Mateo v Sydney City Council [2004] NSWLEC 198

Mateo v Sydney City Council [2004] NSWLEC 198

The covered walkway, even as amended by lowering and setback, would cause a dramatic and intrusive alteration to the St Johns Road streetscape inconsistent with the row of Victorian Italianate buildings and the desired future character for the heritage conservation area; therefore the condition requiring deletion of the covered walkway should stand, while the appeal against refusal should be upheld to permit the agreed amended front fence works.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal Pursuant to S 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Concerning Refusal of a Development Application / Ex Tempore Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Appeal against refusal upheld; appeal against the imposition of a condition requiring deletion of the covered walkway dismissed; application to be approved in terms of amended plans and conditions to be filed.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'visual Impact on Heritage Conservation Area' 'covered Walkway' 'street Frontage Fence' 'development Control Plan']
['planning and Environment Law' 'heritage Conservation'] ['development Application' 'visual Impact on Heritage Conservation Area' 'covered Walkway' 'street Frontage Fence' 'development Control Plan']

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 Pursuant to S 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Concerning Refusal of a Development Application / Ex Tempore Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed covered walkway would have an acceptable visual impact on the heritage conservation area and streetscape having regard to the Leichhardt Development Control Plan.' 'Whether consent should be granted subject to a condition requiring deletion of the proposed covered walkway while approving amended plans for the front fence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The covered walkway, even as amended by lowering and setback, would cause a dramatic and intrusive alteration to the St Johns Road streetscape inconsistent with the row of Victorian Italianate buildings and the desired future character for the heritage conservation area; therefore the condition requiring deletion of the covered walkway should stand, while the appeal against refusal should be upheld to permit the agreed amended front fence works.

Court Disposition

Appeal against refusal upheld; appeal against the imposition of a condition requiring deletion of the covered walkway dismissed; application to be approved in terms of amended plans and conditions to be filed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal against refusal is upheld.' 'The appeal against the imposition of a condition requiring the deletion of the covered walkway is dismissed.' 'The application will be approved in terms of the amended plans and conditions to be filed.' 'The exhibits, with the exception of Exhibit A, may be returned.']