Wechsler v Parramatta City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1663

Wechsler v Parramatta City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1663

The appeal was dismissed and development consent refused because: (1) the excessive bulk and scale of the proposed development is not consistent with the objectives of the floor space ratio control and a clause 4.6 variation cannot be upheld; (2) there is insufficient information to ensure retention of a significant street tree; and (3) there is not enough information provided regarding stormwater management. These uncertainties are not appropriate for resolution via deferred commencement or conditional consents, thus consent cannot be granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; development application refused.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'floor Space Ratio' 'tree Retention' 'stormwater Management' 'variation to Development Standard' 'deferred Commencement Condition']
['planning Law' 'environmental Law'] ['development Application' 'floor Space Ratio' 'tree Retention' 'stormwater Management' 'variation to Development Standard' 'deferred Commencement Condition']

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

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether variation to floor space ratio control should be permitted' 'Whether the proposed bulk and scale is appropriate for the locality' 'Whether sufficient information is provided regarding retention of a significant street tree' 'Whether sufficient information is provided on stormwater management' 'Whether the proposal meets other planning requirements such as parking and loading']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed and development consent refused because: (1) the excessive bulk and scale of the proposed development is not consistent with the objectives of the floor space ratio control and a clause 4.6 variation cannot be upheld; (2) there is insufficient information to ensure retention of a significant street tree; and (3) there is not enough information provided regarding stormwater management. These uncertainties are not appropriate for resolution via deferred commencement or conditional consents, thus consent cannot be granted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; development application refused.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'The development application, numbered 855/2016, for the construction of a four-storey self-storage facility with associated tree removal and signage at 103 to 105 Silverwater Road, Silverwater, is refused.' 'The exhibits are returned, except for exhibits A, B and 1.']