Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Wheeldon v Woollahra Municipal Council [2025] NSWLEC 1176 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 6 March 2025 Date of orders: 31 March 2025 Decision date: 31 March 2025 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: O’Neill C Decision: The orders of the Court are:
(1) The appeal is upheld.
(2) Development Application No 226/2023/1 for the demolition of the existing house and garage and construction of a new dwelling, swimming pool and landscaping, at 11A Burrabirra Avenue, Vaucluse NSW 2030, also identified as Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 534559, is determined by the grant of consent, subject to the conditions of consent at Annexure A.
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 4.16, 8.7
Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 34
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, s 38
State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6
Woollahra Local Environmental Plan 2014, cll 4.3, 6.1, 6.2
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Susan Wheeldon (Applicant)
Woollahra Municipal Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
H Irish (Applicant)
J Farrell (Respondent)
Boskovitz Lawyers (Applicant)
Woollahra Municipal Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2024/364616 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to the provisions of s 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) against the refusal of Development Application No DA-226/2023/1 for demolition of the existing house and garage and construction of a new dwelling, swimming pool and landscaping at 11A Burrabirra Avenue, Vaucluse by Woollahra Municipal Council (the Council).
-
The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 6 March 2025. I presided over the conciliation conference. At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision if the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.
-
The parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.16 of the EPA Act to grant consent to the development application. There are preconditions to the exercise of power to grant development consent for the proposal.
Amended application
-
The Council, as the consent authority, consented to the amendment of the application pursuant to s 38(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021. The plans and documents comprising the amended application are listed below:
| Reference | Description | Author/Drawn | Date(s) |
| DA-001 DA-002 DA-003 DA-004 DA-004b DA-100 DA-101 DA-102 DA-103 DA-200 DA-201 DA-202 DA-301 DA-302 DA303 DA304 All Revision B | Architectural Plans | Atelier Lux | 4/03/2025 |
| Stormwater Plans S101 S200 S201 S202 S203 S300 S301 S302 S303 All Revision 03 | Stormwater Plans | De Boke | 5/03/2025 |
| 202502_11A_ Burrabirra_A0.0 | Landscape Plan | Ben Kaye Garden Design | February 2025 |
| Aboriginal Heritage… |
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Wheeldon v Woollahra Municipal 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
- [2025] NSWLEC 1176
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the development application complied with the relevant planning schemes, including any applicable environmental impact assessments and zoning regulations. Additionally, the court needed to consider whether the proposed development would result in any undue harm or detriment to the surrounding neighbourhood or environment.
The court found that the development application complied with all relevant planning schemes and that the proposed development would not result in any undue harm or detriment to the neighbourhood or environment. The court held that the council's decision to refuse the development application was not justified and that the application should be granted consent subject to certain conditions. The court also found that the council had not adequately considered the potential benefits of the proposed development, such as increased housing stock and improved property values.
The orders of the court were that the appeal be upheld and that the development application be granted consent, subject to the conditions of consent set out in Annexure A. These conditions included requirements for the applicant to obtain necessary permits, comply with environmental impact assessments, and address any concerns raised by neighbouring properties. Overall, the court found in favour of the applicant and determined that the proposed development should proceed as planned.
Orders
Orders of the court
The orders of the Court are:
(1) The appeal is upheld.
(2) Development Application No 226/2023/1 for the demolition of the existing house and garage and construction of a new dwelling, swimming pool and landscaping, at 11A Burrabirra Avenue, Vaucluse NSW 2030, also identified as Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 534559, is determined by the grant of consent, subject to the conditions of consent at Annexure A.
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.