Gary Saunders & Anor v Hunters Hill Council [2017] NSWLEC 1705

Gary Saunders & Anor v Hunters Hill Council [2017] NSWLEC 1705

The cottage at 18 Richmond Crescent is a contributory item in both designated conservation areas due to its rarity, intactness, and contribution to social heritage and streetscape character. Demolition is not justified without proper consideration of financial and structural feasibility for retention and extension. The proposed development would have adverse impacts on the heritage significance of the conservation areas per LEP cl 5.10(4), and alternative options for retention must be explored.

Parties
Applicant: Gary Saunders; Applicant: Lynne Saunders; Respondent: Hunters Hill Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; development application refused
Legal Topics
Development Application, Heritage Conservation, Conservation Areas, Streetscape Impact, Land Use Planning, Demolition Controls
Planning Law Heritage Law Development Application Heritage Conservation Conservation Areas Streetscape Impact Land Use Planning Demolition 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gary Saunders

Applicant

Lynne Saunders

Applicant

Hunters Hill Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether demolition of the existing cottage is justified in two heritage conservation areas
  2. 2 Whether the replacement dwelling respects the heritage values and character of the conservation areas
  3. 3 Effect of proposed development on heritage significance under Hunters Hill LEP 2012

Ratio Decidendi

The cottage at 18 Richmond Crescent is a contributory item in both designated conservation areas due to its rarity, intactness, and contribution to social heritage and streetscape character. Demolition is not justified without proper consideration of financial and structural feasibility for retention and extension. The proposed development would have adverse impacts on the heritage significance of the conservation areas per LEP cl 5.10(4), and alternative options for retention must be explored.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; development application refused

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • Development Application DA 2016/1172 for demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a new dwelling house and pool at 18 Richmond Crescent, Hunters Hill is refused.