Mercury Resources Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1094

Mercury Resources Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1094

Although the Court was satisfied that the clause 4.6 tests were met and that the site could support a building exceeding the height standard, consent could not be granted because the Court was not satisfied under clause 6.3(3) that the development was compatible with the flood hazard of the land or that it would avoid unsustainable social and economic costs to the community as a consequence of flooding. The Court also found that the building was too big in its context, with unsatisfactory bulk and scale, a wide elliptical element, excessive gross floor area in too large a footprint, poor apartment layout and inferior internal amenity inconsistent with Principle 6 of SEPP65.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Appeal From Council Refusal of Development Application No 86/2015
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Development Application No 86/2015 refused consent.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'mixed Use Development' 'height Development Standard' 'clause 4.6 Variation' 'flood Planning' 'shelter in Place' 'bulk and Scale' 'residential Amenity' 'overshadowing' 'acid Sulphate Soils']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'mixed Use Development' 'height Development Standard' 'clause 4.6 Variation' 'flood Planning' 'shelter in Place' 'bulk and Scale' 'residential Amenity' 'overshadowing' 'acid Sulphate Soils']

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 Development Application Appeal / Appeal From Council Refusal of Development Application No 86/2015

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed contravention of the RL14 height of buildings development standard satisfied clause 4.6 of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011.' 'Whether the development was compatible with the flood hazard of the land and would avoid unsustainable social and economic costs to the community as a consequence of flooding under clause 6.3 of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011.' 'Whether the proposed shelter in place strategy was appropriate during a flood event.' 'Whether the bulk, scale, character and amenity of the proposed development were appropriate for the site.' 'Whether overshadowing impacts on the adjacent bowling greens warranted refusal.' 'Whether an acid sulphate soils management plan was required before consent could be granted.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Court was satisfied that the clause 4.6 tests were met and that the site could support a building exceeding the height standard, consent could not be granted because the Court was not satisfied under clause 6.3(3) that the development was compatible with the flood hazard of the land or that it would avoid unsustainable social and economic costs to the community as a consequence of flooding. The Court also found that the building was too big in its context, with unsatisfactory bulk and scale, a wide elliptical element, excessive gross floor area in too large a footprint, poor apartment layout and inferior internal amenity inconsistent with Principle 6 of SEPP65.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Development Application No 86/2015 refused consent.

Orders

  • ["The applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended plans, Exhibit K, subject to the payment of the council's cost thrown away as agreed or assessed pursuant to the provisions of Section 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979." 'The appeal is dismissed.' 'Development Application No 86/2015...