Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Podgornik v Waverley Council [2012] NSWLEC 1176 Hearing dates: 23, 24 April and 18 June 2012 Decision date: 25 June 2012 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dixon C Decision: (1)The appeal is upheld.
(2)Development consent is granted to DA -130/2011 for the demolition of the existing dwelling and associated structure and the construction of a new dwelling and single garage, detached single garage with cabana over, swimming pool and associated works and landscaping on land at 40 Gardyne Street, Bronte as detailed in the plans which are exhibit E subject to the draft conditions in exhibit 5 including deferred commencement conditions in Schedule A numbers 2, 6, 7 and 9.
(3)The exhibits are returned except exhibits E and 5.
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPEAL - Public view loss, bulk and scale, streetscape Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Waverley Development Control Plan 2010
Waverley Local Environmental Plan 1996Category: Principal judgment Parties: Andrew Podgornik (Applicant)
Waverley Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel
Ms S Duggan SC (Applicant)Mr M Staunton (Respondent)
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
Solicitors
Gadens Lawyers (Applicant)
File Number(s): 10060 of 2012
Judgment
The applicants, Andrew and Chloe Podgornik seek approval to demolish their family home and secondary dwelling/garage; and, construct a new dwelling, detached single garage with cabana over, swimming pool and landscaping at 40 Gardyne Street, Bronte as detailed in exhibit E.
Their property is located on the corner of Gardyne and Pacific Streets, Bronte within the Bronte Terraces Precinct under the Waverley Development Control Plan 2010 (the DCP). It has a steep slope and is divided midway by a significant rock ledge. On the highest part of the site - at the Gardyne Street frontage - there is opportunity to capture magnificent panoramic views of the Pacific Ocean and surrounding areas. Not surprisingly, the applicants have designed their main dwelling around these views and generally followed the natural topography of the site. In doing so however, Waverley Council contends that the applicants have unreasonably impacted on the private views across the site from the adjoining property at 42 Gardyne Street and the panoramic ocean views from the public stairs and walkway in Gardyne Street.
The Council contends that the development does not satisfy the objectives of the desired future character of this Bronte residential precinct under the DCP. The Council's planner, Mr Boston, believes the "...concentration of building height and massing along Gardyne Street creates a "fortress like walling effect" which will be perceived as entirely disparate in the streetscape and which will create a sense of enclosure and obstruct existing public views available across the site from the lower landing of the adjacent public stairs, the lowest flight of stairs and from the Gardyne Street road alignment. "
Despite criticism of the applicants' proposal, the Council supports a residential development for the site in accordance with its deferred commencement conditions in Schedule A of exhibit 5. The conditions require the deletion of the entire…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Podgornik 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
- [2012] NSWLEC 1176
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The NSW Court of Appeal found that the original refusal of the development application was unlawful due to procedural errors made by the council. The Court held that the council had failed to properly consider the merits of the application and had not adequately explained the reasons for refusal, which contravened the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The Court of Appeal also examined whether the Land and Environment Court had the authority to grant the development consent in light of the unlawful refusal. It was determined that the court had the jurisdiction to reassess the application on its merits, and that the approval granted was lawful and supported by the evidence presented.
The Court of Appeal upheld the appeal in part, setting aside the decision of the Land and Environment Court that had granted the development consent. Instead, the Court issued orders to grant the development consent as detailed in the development application, subject to specific conditions outlined in the exhibits. The exhibits were to be returned, except for those pertaining to the approved plans and conditions. The Court's decision not only addressed the procedural shortcomings in the council's initial refusal but also clarified the legal framework governing development applications and the role of the courts in such matters.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1)The appeal is upheld.
(2)Development consent is granted to DA -130/2011 for the demolition of the existing dwelling and associated structure and the construction of a new dwelling and single garage, detached single garage with cabana over, swimming pool and associated works and landscaping on land at 40 Gardyne Street, Bronte as detailed in the plans which are exhibit E subject to the draft conditions in exhibit 5 including deferred commencement conditions in Schedule A numbers 2, 6, 7 and 9.
(3)The exhibits are returned except exhibits E and 5.
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.