Phone 4342 5333         Email us.

Skip Navigation Links.
Collapse Issue 443 - 23 Apr 2018Issue 443 - 23 Apr 2018
Collapse  NEWS NEWS
Collapse  FORUM FORUM
Collapse  HEALTH HEALTH
Collapse  ARTS ARTS
Collapse  EDUCATION EDUCATION
Collapse  SPORT SPORT

A 'complying' certificate granted for non-complying units

A complying development certificate has been granted for the subdivision of an approved three-unit residential flat building at 223 Booker Bay Rd, Booker Bay.

This will enable the three units to be sold under Stata Title.

The application to construct the residential flat building, consisting of three two-storey units, was lodged with Council in December 2016 and consent was granted in April 2017.

An assessment report prepared by Central Coast Council staff prior to it giving consent for the building included a table summarising the development's non-compliance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, Council policies and management plans.

The approved development did not comply with required setbacks under the Gosford DCP 2013.

The non-compliance of side setbacks was 50 per cent and rear setbacks did not comply with the Gosford DCP 2013 by 80 per cent.

The maximum unarticulated length of an exterior wall did not comply with the Gosford DCP 2013 and failed to do so by 43 per cent.

The height of the front fence failed to comply with the Gosford DCP 2013 by 25 per cent.

Building services were also listed as having a "variation to the numeric provision" within the DCP but the exact variation was not specified in the report.

The justification given in the assessment report for non-compliance with setbacks was: "The proposal presents with good outcomes in terms of open space and the provision of landscaping.

"The proposed variations do not result in undue negative impacts on adjacent development in terms of solar access or overshadowing.

"The building is well articulated and the setback non compliances are minor and considered acceptable in this instance."

The 1.5 metre high front fence was deemed acceptable because it featured "decorative slat infill and rendered brickwork.

"It is considered that the proposed adequate material differentiation to not present a solid wall face and is an acceptable solution to the site," the report said.

As for building services, the report said: "Not withstanding noncompliance with the numeric controls, each unit has adequate space within the development to locate storage facilities."





Skip Navigation Links.

Skip Navigation Links.
  Copyright © 2018 Peninsula Community Access Newspaper Inc