Ison v Richmond Valley Council [2012] NSWLEC 1167

Ison v Richmond Valley Council [2012] NSWLEC 1167

The proposed works do not satisfy the criteria in clause 29(3)(c) and (d) of Richmond River Local Environmental Plan 1992, in that the building, whether restored or raised, would not be structurally capable of withstanding flooding nor be adequately flood proofed, given the agreed flood hazard and the scope of works required. As such, the site is unsuitable for the proposed development and consent must be refused.

Parties
Applicant: Rodney Harold Ison; Respondent: Richmond Valley Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S97 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; development application refused.
Legal Topics
Development Application, Flood Liable Land, Existing Dwelling, Merit Assessment, Restoration Works, Flood Management, Land Use
Planning Law Environmental Law Development Application Flood Liable Land Existing Dwelling Merit Assessment Restoration Works Flood Management +1 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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rodney Harold Ison

Applicant

Richmond Valley Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under S97 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Final Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the building on the site is an existing dwelling
  2. 2 Whether the proposed works constitute restoration or the erection of a new dwelling
  3. 3 Whether the site is suitable for residential development given flood hazard and planning controls

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed works do not satisfy the criteria in clause 29(3)(c) and (d) of Richmond River Local Environmental Plan 1992, in that the building, whether restored or raised, would not be structurally capable of withstanding flooding nor be adequately flood proofed, given the agreed flood hazard and the scope of works required. As such, the site is unsuitable for the proposed development and consent must be refused.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; development application refused.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The development application for proposed restoration works to an existing rural dwelling at 237 Pacific Highway, Broadwater, is refused.