Jackson Teece v Waverley Council [2007] NSWLEC 69

Jackson Teece v Waverley Council [2007] NSWLEC 69

The proposal was too big for its site, with an FSR inconsistent with the objective, variation criteria and design solutions for density in DCP 1; it came too close to Wairoa Avenue through projecting balconies; it achieved poor solar access; and it adversely impacted the western neighbour. Those matters justified dismissal of the appeal and refusal of the development application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Development Application Appeal / Appeal Against Deemed Refusal; Judgment Dismissing the Appeal and Determining the Development Application by Refusal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; development application refused.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'deemed Refusal' 'performance Based Planning Instruments' 'floor Space Ratio' 'setbacks' 'bulk and Scale' 'parking' 'solar Access']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'deemed Refusal' 'performance Based Planning Instruments' 'floor Space Ratio' 'setbacks' 'bulk and Scale' 'parking' 'solar Access']

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

Development Application Appeal / Appeal Against Deemed Refusal; Judgment Dismissing the Appeal and Determining the Development Application by Refusal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the proposed development's bulk and scale, including its presentation to Wairoa Avenue, were acceptable under the applicable planning controls." 'Whether the proposal would adversely impact neighbours.' 'Whether inadequate parking warranted refusal.' 'Whether lack of solar access to apartments warranted refusal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposal was too big for its site, with an FSR inconsistent with the objective, variation criteria and design solutions for density in DCP 1; it came too close to Wairoa Avenue through projecting balconies; it achieved poor solar access; and it adversely impacted the western neighbour. Those matters justified dismissal of the appeal and refusal of the development application.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; development application refused.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'Development application to demolish the existing police station and construct a four-storey residential flat building containing a shop and ten apartments on lot 1 DP 15662, known as 30A Hastings Parade, Bondi Beach is determined by refusal.' 'The exhibits are returned.']