Collaroy Street Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council [2021] NSWLEC 1779

Collaroy Street Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council [2021] NSWLEC 1779

The Court was satisfied that the cl 4.6 written request adequately demonstrated that compliance with the cl 4.3 height standard was unreasonable and unnecessary because the proposed development achieved the objectives of the height standard, and that sufficient environmental planning grounds justified the contravention. The contravening upper-level elements were found to be visually recessive, contextually responsive, compatible with surrounding and nearby development, and not productive of unacceptable view, privacy, solar access, scenic or public-place visual impacts. The proposal was also consistent with the B2 Local Centre zone objectives, met the relevant public interest test,...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Development Application Da2020/1453 / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'shop Top Housing' 'building Height Development Standard' 'clause 4.6 Written Request' 'character and Built Form' 'public Interest' 'objector Submissions']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent'] ['development Application' 'shop Top Housing' 'building Height Development Standard' 'clause 4.6 Written Request' 'character and Built Form' 'public Interest' 'objector Submissions']

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

Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Development Application Da2020/1453 / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the written request under cl 4.6 of Warringah Local Environmental Plan 2011 justified contravention of the height of buildings development standard at cl 4.3.' 'Whether compliance with the building height development standard was unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances.' 'Whether there were sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention.' 'Whether the proposed development was in the public interest because it was consistent with the objectives of the building height standard and the B2 Local Centre zone.' 'Whether the proposal was compatible with the character, built form and scale of the local area and satisfied relevant SEPP 65 design quality principles.' 'Whether public objections and other jurisdictional matters warranted refusal of consent.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the cl 4.6 written request adequately demonstrated that compliance with the cl 4.3 height standard was unreasonable and unnecessary because the proposed development achieved the objectives of the height standard, and that sufficient environmental planning grounds justified the contravention. The contravening upper-level elements were found to be visually recessive, contextually responsive, compatible with surrounding and nearby development, and not productive of unacceptable view, privacy, solar access, scenic or public-place visual impacts. The proposal was also consistent with the B2 Local Centre zone objectives, met the relevant public interest test,...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The written request seeking to justify the contravention of the height of buildings development standard at cl 4.3 of Warringah Local Environmental Plan 2011, prepared by Boston Blyth Fleming and dated 13 September 2021, is upheld.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development consent is granted to Development Application...