Claron Projects Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2004] NSWLEC 296

Claron Projects Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2004] NSWLEC 296

Although the additional demolition and reconstruction works would have minimal environmental impact and the resulting built form and land use would be almost identical to the originally approved development, the modified consent would involve demolition of most external walls and erection of new two-storey walls on new footings, which were material and significant differences from the original consent that retained the external walls. The modified development could no longer be described as additions and alterations to the existing two-storey dwelling and conversion into a residential flat building, and therefore was not substantially the same development as originally granted under s...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal Relating to an Application to Amend an Existing Development Consent Under S 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed and development application refused.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'section 96 Modification' 'residential Flat Building' 'substantially the Same Development' 'minimal Environmental Impact' 'demolition and Reconstruction of External Walls']
['environmental Planning and Development Law'] ['development Application' 'section 96 Modification' 'residential Flat Building' 'substantially the Same Development' 'minimal Environmental Impact' 'demolition and Reconstruction of External Walls']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal Relating to an Application to Amend an Existing Development Consent Under S 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed modification was of minimal environmental impact under s 96(1A)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' 'Whether the development to which the consent as modified relates was substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted under s 96(1A)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.' "Whether the subject application should be publicly notified in accordance with Leichhardt Municipal Council's Development Control Plan No 36 - Notifications."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the additional demolition and reconstruction works would have minimal environmental impact and the resulting built form and land use would be almost identical to the originally approved development, the modified consent would involve demolition of most external walls and erection of new two-storey walls on new footings, which were material and significant differences from the original consent that retained the external walls. The modified development could no longer be described as additions and alterations to the existing two-storey dwelling and conversion into a residential flat building, and therefore was not substantially the same development as originally granted under s...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed and development application refused.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'The development application pursuant to s 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to amend existing Development Consent No. D/1999/535 for alterations and additions to the existing two-storey dwelling at 50 Louisa Road, Birchgrove, and its conversion into a...