Strebora Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council (No. 2) [2017] NSWLEC 1575

Strebora Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council (No. 2) [2017] NSWLEC 1575

The Court was not satisfied that the applicant's cl 4.6 request for the height contravention should be upheld. Although the proposal was not inconsistent with the R3 zone objectives, the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence or analysis to properly determine the extent of the height variation by reference to existing ground level, and the Court accepted the Council's planning evidence that the non-compliant height, combined with the extent of the upper level, building volume and limited setbacks, produced an overbearing streetscape outcome incompatible with the desired future character. Because the development was not consistent with objective (a) of the height standard, the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Consent for a Residential Flat Development / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; development application refused.
Legal Topics
['residential Flat Building' 'clause 4.6 Variation Request' 'building Height Development Standard' 'floor Space Ratio Development Standard' 'streetscape and Desired Future Character' 'traffic and Parking' 'costs on Amended Development Application']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['residential Flat Building' 'clause 4.6 Variation Request' 'building Height Development Standard' 'floor Space Ratio Development Standard' 'streetscape and Desired Future Character' 'traffic and Parking' 'costs on Amended Development Application']

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 Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Consent for a Residential Flat Development / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed variations to the height and floor space standards were well founded and worthy of support.' 'Whether the traffic and parking demands arising from the development were managed in a safe and satisfactory manner.' "Whether the applicant's written request adequately demonstrated that compliance with the building height development standard was unreasonable or unnecessary." 'Whether the proposed development was consistent with the objectives of the height standard in cl 4.3 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was not satisfied that the applicant's cl 4.6 request for the height contravention should be upheld. Although the proposal was not inconsistent with the R3 zone objectives, the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence or analysis to properly determine the extent of the height variation by reference to existing ground level, and the Court accepted the Council's planning evidence that the non-compliant height, combined with the extent of the upper level, building volume and limited setbacks, produced an overbearing streetscape outcome incompatible with the desired future character. Because the development was not consistent with objective (a) of the height standard, the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; development application refused.

Orders

  • ['The applicant is granted leave to rely on amended plans.' 'No order as to costs.' 'The objections pursuant to cl 4.6 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 are not sustained.' 'The appeal is dismissed.' 'Development application DA 455/2016 for a four storey residential flat development over basement car...