Goulburn Mulwaree Council refuses application for multi-units

Councillors at their recent meeting unanimously refused an application for three double-storey units pegged for a vacant block at 13 Chiswick Street.

It sits below Rocky Hill's bushland in a street dominated by single homes.

READ MORE:

Goulburn Mulwaree Council tightens residential subdivision controls

State proposal for Goulburn social housing divides residents

Seven units on single block angers neighbouring residents

Councillors rejected the plan and agreed with objectors that it "didn't promote good design or amenity" of the area. The DA was refused on seven other grounds including that it wasn't "orderly or (good) economic use; it didn't address the impact of earthworks on drainage patterns and soil stability; didn't provide four hours of sunlight to dwellings; did not ensure privacy between houses or the units and avoid overshadowing; there was insufficient open space and inadequate turning space for vehicles.

The DA attracted four objecting submissions, one of which was a 12-signature petition.

They raised all of the above issues but also bushfire risks and "loss of view."

Objector Rod Cranston told councillors during open forum that residents were worried about water logging of nearby houses during and after construction. He feared water drainage pits would be inadequate during heavy rainfall and the project would contribute to ground instability.

"If this application is approved in its current form and our foundation is affected, we will seek compensation from the council," he wrote in his submission.

ALSO READ: Army cadets take up 'battle stations' around city as part of training

Mr Cranston challenged statements by the developer's consultant that the homes wouldn't impact privacy or overshadow. He said the three units would have a "devastating" effect not just on his but a neighbour's home, with two of them built just 90cm from the eastern block's border.

"Our opposition to the substantial changes that the project will inevitably bring into the environment of our community, which has decades of history, is considered by the applicant as us rejecting progression," he told councillors.

"Furthermore, the applicant is suggesting to those who do not accept this progress to move to a rural area. We find this quite offensive as we have enjoyed a quiet and peaceful, almost semi-rural existence in Eastgrove for many years, an area of Goulburn well known for its quieter environment. It is a locale where single dwelling residences are the norm."

The units would have sat on an 1117 square metre block, with each one occupying 350sqm. Planners said the development was permissable with consent in the R2 low density residential zone but it "wasn't consistent with existing character." This was also because two units were set back further from the street than adjoining properties. However one would face the street.

ALSO READ: Rural property sold for a record high price

Their report stated that the area's slope had typically deterred higher density development and in this case, the site's constraints meant it didn't meet planning controls.

"Therefore, the development as proposed is considered to be detrimental to the area's character and the amenity of future residents," they wrote.

The proponent's consultant, Moe El Hassan of Linea Verde Design, said his client was reviewing the council's refusal.

"We are not happy with any refusal," he said.

"We submitted it with the intent it was fully compliant...A lot of thought was put into the proposal so we're a bit upset with the refusal."

Mr Hassan maintained there was sufficient open space and turning area for vehicles and that the only overshadowing was within the development. Whether it was one or three units, he said there would be some overlooking of neighbouring homes due to the land's slope.

He told The Post his firm designed many multi-unit and dual occupancy projects in Goulburn.

ALSO READ: Zooming into modern age with remote council meeting attendance

"It is the way forward for a growing town like Goulburn," he said.

"Ninety-five percent of our work is for those developments, especially in new release estates. The majority of it is for individuals buying a block and building a detached dual occupancy and selling one to offset their costs."

The council last year expressed concern about "over-development" in these estates from units and dual occupancies. It is reviewing the LEP and a development control plan in the hope of addressing pressure on infrastructure, road widths, solar access, privacy and open space.

The trend is occurring at Marys Mount, the Joseph's Gate subdivision, off Taralga Road, and in isolated residential areas.

In the case of Chiswick Street, Mr Hassan said the project was compliant with both the Local Environmental Plan and the development control plan and that residents' objections were largely based on opinion.

But councillors thought otherwise and took just minutes to refuse the proposal.

"I can see how passionate the residents are about it," Deputy Mayor Peter Walker said.

"...There are eight issues where it's not compliant. Regarding the comment that we could be taken to court, well sometimes we need to cop it on the chin."

We care about what you think. Have your say in the form below and if you love local news don't forget to subscribe.