capacity that will be utilised, is
appropriate.
The proposed facility is in itself a piece of community infrastructure. However, it is noted that the cost of access
and electricity to be provided to the facility will be borne by the proponent and this will be enforced by way of
permit condition. Compliance with AS 3.1 is therefore achieved.
9.4.1 Issue 11.0:– Design and Form
Objective: To design and site rural buildings in a manner that protects rural amenity and maintains appropriate
rural character.
Acceptable Solution
Performance Criteria
11.1 Building that are not occupied by sensitive uses 11.1 The required setbacks may be varied where it can
and to be setback a minimum of:-
be demonstrated that:
(a) 30 metres from a road boundary (unless a
greater setback from Category I, II or III road is
required in accordance with Table 14.2.1 Issue
5.0:- Setbacks for Buildings and Structures.); and
(b) 10 metres from any other boundary.
(a) the location of proposed building or
structures compliments the setbacks of existing
buildings or structures in the immediate area; or
(b) the design and location of proposed
buildings or structures compliments the
amenity and character of the locality and is not
visually intrusive; or
(c) the design of the proposed building or
structures minimises the earth works associated
with construction and responds appropriately to
the particular size, shape, contours or slope of
the land.
Waratah-Wynyard Council – Minutes Ordinary Meeting – 19 November 2012 – Page 364