McDonald v Randwick City Council [2012] NSWLEC 1175
The appeal is dismissed because approving the enclosure would set an undesirable precedent for piecemeal balcony enclosure, detracting from the design integrity and appearance of the building; the proposal should be refused under the DCP guidance and planning considerations.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 26 June 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; development application refused
- Legal Topics
- ['development Application' 'floor Space Ratio' 'precedent' 'balcony Enclosure' 'development Control Plan']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the proposed enclosure of the balcony should be approved despite exceeding floor space ratio (FSR) controls' 'Whether the proposal would set an undesirable planning precedent for the piecemeal enclosure of balconies' 'Whether the proposal affects the size, scale, and streetscape appearance of the building']
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal is dismissed because approving the enclosure would set an undesirable precedent for piecemeal balcony enclosure, detracting from the design integrity and appearance of the building; the proposal should be refused under the DCP guidance and planning considerations.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; development application refused
Orders
- ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'Development Application No. 542/11 to enclose an existing balcony at apartment 11, 98 Mount Street, Coogee is refused consent.' 'The exhibits, other than exhibits 3, A and C, are returned.']
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