Reswent Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2021] NSWLEC 1388
The appeal was dismissed because the Applicant's cl 4.6 written request for the building height contravention did not adequately demonstrate that compliance with objective (d) of the height standard was unreasonable or unnecessary, and did not establish sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention. The Court found the proposed built form, roof form, upper-level presentation, cantilevered balconies and front setback functions incompatible with the height, bulk and scale of the desired future character of the low density locality on the southern side of Sir Thomas Mitchell Road. Because the Court could not form the required positive opinion of satisfaction under cl...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 06 July 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Concerning Refusal of Development Application No. DA 109/2020 / Principal Judgment After Hearing
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; development consent refused.
- Legal Topics
- ['existing Use Rights' 'residential Flat Building in R2 Low Density Residential Zone' 'clause 4.6 Written Request' 'building Height Development Standard' 'floor Space Ratio Development Standard' 'desired Future Character' 'overshadowing and Amenity']
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 Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Concerning Refusal of Development Application No. DA 109/2020 / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the site benefited from existing use rights for a residential flat building and whether the application could be considered as an enlargement, expansion or intensification of that use.' 'Whether the written request under cl 4.6 of the Waverley Local Environmental Plan 2012 adequately demonstrated that compliance with the cl 4.3 building height development standard was unreasonable or unnecessary.' 'Whether the written request established sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravention of the building height standard.' 'Whether the proposed development was compatible with the height, bulk and scale of the desired future character of the locality.' "Whether the Court's power to grant development consent was enlivened."]
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the Applicant's cl 4.6 written request for the building height contravention did not adequately demonstrate that compliance with objective (d) of the height standard was unreasonable or unnecessary, and did not establish sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravention. The Court found the proposed built form, roof form, upper-level presentation, cantilevered balconies and front setback functions incompatible with the height, bulk and scale of the desired future character of the low density locality on the southern side of Sir Thomas Mitchell Road. Because the Court could not form the required positive opinion of satisfaction under cl...
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; development consent refused.
Orders
- ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'Development consent for Development Application No. DA-109/2020 for the demolition of the existing two-storey residential flat building and construction of a new three-storey residential flat building comprising 4 apartments and basement carpark at No 56 Sir Thomas Mitchell Road, Bondi...
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