46 Noamunga Crescent, Gwandalan, NSW

New Dwelling, Inground Swimming Pool & Demolition of Existing Structures - Renotification for Amended Plans

External link Read more information

We found this application for you on the planning authority's website ago. It was received by them earlier.

(Source: Central Coast Council, reference DA/1964/2023)


Create an account or sign in to have your say by adding your own comment.

  1. Danny Azzi commented

    Objection to the proposed build.
    setback from front Boundary Boundary should be 7.5 metres as per building Lines "development control Plan no 99" on page 11
    >The Building is taller than 10 metres. and If plantation are being added then the building and trees above will be greater than 10 metres once plantation are established on the Roof.
    >This seems to be a flat roof with access, so this will change the characteristics of the area.
    >Shouldn't there be a percentage for grass area around the property? It is clearly built with larger intentions than the average two storey home.
    >The size of this development will restrict the natural environments view for the residents accross the road and as well as the residents on Winbin Crescent.
    >The size of this development should be similar to No 48 and 50 Noamunga crescent. Not double the size and impact the neighbours all around.

  2. Michael Ernest Collins commented

    Central Coast Council reference DA/1964/2023

    I would like to comment on the proposed building application at 46 Noamunga Crescent GWANDALAN.

    This proposed building is well out of character and will overshadow the adjoining building.

    Although it states 2 storey building, with a viewing area on top, this will allow other objects to be placed on the roof making the total height beyond reason.

    The building covers a large percentage of the land, there appears to be no area left for any outdoor recreation.

    A house with 5 bedroom and only 1 garage means there will be many times that extra vehicles will be parked on the street.

    Mike Collins

  3. Gavin Craig commented

    I wish to register an initial objection to this development application.

    It is in direct conflict with the Objectives defined in section Building Height of the Central Coast Development Control Plan 2022 (CCDCP 2022)

    The zoning is R2 Low Density Residential.

    As the site is not specifically mapped, it receives the standard 10m max height for that zone as set out in the CCLEP2022.

    The wording in the review table of the Statement of Environmental Effects do not match the detail shown in the plans.

    Under it says:

    The building height exceedance of 1.3m is seeking a “reasonable alternative solution”.

    The building façade and rooftop balustrade may be 1.3m above the 10m limit, but the stairwell structure exceeds the 10m by approximately 3m and it is not just glass. It contains, steel structure, metal sheeting, sunshades and probably some reinforced concrete. Not really “visually permeable” as they suggest. Additionally the plans show significant planting on the rooftop, which taken with the stairwell structure and building façade constitute a significant occupation of the space above 10m which is supposed to be free of visual obstructions or impediments.

    Two other statements made in the table are:

    The glass stairwell structure “enhances the visual aesthetics of the dwelling house and also provides an opportunity for future occupants to appreciate and embrace the scenic waterfront surroundings.” But this is precisely what it will impact and take away from surrounding residential properties. Ie. It is advantageous to the site occupier at the expense of others surrounding.

    “Crucially the height exceedance does not yield any adverse visual privacy impacts, overshadowing effects, or any other known consequences for adjoining properties or the streetscape.” This is clearly not the case as demonstrated by the side elevational drawings and visual elevations supplied.

    In summary:

    1.) The development will clearly visually pollute and compromise the space above the 10m height limit to the advantage of the occupier and the detriment of the amenity of the surrounding community, which does not satisfy objective 2. of the CCLEP 2022.

    >Objective 2< To ensure that the height of buildings protects the amenity of neighbouring properties in terms of visual bulk, access to sunlight, privacy and views

    2.) It will set a precedent for further non-complying development and incursion into the space above 10m which was prescribed to be free of buildings and structures. As outlined in Objectives 1 & 3, this will adversely affect both the streetscape and appearance of the foreshore from the Lake itself.

    >Objective 1< To ensure that buildings are compatible with the height, bulk and scale of the existing and desired future character of the locality

    >Objective 3< To ensure that building height is compatible with the scenic qualities of hillside and ridgetop locations and respects the sites natural topography

    Gavin Craig

  4. Leanne Palmer commented

    We strongly object to the proposed dwelling at 46 Noamunga Crescent, Gwandalan based on the proposal consisting of a 2 storey home, however, the plans reflect a rooftop terrace with proposed trees and we are concerned about the impact of this terrace on our privacy or lack of it in the neighbouring back yard. Council website states "The maximum building height for dwellings is 10m. Building Height shall generally not exceed two storeys" and this clearly breaches this guideline.
    We are also concerned about a 5 bedroom house only providing 1 garage and this will negatively impact the safety of the road due to the increase in street parking.
    The design and size of the dwelling is out of character for the local environment and will be a blot on the street and waterscape.
    Given the land size of 506m2, the majority of this will be taken up with dwelling, leaving minimal space for yard.
    We also strongly object to the breach of the front boundary which is required to be 7.5m.

  5. Kaz Getts and Warren Bradey commented

    We would like to submit an objection to this proposed development. The building is out of character with the streetscape and the rest of the houses in Noamunga Crescent where we are residents. The proposed height is over 10 metres which is out of character with the rest of the houses heights. Furthermore this proposed development builds to the boundaries and we believe this should never be permitted as it does not allow any space on the owners own land for repairs or even general maintenance such as painting, clearing branches and leaves etc and hence any repairs encroach on neighbouring properties which is unacceptable. Further, failure to be able to adequately carry out these basic maintenance tasks like getting rid of fallen branches and leaves poses a fire risk not just to this house but to its immediate neighbours. We strongly oppose this development.

  6. Natalie Bunting commented

    The Building does not meet the character of the area and surrounds, It is a very heavy set home with not alot of natural surroundings.
    The space of concrete ground in comparison to the natural surface of earth seems extremely greater than the council requirements of 50%
    The setback of the planned development " The average distance of the setbacks of the nearest 2 dwelling houses having the same primary road boundary" - The nearest 2 houses are more than 7m setback from frontage so this property cannot only be setback at 4.5m as it will not be in line.
    The size states 10 metres in height? Is this a true representation of the height on the plans as it seems to outweigh any sizing of the double story home already built next door, being 48 Noamunga Crecsent.
    Lack of parking for a 5 bedroom home - the does not seem sufficient parking and this will become hazardous to other home owners aswell as other pedestrians in the area.

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Central Coast Council. They may consider your submission when they decide whether to approve this application. Your name and comment will be posted publicly above.

Create an account or sign in to make a comment

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is part of the digital library from the local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts