Stoneman v Byron Shire Council [2011] NSWLEC 1089

Stoneman v Byron Shire Council [2011] NSWLEC 1089

Consent orders were appropriate because the council had properly assessed the application against s 79C of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, the Byron Local Environmental Plan 1988, relevant SEPPs and REPs, and the Byron Development Control Plan; the proposal met the objectives of the zone, was permitted with consent as a rural industry, the SEPP 1 objection and relevant objections had been addressed, and the necessary concurrence had been granted by the Department of Planning and the Rural Fire Service.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal Under S 97(1) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 / Consent Orders
Outcome
Appeal upheld.
Legal Topics
['development Consent' 'special Purpose Subdivision' 'rural Industry' 'development Standards' 'sepp 1 Objection' 'consent Orders']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Consent' 'special Purpose Subdivision' 'rural Industry' 'development Standards' 'sepp 1 Objection' 'consent Orders']

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 Under S 97(1) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 / Consent Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether consent should be granted for a special purpose subdivision creating a 2.4 ha lot despite the 40 ha minimum rural lot area under cl 11 of the Byron Local Environmental Plan 1988.' 'Whether the proposed shed could be characterised as a rural industry permitted with consent in the 1(a) General Rural Zone.' 'Whether the relevant statutory provisions, planning controls, objections and concurrence requirements had been addressed for the making of consent orders.']

Ratio Decidendi

Consent orders were appropriate because the council had properly assessed the application against s 79C of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, the Byron Local Environmental Plan 1988, relevant SEPPs and REPs, and the Byron Development Control Plan; the proposal met the objectives of the zone, was permitted with consent as a rural industry, the SEPP 1 objection and relevant objections had been addressed, and the necessary concurrence had been granted by the Department of Planning and the Rural Fire Service.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' "Development Application No. 10.2010.353.1 for a special purpose subdivision and the construction of a shed for a rural industry on the land known as Lot 33 DP 855301, 107 Risley's Hill Road Federal is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure A." 'No orders as to costs.'...