Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Nicola v Waverley Council [2020] NSWLEC 1599 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 30 July 2020;
Hearing on 30 and 31 July 2020Date of orders: 4 December 2020 Decision date: 04 December 2020 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Bindon AC Decision: The Court orders:
(1) Leave is granted to rely on the Amended Plans in Exhibit A and as described in the conditions in Annexure A.
(2) The appeal is upheld.
(3) Development Consent is granted to Development Application DA-513/2017/B at 27 Princess Street, Rose Bay for internal alterations to room layouts, the addition of a new stair access with glass enclosure to the roof level and a new 15m2 rooftop terrace with glass balustrade, subject to the agreed conditions in Annexure A.
(4) The exhibits, with the exception of Exhibits A and 6 are returned.
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – dwelling house – clause 4.6 variation to building height – calculation of ground level (existing) – view impacts
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000
Cases Cited: Bettar v City of Sydney [2014] NSWLEC 1070
Chami v Lane Cove Council [2015] NSWLEC 1003
Connoisseur Investments Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council ([2020]) NSWLEC 1181
Stamford Property Services Pty Ltd v City of Sydney [2015] NSWLEC 1189
Texts Cited: Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, COVID-19 Pandemic Arrangements Policy, (March 2020)
Waverley Development Control Plan 2012
Category: Principal judgment Parties: George Nicola (First Applicant)
Miriam Nicola (Second Applicant)
Waverley Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
A Pickles SC (Applicants)
M Hanna (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Mills Oakley (Applicants)
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2020/142708 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is a Class 1 appeal filed with the Land and Environment Court (the Court) on 13 May 2020 under s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) against the refusal by Waverley Council (Council) of Development Application DA-513/2017/B (the subject modification DA). The subject modification DA seeks consent to modify the development application DA-513/2017 as approved by Council on 1 February 2018 (the original DA) to allow a new rooftop terrace and access thereto. In exercising the functions of consent authority the Court has the power to determine the modification DA pursuant to ss 4.15 and 4.16 of the EPA Act.
Modification application pursuant to s 4.55(1A) or s 4.55(2)
-
The subject modification DA was lodged pursuant to s 4.55(1A) of the EPA Act, which applies to “modifications involving minimal environmental impact”. Section 4.55(1A)(a) states:
(1A) Modifications involving minimal environmental impact A consent authority may, on application being made by the applicant or any other person entitled to act on a consent granted by the consent authority and subject to and in accordance with the regulations, modify the consent if—
(a) it is satisfied that the proposed modification is of minimal environmental impact, and
…
-
Although not a matter of dispute between the parties,…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Nicola v Waverley 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2020] NSWLEC 1599
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Court were whether the proposed changes complied with the requirements of the Waverley Local Environment Plan 2012, the Heritage Amendment (Conservation of Buildings of Historic Character) Order 2010, and the NSW Building Code. The Court was also required to determine whether the proposed changes were in accordance with the design standards set out in the Waverley Development Control Plan 2018.
The Court found that the proposed changes did comply with the applicable planning scheme and design standards, and therefore granted development consent. The Court found that the proposed changes would not have a significant impact on the character of the surrounding area, and that the design of the proposed changes was in accordance with the design standards. The Court also found that the proposed changes did not constitute a heritage modification, as they did not alter the character of the building of historic character. The Court therefore granted leave to rely on the Amended Plans in Exhibit A, as described in the conditions in Annexure A, and granted development consent for the proposed changes.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Court orders:
(1) Leave is granted to rely on the Amended Plans in Exhibit A and as described in the conditions in Annexure A.
(2) The appeal is upheld.
(3) Development Consent is granted to Development Application DA-513/2017/B at 27 Princess Street, Rose Bay for internal alterations to room layouts, the addition of a new stair access with glass enclosure to the roof level and a new 15m2 rooftop terrace with glass balustrade, subject to the agreed conditions in Annexure A.
(4) The exhibits, with the exception of Exhibits A and 6 are returned.
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.