Iloski v Sutherland Shire Council [2011] NSWLEC 1139

Iloski v Sutherland Shire Council [2011] NSWLEC 1139

The proposed alterations and additions breached the gross floor area and building height development standards, and the breaches produced excessive bulk, scale and height inconsistent with the locality and with views from the street, Georges River and Bald Face Point Reserve. Compliance with the standards was not unreasonable or unnecessary and the SEPP 1 objections were not well founded. The proposal also caused view loss that was difficult to justify because it resulted from breaches of development standards, and it would unacceptably impact the heritage significance of the adjoining heritage item, Green Gables. These matters required refusal of the development application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Refusal of a Development Application / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['development Application for Alterations and Additions to an Existing Dwelling' 'sepp 1 Objections' 'gross Floor Area Development Standard' 'building Height Development Standard' 'view Loss' 'impact on Heritage Item']
['environmental Planning and Development' 'heritage Conservation'] ['development Application for Alterations and Additions to an Existing Dwelling' 'sepp 1 Objections' 'gross Floor Area Development Standard' 'building Height Development Standard' 'view Loss' 'impact on Heritage Item']

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

Class 1 Appeal Against Refusal of a Development Application / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the SEPP 1 objection to the gross floor area development standard was well founded.' 'Whether the SEPP 1 objection to the building height development standards was well founded.' 'Whether the proposed development would cause unacceptable view loss from neighbouring properties.' 'Whether the proposed development would have an unacceptable impact on the heritage significance of the adjoining heritage item at 10-12 Kangaroo Point Road.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed alterations and additions breached the gross floor area and building height development standards, and the breaches produced excessive bulk, scale and height inconsistent with the locality and with views from the street, Georges River and Bald Face Point Reserve. Compliance with the standards was not unreasonable or unnecessary and the SEPP 1 objections were not well founded. The proposal also caused view loss that was difficult to justify because it resulted from breaches of development standards, and it would unacceptably impact the heritage significance of the adjoining heritage item, Green Gables. These matters required refusal of the development application.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'Development Application No. 10/0608 for alterations and additions to an existing dwelling at 6-8 Kangaroo Point Road, Kangaroo Point is refused.' 'The exhibits are returned with the exception of exhibit 1.']