Panel decision expected on proposal with 48 objectors
The Central Coast Local Planning Panel is expected to announce its decision about a proposal to build a five-bedroom house 36 Coral Cr, Pearl Beach.
The Panel considered the development application after the council received 48 submissions from the public about proposal.
The only registered speaker for the Panel meeting on Thursday, November 25, was applicant Ms Trish Affleck, but she notified the panel that she would not be appearing.
Under conflict of interest rules, two members of the panel declared a non-pecuniary past or occasional professional association with the applicant's planning consultant Mr Michael Leavey, who is a past member of the Regional Planning Panel.
They were chair Ms Kara Krason and expert member Ms Sue Francis.
The meeting closed less than 30 minutes after it started, with Ms Krason stating that the Panel's decision would be posted later on the Central Coast Council website.
Among the objections to the proposal was a 16-page submission prepared by planning consultant Robinson Urban Planning on behalf of a neighbour.
The main themes of the objections were that the development was not within the Coastal Building Line, that its bulk and scale were excessive, that it removed natives trees and replaced them with hard surfaces, and that the development was a de facto dual occupancy.
Most objections mentioned that the proposed development was not within the Coastal Building Line.
One comment was: "Why should a new owner have this privilege when all other owners have respected the designated building line however wealthy?"
Many submissions said the bulk and scale were out of character with the rest of the street, overbearing and ugly.
One objector commented: "If you keep allowing houses like this to be built, you are taking away the beauty and uniqueness of Pearl Beach, which can then never be restored.
"You are benefiting one house and stealing from the rest of the community.
"This is not right."
Other submissions objected to the removal of native trees including a street tree gum.
One person said: "The street scape is adversely affected with the loss of a mature tree and bus stop, being replaced with concrete block side-to-side wall and three driveways and garage doors, plus one inappropriate jacaranda."
Several people objected to the application on the basis that it was surrepticiously creating a dual occupancy which was not allowed in an R2 zone.
One commented: "When the plans were shown to me by the owner in November 2020, the first floor 'rumpus room and bar' were noted on plan as kitchen and dining-lounge rooms.
"This was described to me as a separate two-bedroom, two-garage apartment, as part of a dual occupancy.
"The apartment is totally separate once one door is sealed, a two-bedroom apartment: dual occupancy by another name."
The council's planning assessment report recommended approval of the application.
SOURCE:
DA Tracker, 26 Nov 2021
DA604106, Central Coast Council
Central Coast Council Local Planning Panel online meeting 25/11/2021