Coronation (33 Shepherd St) Pty Ltd v Liverpool City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1170

Coronation (33 Shepherd St) Pty Ltd v Liverpool City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1170

The Court was satisfied that the applicant's written request addressed the required matters under clause 4.6(3), established that compliance with the height standard is unreasonable or unnecessary, and provided sufficient environmental planning grounds specific to the contravention. The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the R4 zone and the height standard, the contravention is justified, and the development is in the public interest, warranting the grant of consent subject to conditions.

Parties
Applicant: Coronation (33 Shepherd St) Pty Ltd; Respondent: Liverpool City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal / Judgment Following Hearing
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions
Legal Topics
Development Application, Clause 4.6 Variation, Design Excellence, Residential Apartment Development
Planning and Environment Development Application Clause 4.6 Variation Design Excellence Residential Apartment Development

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Coronation (33 Shepherd St) Pty Ltd

Applicant

Liverpool City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Appeal / Judgment Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed development should be granted consent despite exceeding the maximum permissible building height under the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's written request under clause 4.6 adequately justifies contravening the development standard for height of buildings
  3. 3 Whether the proposal is consistent with planning objectives and in the public interest

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the applicant's written request addressed the required matters under clause 4.6(3), established that compliance with the height standard is unreasonable or unnecessary, and provided sufficient environmental planning grounds specific to the contravention. The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the R4 zone and the height standard, the contravention is justified, and the development is in the public interest, warranting the grant of consent subject to conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions

Orders

  • The applicant is granted leave to amend the application for development consent, subject to the applicant paying the respondent's costs thrown away as a result of the amendment, as agreed or assessed.
  • The written request dated March 2019 pursuant to clause 4.6 Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 seeking variation to the height development standard is upheld.