Seljanovski v Sutherland Shire Council [2003] NSWLEC 234

Seljanovski v Sutherland Shire Council [2003] NSWLEC 234

The appeal failed because the proposed approximately 40 m jetty, ramp and pontoon was excessive in length for the shallow inter-tidal setting, would be a visual and physical intrusion on the public domain and use of the foreshore, and the site was unsuitable for the development. Balancing public and private interests, the proposal was not in the public interest, and the exceedance of relevant waterfront development standards was not justified merely because the length was needed to reach 600 mm water depth at low tide.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S 97 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Against Refusal of a Development Application / Merits Assessment of Development Application for Jetty, Ramp and Pontoon
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; development consent refused.
Legal Topics
['waterfront Development' 'development Control Plan Standards' 'suitability of Site' 'public Interest' 'public Access to Inter Tidal Area' 'precedent and Cumulative Impact' 'visual Impact']
['environmental Planning and Assessment' 'land and Environment' 'development Consent'] ['waterfront Development' 'development Control Plan Standards' 'suitability of Site' 'public Interest' 'public Access to Inter Tidal Area' 'precedent and Cumulative Impact' 'visual Impact']

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 Under S 97 of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Against Refusal of a Development Application / Merits Assessment of Development Application for Jetty, Ramp and Pontoon

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the site at 55 Holt Road, Taren Point was suitable for a proposed approximately 40 m jetty, ramp and pontoon.' 'Whether the proposed development was in the public interest having regard to the public domain, inter-tidal area and foreshore setting.' 'What weight should be given to the Sutherland Development Control Plan for Waterfront Development 2002 and its standards for waterfront structures.' 'Whether precedent and cumulative impact were relevant considerations.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the proposed approximately 40 m jetty, ramp and pontoon was excessive in length for the shallow inter-tidal setting, would be a visual and physical intrusion on the public domain and use of the foreshore, and the site was unsuitable for the development. Balancing public and private interests, the proposal was not in the public interest, and the exceedance of relevant waterfront development standards was not justified merely because the length was needed to reach 600 mm water depth at low tide.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; development consent refused.

Orders

  • ['The appeal in respect of the property known as No. 55 Holt Road, Taren Point, is dismissed.' 'The development application submitted to Sutherland Shire Council, and as amended, for a jetty, ramp and pontoon adjoining the above property is determined by the refusal of consent.' 'The exhibits are returned.']