The Court upheld the appeal and granted consent for Torrens title subdivision of two lots into three undersized lots (ranging from 79.8m² to 100.4m² against a 200m² minimum), finding that where built form is already approved under a prior consent, strict compliance with the minimum lot size standard under cl 4.1 of IWLEP 2022 is unreasonable and unnecessary, and the cl 4.6 variation request was justified. Applying Landcorp, Investa, and Connolly, the Court held that development standards for FSR (cl 4.4), minimum landscaped area (cl 4.3C(3)(a)), and maximum site coverage (cl 4.3C(3)(b)) do not apply to a subdivision application where no building works are proposed, as the subdivision does not 'contribute to' or 'alter' the relevant built form metrics. The Court also applied SJD DB2 to hold that Council misdirected itself by focusing on LDCP 2013 controls to determine 'desired future character' when that term is not defined in IWLEP 2022, and declined to follow Threlfo on the basis that different DCP controls applied.
The full text is available to signed-in members.