Killcare development conditions reviewed

Gosford Council will review a development application for a house in Beach Dr, Killcare.

Neighbour Mr Paul Goodsall spoke at last week's council meeting against the development.

He purchased the lot in front of the proposed development, which was half of a dual occupancy.

"The first development application was refused due to the height, bulk and scale of the building.

"The proposal was in not in the public interest," he said.

"The only change in this new submission is that it doesn't have a third storey.

"It still encompasses the whole block.

"This thing is a Taj Mahal on a postage stamp and I think it's ridiculous," he said.

Mr Tim Trigg also spoke opposing the development.

"The proposed development covers the whole block of land," he said.

"To build this proposal, trees have to be removed which will further enhance the mosquito problem due to poor drainage in the area.

"Access is via a laneway. There is no frontage to the house," he said.

Cr Robert Bell, seconded by Cr Terri Latella, moved that Council adhere to its previous decision.

Cr Peter Hale spoke against that motion.

"This is another one that amazes me.

"Unfortunately this loophole exists. At the end of the day, the government allowed it to happen," he said.

Cr Latella responded to Cr Hale saying that the bulk and scale of the development were completely out of character with the area.

Cr Doyle disagreed.

He said that whichever way you looked at it, it was a small block.

"We had good reasons last time but, as we've heard today, each reason has been removed - such as the turret and setbacks.

"This is one of those residue blocks from the war we had with dual occupancies many years ago.

"They've brought it down to two storeys.

"As long as drainage concerns are addressed before a construction certificate is issued, all the reasons we had for refusal are now non-existent," he said.

Cr Latella responded saying: "Removing all the trees on one block, I can't see any benefits to that.

Cr Bell's motion to adhere to the previous decision was lost.

Council officers will now review the conditions of consent and the development application will come back to Council.

Alison Branley, Council agenda DH.039, May 11