The commissioner noted that the view from the first property did not meet the definition of an “iconic view”, although it was clearly appreciated by the resident.
“Given its partial nature, I’m not convinced that it would be readily recognizable as the Sydney skyline,” Dickson stated.
“In my estimation, the impact of the proposed development on views is the most moderate.”
At the second property, the commissioner noted that there was “a view of Sydney CBD’s iconic skyline, which includes the Harbor Bridge”, visible primarily from the master bedroom but also from a side window in the living room.
“I think it’s a recognizable view group, especially at night,” Dickson said.
Dickson accepted: “The proposed development will remove the existing view of the pylons and most of the Sydney Harbor Bridge and half of the Crown Tower, but retain the top section of the Sydney Harbor Bridge arch.”
“While the proposal will undoubtedly result in loss of visibility [two neighbouring properties in] … High Street, my assessment of the views affected and where they came from, the magnitude of the impact and the adequacy of the proposal imposing the impact leads me to conclude that the loss of views caused by the development is reasonable,” said the commissioner found.
“I think that the planned development is designed and designed in such a way that it enables the exchange of views.”
Dickson said that “I believe a redevelopment of the existing two-story building on the site is foreseeable” and gave the building permit with conditions.
The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Login here.