Sanna V & S v Kiama Municipal Council [2003] NSWLEC 405

Sanna V & S v Kiama Municipal Council [2003] NSWLEC 405

The proposed development does not satisfy the objectives of the foreshore building line as set out in DCP 36. The insertion of a dwelling forward of the 30 m foreshore building line increases bulk and scale when viewed from the Minnamurra River and results in an overdevelopment of the site. The SEPP 1 objection is not well-founded as the objectives of the relevant development standard are not met. Accordingly, the application is refused.

Parties
Applicant: Vincent and Sharon Sanna; Respondent: Kiama Municipal Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Development Application, Foreshore Building Line, Dual Occupancy, Variation of Development Standards
Planning and Environment Development Application Foreshore Building Line Dual Occupancy Variation of Development Standards

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vincent and Sharon Sanna

Applicant

Kiama Municipal Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed dual occupancy development warrants a variation to the 30 m foreshore building line under SEPP 1
  2. 2 Whether the development constitutes an overdevelopment of the site
  3. 3 Whether the objectives of the relevant planning controls are satisfied by the proposal

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed development does not satisfy the objectives of the foreshore building line as set out in DCP 36. The insertion of a dwelling forward of the 30 m foreshore building line increases bulk and scale when viewed from the Minnamurra River and results in an overdevelopment of the site. The SEPP 1 objection is not well-founded as the objectives of the relevant development standard are not met. Accordingly, the application is refused.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal in respect of 106 Charles Avenue, Minnamurra, is dismissed.
  • The SEPP 1 objection to vary the foreshore building line from 30 m to approximately 6 m is not allowed.