Stannards Marine Pty Ltd v North Sydney Council (No 2) [2022] NSWLEC 112

Stannards Marine Pty Ltd v North Sydney Council (No 2) [2022] NSWLEC 112

Development consent should be granted for the Relocatable Shed and Air Quality Pollution Control System subject to revised conditions: the proposed extra wording and Annexure C for "Approved Activities" were deleted because the 1990 Consent and Part 5 Approval should speak for themselves; condition AA5, renumbered AA4, should require revised architectural plans to demonstrate that the Air Quality Pollution Control System and Relocatable Shed will not impede or affect use of the Wash Bay; and the Statement of Environmental Effects should not be listed in condition A1 because the revised plans and conditions specify the relevant design, locations and use and its inclusion would cause...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Actual or Deemed Refusal of Development Applications / On the Papers; Determination of Disputed Conditions of Consent Following Principal Judgment
Outcome
The appeal in proceedings 2022/36839 was upheld and development consent was granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'development Consent' 'conditions of Consent' 'deferred Commencement Conditions' 'relocatable Shed' 'air Quality Pollution Control System']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'development Consent' 'conditions of Consent' 'deferred Commencement Conditions' 'relocatable Shed' 'air Quality Pollution Control System']

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 Actual or Deemed Refusal of Development Applications / On the Papers; Determination of Disputed Conditions of Consent Following Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the definition of "Approved Activities" should be expanded to refer to locations identified in an annexure.' 'Whether condition AA5 should require revised architectural plans as well as a plan of management to demonstrate that the Air Quality Pollution Control System and Relocatable Shed will not impede or affect use of the Wash Bay.' 'Whether the Statement of Environmental Effects and Heritage Impact Statement should be listed in condition A1 as a document in accordance with which the development must be carried out.']

Ratio Decidendi

Development consent should be granted for the Relocatable Shed and Air Quality Pollution Control System subject to revised conditions: the proposed extra wording and Annexure C for "Approved Activities" were deleted because the 1990 Consent and Part 5 Approval should speak for themselves; condition AA5, renumbered AA4, should require revised architectural plans to demonstrate that the Air Quality Pollution Control System and Relocatable Shed will not impede or affect use of the Wash Bay; and the Statement of Environmental Effects should not be listed in condition A1 because the revised plans and conditions specify the relevant design, locations and use and its inclusion would cause...

Court Disposition

The appeal in proceedings 2022/36839 was upheld and development consent was granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The appeal in proceedings 2022/36839 is upheld.' 'Development application No 456/21 for the installation and use of a Relocatable Shed and an Air Quality Pollution Control System at 6 John Street, McMahons Point is determined by the grant of development consent subject to the conditions in Annexure A.' 'The...