Golden Harvest (Aust) Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council [2005] NSWLEC 528

Land and Environment Court of New South Wales

CITATION : Golden Harvest (Aust) Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council [2005] NSWLEC 528

APPLICANT Golden Harvest (Aust) Pty Ltd

PARTIES : RESPONDENT Parramatta City Council

FILE NUMBER(S) : 10484 of 2004

CORAM: Hussey C

KEY ISSUES: Development Control Plan :- Height - bulk - mixed use development

Parramatta Development Control Plan 2001 LEGISLATION CITED: Paramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65

CASES CITED: Sumajen Pty Ltd v Sydney City Council

DATES OF HEARING: 20/09/2005 - Interim Finding - 22/09/2005 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 09/22/2005

APPLICANT Mr G Bingham, solicitor SOLICITORS Deacons

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT Mr C Gough, solicitor SOLICITORS Storey & Gough

JUDGMENT: THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES

Hussey C

22 September 2005

10484 of 2004 Golden Harvest (Aust) Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council

JUDGMENT Interim Finding

1 Following the final submissions in this matter on 20 September 2005 and my review of the evidence before the Court, I am inclined to adjourn this matter for an appropriate period to enable a s 82A review to be lodged and considered by council and I will invite the parties submissions in that regard. My reasons are: 1. Firstly this is a significant development on a very prominent site which has attracted considerable public interest/objections. 2. The amended plan before the Court represents a final plan arrived at after considerable number of amendments. However, this plan still results in significant variations to the Parramatta DCP 2001 , particularly in relation to its proposed height of 5-7 storeys, compared to the maximum height of 3 storeys in the DCP and there are other environmental impacts. 3. A considerable number of objections have been lodged and they go to the excessive height and bulk of the proposal, together with other environmental impacts. 4. This latest plan has apparently not been subject to any formal consideration by council. 2 Based on the evidence before the Court, the last council assessment was on 5 July 2004, when council apparently adopted the independent planning consultant recommendation to refuse the application because of the following reasons: 1. The height of the development is considered excessive and does not comply with the 3 storey height requirement contained in Parramatta DCP 2001 and does not satisfy the objectives of this control. 2. The development is inconsistent with the objectives of the 3A Centre Business Zone under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and the objectives for Mixed Use Development contained in DCP 2001. 3. The design quality of the proposed development is considered to not satisfy the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 with regard to the design quality principles contained in Pt 2. In particular, the proposal fails to adequately address design quality principles relating to context, scale, built form, amenity and aesthetics. 4. The applicant has submitted insufficient information to address potential impacts of traffic noise on internal amenity for future occupants of the proposed building. 5. Issues raised by objectors and the public interest. 3 During the hearing, I expressed some concern about the degree of change in the proposal, particularly the height exceedance of the DCP. Whilst I accept the proposal accords with the urban design approach presented by the Court-appointed expert Mr Harrison and that approach does appear to have merit, there is no substantive evidence to confirm council's consideration/acceptance of these significant policy changes to which objections have been made.