Cittrus Pty Ltd v Inner West Council - [2019] NSWLEC 1558

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Cittrus Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2019] NSWLEC 1558
Hearing dates: 22 October 2019
Date of orders: 15 November 2019
Decision date: 15 November 2019
Jurisdiction: Class 1
Before: Dixon SC
Decision:
The Court orders:
(1) The appeal is upheld.
(2) Development Application No. 2018/00033 is granted subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure A.

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – roof signage – Parramatta Road transport corridor – desired future character – State Environmental Planning Policy No 64 – Advertising and Signage – height standard
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011
State Environmental Planning Policy No 64 – Advertising and Signage
Cases Cited: Al Maha Pty Ltd v Huajun Investments Pty Ltd (2018) 365 ALR 86; [2018] NSWCA 245
Baron Corporation Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Sydney [2019] NSWLEC 61
Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWLEC 1009
Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 118
Randwick City Council v Micaul Holdings Pty Ltd (2016) 225 LGERA 94
Rebel MH Neutral Bay Pty Ltd v North Sydney Council [2019] NSWCA 130
Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) 156 LGERA 446
Texts Cited: Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011
NSW Department of Planning and Environment, ‘Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines’ (November 2017)
UrbanGrowth NSW, ‘Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation Planning and Design Guidelines’ (November 2016)
UrbanGrowth NSW, ‘Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation Strategy’ (November 2016)
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Cittrus Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Inner West Council (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
S Nash (Applicant)
M Cottom (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Applicant)
Pikes & Verekers Lawyers (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2018/328621
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

These proceedings concern the replacement of roof signage on a commercial building located on the southern side of Parramatta Road at its intersection with West Street, Lewisham (“site”).
The Applicant’s building (depicted below) contains two ‘older style’ static roof signs facing Parramatta Road and a third roof sign facing West Street.

The proposal

The proposal is to demolish the existing roof signage and replace the two signs facing Parramatta Road with two illuminated digital roof signs (“the development”). The roof sign facing West Street will be demolished and removed.
The new signage is approximately 1m lower than the existing signage. It protrudes above the parapet of the existing building and has a maximum height of 9.8m.
The surface area of the proposed two signs is 28m², whereas the existing signage collectively has a surface area of 31m².
All cables and associated plant for the new signage will be integrated into the structures in an effort to reduce visual clutter. The digital screens will display static electronic images successively at set intervals of at least 10 seconds. The content will include third party advertising, with the opportunity for advertising by public authorities such as the Inner West Council. The…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Cittrus Pty Ltd v Inner West Council and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2019] NSWLEC 1558
Decision Date: 15 November 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Court was an appeal by Cittrus Pty Ltd against a decision of Inner West Council to refuse their development application. The applicants sought approval for a mixed-use development on a property in Annandale. The appeal was heard by the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issues in the case were whether the Council's decision was legally sound and whether the development application complied with the relevant planning and environmental laws. Cittrus argued that the refusal was unreasonable and not supported by sufficient evidence, while the Council maintained that the development would have significant adverse environmental impacts and did not align with the local planning policies.

The Court found that the Council's decision was flawed and not in accordance with the law. The Court held that the evidence presented by Cittrus demonstrated that the proposed development would not result in the significant adverse environmental impacts claimed by the Council. Additionally, the Court found that the development was consistent with the relevant planning policies, including the Local Environment Plan. As a result, the Court concluded that the refusal of the development application was unreasonable and ordered the appeal be upheld, granting the application subject to specific conditions outlined in Annexure A.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Court orders:

(1) The appeal is upheld.

(2) Development Application No. 2018/00033 is granted subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure A.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Cittrus Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2019] NSWLEC 1558
Hearing dates:	22 October 2019
Date of orders:	15 November 2019
Decision date:	15 November 2019
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Dixon SC
Decision:	The Court orders: (1) The appeal is upheld. (2) Development Application No. 2018/00033 is granted subject to the conditions of consent in Annexure A.
Catchwords:	DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – roof signage – Parramatta Road transport corridor – desired future character – State Environmental Planning Policy No 64 – Advertising and Signage – height standard
Legislation Cited:	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011 State Environmental Planning Policy No 64 – Advertising and Signage
Cases Cited:	Al Maha Pty Ltd v Huajun Investments Pty Ltd (2018) 365 ALR 86; [2018] NSWCA 245 Baron Corporation Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Sydney [2019] NSWLEC 61 Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWLEC 1009 Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 118 Randwick City Council v Micaul Holdings Pty Ltd (2016) 225 LGERA 94 Rebel MH Neutral Bay Pty Ltd v North Sydney Council [2019] NSWCA 130 Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) 156 LGERA 446
Texts Cited:	Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 NSW Department of Planning and Environment, ‘Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines’ (November 2017) UrbanGrowth NSW, ‘Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation Planning and Design Guidelines’ (November 2016) UrbanGrowth NSW, ‘Parramatta Road Corridor Urban Transformation Strategy’ (November 2016)
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Cittrus Pty Ltd (Applicant) Inner West Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: S Nash (Applicant) M Cottom (Solicitor) (Respondent) Solicitors: Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Applicant) Pikes & Verekers Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2018/328621
Publication restriction:	No