Merrag Pty Ltd v Warringah Council

[2005] NSWLEC 508

Land and Environment Court

of New South Wales

CITATION:

Merrag Pty Ltd v Warringah Council [2005] NSWLEC 508

PARTIES:

APPLICANT
Merrag Pty Ltd

RESPONDENT
Warringah Council

FILE NUMBER(S):

11297 of 2004

CORAM:

Hoffman C

KEY ISSUES:

Appeal :- s 96 amendment to consent for a multi-storey mixed use residential
retail and commercial development with basement carpark.

LEGISLATION CITED:

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

DATES OF HEARING:

14/02/2005, 06/06/2005 and 03/08/2005

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE:

08/03/2005

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:

APPLICANT
Mr D Briggs, solicitor
Of DG Briggs and Associates

RESPONDENT
Mr A Hudson, solicitor
SOLICITORS
Wilshire Webb

JUDGMENT:

THE LAND AND
ENVIRONMENT COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES

Hoffman C

3 August 2005

11297 of 2004 Merrag Pty Ltd v

Warringah Council

JUDGMENT

1 This is a s 96 application to amend existing consent 2001/0243 DA for a multi storey mixed use residential, retail and commercial development with basement carparking at No. 11 Oaks Avenue, Dee Why.

2 The building was at an advanced stage of construction at the commencement of the hearing. The hearing was adjourned twice to enable parties to negotiate and clarify anomalies in the drawings and to obtain DIPNR concurrence to works in and next to a water-course and to allow re-exhibition of updated drawings. On the 3rd occasion of the hearing that occurred during a 6 month period, the parties reached consent orders.

3 The parties are directed to have the applicant’s consult with Mr Findlay of council to advise how the basement carpark is ventilated and to correctly indicate the detention tanks on plan S96-3-DWB in Exhibit C and advise where the ventilation grilles to the basement carpark occur as they currently appear to conflict with the stormwater detention tanks and to advise if the large duct beside the lift is the carpark exhaust duct and if so, where does it discharge.

4 Appropriate conditions and amended drawings as necessary to be filed within twenty-one days. Issue of consent orders is foreshadowed in chambers once the above matters are clarified.

_________________________

K G Hoffman

Commissioner of the Court
Rjs/ljr