Radray Constructions v Hornsby Shire Council

The applicant's request for leave for amended plans 31 At the conclusion of the hearing, Mr Rigg made an application to have the matter adjourned allowing the applicant to amend its proposal by deleting Unit 7. If the removal of that unit were likely to result in an acceptable development, I would be inclined to grant the request notwithstanding the very long time that this appeal has been with the Court. However, the removal of unit 7 would not cure the proposal's major flaw, which is that the basement excavation under the northern building comes to the bank of the watercourse, thus breaching both the DNR's General Terms of Approval and cl 31(g) of the SEPPSL. To overcome this basic and serious problem the applicant would have to either drastically change the proposal or present evidence to the effect that excavating so close to the watercourse does not lead to unacceptable impacts. In either case, an adjournment is inappropriate and there is no alternative to the refusal of the application. The appeal is therefore dismissed.

2. Development application to demolish the existing buildings and erect a Seniors Living development containing 18 dwellings over basement parking on lot 12 DP 571045 (15 Eyles Avenue) and lot 3 DP 201713 (15 Anthony Street), Carlingford is determined by refusal.