Dan Properties Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2014] NSWLEC 1276

Dan Properties Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2014] NSWLEC 1276

The Court upheld the appeal and granted development consent because the amended proposal was supported by the parties, the objectors' concerns had been considered, and the proposed conditions adequately addressed pedestrian safety, community land protection, vegetation management, construction hours, noise and amenity impacts. The expert acoustic and traffic evidence did not support further acoustic measures and indicated very low additional traffic, so the development was acceptable on its merits after assessment under section 79(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal / Consent Orders on Appeal From Refusal of Development Application
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Consent' 'development Appeal' 'consent Orders' 'alterations and Additions to Shopping Centre' 'traffic and Pedestrian Safety' 'construction Amenity Impacts' 'community Land']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Consent' 'development Appeal' 'consent Orders' 'alterations and Additions to Shopping Centre' 'traffic and Pedestrian Safety' 'construction Amenity Impacts' 'community Land']

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

Class 1 Development Appeal / Consent Orders on Appeal From Refusal of Development Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should make consent orders granting development consent for the amended development application.' 'Whether proposed conditions adequately addressed pedestrian safety, traffic, construction amenity, noise, landscaping and community land concerns raised by objectors.' 'Whether the amended development was acceptable on its merits after assessment under section 79(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court upheld the appeal and granted development consent because the amended proposal was supported by the parties, the objectors' concerns had been considered, and the proposed conditions adequately addressed pedestrian safety, community land protection, vegetation management, construction hours, noise and amenity impacts. The expert acoustic and traffic evidence did not support further acoustic measures and indicated very low additional traffic, so the development was acceptable on its merits after assessment under section 79(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'Development application DA 13/0646 for the construction of additional retail floor space and a new car park entry off Bates Drive is determined by the granting of development consent, subject to the conditions in Annexure A, dated 5 August 2014.']