Proposal to replace two houses with six townhouses

An aerial view of the development site

Six townhouses could replace two free-standing houses in Victoria Rd, Woy Woy, if Central Coast Council gives consent to a $1.2 million proposal.
The proposal does not comply with local planning regulations for front, side and rear setbacks, residential car spaces and “articulation”.
However, the developer has described the variations as “insignificant” and asked Council to approve the plans without amendment.
The two existing regular shaped allotments are number 11 and 13 Victoria Rd, Woy Woy, within close proximity of the Woy Woy town centre.
The flat 1531 square metre site is 25.145 metres in width, 60.89 metres in length and has direct car access.
The car access would be changed to a central driveway to separate garages for each townhouse.
“The multi-unit housing building design would not result in any adverse environmental, amenity, social or economic impacts to the site and surrounding area,” the developer claimed.
“The proposal would be consistent with the established medium density residential development pattern.
“It is considered that the development satisfies the objectives of the The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.”
According to the developer, State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 71 Coastal Protection, did not apply to the development.
He said the proposal did comply with all aspects of the Gosford Local Environmental Plan which showed the land zoned as Residential R1 General Residential.
“The proposed development is defined as ‘multi-dwelling housing’ under the Plan and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.”
The developer claimed the proposed building design was in character with the area, classified as Place 3: Sandplain Medium Density.
“The desired character for development within this precinct is to remain medium-density residential neighbourhoods where improved standards of amenity and urban design quality are achieved by new low-rise multi-unit developments that reflect features of the traditional mid-20th Century bungalows which remain distinctive elements of the Woy Woy Peninsula’s identity.”
The description of Place 3 also calls for each multi-unit development to be surrounded “with leafy gardens that conserve existing visually-prominent trees, particularly along back fences and street frontages or verges, as well as providing space for new shady trees and shrubs planted as backdrops to new buildings.
The planning guidelines also requires maintenance of “the informal qualities of existing wide grassy street verges and conserve existing shady street trees with a combination of trees and shrubs around courtyards as well as along all property boundaries, and use of hedges or fences that are low or see-through rather than tall and opaque in order to complement the informal character of existing garden frontages.”
The town planner representing the developer has argued that: “The proposed multi-unit development would be commensurate with the established scale of development within the medium density residential zone and consistent with the desired character in relation to the built form of structures outlined in the Character Statement for Woy Woy”.
The proposed side and rear setbacks of the town-houses do not comply with other planning guidelines.
However, the developer has included a list of other recent, multi-dwelling developments on single suburban sized lots to show that the proposed setbacks are essentially the same as those proposed for the Victoria Rd site.
“Recent approvals of multi-unit development with the same design scale, height, setbacks, site cover and parking include: 14 Whiting St, Ettalong; 4-6 King St, Umina; 12 King St, Umina; 176 Bourke Rd, Umina; 177 Blackwall Rd, Woy Woy; 7 Greene St, Woy Woy; 117 Booker Bay Rd, Booker Bay; 174 The Esplanade, Umina; 10 Gallipoli Ave, Blackwall; 9 Barrenjoey Rd, Ettalong.”
The proposed garages provide six off-street parking spaces which does not comply with the 10 spaces including visitor parking required in planning guidelines for parking rates for multi-housing development.
The developer’s consultant has argued that the site is located within close walking and cycling proximity of public transport, recreation facilities, shops and schools and therefore warrants lower parking rate requirements.
“The prescriptive parking rates are onerous when compared to other parking rates for other residential development such as a three-bedroom dwelling-house only requiring one parking space,” the developer said.
The application was lodged with Central Coast Council on October 31 and is under consideration by Council staff.

Gosford DA Tracker, 9 Nov 2017
DA53215/2017, Central Coast Council