Spence v Waverley Council

Link copied
Case Copied 28 min read

Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Spence v Waverley Council [2021] NSWLEC 1214
Hearing dates: 30-31 March 2021
Date of orders: 30 April 2021
Decision date: 30 April 2021
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Bradbury AC
Decision:

The Court Orders:

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Development Application No. DA-167/2020 for the partial demolition of the side fence and the construction of a hardstand car space, driveway and sliding timber gate to the rear of 75 Newland Street Bondi Junction is refused.

3. The exhibits are returned with the exception of Exhibits 4, 6, A and H.

Catchwords:

APPEAL – development application – driveway and car parking space – unacceptable impact on streetscape – heritage – appeal dismissed

Legislation Cited:

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 s 4.15

Land and Environment Court Act 1979 s 34AA

Waverley Local Environmental Plan 2012 cll 2.3, 5.10

Width of Public Streets and Lanes Act 1881

Cases Cited:

Donnellan v Armidale Regional Council [2018] NSWLEC 1372

Goldin & Anor v Minister for Transport Administering the Ports Corporatisation and Waterways Management Act 1995 (2002) 121 LGERA 101; [2002] NSWLEC 75

Zhang v Canterbury City Council (2001) 115 LGERA 373; [2001] NSWCA 167

Texts Cited:

Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 Off Street Car parking

Waverley Council, - Waverley’s People, Movement and Places: Where We Go and How We Get There: Final Summary (2017)

Waverley Development Control Plan 2012 (Amendment No.8)

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Edwina Spence (Applicant)
Waverley Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
P Holland (Solicitor) (Applicant)
C Rose (Solicitor) (Respondent)

Solicitors:
McCullough Robertson (Applicant)
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2020/332627
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. COMMISSIONER: This appeal concerns a proposal to provide an off-street car parking space to a dwelling house on the corner of Newland Street and Keiran Street, Bondi Junction.

  2. The development application (DA-167/2020) seeks approval for the following development:

  1. The partial demolition of the side fence along Keiran Street;

  2. The construction of a sliding timber gate;

  3. The construction of a hard stand car parking space measuring 5.4 m by 2.4 m at the rear of the site with access from Keiran Street; and

  4. The construction of a new driveway and crossover through the grass verge to Keiran Street, including excavation into the verge to assist in levelling out the driveway and crossover.

  1. The appeal was subject to mandatory conciliation on 30 March 2021, in accordance with the provisions of s 34AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act). As no agreement was reached in the conciliation, the conciliation conference was terminated pursuant to s 34AA(2)(b) and the appeal proceeded to a hearing.

  2. The principal contested issues relate to the impact the proposed development will have on the streetscape of Keiran Street and on the Conservation Area. For the reasons given below, I have concluded that those impacts are unacceptable and consequently that the development application should be refused.

The Site and it’s locality

  1. A site view was conducted at the commencement of…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Spence 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
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2021] NSWLEC 1214
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Spence v Waverley Council was heard in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, where the applicant, Mr Spence, sought to appeal a decision made by the Council concerning a development application. The applicant sought to partially demolish a side fence, construct a hardstand car space, driveway, and a sliding timber gate at the rear of his property located at 75 Newland Street, Bondi Junction. The Waverley Council had rejected this application, leading to Mr Spence's appeal.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Waverley Council's decision to refuse the development application was lawful and in accordance with the relevant planning legislation and policies. The applicant argued that the refusal was unreasonable and that the Council had failed to adequately consider the merits of the proposal. Conversely, the Council contended that the refusal was justified based on the assessment of the application against the planning scheme and relevant policies.

In delivering its judgment, the Court found that the Waverley Council's decision was lawful and well-founded. The Court held that the Council had appropriately exercised its discretion in accordance with the applicable legislative and policy framework. The Court considered factors such as the impact on the character of the area, compliance with planning schemes, and the merits of the application. The Court was satisfied that the Council had given due consideration to these factors and that the refusal was not unreasonable. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Council's decision to refuse the development application.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Court Orders:

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Development Application No. DA-167/2020 for the partial demolition of the side fence and the construction of a hardstand car space, driveway and sliding timber gate to the rear of 75 Newland Street Bondi Junction is refused.

3. The exhibits are returned with the exception of Exhibits 4, 6, A and H.

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.