Frith & Anor v Blue Mountains City Council [2014] NSWLEC 1134

Frith & Anor v Blue Mountains City Council [2014] NSWLEC 1134

The Court found that the setback and fence height controls in the Local Environmental Plan constitute development standards. In the absence of a written objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 – Development Standards (SEPP 1), consent cannot be granted as the application did not comply with these standards and was therefore refused.

Parties
Applicant: Douglas William Frith; Applicant: Roby Anne Frith; Respondent: Blue Mountains City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; consent refused
Legal Topics
Development Application, Development Standards, SEPP 1 Objection, Bulk, Scale, Character
Planning Law Development Application Development Standards SEPP 1 Objection Bulk Scale Character

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Douglas William Frith

Applicant

Roby Anne Frith

Applicant

Blue Mountains City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the building setback and fence height controls are development standards under the LEP
  2. 2 Ability of the Court to approve the application in the absence of an objection to the standard pursuant to SEPP 1
  3. 3 Adequacy of building separation distance under DCP

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the setback and fence height controls in the Local Environmental Plan constitute development standards. In the absence of a written objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 – Development Standards (SEPP 1), consent cannot be granted as the application did not comply with these standards and was therefore refused.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; consent refused

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • Development Application X/827/2013 for the construction a two storey dwelling house to create a detached dual occupancy at No 21 Chapman Parade, Faulconbridge is refused consent.