Gordon Lawrenson v Waverley Council

[2009] NSWLEC 1288

Land and Environment Court

of New South Wales

CITATION:	Gordon Lawrenson v Waverley Council [2009] NSWLEC 1288
PARTIES:	APPLICANT Gordon Lawrenson RESPONDENT Waverley Council
FILE NUMBER(S):	10435 of 2009
CORAM:	Brown C
KEY ISSUES:	DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION :- consent orders - construction of a single hard stand car parking space
LEGISLATION CITED:	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
DATES OF HEARING:	26 August 2009
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE:	26 August 2009
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:	APPLICANT Mr M McMahon, solicitor SOLICITORS M E McMahon & Associates RESPONDENT Ms N Jones, solicitor SOLICITORS Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie

JUDGMENT:

THE LAND AND
ENVIRONMENT COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES

Brown C

26 August 2009

10435 of 2009 Gordon Lawrenson v Waverley Council

JUDGMENT

1 COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal by Waverley Council of DA 47/2008 for the construction of a single hard stand car parking space in front of an existing semi-detached dwelling at 42 Dudley St, Bondi. The basis for the refusal was that the proposed hard stand area did not comply with the minimum dimensions in cl 5.7.4 of Part D1 of Waverley Development Control Plan 2006 (the DCP), there would be a loss of on street car parking and the location of the space had potential impacts on pedestrian safety.

2 Following the submission of amended plans by the applicant, the appeal now comes before the Court for Consent Orders. In accordance with the Practice Note – Class 1 Development Appeals (cll 35 and 36) the "consent authority will be required to demonstrate that relevant statutory provisions have been complied with and that any objection by any person has been properly taken into account".

3 The amended plans provide for the demolition of an existing veranda at the front of the terrace to allow the original undersized hard stand area to be extended and amendments made to the existing front fence. The report from the council on the amended plans states that the hard stand area now complies with the minimum dimensions required by the DCP, including compliance with the relevant Australian Standard. The amendments also overcome the other concerns of the council, including any issues associated with the alterations to the semi-detached dwelling.

4 Ms Jones, for the council, states that the development application attracted no objections.

5 There being no reason why the Consent Orders should not be made, the Orders of the Court, by consent, are:

1. Leave is granted to the Applicant to rely on the amended plans referred to in Condition 1 of Annexure A, filed on 26 August 2009.
2. The appeal is upheld.
3. Development consent is granted to DA 47/2009 for the construction of a hardstand car space including the demolition of an enclosed veranda, subject to the conditions in Attachment A.
4. The exhibits, except Exhibit B may be returned.
Pursuant to s 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 the Applicant pay the Respondent $1,800 being the Respondent’s costs incurred as a result of the Applicant relying on amended plans referred to in these orders.
______________
G T Brown
Commissioner of the Court