Willis & Tosich v Sydney City Council [2004] NSWLEC 495

Willis & Tosich v Sydney City Council [2004] NSWLEC 495

The appeal was upheld because the agreed amendments, including removal of the pergola and reduction and redesign of the balustrade, reasonably addressed the council's heritage and visual amenity concerns while maintaining an acceptable balcony/carport footprint and balancing the applicants' privacy interests with the public interest in visual impact.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against a S 121 B Order No. 2 Requiring Demolition of a Rear Deck/pergola / On Site Hearing; Ex Tempore Judgment; Consent Orders
Outcome
Appeal upheld; the council's order was substituted by consent; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['section 121 B Order' 'demolition Order' 'unauthorised Building Work' 'visual Amenity' 'glebe Conservation Area' 'rear Deck, Pergola and Carport']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Control' 'heritage and Conservation'] ['section 121 B Order' 'demolition Order' 'unauthorised Building Work' 'visual Amenity' 'glebe Conservation Area' 'rear Deck, Pergola and Carport']

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 a S 121 B Order No. 2 Requiring Demolition of a Rear Deck/pergola / On Site Hearing; Ex Tempore Judgment; Consent Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the s 121B order requiring demolition of the rear deck/pergola should be upheld or substituted.' 'Whether the rear balcony/carport footprint and amended works were acceptable having regard to visual amenity and the Glebe Conservation Area.' "Whether the pergola and lattice screening unreasonably affected views of the residence's rear cantilevered balconies from the public domain."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was upheld because the agreed amendments, including removal of the pergola and reduction and redesign of the balustrade, reasonably addressed the council's heritage and visual amenity concerns while maintaining an acceptable balcony/carport footprint and balancing the applicants' privacy interests with the public interest in visual impact.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; the council's order was substituted by consent; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'Under s 121K of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Court substitutes the order under s 121 served by the council on 22 March 2004 with the following order: (a) On the Creek Street elevation a balustrade to a maximum height of 1600 mm above the finished floor level of...