Addenbrooke Pty Lty v Woollahra Municipal Council [2008] NSWLEC 190

Addenbrooke Pty Lty v Woollahra Municipal Council [2008] NSWLEC 190

The proposed Rose Bay Marina would have a very adverse visual impact because its size and the number, density and size of berthed vessels would create the impression of a wall of boats, dominate west Rose Bay, obscure important public views from the Esplanade and New South Head Road, and damage the unique visual qualities of Sydney Harbour, Rose Bay, Shark Island and the foreshores. The visual impact was so substantial that the proposal was not consistent with the aim in cl 2(1)(a) of the Harbour REP, the aims of cl 3.2 of the Harbour DCP, or W5 zone objectives (d) and (g), and was not in the public interest. Those conclusions were sufficient to dismiss the appeal and refuse the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Merits Appeal Under Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (nsw) Against Deemed Refusal of a Development Application / Judgment After Hearing; Appeal Dismissed and Development Application Refused
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; development application refused.
Legal Topics
['development Application for Marina Redevelopment' 'visual Impact' 'sydney Harbour Planning Controls' 'public Access to Waterways' 'heritage Impacts' 'parking Impacts' 'noise and Lighting Impacts' 'marine Safety and Navigation' 'ecology']
['planning and Environment' 'development Consent' 'heritage' 'administrative Merits Review'] ['development Application for Marina Redevelopment' 'visual Impact' 'sydney Harbour Planning Controls' 'public Access to Waterways' 'heritage Impacts' 'parking Impacts' 'noise and Lighting Impacts' 'marine Safety and Navigation' 'ecology']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Merits Appeal Under Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (nsw) Against Deemed Refusal of a Development Application / Judgment After Hearing; Appeal Dismissed and Development Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the visual impact of the proposed development at Rose Bay Marina would be acceptable.' 'Whether the proposal was consistent with the aims of the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005, the Sydney Harbour Foreshores and Waterways Area Development Control Plan 2005 and the W5 Water Recreation zone objectives.' 'Whether the impacts on public views, heritage items, public access, navigation, ecology, lighting, noise and parking warranted refusal of the development application.' 'Whether the development application should be approved or refused having regard to the matters in s 79C(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed Rose Bay Marina would have a very adverse visual impact because its size and the number, density and size of berthed vessels would create the impression of a wall of boats, dominate west Rose Bay, obscure important public views from the Esplanade and New South Head Road, and damage the unique visual qualities of Sydney Harbour, Rose Bay, Shark Island and the foreshores. The visual impact was so substantial that the proposal was not consistent with the aim in cl 2(1)(a) of the Harbour REP, the aims of cl 3.2 of the Harbour DCP, or W5 zone objectives (d) and (g), and was not in the public interest. Those conclusions were sufficient to dismiss the appeal and refuse the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; development application refused.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'Development application (DA 766/2006/1) proposing redevelopment of the Rose Bay and Point Piper Marinas is refused.' 'The exhibits may be returned.']