Tektonik Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1448

Tektonik Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1448

Because the parties reached a s 34 agreement and the Commissioner was satisfied that the amended development application met the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites, including that the clause 4.6 height variation request was justified and that the applicable RLEP, SEPP 65, SEPP Resilience and Hazards and BASIX requirements were satisfied, the parties' decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions and the proceedings had to be disposed of in accordance with that decision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Following Refusal of Development Application Da/415/2022 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
Appeal upheld; clause 4.6 request upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; Applicant ordered to pay Council's costs thrown away.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'mixed Use Development' 'clause 4.6 Variation Request' 'height of Buildings Development Standard' 'community Infrastructure and Planning Agreement' 'design Quality of Residential Apartment Development' 'site Contamination' 'basix' 'conciliation Conference']
['environmental Planning and Development' 'land and Environment Court Procedure'] ['development Application' 'mixed Use Development' 'clause 4.6 Variation Request' 'height of Buildings Development Standard' 'community Infrastructure and Planning Agreement' 'design Quality of Residential Apartment Development' 'site Contamination' 'basix' 'conciliation Conference']

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 Following Refusal of Development Application Da/415/2022 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' decision to grant conditional development consent was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether the clause 4.6 request to vary the height of buildings standard was justified.' 'Whether the proposed development satisfied relevant jurisdictional prerequisites under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 and applicable State environmental planning policies and regulations.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the parties reached a s 34 agreement and the Commissioner was satisfied that the amended development application met the relevant jurisdictional prerequisites, including that the clause 4.6 height variation request was justified and that the applicable RLEP, SEPP 65, SEPP Resilience and Hazards and BASIX requirements were satisfied, the parties' decision was one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions and the proceedings had to be disposed of in accordance with that decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; clause 4.6 request upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions; Applicant ordered to pay Council's costs thrown away.

Orders

  • ['The request pursuant to clause 4.6 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 (RLEP) in relation to the height of buildings standard at clause 4.3 of the RLEP, prepared by ABC Planning Pty Limited dated July 2023, is upheld.' "The Applicant is to pay the Council's costs thrown away pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the...