06/0823 - Change to Development Approval [As Published] · 132006.823.03

@ Page 2 December 5, 2007

Furthermore, it is noted that a condition of approval of the current Court Approved
Scheme (CAS) required all service vehicles to access the site via Viewland Drive. The
applicant has indicated a similar condition may be recommended for the subject proposal.

Submission 2 ~ received 5" October 2006

1. Inappropriate height and size of the proposed villas — The villas at the sea end of
Sheoake Street. Although these are stated to be three stories high in comparison
to the top living of our villa they will be six storeys higher. This is because the
ground level is three stories above our top floor. This close proximity of the
building will deprive us of our moming sun. Because of its size and height and
forward position the building will [be] seen from many positions including Hastings
Street. The position of the building should be moved away from our villa or its
height should be restricted to one storey.

Based upon the description provided, the submitter appears to be referring to the Resort
Villa described as ‘ Building A’. The Site Plan provided below details the comparative
building footprints and maximum Reduced Levels of ‘Top of Roof for this building under
the CAS and current proposal. It is further noted that the submitters villa is also mapped
in this figure.

 

  
 
   
 

 

 

Submitters Villa

 

 

 

 

Building A

 

s
2

As can be seen, the current proposal is located no closer to the submitters villa that the
currently approved CAS, in fact the actual building line of Building A is setback further
than the CAS approval, with open balconies extending the length of the facade facing
towards the garage of the submitters villa.