Precise Planning v Wollondilly Shire Council & Anor [2005] NSWLEC 339

Precise Planning v Wollondilly Shire Council & Anor [2005] NSWLEC 339

In absence of concrete evidence that the proposed SEPP 1 objection and subdivision would result in adverse cumulative impacts or undermine planning objectives, and given that the application satisfies the objectives of the 7(c) zone, strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary. The SEPP 1 objection is well-founded and should be allowed.

Parties
Applicant: Precise Planning; First Respondent: Wollondilly Shire Council; Second Respondent: Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal upheld. Development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
Development Application, SEPP 1 Objections, Subdivision Standards, Density Variation, Precedent and Cumulative Impact, Appeal Against Refusal, Local Environmental Plan
Environmental Law Planning Law Administrative Law Development Application SEPP 1 Objections Subdivision Standards Density Variation Precedent and Cumulative Impact +2 more

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Precise Planning

Applicant

Wollondilly Shire Council

First Respondent

Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the SEPP 1 objection to vary the development standard should be upheld
  2. 2 Whether strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary
  3. 3 Whether the proposed subdivision would set an adverse precedent and result in unacceptable cumulative impacts

Ratio Decidendi

In absence of concrete evidence that the proposed SEPP 1 objection and subdivision would result in adverse cumulative impacts or undermine planning objectives, and given that the application satisfies the objectives of the 7(c) zone, strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary. The SEPP 1 objection is well-founded and should be allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. Development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • The appeal against refusal by Wollondilly Shire Council is upheld.
  • The SEPP 1 objection to vary the development standard in cl 13B(1)(a) is allowed.