/

/

Laza Design Studio Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2025] NSWLEC 1917 | Case summary | Zoe

NSWNSWLEC

Laza Design Studio Pty Ltd v Waverley Council

[2025] NSWLEC 1917

Land and Environment Court (NSW)|2025-12-24|Before: Gray C

View on NSW Caselaw

General information, not legal advice.

At a glance

Source facts

Court

Land and Environment Court (NSW)

Decision date

2025-12-24

Before

Gray C

Catchwords

APPEAL – development application – hardstand parking space
– conciliation conference – agreement reached –
orders
made

Source

Original judgment source is linked above.

Email me a plain-English brief of this case

Zoe will write a short plain-English brief of this judgment and email it to you: what it was about, what the court decided and why. It can take up to a minute.

General information, not legal advice.

Or create a free account to save it and ask Zoe follow-up questions.

Catchwords

APPEAL – development application – hardstand parking space– conciliation conference – agreement reached –ordersmade

Judgment

Source: NSW Caselaw (www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au). Converted to plain text by ZoeLaw. Not the official version.

Medium Neutral Citation: Laza Design Studio Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2025] NSWLEC 1917

Hearing dates: Conciliation conference 20 November 2025

Date of orders: 24 December 2025

Decision date: 24 December 2025

Jurisdiction: Class 1

Before: Gray C

Decision: The Court orders that:
(1) The appeal is upheld.
(2) Development consent is granted to Development Application No DA-201/2025 for a hard stand car parking space and landscaping works at Lot 1 in DP 519578, and known as 33 Roscoe St, Bondi, subject to the conditions in Annexure A.

Catchwords: APPEAL – development application – hardstand parking space – conciliation conference – agreement reached – orders made

Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 4.15, 4.16, 8.7
Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 34
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, ss 37, 38
State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6
Waverley Local Environmental Plan 2012, cl 6.15

Cases Cited: McMillan v Taylor (2023) 111 NSWLR 634; [2023] NSWCA 183

COMMISSIONER: This appeal concerns a development application for the construction of a hard stand parking space at 33 Roscoe Street, Bondi. The development application was refused by the Council on 14 July 2025. The applicant appeals against that decision, pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EPA Act). In exercising the functions of the consent authority on the appeal, the Court has the power to determine the development application pursuant to ss 4.15 and 4.16 of the EPA Act. The final orders in this appeal, outlined in [9] below, are made as a result of an agreement between the parties that was reached at a conciliation conference.
The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 20 November 2025. I presided over the conciliation conference.
Following the conciliation conference, an agreement under s 34(3) of the LEC Act was reached between the parties as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that was acceptable to the parties. The agreement was subsequently filed on 18 December 2025, following the Council’s approval of an application for an amendment to a development application pursuant to ss 37 and 38 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW). The amendments include an increase in the depth of the car space by proposed alterations to the front façade of the existing dwelling.
The decision agreed upon is for the grant of development consent subject to conditions of consent pursuant to s 4.16(1) of the EPA Act. The signed agreement is supported by a Jurisdictional Statement provided by email on 22 December 2025. I have considered the contents of the Jurisdictional Statement, together with the documents referred to therein, the Class 1 Application and its attachments, and the documents that are referred to in condition 1. Based on those documents, I have considered the matters required to be considered pursuant to s 4.15(1) of the EPA Act.
As the presiding Commissioner, I am satisfied that the decision to grant development consent to the amended application subject to conditions of consent is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, this being the test applied by s 34(3) of the LEC Act. This test is concerned with there being no jurisdictional constraints that preclude the making of orders in accordance with the decision that the parties’ have agreed upon (see McMillan v Taylor (2023) 111 NSWLR 634; [2023] NSWCA 183 at [4], [51]). I formed this state of satisfaction as each of the jurisdictional preconditions identified by the parties is met, for the following reasons:
The development works are for the purposes of a dwelling house, which is a permissible use in the R3 Medium Density Residential zone pursuant to the Waverley Local Environmental Plan 2012 (WLEP).
Clause 6.15 of the WLEP concerns stormwater management. Based on the stormwater plan by Laza Design dated 2 December 2025, I am satisfied of the matters in cl 6.15(3).
The proposed development is not in breach of any of the applicable development standards in the WLEP.
Consideration has been given as to whether the subject site is contaminated as required by s 4.6 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021. As the site has a history of use for the purposes of residential premises, it is unlikely to be contaminated.
The development application was notified from 20 June 2025 to 8 July 2025. No submissions were received in response.
Having reached the state of satisfaction that the decision is one that the Court could have made in the exercise of its functions, s 34(3)(a) of the LEC Act requires me to “dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the decision”. The LEC Act also requires me to “set out in writing the terms of the decision” (s 34(3)(b)).
In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to make, and have not made, any evaluative judgment on the matters that were originally in dispute between the parties, or any assessment of the merits of the development application against the discretionary matters that arise pursuant to an assessment under s 4.15 of the EPA Act.
The Court notes that:
The Respondent has, pursuant to s 38 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW), approved the amendment of development application No DA-201/2025 in accordance with the documents listed below: