PM Submission Object - Barry Cotterell MCU16/0153 & REC16/0041

                                                                                                           2


                     In the DA prepared by Adams & Sparkes, on behalf of the developer, the
                     following comments appear:

                     Adams + Sparkes page 38 para 136

                               5.5.1 Eastern Beached Locality Code 5.5.1.1 Inconsistent Land Use –
                               Specific Outcome O73 136. The proposed development does not comply
                               with Specific Outcome O74 of the code, with the proposed Visitor
                               Accommodation (Type 4) and Multiple Housing (Type 4) not being a
                               consistent land uses within the Open Space Recreational Zone.
                               (Highlighting added)

                     Adams + Sparkes page 41 para 145 states:

                               5.5.1.2 Building Height – Probable Solution S4.1
                               “145. The proposed development generally complies with the preferred
                               maximum building height of 8 metres specified within with code, with all
                               detached units containing a maximum building height not exceeding 7
                               metres in height, when considered from the finished ground level. When
                               considered from the Natural Ground Level, there are a number of roof
                               forms associated with the detached Multiple Housing Units that
                               exceed the 8 metre height limit, …(Highlighting added)

                     Adams + Sparkes page 42 para 151 states:

                               5.5.1.3 Setbacks – Probable Solution S5.1
                               151. The proposed development does not comply with Specific
                               Outcome S5.1 of the Eastern Beaches Locality Code, as the proposed
                               development does not comply with Council’s preferred setbacks for
                               development within the Open Space Recreation Zone, where adjoining
                               land within a residential zone. (Highlighting added)

                     Adams + Sparkes page 43 para 155 states:

                               5.5.1.4 Site Cover, Gross Floor Area and Plot Ratio – Specific Outcome O6, O7
                               and O9
                               155. It is noted that there is no site cover, gross floor area or plot ratio
                               limitations for development within the Open Space Recreational Zone.
                               Despite this, the proposed development does not result in an
                               overdevelopment of the site, with the proposed development resulting in a
                               total site cover of 5,463m2 (39%), total GFA of 9,232m2 and 2,663m2
                               (24%) of the site as planting area. It is noted that these calculations have
                               been made based on the overall site area once the required land dedication
                               included in the Court Order approval (Appeal 2587 of 2008) and the
                               Shopping Centre approval (MCU13/0251) has being excluded.

                     I note that these “these calculations have been made based on the overall site
                     area” and ignore the application for reconfiguration which results in 26 small




Document Set ID: 20306792
Version: 1, Version Date: 24/04/2017