If any of us wanted to add to an existing house, maybe go up a level, or build a shed, a carport, or a pool we would first go to the Council's Building Code to find out what the rules are.
This makes sense. The rules are to ensure that everyone is treated equally. There are boundary offset rules so that we all remain comfortably separated and there are even shadow rules so that our construction doesn't impinge on our neighbour.
There are so many rules, so many policies and codes but each of them is there for a reason. The same applies to the Zoning rules that control what can be built on the block next door.
To each and all of us the process is to determine what is allowed, then design what we want within the rules, knowing full well that if we are out by a centimetre and impinge the boundaries of setback, offset, height and footprint we would either be told to redesign or, as has become the new norm, put in a variation that might, or might not be approved.
If you entertain yourself by watching all of the building applications that come to Eurobodalla you might notice a trend where projects are pushing the boundaries.
The first example is on Beach Road. The plan that is awaiting approval clearly reveals that the design is 5.150m over the Council's height limit.
Above: The ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STATEMENT states: the overall height, bulk, scale, and form compliments the surrounding built and developing context and streetscape, whilst providing a positive contribution to the area which reflects the Councils future visions.
This isn't the first time this issue has come to Council. Just down the road the Council approved a luxury 67-apartment complex that stands 22 metres at its highest point, seven metres above Council’s allowed limit.
With such a precedent it is inevitable the proposal to demolish existing motel and construct 34 units on the corner of Beach Road and Pacific Street will be approved, especially given that we have a housing shortage.
Of interest then is the Development Application for 28 units just a few doors down that has a building height of 15.56m with an estimated construction cost of $11,451,813
The developer offers of the height variation: "Whilst there is a height breach and non‐compliance for top storey at front and the top 2 storey at back, the breach is considered acceptable as no significant acoustic, overshadowing or privacy implications occur due to the breach".
One by one the new developments along Beach Road are becoming taller and taller with the nature of the streetscape changing rapidly from bungalows and old motel blocks to units.
And it is all being done outside of the building code rules and guidelines to be rubber stamped by councillors who have little if any power to deny, given the precedents they have already approved.
No one is saying any of this is a bad thing. But if they were then Council offers up the opportunity to make a submission to the development application stating your concerns.
Blind Freddy could see what was coming to Batemans Bay. The town needs the dynamic of a population mass to vitalise it. We could either run with urban expansion as is happening across the shire or we can infill, maximising the existing sewer, water, electricity and road infrastructure. At some point in the argument the issue of population boom, limited land stock and affordability stepped in with smaller units, closer to town, as a viable solution.
Welcome to the new Batemans Bay and the new face of Eurobodalla. With such precedents of height variations it is inevitable that the developers would attempt to maximise their return by offering units with more floor space. To do so is to go UP.
As is now the case in the recent Development Application at Smith Street in Broulee. The proposal is to demolish an existing house and build an 8 unit block. But once again we see the Council's building height limits pushed aside.
In the images below the 8.5m height limit is clear - but this building has a height of 15.503m. The Development Application says of this breach to the Code "This Clause 4.6 variation request demonstrates that compliance with the maximum building height development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case and that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravention of the standard".
Images: dna architects
What we have is a changing urban environment where housing affordability dictates smaller properties that attract lower rents and lower purchase costs.
We can write and make submissions. Some of us might jump up and down and wave the rule book but at the end of the day we are witnessing to rapid transformation of a once sleepy seaside with its quaint fibro and weatherboard holiday houses into a fast moving urban landscape that is dynamic enough to accept variations to the codes, policies and rules.
At every turn the response will be that we need investment, we need jobs, we need affordable housing, we need to maximise the use of our infrastructure, we need to reduce the ever expanding impact on our adjacent lands, waterways and environment, we need to improve our rate base in order to afford to sustain our council's assets and services and and we need to think outside of the box.
As for our Councillors - most of them would have no idea of any of these development applications or the variations sought. Where development applications once used to come before council they are now handled by staff under delegated authority unless, as in the above cases, where an application for a height variation exceeds the allowable +10%.
While the precedents exist along Beach Road the Broulee development will be the first within suburbia.
If you do have an interest in the changing face of the region the Application Register on Council's website offers some great insights.
