158 Terrigal Drive, Terrigal NSW 2260

Section 96 Amendment Increase Height And Units OF Building A Reduce Number OF Units IN Buildings B-F Increase Number OF Carparking Spaces Internal Changes TO Number OF Bedrooms All Ground Floor Units And Accessible Change IN Size And Shape OF Balconies

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 (Gosford), reference 011.2010.00038134.003 )

3 Comments

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

  1. Nicole Perezous commented

    Disputing height increase and as a neighbour have yet received proposed plans. Supposedly, there was some more than 5 years ago, which thereby theoretically should have been resubmitted. Furthermore, nor were we notified of construction before demolition began.

  2. Nerice Saliba commented

    We are an adjoining neighbour and have not received any plans or notices. The only notification we had was real estate agents wanting to buy our property for this development.

  3. Luzette DeMont commented

    New Development that enhances the area is always welcome and this Site certainly holds a key position as a “Gateway to Terrigal CBD” calling for a “Landmark Iconic Development” on this Site given the currently Proposed Scale.

    Sadly, as can be expected, there are a few Objections.

    D.A. 5 YEAR EXPIRY
    Development Applications have a 5 year limit unless there is commencement of work.
    By this standard, work should have commenced prior to 3 Aug 2015.
    As the local community is aware, tree felling, remediation and demolition commenced late in 2016 with no prior notification to neighbouring properties.

    Could the Applicant OR Council please provide evidence that work had commenced during the 5 year period, and that the Development Application had not lapsed!

    Please be sure to differentiate where reports or actions form part of the “Development Consent”, and where they form part of the “Commencement of Works”

    BUILDING HEIGHT
    Without providing evidence that work had commenced during the 5 year period, the Proposed Development should fall under the GLEP 2014’s new Height Restriction of 8.5m – instead of the previous 10m Height Restriction.
    With that in view, please see below how the Proposed Development exceeds the Height Restrictions.

    BUILDING A
    Current Building Height restriction 8.5m
    Previous Building Height restriction 10m
    Proposed Building Height 13.1m – 14.6m

    The Proposal exceeds the previous 10m Building height restriction by 3.1 – 4.6m
    Approx between 31% to 46% over the Previous Building Height Restriction

    The Proposal exceeds the current 8.5m Building Height restriction by 4.6 – 6.1m
    Approx between 54% to 72% over the Current Building Height Restriction

    BUILDING B,C,D,E & F
    Current Building Height restriction 8.5m
    Previous Building Height restriction 10m
    Proposed Building Height 8.2m – 11.6m

    Proposal exceeds the previous 10m Building Height restriction by 1.6m
    Up to 11.6% over the Previous Building Height Restriction

    Proposal exceeds the current 8.5m Building Height restriction by 3.1m
    Up to 36% over the Current Building Height Restriction

    These building height not only impacts on the Building Scale, but also on the shadowing effect.

    SOUTHERN FACADE & PRIVACY
    It would be good to give consideration to reducing the windows (or increasing the sill height to 1.7m) on the Southern Elevation to provide privacy to and from adjacent properties. The windows on the Southern Elevation:

    1. Do not serve any solar benefit
    2. Do not have an predominant views or sea views
    3. And will not affect natural ventilation negatively

    As mentioned in the SEPP 65 Design Statement, the cross ventilation requirement of 60% has also been far exceeded to 96.9%.
    There is no valid reason to have large windows on the Southern Elevation, and it also reduces the privacy to residents to the South.

    SIDE BOUNDARY FENCES
    While a 1.8m Modwood Fence would be aesthetically pleasing and a low maintenance choice, it would be expected that the existing lap & cap fences are to be replaced with fences that offer similar privacy between neighbouring properties. ie: Slatted fences (with gaps or spaces) would not provide the same level of privacy as the existing fences with no spaces or gaps in the fence.

    SITE OFFICE
    IF a Site Office or Material Drop off point is intended for 11 or 13 Ena Street, please give consideration to vehicular and pedestrian traffic to Terrigal Primary School which is on the same City Block as the Proposed Development. The street is currently narrow, and if a vehicle is parked on either side of the street (which is usually the case), the street is effectively only wide enough for the passage of one vehicle at a time. As you can imagine, currently, the street is completely congested during school drop off and pick up hours, with the situation intensified on a Friday (bin pickup day – with the addition of bins and bin pickup trucks). If you had to add delivery vehicles to the equation, there would be a traffic standstill in a school zone. There is also currently NO footpath or curb & gutter on the same city block as the Primary School (between 3 to 15 Ena Street) as a result, cars park on the area allocated for a footpath, this in turn results in young children walking in the street, around the cars that are parked on the area allocated for footpaths - on their way to or from school. Safety Standards need to be applied and the Developer or Council need to take responsiblity for the increased traffic conditions to provide and ensure a safe environment for young children.

Have your say on this application

Your comment and details will be sent to Central Coast Council (Gosford). 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