Ingham chicken heir Robby Ingham’s plans to develop his Gerringong property have been refused, amid criticism the proposal takes “no notice of the current legislation”.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
In September 2012, a 40-hectare parcel at 242 Fern Street, Gerringong sold for $7 million, purchased by Robby Ingham Pty Ltd.
Owner/applicant Mr Ingham’s development application was tabled at last Tuesday night’s Kiama council meeting.
The proposal includes the construction of a principal and secondary dwelling, tennis court and pavilion, two swimming pools, and a barn and stables compound consisting of three buildings, two dams, a shed and access driveways.
The development application was reported to council because it has a development value in excess of $5 million, and also because the development attracted more than five objections.
Public submissions raised potential issues such as the proposal representing over-development of the land and being of a size and scale not compatible with the surrounding area; it would allegedly have an unacceptable visual impact on the scenic coastal landscape/vista and be imposing on the skyline; and exceeds the rural building height limit.
“Consideration has been given to the social, economic and environmental impacts of the proposed development and significant concerns are raised in relation to the environmental impact of the proposal, particularly the likely visual impacts,” council’s report said.
“With the exception of the proposed secondary dwelling and farm shed, the proposed development is considered to be unacceptable and refusal is recommended.”
Councillors unanimously endorsed the staff recommendation for refusal.
Kiama Mayor Brian Petschler said he had “not seen a development which hits so many roadblocks in terms of its approach to… The prohibitions in that report are just astounding”.
“They’ve obviously taken no notice of the current legislation, both state and local,” he said.
The site is currently vacant and bounded by vacant rural land to the north, the Tasman Sea to the east, rural land to the south (containing DA approved dwellings) and Fern Street to the west.
According to council’s report, reasons for refusal included that the development is inconsistent with the aims of SEPP 71 – Coastal Protection.
It is also considered that the proposed dams and equestrian centre are prohibited within the E3 Environmental Management zone, and the proposed development inconsistent with the Kiama LEP 2011.
“The proposed principal dwelling, tennis court and pavilion are sited within the foreshore area, do not contribute to achieving the objectives for the zone and are of an appearance that is not compatible with the surrounding area,” the report said.
“The proposed development is of a bulk, scale, size, siting and overall built form design that is unsuitable due to its impact on the scenic amenity of the area and does not comply with the registered building envelope.
“Submissions have been received making valid objections to the development on the grounds of visual impact and non-compliances with Environmental Planning Instruments and DCP 2012.”