Molesworth v Inner West Council [2019] NSWLEC 1191

Molesworth v Inner West Council [2019] NSWLEC 1191

The Commissioner found that the written request adequately addressed both the unreasonableness or unnecessary nature of strict compliance with the site coverage standard and that sufficient environmental planning grounds justified the variation. The development was found consistent with both the objectives of the contravened standard and the zone, thus the appeal was upheld and consent granted, in accordance with s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal (class 1) Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application / Post Conciliation, Final Orders Made
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Applications' 'consent Variations' 'heritage Considerations' 'site Coverage Standards']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Applications' 'consent Variations' 'heritage Considerations' 'site Coverage Standards']

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 (class 1) Against Deemed Refusal of Development Application / Post Conciliation, Final Orders Made

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the contravention of the site coverage development standard under cl 4.3A of the Leichhardt LEP was justified' 'Whether the prerequisites for granting development consent and varying development standards were met' 'Whether the proposed development was consistent with the objectives of the zone and planning instruments']

Ratio Decidendi

The Commissioner found that the written request adequately addressed both the unreasonableness or unnecessary nature of strict compliance with the site coverage standard and that sufficient environmental planning grounds justified the variation. The development was found consistent with both the objectives of the contravened standard and the zone, thus the appeal was upheld and consent granted, in accordance with s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['Leave granted to rely on amended plans as set out in condition 1 of Annexure A.' 'Applicants to pay the Respondent’s agreed costs of $1,000.00 within 28 days.' 'The written request pursuant to cl 4.6 of the LEP to justify the site coverage standard contravention is upheld.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development...