NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Primo Developments Sydney Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2019] NSWLEC 1380 Hearing dates: 7-8 August 2019 Date of orders: 15 August 2019 Decision date: 15 August 2019 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Horton C Decision: The Court orders that: (1) The appeal is upheld. (2) Development consent is granted for DA558/2016 for the demolition of an existing dwelling and ancillary structures, and construction of a new 9-storey residential flat building containing 15 units including basement parking, swimming pool and ancillary site and landscape works at 448 Edgecliff Road, Edgecliff, subject to the conditions of consent set out in Annexure A. (3) The exhibits are returned except for Exhibits D, 2 and 9. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPEAL – impact on state heritage item - heritage conservation area – residential apartment development – potential view loss Legislation Cited: Architects Act 2003 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development Woollahra Local Environmental Plan 2014 Cases Cited: Segal & Anor v Waverley Council (2005) 64 NSWLR 177; [2005] NSWCA 310 Landmark Group Australia Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2016] NSWLEC 1577 GGD Danks Street P/L and CR Danks Street P/L v Council of the City of Sydney [2015] NSWLEC 1521 Tenacity Consulting v Waringah (2004) 134 LGERA 23; [2004] NSWLEC 140 Texts Cited: Australia ICOMOS, The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance 2013 Heritage Office and Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, Heritage Curtilages (1996) Robert Riddel, Robin Dods: Selected Works (2012, URO Media) Woollahra Development Control Plan 2015 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Primo Developments Sydney (Applicant) Woollahra Municipal Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: I Hemmings SC with N Hammond (Applicant) J Hewitt (Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate