Lloyds Building & Development Pty Ltd v Central Coast Council [2025] NSWLEC 1039

Lloyds Building & Development Pty Ltd v Central Coast Council [2025] NSWLEC 1039

The Court upheld both appeals and granted development consent for the amended applications because statutory and local environmental planning controls, environmental and hazards requirements, and procedural requirements—including public notification and owner’s consent—were satisfied, and the parties reached agreement at conciliation on conditions which the Court could properly make.

Parties
Applicant: Lloyds Building & Development Pty Ltd; Respondent: Central Coast Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Orders After Conciliation Conference
Outcome
Appeals upheld; development consents granted for both amended applications; costs ordered.
Legal Topics
Development Application, Conciliation Conference, Coastal Environment, Flood Planning, Acid Sulphate Soils, Multi Dwelling Housing
Planning and Environment Development Application Conciliation Conference Coastal Environment Flood Planning Acid Sulphate Soils Multi Dwelling Housing

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lloyds Building & Development Pty Ltd

Applicant

Central Coast Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Orders After Conciliation Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether development consent should be granted for demolition, subdivision, and construction of three townhouses for DA/286/2024 at 216 Terrigal Drive and DA/13/2024 at 218 Terrigal Drive.
  2. 2 Whether the amended development applications satisfy statutory and local planning controls including environmental and hazards provisions.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court upheld both appeals and granted development consent for the amended applications because statutory and local environmental planning controls, environmental and hazards requirements, and procedural requirements—including public notification and owner’s consent—were satisfied, and the parties reached agreement at conciliation on conditions which the Court could properly make.

Court Disposition

Appeals upheld; development consents granted for both amended applications; costs ordered.

Orders

  • Development Application DA/286/2024 (as amended) for 216 Terrigal Drive is determined by the grant of consent subject to conditions in Annexure A.
  • Applicant to pay respondent's costs thrown away as a result of amendments, in the amount of $2,000 within 28 days.