Part I - Other Considerations - Richmond Valley Council
Part I - Other Considerations - Richmond Valley Council Part I - Other Considerations - Richmond Valley Council
Richmond Valley Development Control Plan 2012Living and Working in Rural Areas – A handbook for managing land useconflict issues on the NSW North Coast (LWRA Handbook) – is thepublication from which most guidelines have been reproduced here for thepurposes of this DCP. Further detail may be obtained from this publication cooperativelyproduced by the Northern Rivers Catchment ManagementAuthority, the NSW Department of Primary Industries, and the Southern CrossUniversity. Any subsequent publications replacing or improving upon theLUCRA concepts discussed here should be sought from these organisationsor their successors.I11.2 Design principles - LUCRAA LUCRA is not an alternative to placing proposed development outside of thebuffer distance of an existing landuse. The first choice for locating newdevelopment should always be outside of the buffer distance area for theproposed and neighbouring existing land-uses. A LUCRA should support theproposed siting of the new development based upon technical reasoning andmeasurements demonstrating land use conflict is unlikely to occur.(1) Circumstances where proposed development requires a LUCRA‣ A LUCRA is required where a proposed development for a particularland-use has a buffer distance which infringes upon nearby existingland-uses and/or development. Buffer distances of existing land uses,key environmental assets and/or development also trigger the need forLUCRA if the development proposed infringes existing landuse/development/keyenvironmental asset buffers. Buffer distances fordevelopment types are given within Tables I11.1, 2 & 3 below.‣ A LUCRA is also required if development is proposed with the vicinity ofan existing landuse which, due to extraordinary circumstances deemedby the consent authority, applicant or representing consultant for theapplicant, requires an increased buffer distance. In exceptionalcircumstances a buffer distance may be reduced based upon acceptedtechnical reasoning. Reduction of buffer distance could be based uponone or more of the relevant elements given below, however morecommonly these elements may increase buffer distances.(2) Buffer distances applied to proposed and existing land uses - LUCRA‣ Buffer distances may vary from those stated within the DCP as thedistances are based upon generic situations between proposals basedon local topographic, climate, environmental and social considerations.The minimum buffer distances do not apply to existing developmentsthat have already been approved. The conditions of consent placed onthese developments form the minimum standards that thesedevelopments should achieve.‣ Proponents, land owners and consultants undertaking conflict riskassessment will be required to reach consensus concerning the effortand detail should be applied to a LUCRA. The consent authority and anyother involved regulatory authorities should be consulted prior to thePart I – Other Considerations – LUCRA I.124
Richmond Valley Development Control Plan 2012lodgement of a formal application for a development requiring LUCRA todetermine the level and direction of detail required.I11.3 Design standards/controlsTable I11.1 Recommended Minimum Buffers (metres) for Primary Production(From Living and Working in Rural Areas – A handbook for managing landuse conflict NSW North Coast).Residential areas &Urban developmentRural dwellingsEducation facilities &pre-schoolsRural touristaccommodationWatercourses &wetlandsBores & wellsPotable watersupply/catchmentProperty boundaryRoadsPiggeries 1 Housing & waste storage 1000 500 1000 500 100 SSD 800 100 100Waste utilisation area 500 250 250 250 100 SSD 800 20 20Feedlots 2 Yards & waste storage 1000 500 1000 1000 100 SSD 800 100 100Waste utilisation area 500 250 250 250 100 SSD 800 20 20Poultry 3 Sheds & waste storage 1000 500 1000 500 100 SSD 800 100 100Waste utilisation area 500 250 250 250 100 SSD 800 20 20Dairies 4 Sheds & waste storage 500 250 250 250 100 SSD 800 100 100Waste utilisation area 500 250 250 250 100 SSD 800 20 20Rabbits 5 Wet shed, ponds & irrig. 300 150 150 150 100 SSD 800 50 50Waste utilisation area 120 60 120 60 100 SSD 800 20 20Other intensive livestock ops 6 500 300 500 300 100 SSD 800 100 100Grazing of stock 50 50 50 50 BMP SSD BMP NAI BMPSugar cane, cropping & hortic. 300 200 200 200 BMP SSD BMP NAI BMPGreenhouse & controlledenvironment horticulture 7 200 200 200 200 50 SSD SSD 50 50Macadamia de-husking 300 300 300 300 50 SSD SSD 50 50Forestry & plantations SSD SSD SSD SSD STRC SSD SSD BMP STRCBananas 150 150 150 150 50 SSD SSD BMP BMPTurf farms 8 300 200 200 200 50 SSD SSD BMP SSDRural industries (incl. feed millsand sawmills)1000 500 500 500 100 SSD SSD SSD 50Abattoirs 1000 1000 1000 1000 100 SSD 800 100 100Potentially hazardous or offensiveindustry1000 1000 1000 1000 100 SSD 800 100 100Mining, petroleum, production &extractive industries5001000*5001000*5001000*5001000*SSD SSD SSD SSD SSD* Recommended min. for operations involving blastingPart I – Other Considerations – LUCRA I.125
- Page 74 and 75: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 76 and 77: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 78 and 79: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 81 and 82: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 83 and 84: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 85 and 86: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 87: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 90 and 91: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 92 and 93: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 94 and 95: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 96 and 97: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 98 and 99: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 100 and 101: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 102 and 103: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 104 and 105: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 106 and 107: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 108 and 109: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 110 and 111: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 113 and 114: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 115 and 116: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 117 and 118: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 119 and 120: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 121: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 126 and 127: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 128 and 129: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 131 and 132: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 133 and 134: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 135 and 136: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 137 and 138: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 139 and 140: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 141 and 142: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 143 and 144: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 145 and 146: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 147 and 148: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 149 and 150: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 151 and 152: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 153 and 154: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 155 and 156: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 157 and 158: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 159 and 160: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 161 and 162: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 163 and 164: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 165 and 166: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 167 and 168: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 169: Richmond Valley Development Control
- Page 172 and 173: Richmond Valley Development Control
<strong>Richmond</strong> <strong>Valley</strong> Development Control Plan 2012Living and Working in Rural Areas – A handbook for managing land useconflict issues on the NSW North Coast (LWRA Handbook) – is thepublication from which most guidelines have been reproduced here for thepurposes of this DCP. Further detail may be obtained from this publication cooperativelyproduced by the Northern Rivers Catchment ManagementAuthority, the NSW Department of Primary Industries, and the Southern CrossUniversity. Any subsequent publications replacing or improving upon theLUCRA concepts discussed here should be sought from these organisationsor their successors.I11.2 Design principles - LUCRAA LUCRA is not an alternative to placing proposed development outside of thebuffer distance of an existing landuse. The first choice for locating newdevelopment should always be outside of the buffer distance area for theproposed and neighbouring existing land-uses. A LUCRA should support theproposed siting of the new development based upon technical reasoning andmeasurements demonstrating land use conflict is unlikely to occur.(1) Circumstances where proposed development requires a LUCRA‣ A LUCRA is required where a proposed development for a particularland-use has a buffer distance which infringes upon nearby existingland-uses and/or development. Buffer distances of existing land uses,key environmental assets and/or development also trigger the need forLUCRA if the development proposed infringes existing landuse/development/keyenvironmental asset buffers. Buffer distances fordevelopment types are given within Tables I11.1, 2 & 3 below.‣ A LUCRA is also required if development is proposed with the vicinity ofan existing landuse which, due to extraordinary circumstances deemedby the consent authority, applicant or representing consultant for theapplicant, requires an increased buffer distance. In exceptionalcircumstances a buffer distance may be reduced based upon acceptedtechnical reasoning. Reduction of buffer distance could be based uponone or more of the relevant elements given below, however morecommonly these elements may increase buffer distances.(2) Buffer distances applied to proposed and existing land uses - LUCRA‣ Buffer distances may vary from those stated within the DCP as thedistances are based upon generic situations between proposals basedon local topographic, climate, environmental and social considerations.The minimum buffer distances do not apply to existing developmentsthat have already been approved. The conditions of consent placed onthese developments form the minimum standards that thesedevelopments should achieve.‣ Proponents, land owners and consultants undertaking conflict riskassessment will be required to reach consensus concerning the effortand detail should be applied to a LUCRA. The consent authority and anyother involved regulatory authorities should be consulted prior to the<strong>Part</strong> I – <strong>Other</strong> <strong>Considerations</strong> – LUCRA I.124