Agliozzo v City of Canada Bay Council [2024] NSWLEC 1831

Agliozzo v City of Canada Bay Council [2024] NSWLEC 1831

The Court upheld the appeal and the cl 4.6 variation request as the written request established sufficient environmental planning grounds justifying the breach in the height standard, the proposal achieved the standard's objectives, impacts on amenity and heritage were acceptable, and procedural requirements were met. Consequently, the development application was approved subject to conditions and costs orders.

Parties
First Applicant: Andrew Agliozzo; Second Applicant: Cathy Agliozzo; Respondent: City of Canada Bay Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Development Appeal / Final Disposition After Conciliation Conference Under S34 Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
The appeal is upheld; development consent is granted subject to conditions; the applicant is ordered to pay the respondent’s costs of $2,000 for thrown away costs within 28 days.
Legal Topics
Development Consent, Variation of Development Standards, Heritage, Contamination, Acid Sulfate Soils, Height Standard Breach
Planning and Environment Development Consent Variation of Development Standards Heritage Contamination Acid Sulfate Soils Height Standard Breach

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Agliozzo

First Applicant

Cathy Agliozzo

Second Applicant

City of Canada Bay Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Development Appeal / Final Disposition After Conciliation Conference Under S34 Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether development consent should be granted for demolition and construction of multi unit residential flat building
  2. 2 Whether written request under cl 4.6 of Canada Bay Local Environmental Plan 2023 justifies contravention of height standard
  3. 3 Whether environmental, heritage, contamination, acid sulfate soils and amenity impacts are acceptable

Ratio Decidendi

The Court upheld the appeal and the cl 4.6 variation request as the written request established sufficient environmental planning grounds justifying the breach in the height standard, the proposal achieved the standard's objectives, impacts on amenity and heritage were acceptable, and procedural requirements were met. Consequently, the development application was approved subject to conditions and costs orders.

Court Disposition

The appeal is upheld; development consent is granted subject to conditions; the applicant is ordered to pay the respondent’s costs of $2,000 for thrown away costs within 28 days.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld.
  • The written request prepared by Andrew Martin Planning made pursuant to clause 4.6 of the Canada Bay Local Environmental Plan 2013 seeking the grant of development consent in contravention of the LEP is upheld.