The proposed five-storey shop-top development at 46 The Esplanade, has attracted around 50 opposing submissions at the close of the public exhibition period.

There are none in support, and a number of submissions are duplicates of others, leaving 25 unique submissions.

Of these, the most common concern, mentioned in 22 submissions, is "negative environmental impact".

This included possible damage to the water table caused by the excavation for a basement car park, increased heat sink effects because of loss of vegetation, and the proximity of such a large building to a "seriously eroding beach".

The second most common concern was "traffic congestion", mentioned in 20 submissions.

Many submissions questioned the accuracy of the applicant's supplied traffic analysis and said that it failed to consider the cumulative effects of several recent developments in the area.

More than one stated that "parking in Ettalong is impossible" and another pointed out that "there is no current infrastructure study for the Peninsula and has not been for many years".

"Ettalong Beach doesn't have the infrastructure for high density and, when considering the development application, it is necessary to consider the 50-plus room hotel that has already been approved and the other application associated with DA146."

"DA146" is an approved application for a five-storey mixed-use building at 275 Ocean View Rd, Ettalong.

Concern about the basement parking was mentioned in 17 submissions.

Many submissions made the point that the rezoning of the land was approved on the basis that there was to be no underground parking.

A graphic illustration of what can occur in a basement near the beach was provided in one submission with photographs showing extensive flooding in the ORA building basement, at 211-213 West St, Umina, on March 19, 2022.

"These apartments are situated one block back from the foreshore, yet are subject to flooding and pipes being blocked with sand."

Many also raised concerns that not enough geotechnical investigation had been done by the applicant and that, as yet, there was not even a design for the foundations.

One submission postulated that by approving a "half baked" structural design the council and regional planning panel would be "bankrolling" further site investigations.

Joint fourth highest concerns were the "bulk and scale" of the proposal and that it was "out of character" with the area.

Many said that Ettalong was losing its "village feel" to over-development.

One group submission from the residents of a building which would become an unwilling neighbour to this proposal said: "This proposal for a mixed-use, high-rise structure poses a significant threat to our current way of life, the character of our beloved community, and the value of our homes.

"We believe that approving this development would have a detrimental impact on both the quality of life for current residents and the very fabric of Ettalong Beach."

Despite claims in the application of providing a 12-metre wide "view corridor", the submission states: "The proposed development disregards the Central Coast Development Control Plan, particularly Clause 4.2.4, which asserts that new buildings in Ettalong should preserve view lines to the waterway, including Lion Island.

"This high-rise structure will entirely block these cherished views, compromising the privacy and open-air enjoyment of our balconies.

"This shift is not merely aesthetic.

"It drastically impacts our health, lifestyle, and the tranquillity we currently enjoy."

The next most common concern raised in 14 submissions was the development's "heat sink" effect.

Submissions claimed that Ettalong Beach was already the "hottest suburb" on the Peninsula and that this large structure blocking the cooling breezes from the bay would exacerbate the situation.

The small size of the ground floor "commercial areas" was raised in 13 submissions, some stating this would do little to create jobs.

Some submission noted that the two shops in the Atlantis building next door had closed and that there were enough empty shopfronts in Ettalong Beach already, without this proposal adding more.

Issues raised in other submissions included "shadowing", "view loss", "inadequate site investigation", "inconsistencies in the documentation", "solar access" issues affecting the proposal itself, the beach and neighbouring properties and "non compliances", including ceiling heights and setbacks.

The application is currently "under assessment".

Failing an amended proposal being submitted, it will be heard and decided at a public hearing of the Regional Planning Panel at a yet to be announced date.

SOURCE:

DA Tracker, 22 Nov 2024

DA/1283/2024, Central Coast Council

Skip Navigation Links.