In November last year, Council refused development Application for a Motel & Swimming Pool – 10 Myall Street, Pindimar.
The application was for a non-urban block of land on which there is no dwelling entitlement.
Yet, when our previous LEP was translated into the Statewide template LEP, although it was not permissible for a dwelling, an anomaly was created which allowed for a motel type accommodation.
Council pointed this anomaly out to the Department of Planning who agreed to commence the process to amend the LEP to overcome this anomaly.
However, in the meantime, an application was lodged for a motel which council refused as it believed it was a sham.
The applicants have lodged an appeal in the Land and Environment Court.
If the applicants are successful in the appeal there will be implications for all no-urban land until the LEP is amended. Such amendment is imminent.
A sham DA is when council forms the opinion that the Development Application is for a lawful use but in reality is intended to be used for another purpose, generally a non-permissible use.
In this case council formed the view that it was highly unlikely that a motel at this site in Pindimar was unlikely to be a successful business and would either be left as a white elephant or more importantly used as a dwelling.
The matter was refused in part for the following reasons:
That Development Application No. 269/2015 for the construction of a motel on Lot 4 Section N DP 8287, 10 Myall Street, Pindimar be refused for the following reasons:
Council is of the opinion that the application is a sham.
The applicant has not provided the consent of the three (3) of the adjoining land owners to establish the Asset Protection Zone required by the NSW Rural Fire Service in accordance with the Bush Fire Safety Authority dated 14 July 2015.
The maximum height of the building from natural ground level will exceed the maximum height of building map in Great Lakes Local Environmental Plan 2014 (8.5m) by 1.43m.
The proposed development would create an undesirable precedent for future development in the locality.
The proposed development would create an undesirable cumulative impact.
The proposed development undermines the rural landscape character of the land.
The tourism character of the proposal is not in association with the primary capability of the land.
The proposal cannot be connected to reticulated water and sewerage which is critical to the water quality of Port Stephens.
The proposed development is not in the public interest.
Council has resolved to prepare an amendment to the LEP that would impact the permissibility of development of this nature.
By Len ROBERTS
Great Lakes Council