Urban Peninsula Pty Limited v Ku-Ring-Gai Council (No 2) [2011] NSWLEC 1150

Urban Peninsula Pty Limited v Ku-Ring-Gai Council (No 2) [2011] NSWLEC 1150

The Court found that the proposed modifications to Conditions 1, 50, 57, 73, and 82 were appropriate, within its power, and reflected the agreement of the parties; the landscape bond requirement was deleted as there was no power to impose it; section 94 contributions were reduced to match the approved thirty-one units, and the correct plans referenced in the consent were clarified.

Parties
Applicant: Urban Peninsula Pty Limited; Respondent: Ku-Ring-Gai Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Modification of Development Consent
Outcome
Application as amended upheld; consent conditions modified by agreement of the parties.
Legal Topics
Modification of Development Consent, Conditions of Consent, Section 94 Contributions
Planning Law Modification of Development Consent Conditions of Consent Section 94 Contributions

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Urban Peninsula Pty Limited

Applicant

Ku-Ring-Gai Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Modification of Development Consent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the modifications to conditions 1, 50, 57, 73, and 82 are within power under s 96(8) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
  2. 2 Correctness of plan references in the consent
  3. 3 Lawfulness of requirement for payment of a landscape bond

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the proposed modifications to Conditions 1, 50, 57, 73, and 82 were appropriate, within its power, and reflected the agreement of the parties; the landscape bond requirement was deleted as there was no power to impose it; section 94 contributions were reduced to match the approved thirty-one units, and the correct plans referenced in the consent were clarified.

Court Disposition

Application as amended upheld; consent conditions modified by agreement of the parties.

Orders

  • The application as amended is upheld.
  • Pursuant to section 96(8) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the development consent granted by the Court on 21 April 2006 in proceedings No. 10110 of 2005 (as subsequently amended by the slip rule) for the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a residential flat building over...