OPPONENTS to the Byng Street hotel have commended recent attempts by the developer to compromise on the design, but believe the pitfalls are still evident.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Revised plans for the restoration of heritage-listed mansion Yallungah, including a 22-room hotel, went on public exhibition at Orange City Council on Wednesday.
The NSW Land and Environment Court allowed the fresh plans to be considered after terminating mediation proceedings in November.
Councillors rejected the original 28-room proposal in May.
The updated design will include a redesigned pitched roof, a reduction in the floor area and less glazing.
However, opponents Des Mulcahy and Ernest Shave said despite the extension’s roof moving away from the original flat design, the height would increase.
“We still have a problem with bulk and scale,” Mr Shave said.
Dr Mulcahy said the reduction in rooms did mean there would be enough parking at the site – previously there were not enough spaces for staff.
[The council has] supported the wishes of the councillors to reject the development and we hope that continues.
- Des Mulcahy
He also welcomed the removal of the Hill Street exit, which would have run alongside his property.
“But for the other people along Hill Street, it’s a significant worsening of their situation because they’ll have twice as much traffic on the Byng Street side,” he said.
When he announced the revised plans, developer David Nock said he had tried to work with the community, but only one person had shown up to a meeting at the council chambers.
But Dr Mulcahy said the group had elected to send their heritage consultant to represent them because he had worked on an alternate design they felt was in keeping with the heritage conservation area.
“We’ve never been consulted on the new amendment,” Mr Shave said.
The plans will be advertised for community comment at the council chambers until February 15.
A court hearing has been set for May 9 and 10.
Dr Mulcahy said the group would make submissions but it was up to the court and praised the council on its conduct of the proceedings.
“They’ve supported the wishes of the councillors to reject the development, and strongly, and we hope that continues,” he said.