Council urges Paton St approval despite 64 objections
Central Coast Council planners have recommended approval of a non-complying development at 95 Paton St, Woy Woy, despite receiving 64 objections from 30 individuals.
The application is expected to be considered by the Local Planning Panel at its meeting on Thursday, April 21.
Owner Mr Thomas Bowyer owner applied for a multi dwelling housing development including alterations and additions to a retained existing dwelling on site and the erection of two three-bedroom dwellings.
"The application has been examined having regard to the matters for consideration detailed in section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and other statutory requirements with the issues requiring attention and consideration being addressed in the report," the council report to the Panel states.
"The application is referred to the Local Planning Panel due to 64 public submissions, from 30 individuals, objecting to the proposal being received."
The council planning assessment recommended: "That the Local Planning Panel grant consent to DA/61493/2021 at 95 Paton St, Woy Woy ... subject to the conditions detailed in the schedule attached to the report."
The report listed the key issues as non-compliance with minimum lot sizes for attached dwellings, dual occupancies, multi dwelling housing and residential flat buildings, and non-compliance ... in regard to ceiling heights, setbacks, separation and private open space."
It also stated there were "matters raised in public submissions, including car parking character and amenity impacts".
Non-compliances included a 53 square metre shortfall in site area, being 679 square metres instead of 750 square metres.
Ceiling height at the first floor was only 2.4 metres instead of the minimum of 2.7 metres.
Deep soil setbacks to the driveway would be reduced by 70 per cent.
Front and rear setback minimums of six metres would be reduced by 2.9 metres at the back and 1.2 metres at the front.
Average minimum side setbacks to exterior walls of four metres would be reduced by 50 per cent.
Separation between adjacent dwellings is only two metres to the north east, well short of the minimum of nine metres.
The minimum dimension of private open space of 3.5 metres is reduced to two metres.
The assessment report said the site was generally level and currently occupied by one dwelling house and ancillary structures.
"The site is zoned R1 General Residential.
"The site is immediately surrounding by single storey detached dwellings.
"The wider area is a mix of one and two storey single dwelling and multi dwelling housing developments."
The existing dwelling would be retained and two three-bedroom townhouses would be built.
Five car-parking spaces would be provided in three enclosed garages and two open car parking spaces.
Access was proposed via a driveway that would run along the southwest.
"On 25 May 2021, the applicant was asked to address issue in relation to parking, setbacks, private open space, vehicle sight lines and access and waste management.
"Following further discussions with the applicant, a final set of amended plans were received on 2 December 2021."
"Given the change to the plans were minor and resulted in a marginally reduced scheme with no greater or additional impacts the plans were not re-notified."
"The applicant's written request has adequately justified that compliance that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in this instance and there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.
"The variation at 53sqm or seven per cent is for all intents and purposes imperceptible from the street, particularly as the existing front dwelling is to be retained.
"Compliance, with a dual occupancy development, could result in the same or greater height, floor space ratio and overall general impacts.
"The proposed development is considered to be in the public interest.
"It is considered to comply with the objectives of the R1 zone, as it provides for a reasonable residential outcome that is consistent with the character of the area."
SOURCE:
Central Coast Local Planning Panel agenda 3.2, 21 Apr 2022