Universal Equity v Waverley Council [2008] NSWLEC 1209

Universal Equity v Waverley Council [2008] NSWLEC 1209

The proposed amendments increased floor space and bulk in a Denison Lane context mainly characterised by single-storey garages, where the approved two-storey development already introduced an inconsistent scale and exceeded the permissible FSR. Additional visible floor space would exacerbate that inconsistency, and absence of environmental harm or improved dwelling amenity did not justify further departure from planning controls. The alleged reversal of concessions from the s34 conference was not a matter taken into account. The application was therefore allowed only to the extent reflected in the orders deleting deferred commencement conditions, and the plan amendments were refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against the Deemed Refusal of an Application Under S96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to Modify a Deferred Commencement Development Consent / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
The s96 application was allowed in part; Deferred Commencement Conditions 1 and 3 were deleted, and the amendments proposed to the approved plans were refused.
Legal Topics
['s96 Modification Application' 'deferred Commencement Consent' 'dual Occupancy Development' 'floor Space Ratio' 'bulk and Scale' 's34 Conciliation Conference']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent'] ['s96 Modification Application' 'deferred Commencement Consent' 'dual Occupancy Development' 'floor Space Ratio' 'bulk and Scale' 's34 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

Appeal Against the Deemed Refusal of an Application Under S96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to Modify a Deferred Commencement Development Consent / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed s96 amendments would render the development too bulky for its Denison Lane context.' 'Whether the Court could take into account that the proposed amendments were a reversal of concessions made at a prior s34 conciliation conference.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed amendments increased floor space and bulk in a Denison Lane context mainly characterised by single-storey garages, where the approved two-storey development already introduced an inconsistent scale and exceeded the permissible FSR. Additional visible floor space would exacerbate that inconsistency, and absence of environmental harm or improved dwelling amenity did not justify further departure from planning controls. The alleged reversal of concessions from the s34 conference was not a matter taken into account. The application was therefore allowed only to the extent reflected in the orders deleting deferred commencement conditions, and the plan amendments were refused.

Court Disposition

The s96 application was allowed in part; Deferred Commencement Conditions 1 and 3 were deleted, and the amendments proposed to the approved plans were refused.

Orders

  • ['The s96 application is allowed in part.' 'Deferred Commencement Conditions 1 and 3 of the Deferred Commencement Consent issued by the Land and Environment Court on 26 October 2007 in respect of a dual occupancy development at 16A Queens Park Road, Queens Park are deleted.' 'The amendments proposed to the plans...