RPNA Group Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1240

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: RPNA Group Pty Ltd v Randwick City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1240 Hearing dates: 3 May 2017, conditions 12 May 2017 Date of orders: 16 May 2017 Decision date: 16 May 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Brown C Decision: 1. The appeal is upheld. 2. Development Application No. 335/2016 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a four storey boarding house at 2-8 Anzac Parade, Kensington is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure A. 3. The exhibits are returned with the exception of exhibits 1 and A. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: demolition of existing structures and construction of a four (4) storey boarding house – whether development is compatible with the character of the local area Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 Cases Cited: Project Venture Developments v Pittwater Council [2005] NSW LEC 191 Category: Principal judgment Parties: RPNA Group Pty Ltd (Applicant) Randwick City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr A Pickles SC (Applicant) Mr A Seton, solicitor.(Respondent)

Solicitors: Conomos Legal (Applicant) Marsdens Law Group.(Respondent) File Number(s): 2016/229136 Publication restriction: No

Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal of Development Application No. 335/2016 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a four storey boarding house containing 39 rooms for student accommodation (including 2 accessible rooms), manager's room with common areas and provision of eight car parking spaces (including two disabled spaces), eight motorcycle spaces and eight bicycle spaces at 2-8 Anzac Parade, Kensington (the site) although the site has also has frontages to Tay Lane and Abbortford Lane. 2. The council maintains that the development application should be refused because the proposed development is not compatible with the character of the local area. The incompatibility relates principally to a portion of the setback to Abbortford Lane and more specifically relates to the inadequate setback at this location and the consequent bulk of the building when compared to other nearby buildings.