Pavilion Developments Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2021] NSWLEC 1462

Pavilion Developments Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2021] NSWLEC 1462

The appeal was upheld because the proposal was permissible in the R3 Medium Density Residential zone, complied with the building height control, could be treated as compliant with floor space ratio once the disputed landing areas were excluded as common vertical circulation, and, despite some overshadowing and an external wall height contravention, provided an acceptable planning response to neighbour amenity through its setbacks, rear open area, articulation, privacy measures, landscaping and consent conditions. The communal open space and design quality response were also adequate, so consent was warranted subject to conditions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Deemed Refusal of a Development Application / Final Determination After Hearing
Outcome
Appeal upheld and development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['deemed Refusal Appeal' 'building Massing' 'external Wall Height' 'gross Floor Area and Floor Space Ratio' 'neighbour Amenity Impacts' 'solar Access and Overshadowing' 'visual Privacy' 'communal Open Space' 'state Environmental Planning Policy No 65 Design Quality']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent' 'residential Apartment Development'] ['deemed Refusal Appeal' 'building Massing' 'external Wall Height' 'gross Floor Area and Floor Space Ratio' 'neighbour Amenity Impacts' 'solar Access and Overshadowing' 'visual Privacy' 'communal Open Space' 'state Environmental Planning Policy No 65 Design Quality']

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 Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Deemed Refusal of a Development Application / Final Determination After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether areas on the First and Second Floor landings properly qualified as common vertical circulation area excluded from gross floor area calculations.' 'Whether the proposed building massing, side setbacks and external wall height produced unacceptable overshadowing, privacy, visual bulk, airflow or redevelopment-potential impacts on neighbouring properties to the south.' 'Whether the communal open space for future occupants was acceptable under Objective 3D-1 of the Apartment Design Guide.' 'Whether the proposal gave adequate regard to SEPP 65 design quality principles and the Apartment Design Guide.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was upheld because the proposal was permissible in the R3 Medium Density Residential zone, complied with the building height control, could be treated as compliant with floor space ratio once the disputed landing areas were excluded as common vertical circulation, and, despite some overshadowing and an external wall height contravention, provided an acceptable planning response to neighbour amenity through its setbacks, rear open area, articulation, privacy measures, landscaping and consent conditions. The communal open space and design quality response were also adequate, so consent was warranted subject to conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld and development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' "Development consent is granted to DA/175/2020 seeking development consent for a residential flat building and associated development at 191 Carrington Road, Coogee subject to conditions of consent at Annexure 'A'." 'Exhibits 1, 2, 4 and 5 are returned.']