If non-compliance is not a basis for rejection, what is?

Central Coast Council's urban design framework's criteria confounds the public.

It has not been explained how a modest local bowling club with three outdoor bowling greens could ever have the same character as a four level, 63-unit seniors' living development at Woy Woy (DA53119/2017) and yet that was Council's assessment, which bamboozled residents and was refused by the JRPP.

The Council's slash and burn character model also applies to Booker Bay (DA54262).

An objector commented that two very large banksia trees were removed to increase the development potential of the site.

The final assessment report from Council confounds the public with this comment: "the potential constraints of the site have been assessed".

The removal of the two large banksia nullified the constraints, increasing development potential for the proponent.

Development potential was further increased with approval for non-compliance with planning instruments.

There were no real constraints on the site yet the development proponent has generously benefits from Council's assessment.

Advice on vital infrastructure has not been provided with this DA.

With the Farnell-Blackwall Rd proposal (DA54551) and its known non-compliance, what other issues remain for comment?

Character is out, infrastructure is also out, non-compliance with planning controls is not an issue, open and recreational space is not an issue.

Is there any issue, any matter, that remains available for public comment?

Will DA54551, which consists of consolidation of five lots for the construction of 27 units and seven town houses be deemed to have "constraints" thereby providing generous benefits to the development proposer?

There must be a generous financial advantage associated with this development, which is a simple comparison of costs between the demolition and construction of five residential cottages against the demolition of five residential cottages and the construction of 27 units and seven town houses.

Note that the original DA included an extra 10 units.

Will the Council endeavour to use this downscaled DA as a constraint and grant further non-compliance concessions?

Letter, 9 Nov 2018

Norman Harris, Umina