Deirdra Sutton and Patrick Cusack v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2006] NSWLEC 337

Deirdra Sutton and Patrick Cusack v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2006] NSWLEC 337

The appeal was dismissed because 24 Grafton Street was a contributory item and its single storey form, together with 22 Grafton Street, contributed to the historical variety of the streetscape. The proposed additional storey would lessen that variety, leave 22 Grafton Street as the only single storey building in the block, represent undesirable incremental change, and fail to achieve the heritage objectives in cl 15 of Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2000. The existing approval provided reasonable accommodation with less heritage impact, and the applicant's desire for views and concerns about attic accommodation did not justify the proposal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Refusal of Development Application D/2005/232 for Alterations and Additions / Final Judgment and Orders
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; development application refused.
Legal Topics
['development Application for Alterations and Additions' 'impact on Heritage Significance of Conservation Area' 'floor Space Ratio Exceedance' 'state Environmental Planning Policy No 1 Objection' 'building Envelope and Wall Height Controls']
['environmental and Planning Law' 'heritage Conservation' 'development Control'] ['development Application for Alterations and Additions' 'impact on Heritage Significance of Conservation Area' 'floor Space Ratio Exceedance' 'state Environmental Planning Policy No 1 Objection' 'building Envelope and Wall Height Controls']

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 Against Refusal of Development Application D/2005/232 for Alterations and Additions / Final Judgment and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed second storey would have an acceptable impact on the heritage significance of the conservation area.' 'Whether the proposal achieved the heritage objectives in cl 15 of Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2000.' 'Whether the State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 objection to the floor space ratio standard should be supported.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because 24 Grafton Street was a contributory item and its single storey form, together with 22 Grafton Street, contributed to the historical variety of the streetscape. The proposed additional storey would lessen that variety, leave 22 Grafton Street as the only single storey building in the block, represent undesirable incremental change, and fail to achieve the heritage objectives in cl 15 of Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2000. The existing approval provided reasonable accommodation with less heritage impact, and the applicant's desire for views and concerns about attic accommodation did not justify the proposal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; development application refused.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'The development application for alterations and additions at 24 Grafton Street, Balmain, is refused.' 'The exhibits, except Exhibits 2 and 3, may be returned.']