2016-12-06 Planning & Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                6 DECEMBER 2016


In regard to the subject application Council sent a request for further information on 2 September
2016. The information request:
    described the non-compliant components of the proposal (setback distance for the boat
      lifting device) and
    requested the owner to investigate the potential for a shared jetty with the adjoining
      property (Lot 2) and provide an agreement if possible
In responding to the information request the applicant provided an amended plan and a letter
describing the financial reasons why they are not willing to enter into an agreement with the
adjoining owner. The amended plans indicate:
    the boat lifting device setback 1m from the prolongation of the boundary.
    a finger jetty that is:
      o     setback 2.63m from the side boundary at the corner,
      o     setback 1.97m from the prolongation of the boundary at the end,
      o     1.2m wide and extends 10m into the canal (quay line)
The setback and dimensions of the boatlifting device comply with the probable solutions of the
code.
The width and quay line of the jetty comply with the probable solutions of the code. The setbacks
for the jetty do not comply with the minimum requirement of 3m. It is not possible to comply with
the minimum setbacks for both the boatlift and jetty due to the limited width of the lot. The
proposed jetty and boatlifting device are setback a greater distance than the existing jetty and will
have a lesser impact on the adjoining property.
In regard to view lines from adjoining properties consideration needs to be given to the likely
mooring of a boat on the head of the existing jetty. Compared to the existing jetty (and moored
boat) the proposed jetty and boat lifting device will have a lesser impact on the view lines from
the adjoining 2/17 Sunseeker Close and a minor impact on the view lines for the adjoining 2/21
Sunseeker Close. Refer to Attachment 1.
While it is acknowledged that the subject property has an approval for a private jetty within its
frontage there are some concerns with approving a new jetty and boatlift that does not comply
with the current requirements. The Watercourses Works Code probable solution requires for unit
developments where each unit has its own individual canal frontage that a joint application be
made for a shared jetty located on the common boundary of the two units. There is potential that
such an approval may create expectations for other property owners in group title developments
desiring similar facilities. These expectations could result in an additional 12 jetties along the
Sunseeker Close/Skipper Place section of the canal and an additional 5 jetties along the
Laburnum Crescent section. As these properties all have frontages that are less than a traditional
lot the additional jetties would create visual cluttering of the canal frontage.


3.    CONCLUSION
The proposed jetty and boatlift will not have any greater impact on the amenity of the immediate
area or the views from the adjoining properties compared to that created by the existing jetty and
a boat moored at the existing jetty.
There is the potential that other property owners may expect similar facilities but the subject site
is unique in that an approval for a jetty for their sole use currently exists.




                                                                                     Page 29 of 83