Georgees v Randwick City Council

[2025] NSWLEC 1800

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Georgees v Randwick City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1800

Hearing dates:

Conciliation Conference on 29-30 October 2025

Date of orders:

14 November 2025

Decision date:

14 November 2025

Jurisdiction:

Class 1

Before:

Macken AC

Decision:

The Court orders:

(1) The appeal is upheld.

(2) Development Application DA No. 192/2023/A pursuant to s 4.55(8) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) is approved.

(3) Development consent DA192/2023, granted by the Land and Environment Court on 23 December 2024 is modified in the terms in Annexure A.

(4) Development consent DA192/2023 as modified by the Court is Annexure B.

Catchwords:

MODIFICATION APPLICATION – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – dual occupancy development in R2 low density zone – orders

Legislation Cited:

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 4.16, 4.15, 4.55, 8.7

Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), ss 34, 34AA

Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, ss 3, 27

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012, cl 5.10

Texts Cited:

Randwick Development Control Plan 2013

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Salem Georgees (First Applicant)
Randwick City Council (Respondent)

Representation:

Solicitors:
A Boskovitz (Solicitor) (Applicant)
S Patterson (Solicitor) (Respondent)

File Number(s):

2025/184173

Publication restriction:

Nil

Judgment

1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to the provisions of s 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EPA Act) for approval to modify development consent DA192/2023, which was determined by the grant of consent by the Land and Environment Court on 23 December 2024.

2. The Modification Application was lodged with the Land and Environment Court on 14 May 2025 pursuant to s 4.55(8) of the EPA Act in Class 1 of the Court’s jurisdiction.

3. Modification Application No DA192/2023/A, as amended, is for modification to the approved dual occupancy and existing stables and includes the relocation of parking and the driveway, extension of the living area on the northern dual occupancy, the provision of a side courtyard on the southern dual occupancy, changes to roof forms, internal reconfiguration of each dwelling and other ancillary changes at 7 Ingram Street, Kensington, identified as Lot 37 in Section 10 in Deposited Plan 5759.

4. The subject site is occupied by an L-shaped single storey former stables building, with brick walls and terracotta tile roof, located at the rear of the site. It is within an established residential area of mainly single and two storey houses. The site is within the West Kensington Heritage Conservation Area.

5. The Court arranged a conciliation conference between the parties, in accordance with the provisions of s 34AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) (LEC Act), which was held on 29-30 October 2025. I presided over the conciliation conference.

6. On the basis of amended documentation and agreed conditions of consent, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. A signed agreement prepared in accordance with s 34(10) of the LEC Act was submitted to the Court on 30 October 2025.

7. Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision if the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.16 of the EPA Act to grant consent to the development application.

8. I formed an opinion of satisfaction that each of the pre-jurisdictional requirements identified by the parties have been met, for the reasons that follow.

Jurisdictional matters

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act

9. Section 4.55(2)(a) of the EPA Act requires the Court as the consent authority to be satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is the same or substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted.

10. I am satisfied that the proposed development complies with this requirement on the basis that the modification application is for a development within substantially the same envelope as that with development consent and that there is no increase in height or GFA.

11. Section 4.55(3) requires the Court as the consent authority to take into consideration such of the matters referred to in s 4.15(1) as are of relevance to the development the subject of the application, and the reasons given by the consent authority for the grant of the consent that is sought to be modified.

12. The parties agree, and I am satisfied that these matters have been taken into consideration. No relevant matters arise under the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 (RLEP) and consideration has been given to the merits of the modification in regard to the provisions of the Randwick Development Control Plan (RDCP). Due consideration has been given to the impacts of the modification application by the parties’ planning and heritage experts.

Planning Framework

Randwick Local Environmental Plan

13. The RLEP is the applicable planning instrument. The site is located within the R2 General Residential zone, pursuant to RLEP.

14. I am satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the zone, which are:

• To provide for the housing needs of the community within a low density residential environment.

• To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

• To recognise the desirable elements of the existing streetscape and built form or, in precincts undergoing transition, that contribute to the desired future character of the area.

• To protect the amenity of residents.

• To encourage housing affordability.

• To enable small-scale business uses in existing commercial building.

15. Pursuant to cl 5.10 (Heritage Conservation) of the RLEP, I am satisfied that consideration has been given by the parties to the effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the heritage conservation area in accordance with cl 5.10(4), as the proposal has been the subject of consideration by planning and heritage experts.

Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021

16. The Modification Application is a BASIX development as defined in s 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (EPA Reg).

17. Pursuant to s 27 of the EPA Reg, the application is accompanied by a BASIX certificate (no 1774365M_02 dated 29 October 2025), prepared by Elias Aboutannous.

Other considerations

18. I note the advice of the parties that landowner’s consent for the development application was provided on 26 November 2024, and that the DA was publicly exhibited from 5-19 June 2025, and that no written submissions were received.

Conclusion

19. Having considered the above, along with the jurisdictional statement provided by the parties to the Court to assist the Court in understanding how the requirements of the relevant environmental planning instruments have been satisfied, I am satisfied on the basis of the evidence before me that the agreement of the parties is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.

20. I am required under s 34(3) of the LEC Act to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ agreement.

21. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to and have not made any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.

22. The Court notes that:

1. Randwick City Council, as the relevant consent authority, has approved, under section 113 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, the Applicant amending Development Application No DA/192/2023/A to rely on the documents below:

Document	Prepared/Drawn by	Dated
DA000(03) – Cover Page	Common Office	20/10/2025
DA001(03) – Site Plan		20/10/2025
DA100(03) – Ground Floor Plan		20/10/2025
DA101(03) – First Floor Plan		20/10/2025
DA102(03) – Roof Plan		20/10/2025
DA110(03) – Detail Ground Floor Plan		20/10/2025
DA111(03) – Detail First Floor Plan		20/10/2025
DA112(03) – Detail Roof Plan		20/10/2025
DA200(03) – Elevations		20/10/2025
DA201(03) – Elevations		20/10/2025
DA300(03) – Sections		20/10/2025
DA301(03) – Sections		20/10/2025
DA310(03) – Dormer Details		20/10/2025
C1 – Landscape Plan (Rev B)	Contour Landscape Architecture	30/04/2025
C1 – Plant Images (Rev B)		30/04/2025
C3 – Landscape Details (Rev B)		30/04/2025
C4 – Landscape Specifications (Rev B)		30/04/2025
Acoustic letter	Pulse White Noise Acoustics	24/10/2025
BASIX Certificate No 1774365M_02	Elias Aboutannous	29/10/2025

Orders

23. The orders of the Court are:

1. The appeal is upheld.

2. Development Application DA 192/2023/A pursuant to s 4.55(8) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) is approved.

3. Development consent DA192/2023, granted by the Land and Environment Court on 23 December 2024 is modified in the terms in Annexure A.

4. Development consent DA192/2023 as modified by the Court is Annexure B.

Niall Macken

Acting Commissioner of the Court

Annexure A (273 KB, pdf)

Annexure B (487 KB, pdf)

**********

Decision last updated: 14 November 2025