Dickson v Sutherland Shire Council [2020] NSWLEC 1100

Dickson v Sutherland Shire Council [2020] NSWLEC 1100

The Court is satisfied, having regard to the amended clause 4.6 request, that strict compliance with the height of buildings development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances and sufficient environmental planning grounds exist; all pre-conditions to granting consent are met and development will be in the public interest. The appeal (against refusal of the development application) is therefore upheld.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal / Final Orders After Conciliation
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to amended plans and conditions
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'height Variation' 'landscaping Requirements' 'foreshore Building Line']
['environmental Law' 'planning Law'] ['development Application' 'height Variation' 'landscaping Requirements' 'foreshore Building Line']

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 / Final Orders After Conciliation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the development application should be approved despite non-compliance with height and other controls under the LEP and DCP' 'Whether clause 4.6 variation to maximum building height standard should be granted']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court is satisfied, having regard to the amended clause 4.6 request, that strict compliance with the height of buildings development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances and sufficient environmental planning grounds exist; all pre-conditions to granting consent are met and development will be in the public interest. The appeal (against refusal of the development application) is therefore upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to amended plans and conditions

Orders

  • ["Leave granted to applicants to rely upon amended plans listed in Condition 1 at Annexure 'A' and the written request under clause 4.6 of the LEP dated January 2020" "Applicants' clause 4.6 request to vary height of buildings control is upheld" 'The appeal is upheld' "Development Application DA18/1362 for...