Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community

Objection to a DA

Discussion in 'Development' started by neK, 9th Nov, 2015.

  1. neK

    neK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,272
    Location:
    Sydney
    Hi all,

    Just wondering if anyone knows how days are given to the general public to object to a development application?

    I thought it was 28 days, but for this particular application it says 14 days.

    Thanks!
     
  2. Be Developer

    Be Developer Property Developer Business Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,078
    Location:
    Australia
    Normally 14 days! (For small-med resi deve)
     
  3. neK

    neK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,272
    Location:
    Sydney
    what defines small to med resi?

    How many units / storeys does it need to comply to?
     
  4. Aaron Sice

    Aaron Sice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    898
    Location:
    Ocean Reef, WA
    are you pulling apart the advertising policy being applied, have a genuine objection to the proposed development or have become a megalomaniac surrounding your opinion being requested in the public arena?
     
  5. Scott No Mates

    Scott No Mates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,567
    Location:
    Sydney or NSW or Australia
    Anything which can be determined by the council ie not State significant or worth over $1x,000,000
     
  6. AndrewTDP

    AndrewTDP Urban Planning Consultant Business Member

    Joined:
    1st Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    765
    Location:
    Newcastle
    Tends to be 14 days for most smaller scale stuff (anything that is determined by Council). If it goes to JRPP/DoP then 28 days is more common.

    You can request an extension in time to lodge an objection, but top tip, impacts on your property values are not grounds for refusal.
     
  7. neK

    neK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,272
    Location:
    Sydney
    The issue is more about parking and height. 50m down the road has just finished a 6 Storey development.

    This one breaches height by about 2m and is only giving one car spot per unit (which appears to be legal - carspot), but we all know what's going to happen to parking on a suburban street - especially one that isn't near a train a station and is serviced by a bus that runs every 15 minutes.

    They are also asking for fsr exemption to do 1.12:1, when the area is 0.65:1
     
  8. AndrewTDP

    AndrewTDP Urban Planning Consultant Business Member

    Joined:
    1st Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    765
    Location:
    Newcastle
    Big variation to FSR which means it will have to be well justified. What Council?

    Car parking, if it complies, is not ground to refusal. The 2m may be minor depending on height restrictions - if it's 20m then 2m won't matter too much as it's within 10%. If it's 8.5m then different story.
     
  9. neK

    neK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,272
    Location:
    Sydney
    Strathfield Council.

    FSR is 0.65:1, Proposed is 1.12:1 - they are saying that 50% of it is going to be under Affordable housing.

    The zoning is R3, with a height limit of 9.5. Proposed height is 12.41m.
    This is the reason used:

    It has been a common practice that the additional GFA provided under the ARH SEPP, or part thereof, requires some form of variation to the built form envelope. In this instance, it has been accommodated by increasing the height of buildings rather than encroach further into setbacks, in order to mitigate amenity impacts from additional GFA.

    So the North side of the street is R3. The opposite side (South Side) is R2.

    4 storey building plus basement (so 5 levels all up), 25 units.
    (3 x1 bed + 21x 2 bed + 1x3 Bed).
    They are giving a total of 25 car spaces.

    Furthermore, its on a suburban street where its all single storey houses. At least build on the other side where it faces a major road.
     
    Last edited: 9th Nov, 2015
  10. neK

    neK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,272
    Location:
    Sydney
    My sister has a genuine objection to the policy (for the reasons mentioned above - density, parking, high rise in the middle of single storey dwellings). However she's getting married this weekend and the submission closes in a few days time. I don't believe they were notified as they are just outside the 75m radius and were only made aware by a nearby owner.

    I was hoping to buy her another 2 weeks, so she could speak with someone to address this properly.
     
  11. neK

    neK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,272
    Location:
    Sydney
    I also don't have objections to development, as long as its done tastefully, and not some big monstrosity who's sole purpose is to make money for the developer and doesn't care what happens to the community in the process.
     
    Last edited: 9th Nov, 2015
  12. Aaron Sice

    Aaron Sice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    898
    Location:
    Ocean Reef, WA
    To provide some clarification to your points -

    1) Late submissions can be received - you just need to let the Council advertising know about the restriction IN DUE TIME and then have the response tabled later. Alternatively, table the verbal response on her behalf.

    2) If she wasn't in the "blast radius" then it's unlikely her objections will hold the same weight as those directly targeted by the advertising process - unless the Council group all received objections in to one pile.

    3) An objection to, or support of, a proposal holds very little weight at a state appeals level. So even if council agree with residents, the applicant has every right to an appeal in which case the neighbouring objections do little.

    My point is that objecting to items like "increased traffic" or "ugliness" or "high rise" if the proposal provides for adequate parking, is generally compliant with design criteria / principles and meets height limits then the argument is not based on Planning grounds and is easily - and always - dismissed.
     
    PacMan, neK and sanj like this.
  13. Chilliblue

    Chilliblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,579
    Location:
    Australia
    You can request for an extension to reply @neK
     
  14. D.T.

    D.T. Adelaide Property Manager Business Member

    Joined:
    13th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,591
    Location:
    Adelaide, SA
    The objections you have don't seem very reasonable to me. Firstly they don't affect you because you're not near it but secondly they're subjective.