Decision on Mrs Wilson's Shop is deferred
The Central Coast Local Planning Panel has deferred determination of an application to subdivide a property at 68 Railway St, Woy Woy, containing a local heritage building known as Mrs Wilson's Shop.
The Panel invited the applicant to submit an amended proposal within 21 days involving Torrens title subdivision of the heritage item and strata titling of the remaining two dwellings.
"Upon receipt of this information, the matter shall be subject of a further report by council staff as soon as practicable, which may be determined by the Panel through electronic means," according the Panel's resolution.
The meeting minutes stated that there was common ground amongst the Panel that the proposal should be accompanied by a Clause 4.6 variation request regarding the floor space ratio.
"This was provided by the applicant and provided late to the Panel prior to the meeting, although not subject to analysis in the Council report (due to a different conclusion by Council staff to the Panel regarding its necessity) and without sufficient time for the Panel to properly assess the request.
"The Panel was of the view this required further analysis prior to being able to determine the application."
The minutes reported that there was disagreement about whether the proposal, and the form of subdivision sought, should be supported.
"The majority of the Panel (all but Mr Jason Perica) were of the view that the proposal should be refused in the form put forward.
"Mr Perica generally agreed with the Council staff assessment report and the conclusions therein.
"The key issue of concern for the majority of the Panel related to the very significant size of the variation requests to lot sizes and the potential precedent, as well as the applicant's core objectives being able to be facilitated in an alternative way.
"The applicant's stated objectives for favouring a Torrens Title subdivision were that this would facilitate accurate identification of the heritage item (being part of the site and not the whole site), and that the dwelling(s) and commercial heritage lot would have different funding needs and this may cause unfair distributed costs in a shared strata scheme.
"Both arguments had some merit, although legally a heritage item is as defined and described in Schedule 5 of the LEP, not the map.
"Despite this, separate Torrens titling of the heritage item would reduce potential confusion.
"It is agreed the heritage and other lots are likely to have likely different ongoing maintenance needs and thereby associated costs.
"Having regard to this and balancing the precedential issues, the majority of the Panel were of the view that a Torrens title of the heritage item and strata subdivision of the two dwellings was preferable, meeting key applicant objectives, with less adverse precedential outcomes.
"Mr Perica understood this rationale, although also saw the Torrens titling of the two remaining dwellings as being consistent in principle to strategic directions in the draft LEP, as argued in the Clause 4.6 variation request.
"However, on reflection and balanced consideration, Mr Perica accepted the position to protect the adverse potential precedent was a reasonable concern (given the potential Torrens subdivision of dual occupancies contemplated by the draft LEP would ordinarily be on larger lots) and supported the position of the majority of the Panel, as a reasonable compromise."
SOURCE:
Central Coast Local Planning Panel agenda 4.1, 8 Apr 2021