Kyselov v Campbelltown City Council [2014] NSWLEC 1013

Kyselov v Campbelltown City Council [2014] NSWLEC 1013

The application for development consent was refused because the proposed development did not achieve a high quality standard of design and was not appropriately sympathetic to the character, bulk, scale, and streetscape of the neighbourhood, as required by the Local Environmental Plan and Development Control Plan.

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'dual Occupancy' 'planning Controls' 'bulk and Scale' 'streetscape' 'subdivision']
['planning and Environmental Law'] ['development Application' 'dual Occupancy' 'planning Controls' 'bulk and Scale' 'streetscape' 'subdivision']

Source-derived case record

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

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed dual occupancy development is consistent with applicable planning controls' 'Whether the bulk and scale of the proposal are compatible with existing and desired neighbourhood character' 'Whether the development achieves a high quality standard of design']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for development consent was refused because the proposed development did not achieve a high quality standard of design and was not appropriately sympathetic to the character, bulk, scale, and streetscape of the neighbourhood, as required by the Local Environmental Plan and Development Control Plan.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'Development Application 2159/2012 for the construction of a detached dual occupancy development and subdivision of land at 15 Nepean Towers Avenue, Glen Alpine into two allotments is refused consent.' 'The exhibits, other than exhibits A, D, 2 and 3, may be returned.']