Paino v Woollahra Municipal Council [2002] NSWLEC 13
The foreshore building line in cl 22 of the Woollahra Local Environmental Plan 1995 is a development standard to which SEPP No. 1 applies. Approval of the terrace extension is justified given the ameliorative conditions proposed, the absence of significant visual or acoustic impact, and the objectives of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Parties
- Applicant: Salvatore Paino; Respondent: Woollahra Municipal Council; Intervener: Frank Lowy
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 23 January 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Under S 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Judgment at First Instance in the Land and Environment Court
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; development consent granted with conditions.
- Legal Topics
- Development Consent, Modification Application, Acoustic and Visual Impact, Foreshore Building Line, Application of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Salvatore Paino
Applicant
Woollahra Municipal Council
Respondent
Frank Lowy
Intervener
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Judgment at First Instance in the Land and Environment Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the proposed terrace extension should be approved given concerns about adverse acoustic and visual privacy impacts and possible contravention of the foreshore building line development standard
- 2 Whether the foreshore building line in cl 22 of the Woollahra Local Environmental Plan 1995 is a development standard amenable to SEPP No. 1 objection
Ratio Decidendi
The foreshore building line in cl 22 of the Woollahra Local Environmental Plan 1995 is a development standard to which SEPP No. 1 applies. Approval of the terrace extension is justified given the ameliorative conditions proposed, the absence of significant visual or acoustic impact, and the objectives of the foreshore building line and zone. As compliance would be unreasonable and unnecessary, the objection under SEPP No. 1 is well founded, and consent should be granted with conditions.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; development consent granted with conditions.
Orders
- Appeal allowed.
- Development consent is granted for an extension to the approved balcony subject to the condition annexed hereto.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment