Stratford v Manly Council [2006] NSWLEC 703
The appeal should be upheld subject to revised plans and revised conditions because the amended proposal was acceptable, the northern elevation windows would not cause unacceptable overlooking, and, given there was no alteration to hard surfaces or increase in roof stormwater collection area, it would be unreasonable to impose a more extensive stormwater detention or retention system or require a 5000 litre tank; a slimline tank of at least 800 litres connected to the roof water collection system was an appropriate response.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 25 October 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Pursuant to S 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Concerning Refusal of Development Application 85/06 for Additions and Alterations at 164 Pittwater Road, Manly / Ex Tempore Judgment on Proposed Consent Orders, With Contested Stormwater Conditions
- Outcome
- Appeal to be upheld subject to the applicant filing amended plans and the council filing revised conditions of consent, including a condition for a slimline stormwater tank of not less than 800 litres.
- Legal Topics
- ['development Application' 'stormwater Detention' 'stormwater Retention' 'heritage Conservation Area' 'residential Development Control Plan' 'privacy and Overlooking']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal Pursuant to S 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Concerning Refusal of Development Application 85/06 for Additions and Alterations at 164 Pittwater Road, Manly / Ex Tempore Judgment on Proposed Consent Orders, With Contested Stormwater Conditions
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether development consent should be granted for additions and alterations to the dwelling subject to conditions.' 'Whether proposed windows on the northern elevation would cause unacceptable overlooking of the adjacent property.' "Whether conditions requiring on-site stormwater detention or retention in accordance with the council's Stormwater Disposal Manual were appropriate." 'Whether a slimline rainwater tank, rather than a larger stormwater system or 5000 litre tank, was an appropriate stormwater response.']
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal should be upheld subject to revised plans and revised conditions because the amended proposal was acceptable, the northern elevation windows would not cause unacceptable overlooking, and, given there was no alteration to hard surfaces or increase in roof stormwater collection area, it would be unreasonable to impose a more extensive stormwater detention or retention system or require a 5000 litre tank; a slimline tank of at least 800 litres connected to the roof water collection system was an appropriate response.
Court Disposition
Appeal to be upheld subject to the applicant filing amended plans and the council filing revised conditions of consent, including a condition for a slimline stormwater tank of not less than 800 litres.
Orders
- ['The applicant is to file and serve revised plans by the close of business on 3 November 2006.' 'The respondent is to file and serve revised conditions by the close of business on 3 November 2006 and the conditions are to be filed in accordance with Practice Direction 2 of 2005 with a separate email notification...
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