Peric v Randwick City Council

Case [2018] NSWLEC 1509

Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Peric v Randwick City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1509
Hearing dates: 10 September 2018
Date of orders: 08 October 2018
Decision date: 08 October 2018
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Chilcott C
Decision:

The orders of the Court are:
(1)   The appeal is dismissed;
(2)   Development Application No. DA/687/2017 for demolition of an existing dwelling, garage and shed, Torrens title subdivision of the land into two lots, and construction of two semi-detached dwellings with garages and associated landscaping and fencing is determined by refusal;
(3)   The exhibits are returned, with the exception of Exhibits A, B and 1.

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: Torrens title subdivision of land – minimum subdivision lot area development standard – whether the Applicants’ environmental planning grounds are sufficient to uphold a cl 4.6 written request under RLEP
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Randwick Local Environment Plan 2012
Cases Cited: Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWCA 248
Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWLEC 90
Gabriel Stefanidis v Randwick City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1307
Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Council [2018] NSWLEC 118
Randwick City Council v Micaul Holdings Ltd (2016) 225 LGERA 94; [2016] NSWLEC 7
Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) 156 LGERA 446; [2007] NSWLEC 827
Texts Cited: Randwick Development Control Plan 2012
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Mirko Peric (First Applicant)
Jovan Davidovic (Second Applicant)
Randwick City Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
N Eastman (Applicants)

  Solicitors:
Mills Oakley (Applicants)
A Seton, Marsdens Law Group (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2018/81244
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. COMMISSIONER: Mirko Peric and Jovan Davidovic (the Applicants) have appealed the deemed refusal by Randwick City Council (the Respondent) of their Development Application No. DA/687/2017.1 for demolition of an existing dwelling, garage and shed, the Torrens title subdivision of land into two lots, and construction of two semi-detached dwellings, with two garages and associated landscaping and fencing (the proposed development).

  2. The proposed development would be located at 273 Beauchamp Street, Matraville (the Subject Site).

  3. The appeal is made pursuant to s 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act).

  4. The Subject Site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential under the provisions of Randwick Local Environment Plan 2012 (RLEP), and the proposed development is permissible on the Subject Site, with consent.

  5. An inspection of the Subject Site was undertaken as part of a conciliation conference under the provisions of s 34AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act). No objectors sought to make submissions in relation to the proposed development.

  6. At the commencement of the conciliation phase of the proceedings, the Parties advised that two matters that had been in contention between them had been resolved. These concerned the following issues:

  1. the front setback of the proposed development – the Parties confirmed that based on advice they had received from their planning experts, this matter was no longer pressed by the Respondent;

  2. potential adverse…

Continue reading Peric v Randwick City Council

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Peric v Randwick City Council [2018] NSWLEC 1509
Case
[2018] NSWLEC 1509
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Peric, the appellant, sought to appeal the decision of the respondent, Randwick City Council, to refuse a development application for the demolition of an existing dwelling, garage, and shed, and for the construction of two semi-detached dwellings. The nature of the dispute revolves around the merits of the refusal of the development application and whether the council's decision was legally sound and in accordance with the relevant planning legislation and policies. The case was determined by Justice Perram.

The legal issues before the court included whether the refusal of the development application was an error of law, whether the council's decision was unreasonable, and whether the proposed development was consistent with the relevant planning scheme. Additionally, the court considered whether the appellant had standing to bring the appeal and whether there were any procedural irregularities in the council's decision-making process.

Justice Perram held that the appeal was dismissed, and the development application was refused. The court found that the council's decision was not an error of law and was not unreasonable. The proposed development did not align with the relevant planning scheme and would have adverse impacts on the surrounding area, including loss of green space and potential impacts on neighbouring properties. The court also found that the appellant had standing to bring the appeal, and there were no procedural irregularities in the council's decision-making process. The exhibits were returned, with the exception of Exhibits A, B, and 1.

Orders

Orders of the court

The orders of the Court are:

(1) The appeal is dismissed;

(2) Development Application No. DA/687/2017 for demolition of an existing dwelling, garage and shed, Torrens title subdivision of the land into two lots, and construction of two semi-detached dwellings with garages and associated landscaping and fencing is determined by refusal;

(3) The exhibits are returned, with the exception of Exhibits A, B and 1.

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.