K Z Holdings Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2015] NSWLEC 1181
The Court was satisfied, after the site inspection, expert evidence and computer generated modelling based on accurate levels, that the proposed modifications would not detract from the heritage significance of the item or the Woollahra Heritage Conservation Area. The addition would not be discernible above the front parapet from across Grosvenor Street, any visibility through the balustrades would have negligible heritage impact, and retention of flashing was sufficient in the circumstances to allow interpretation of the original roof form given the earlier approval to remove and lower the roof. With amended rear roof pitch and setback conditions resolving planning concerns, consent...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 01 May 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Class 1 Appeal Against Woollahra Municipal Council's Refusal of Modification Application No. 371/2011/3 Under S 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Final Orders After Mandatory Conciliation Conference Was Terminated and the Matter Proceeded to Hearing
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld; Modification Application No. 371/2011/3 approved subject to modification conditions and consolidated conditions of consent.
- Legal Topics
- ['modification Application for Alterations and Additions to a Dwelling' 'visual Impact on Heritage Conservation Area' 'development Control Plan Objectives and Controls' 'heritage Significance of Principal Building Form' 'amenity Impacts Including Bulk, Scale, Privacy and Solar Access']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Woollahra Municipal Council's Refusal of Modification Application No. 371/2011/3 Under S 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Final Orders After Mandatory Conciliation Conference Was Terminated and the Matter Proceeded to Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the proposed modifications would adversely affect the heritage significance of the Woollahra Heritage Conservation Area or the significant item at 37 Grosvenor Street, Woollahra.' 'Whether the first floor addition and modified deck above the principal building form would be sufficiently screened by the front parapet and have acceptable visual impact from Grosvenor Street.' 'Whether removal or modification of the original roof form would still allow interpretation of the original single storey principal building form.' 'Whether rear additions should maintain the approved southern side setback and amended fenestration to address planning and amenity concerns.']
Ratio Decidendi
The Court was satisfied, after the site inspection, expert evidence and computer generated modelling based on accurate levels, that the proposed modifications would not detract from the heritage significance of the item or the Woollahra Heritage Conservation Area. The addition would not be discernible above the front parapet from across Grosvenor Street, any visibility through the balustrades would have negligible heritage impact, and retention of flashing was sufficient in the circumstances to allow interpretation of the original roof form given the earlier approval to remove and lower the roof. With amended rear roof pitch and setback conditions resolving planning concerns, consent...
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld; Modification Application No. 371/2011/3 approved subject to modification conditions and consolidated conditions of consent.
Orders
- ['The appeal is upheld.' "Modification Application No. 371/2011/3 for alterations and additions to a dwelling at 37 Grosvenor Street, Woollahra is determined by approval subject to the modification conditions in Annexure 'A' and the consolidated conditions of consent in Annexure 'B'." 'All exhibits except 1, A and B...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment