Willoughby Projects Pty Ltd v Willoughby City Council

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION — demolition of existing structures and construction of a new shop top housing development — conciliation conference — amended plans and documents – amended development application — agreement between the parties — orders made

Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 4.15, 4.16, 4.46, 7.4, 8.7, 8.15
Fisheries Management Act 1994 (NSW)
Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 34
Water Management Act 2000 (NSW), s 89
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW), ss 23, 37
State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, Pt 6.2, ss 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 6.90, 6.10
State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021, Ch 4, ss 142, 144, 145, 147, 148, Sch 9
State Environmental Planning Policy (Planning Systems) 2021, s 2.19, Sch 6
State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6
State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2021, s 3.2
State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021, ss 2.48, 2.119
Willoughby Local Environmental Plan 2012, cll 2.7, 4.3, 4.6, 5.1A, 5.10, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.7, 6.8, 6.23

Cases Cited: McMilllan v Taylor (2023) 111 NSWLR 634; [2023] NSWCA 183
Mulpha Norwest Pty Ltd v The Hills Shire Council (No 2) [2020] NSWLEC 74

Texts Cited: Willoughby City Council, Willoughby Development Control Plan 2023

Category: Principal judgment

Parties: Willoughby Projects Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Willoughby City Council (Respondent)

Representation: Counsel:
M Lewis (Solicitor) (Applicant)
J Simpson (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Bartier Perry Lawyers (Applicant)
Willoughby City Council (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2025/180881

Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EPA Act) by Willoughby Projects Pty Ltd (the Applicant) against the deemed refusal of development application DA-2024/274 by the Respondent, Willoughby City Council. The development application, as amended, seeks consent for demolition of existing structures and construction of a shop top housing development comprising commercial tenancies, residential apartments, basement car parking and associated works through a public site link. The development is proposed at 224 Sydney Street and 330-342 Penshurst, North Willoughby (Lot 1, 2 DP 708223 and Lot 41, 42 DP 553209 and Lot A, B and C in DP 374488).

2. The Court arranged a conciliation conference between the parties, pursuant to s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) (LEC Act). The conciliation conference commenced on 11 August 2025. The conciliation conference was adjourned to provide the parties the opportunity to seek to resolve their dispute, but the conciliation was ultimately terminated on 9 September 2025 and the matter listed for hearing.

3. Prior to the commencement of the hearing the parties advised the Court they had reached agreement following an adjournment of the hearing, 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 14 November 2025. I presided over the further conciliation conference. The decision agreed upon is for the grant of development consent to the development application, as amended, subject to conditions of consent pursuant to s 4.16(1) of the EPA Act. This agreement meets the first condition to the exercise of power and obligation of a commissioner to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the decision of the parties (this being the test applied by s 34(3) of the LEC Act): see McMilllan v Taylor (2023) 111 NSWLR 634; [2023] NSWCA 183 (McMillan) at [51].

4. As the presiding Commissioner, I am satisfied that the second condition is met, that being the decision is one that the Court can make in the proper exercise of its functions, see McMillan at [51]. I form this state of satisfaction on the basis that:

5. Pursuant to s 23 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW) (EPA Regulation 2021), a development application may be made by the owner of the land, or another person with consent of the owner. The development application was lodged by Evolution Planning Pty Ltd with the consent of the owner of the land (Willoughby Projects Pty Ltd). The development application also proposes work over the Road Reserve, owned by Willoughby City Council. The Council has provided owners consent for those works.

6. The development application is integrated development pursuant to s 4.46 of the EPA Act and s 89 of the Water Management Act 2000 (NSW). The amended development application received General Terms of Approval from Water NSW on 27 August 2025.

7. The development application was notified by the Respondent from 12 December 2024 to 7 February 2025. Eleven submissions in objection were received by the Council. Since the notification of the development application, the development has been amended. Those amendments include being reduced in height, clarity of the works to the public domain and changes to the traffic access. With the assistance of the amended development application documents filed in the proceedings I am satisfied that the submissions have been considered in the determination of the development application by either amendment to the application or by the imposition of conditions of consent: s 4.15(1)(d) of the EPA Act.

8. Pursuant to s 2.19(2) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Planning Systems) 2021 (SEPP Planning Systems), the development is declared ‘regionally significant development’ as defined in Sch 6 of SEPP Planning Systems. Accordingly, the consent authority is the Sydney North Planning Panel (SNPP). I am satisfied that the SNPP has delegated its authority to the Respondent to enter into the agreement.

9. The development application was referred to Ausgrid in accordance with s 2.48 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021 (SEPP TI). The Respondent received a response from Ausgrid noting no objection to the proposed development application. The parties agree, and I accept, that s 2.48 of the SEPP TI is satisfied.

10. Section 2.119 applies to the development application as the subject site has a frontage to Penshurst Street which is identified as a Classified Road. I accept s 2.119(2) is satisfied as:

(a) all vehicular access to the Site is via Stirling Lane and that access will be provided in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2890.4. (b) The estimated traffic generation rates for the proposed development have been estimated as a minor increase in the AM peak and a net reduction during the PM peak. (c) The development application includes an Acoustic Report prepared by Koikas Acoustics. That report concludes that with the imposition of the annexed conditions the requirements of s 2.119(2)(c) of SEPP TI are met. (d) The development application includes an Air Quality Assessment prepared by Northstar. That report confirms that the development is appropriately located and designed, or includes measures, to ameliorate vehicle emissions.

7. 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 (SEPP RH). The development application includes a Detailed Site Investigation report and Remedial Action Plan. Those reports confirm that the site can be made suitable for the development through remediation which is required by the annexed conditions. Section 4.6 of SEPP RH is satisfied.
8. The amended development application is accompanied by a complying BASIX Certificate. Further, the development application includes an ESD Report which satisfies s 3.2 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2022. The parties agree, and I accept that, the sum of embodied emissions from all materials proposed has been entered into the online BASIX tool and the total embodied emissions for the development have been calculated. I am satisfied that the embodied energy report forms part of the online BASIX tool of which the BASIX certificate is part. A condition of consent requires compliance with the commitments detailed in the BASIX certificate.
9. Part 6.2 ‘Development in regulated catchments’ of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021 (SEPP BC) applies as the site is located with the Sydney Harbour Catchment. The parties are satisfied, and I accept with the assistance of the architectural stormwater plans and statement of environmental effects, that the proposed development will have a neutral effect on the quality of water entering the Sydney Harbour Catchment. The design of the proposed development provides a reduction in discharge flow rates from the site through the provision of onsite detention (OSD) and a reduction in surface runoff through the collection of roof water. Sediment traps are provided at discharge points as demonstrated by the Sediment and Erosion Plan in the Civil Engineering Drawings.
10. In determining the development application I am satisfied that the proposal appropriately considers the matters set out at ss 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 6.9 and 6.10 of SEPP BC, which deal with mandatory aquatic ecology matters, impacts on periodic flooding that benefits wetlands and other riverine ecosystems, impacts on recreational land uses in the Sydney Harbour Catchment, and adverse environmental impacts on any adjacent or downstream local government areas.
11. The parties agree, and I accept, that no clearing is proposed nor is consent sought under the Water Management Act 2000 (NSW) or the Fisheries Management Act 1994 (NSW). There are no known wetlands or significant aquatic ecology that will be affected by the proposed development. Further, the proposed development will not result in the release of pollutants or affect water quality in the locality nor alter the natural recession of water. The requirements of SEPP BC are satisfied.
12. Chapter 4 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 (SEPP Housing) applies to the development application as it meets the matters prescribed at ss 144(2) and 144(3), namely:

(a) It is development for the purposes of shop top housing, (b) It proposes erection of a new building (c) that building is over 3 storeys (not including carparking); and (d) the building contains at least 4 dwellings

13. As required by s 145(2) of SEPP Housing the development application was referred to the Willoughby City Council Design Excellence Review Panel.
14. Section 147 of the SEPP Housing mandates that the consent authority consider three matters. Firstly, the quality of the design of the development, evaluated in accordance with the design principles for residential apartment development set out in Sch 9 the Housing SEPP. Secondly, the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) and thirdly, any advice received from a design review panel (DRP) within 14 days of the referral of the matter to them. The Applicant submitted a Design Excellence Response, Design Verification Statement and Design Report (Design Reports) as part of the development application. With the benefit of the Design Reports and reviewing the plans, I have considered the design principles and the ADG and accept the agreement of the parties that those matters have been addressed by the amended development application.
15. Further, as required by s 147(c) I have considered the advice of the DRP which was that the unamended development application required review. With the benefit of the Design Reports prepared by the project architects, I accept the agreed submission of the parties that the matters raised by the DRP have been addressed by the amended development application.
16. Finally, I accept that the amended development application complies with the non-discretionary development standards at s 148 of SEPP Housing.
17. The Willoughby Local Environmental Plan 2012 (LEP 2012) is the relevant local environmental plan that applies to the site. Pursuant to LEP 2012 the site is zoned E1 Local Centre. In determining the development application, I have given consideration to the zone objectives. The proposed use, shop top housing, is permitted in the zone.
18. Demolition is permitted with consent pursuant to cl 2.7 of LEP 2012.
19. The amended development application proposes works in the Road Reserve which is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential. The construction of roads is permitted with consent in the zone.
20. Pursuant to cl 4.3 Height of Buildings the maximum building height varies across the site with three standards being applicable on the referrable map. The proposed development exceeds the applicable height development standards as follows:

(a) The maximum height of the proposed development is 22.3m which occurs where the development standard is 17m, (b) The height of the proposed development is 20.5m at a location where the development standard is 20m, (c) the height of the proposed development is 16.7m at a location where the development standard is 14m.

21. Accordingly, the development application seeks a variation to the development standard pursuant to cl 4.6 of LEP 2012. The development application is accompanied by a written request to vary the standard. I have read the written request prepared by Evolution Planning dated 9 September 2025 and in accordance with cl 4.6 of LEP 2012, I am satisfied that:

(a) The written request demonstrates that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary on the basis that the objectives of the Height control are met, notwithstanding the numeric variation (cl 4.6(3)(a) of LEP 2012). I find that the objectives of the Height standard are met, notwithstanding the variation to the standard for the reasons detailed in the written request which I adopt. The proposed development will offer a compatible streetscape presentation and is consistent with the desired future character. (b) I am satisfied that the written request adequately establishes sufficient environmental planning grounds that justify the breach of the standards (cl 4.6(3)(b) of LEP 2012). In particular, I find that the reasons articulated in written request in relation to the topography of the site and the complimentary nature of the elevation with the streetscape of the adjoining properties and the locality to be sufficient. (c) The states of satisfaction required by cl 4.6 of LEP 2012 have been reached and there is therefore power to grant development consent to the proposed development, notwithstanding the breach of the Height control.

22. Pursuant to cl 4.4 ‘Floor space ratio’ of LEP 2012, 342 Penhurst Street is subject to an FSR control of 2.8:1. The development proposed on the area of the site which is subject to the 2.8:1 FSR standard has an FSR of 1.78:1, complying with the development standard: Mulpha Norwest Pty Ltd v The Hills Shire Council (No 2) [2020] NSWLEC 74 at [73].
23. The remainder of the site, 224 Sydney Street and 330-340 Penshurst Street, are subject to an FSR standard of 2:1. The development application seeks to vary this standard. The proposed development on this portion of the site has an FSR of 2.24:1. The development application is accompanied by a written request to vary the standard. I have read the written request prepared by Evolution Planning dated 9 September 2025 and in accordance with cl 4.6 of LEP 2012, I am satisfied that:

(a) The written request demonstrates that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary on the basis that the objectives of the FSR control are met, notwithstanding the numeric variation (cl 4.6(3)(a) of LEP 2012). I find that the objectives of the Height standard are met for the reasons detailed in the written request which I adopt. The proposed development will offer a compatible streetscape presentation and is consistent with the desired future character. (b) I am satisfied that the written request adequately establishes sufficient environmental planning grounds that justify the breach of the standards (cl 4.6(3)(b) of LEP 2012). In particular, I find that the reasons articulated in the written request in relation to consistency with the Master Plan, the provision of efficient servicing and need for the built form to respond to the slope of the site to be sufficient. (c) The states of satisfaction required by cl 4.6 of LEP 2012 have been reached and there is therefore power to grant development consent to the proposed development, notwithstanding the breach of the FSR control.

24. Pursuant to cl 5.1A of LEP 2012, development consent must not be granted on land on the Land Reservation Acquisition Map other than where that development meets the requirements of subcl (3). Subclause (3) states that development consent must not be granted to any development on land to which this clause applies other than development for a purpose specified opposite that land in Column 2 of that Table. Applying the terms of the provision, the land is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential and marked ‘local road widening’ (column 1) and the applicable purpose in Column 2 is development for the purpose of ‘roads’. The development application seeks consent for the construction of roads along Stirling Lane, which is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential, as works ancillary to the proposed development. The terms of cl 5.1A are satisfied.
25. The Applicant has made an offer to the Respondent pursuant to s 7.4 of the EPA Act to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) for the dedication of land for the purpose of road widening of Stirling Lane. The parties agree, and I accept, that the VPA meets the requirements of s 7.4 of the EPA.
26. The development application is accompanied by a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) prepared by Weir Phillips Heritage and Planning which assesses the impact of the proposed development on the proximate heritage Item, Hotel Willoughby. The HIA concludes that the proposed development will have an acceptable impact on the heritage significance of Hotel Willoughby. This conclusion is accepted by the parties. With consideration of the HIA, I accept the parties’ agreement that the provisions of cl 5.10(4) of LEP 2012 have been considered.
27. Pursuant to cl 6.1 of the LEP 2012, the parties agree that the Subject Land is mapped as “Class 5” on the Acid Sulfate Soils Map. The parties further agree that cl 6.1(3) is not enlivened as the proposed works will not lower the water table. I accept the requirements of cl 6.1 of LEP 2012 are met.
28. Clause 6.2 (Earthworks) of LEP 2012 applies to the development application as it proposes excavation. The development application is accompanied by a Geotechnical Report which demonstrates that those works will not interfere with the aquifer nor disrupt any drainage patterns. In determining the amended development application, I have considered the matters listed at cl 6.2(3) and I am satisfied that none would warrant the refusal of the development application.
29. Clause 6.3 Urban Heat applies as the development is residential accommodation. The development application as amended reduces solar heat through the use of lighter tones on the external walls, green cover on the roof areas, tree planting in the public domain and through the provision of an awning to shelter pedestrians on Penshurst Street. In considering the matters at cl 6.3(2), I accept the agreed position of the parties that they are adequately considered in the development application, and none warrant the refusal of the development application.
30. Pursuant to cl 6.7(3) of LEP 2012, development consent must not be granted to the erection of a building unless the consent authority is satisfied that the building will have an active street frontage. The proposed development provides for the ground floor of the development fronting Penshurst Street and Sydney Street to be used for commercial premises. I satisfied that the requirements of cl 6.7 of LEP 2012 are met.
31. Pursuant to cl 6.8 ‘Affordable Housing’ of LEP 2012, the site is mapped on the Affordable Housing Map with varied rates applying across the development site. The applicant proposes to satisfy the requirements of cl 6.8 by way of payment of an agreed monetary contribution. I accept the submission of the parties that the requirements of cl 6.8 and that those requirements will be implemented by condition 52 in Annexure A.
32. Clause 6.23 ‘Design Excellence’ of LEP 2012 applies to the land as it is mapped within the bounds of ‘Area 5’ on the Special Provisions Map. Pursuant to cl 6.23(3), development consent cannot be granted to development to which the clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that the development exhibits design excellence. Further, in determining whether to grant consent the consent authority is required to consider the matters listed at cll 6.23(4) and 6.23(5). With the benefit of the reports prepared by Sisson Architects which accompany the amended development application and following a review of the amended development application I am satisfied the development exhibits design excellence for the following reasons:

(a) I note the explanation and assessment in the letter by Sisson Architects that accompanies the development application; (b) The amended development application satisfied the master plan provisions with respect to urban form, setbacks and separation between buildings detailed in Willoughby Development Control Plan 2023 (DCP 2023); (c) The development achieves compliance with the provisions of the Apartment Design Guide; (d) The development will create an active street frontage along the proposed link along the southern part of the new urban block through ground floor commercial uses and the residential apartment entries; (e) The amended development application provides an integrated landscape design through the creation of the landscaped feature between the buildings, planting at the roof level, landscaping in the public domain and along the length of the proposed through site link; (f) The form, materials and detailing of the amended proposal achieve a standard of architectural design that is consistent with and reinforce the industrial character of the site and locality. Further, the form and external appearance of the amended proposal are responsive to the site's opportunities and constraints.

33. DCP 2023 applies to the site. The documents filed with the application detail the compliance of the proposed development with the relevant provisions of the DCP 2023. In determining the development application, I have considered the provisions of the development control plan: s 4.15(1) of the EPA Act.

34. Having reached the state of satisfaction that the decision is one that the Court could make 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)).

35. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, the parties have not raised, and I am not aware of any jurisdictional impediment to the making of these orders. Further, I was not required to make, and have not made, 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.

Notes

7. The Court notes that Willoughby City Council, as the relevant consent authority, has agreed in accordance with s 37(1) of the EPA Regulation 2021 for the Applicant to amend the development application and rely upon the amended plans and documents in accordance with the documents listed below:

| TAB | DOCUMENT | | 1. | Architectural Plans, prepared by Sissons, dated 3 September 2025. | | Drawing No. | Drawing Title | Issue | Date | | DA0001 | Cover Sheet | H | 08/09/2025 | | DA0102 | Site Location Plan | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA0103 | Proposed Site and Roof Plan | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA0105 | Land Dedication Plan | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA0106 | Height Plane and Diagram | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA0107 | Public Domain Works Plan | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA0109 | Notification Plan | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA0300 | Demolition Plan – Level 00 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA0410 | GFA Plans 1 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA0411 | GFA Plans 2 | D | 08/09/2025 | | DA0430 | Area Schedule | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA0801 | Renders | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA1008 | GA Plan – Basement B2 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA1009 | GA Plan – Basement B1 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA1010 | GA Plan – Level 00 | H | 08/09/2025 | | DA1011 | GA Plan – Level 01 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA1012 | GA Plan – Level 02 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA1013 | GA Plan – Level 03 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA1014 | GA Plan – Level 04 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA1015 | GA Plan – Level 05 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA1020 | GA Plan – Roof | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA1401 | GA Elevations 1 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA1402 | GA Elevations 2 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA1403 | GA Elevations 3 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA2401 | GA Sections 1 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA2402 | GA Sections 2 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA4010 | Shadow Diagrams | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA4020 | Cross Ventilation and Solar Access | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA4030 | Eye of the Sun – Proposed Building Envelope 1 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA4031 | Eye of the Sun – Proposed Building Envelope 2 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA4032 | Eye of the Sun – Compliant Building Envelope 1 | F | 08/09/2025 | | DA4033 | Eye of the Sun – Compliant Building Envelope 2 | F | 08/09/2025 | | DA4035 | Shadow Profile Diagrams – 13 Kooringa Road – Proposed Building | F | 08/09/2025 | | DA4036 | Shadow Profile Diagrams – 13 Kooringa Road – Proposed Building | F | 08/09/2025 | | DA4040 | Unit Layout Arrangement Sheet 1 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA4041 | Unit Layout Arrangement Sheet 2 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA4042 | Unit Layout Arrangement Sheet 3 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA4043 | Unit Layout Arrangement Sheet 4 | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA4044 | Unit Layout Arrangement Sheet 5 Adaptable | G | 08/09/2025 | | DA4045 | Unit Layout Arrangement Sheet 6 Adaptable | G | 08/09/2025 | | SK-023 | Basement Waste Study | E | 08/09/2025 | | SK-024 | Photomontage 1 – Penshurst Street | F | 08/09/2025 | | SK-025 | Photomontage 2 – Stirling Lane | E | 08/09/2025 | | SK-026 | Waste Travel Distance Diagram | D | 08/09/2025 | | 2. | Site Survey, prepared by 888 Survey, Ref: 22-135, dated 22 July 2025. | | 3. | Topographical Detail Survey Revision A prepared by Survade, dated 23 May 2022. | | 4. | Landscape plans prepared by Canvas Landscape Architects. | | DA-L101 | Landscape Public Domain Plan Ground Floor | C | 04/09/2025 | | DA-L102 | Landscape Plan: Level 01 | B | 26/03/2025 | | DA-L103 | Landscape Plan: Level 05 | D | 27/08/2025 | | DA-L104 | Landscape Typical Details & Maintenance Schedule | B | 26/03/2025 | | DA-L105 | Landscape General Layout Plan | D | 27/08/2025 | | 5. | Concept Stormwater Report and Civil Design prepared by Sissons, dated 25 August 2025. | | Drawing No. | Drawing Title | Issue | Date | | SW100 | Cover Page | 04 | 19/08/2025 | | SW-101 | General Notes | 04 | 19/08/2025 | | SW-200 | Stormwater Design – Basement B2 Plan | 04 | 19/08/2025 | | SW-201 | Stormwater Design – Ground Floor | 04 | 19/08/2025 | | SW-201.1 | Stormwater Design – First Floor Plan | 04 | 19/08/2025 | | SW-202 | Stormwater Design - OSD & WSUD Catchment Plan | 04 | 19/08/2025 | | SW-300 | Sediment & Erosion Control Plan | 04 | 19/08/2025 | | SW-400 | OSD, WSUD Detailed Sections & Calculation Sheet | 04 | 19/08/2025 | | SW-500 | Standard Details | 04 | 19/08/2025 | | 6. | Clause 4.6 Request to Vary Clause 4.4(2) – FSR – Willoughby Local Environmental Plan 2012, prepared by Evolution Planning, dated 9 September 2025. | | 7. | Clause 4.6 Request to Vary Clause 4.4(2) – Height of Buildings– Willoughby Local Environmental Plan 2012, prepared by Evolution Planning, dated 9 September 2025. | | 8. | Operational Waste Management Plan prepared by Elephants Foot, dated 9 September 2025. | | 9. | Letter of Offer to Enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement prepared by Evolution Planning dated, 9 September 2025. | | 10. | Planning Statement prepared by Evolution Planning dated 24 July 2025. | | 11. | Remediation Action Plan Rev 0, prepared by E.I Australia dated 19 August 2024. | | 12. | Geotechnical Report No. 25/1639 prepared by STS Geotechnics Pty Ltd, dated 13 June 2025. | | 13. | Supplementary Traffic Report prepared by TRAFFIX dated 27 June 2025. | | 14. | Ecologically Sustainable Development Report, prepared by Jensen Hughes, Revision 3, dated 16 October 2025. |

Orders

8. The Court orders that:

9. the appeal is upheld.

10. Development Application DA-2024/274 for demolition of existing structures and construction of a shop top housing development comprising commercial tenancies, residential apartments, basement car parking and associated works through a public site link, at land identified as 224 Sydney Street and 330-342 Penshurst Street, North Willoughby (Lot 1 and 2 in DP 708223 and Lot 41 and 42 in DP 553209 and Lot A, B and C in DP 374488) is determined by the grant of consent subject to the conditions in Annexure A.

11. The Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) in the agreed sum of $20,000 within 28 days from the date of these orders.

D Dickson

Commissioner of the Court

**********

Annexure A (634 KB, pdf)