Etherington v North Sydney Council

Link copied
Case Copied 31 min read

Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Etherington v North Sydney Council [2021] NSWLEC 1324
Hearing dates: 3 - 4 May 2021
Date of orders: 07 June 2021
Decision date: 07 June 2021
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Washington AC
Decision:

The Court orders:

(1) The appeal is dismissed.

(2) Development application DA56/20 for the demolition of an existing dwelling and garage and the construction of a new dwelling and double garage, with associated tree removal and earthworks on the land at 58 Cowdroy Avenue, Cammeray, is determined by way of refusal.

(3) The exhibits are returned, with the exception of Exhibits 1, A, B, D, E and F.

Catchwords:

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – dwelling house – clause 4.6 request

Legislation Cited:

North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 cll 2.3, 4.3, 4.4, 4.6, 6.9, 6.10

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017

State Environmental Planning Policy No 19—Bushland in Urban Areas

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55—Remediation of Land

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 cll 3, 12(2), 13(f)14(d), 16, 17, 20, 25, 26

Cases Cited:

Abrams v Council of the City of Sydney [2019] NSWLEC 1583

Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council (2018) 236 LGERA 256; [2018] NSWLEC 118

Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council (2004) 134 LGERA 23; [2004] NSWLEC 140

Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) 156 LGERA 446; [2007 NSWLEC 827

Texts Cited:

North Sydney Development Control Plan 2013

Sydney Harbour Foreshores and Waterways Area Development Control Plan 2005

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Renata Agnieszka Etherington (Applicant)
North Sydney Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
P Tomasetti SC (Applicant)
A Seton (Solicitor) (Respondent)

Solicitors:
Etheringtons Solicitors (Applicant)
Marsdens Law Group (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2020/277618
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. COMMISSIONER: These proceedings arise following the Council’s actual refusal of development application DA56/20, lodged on 17 March 2020 for the demolition of an existing dwelling and construction of a new dwelling with associated tree removal and earthworks at Lot 33 DP 8933, 58 Cowdroy Avenue, Cammeray (the subject site).

  2. The Class 1 appeal is made pursuant to s 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act1979 (EP&A Act) and is determined pursuant to the provisions of s 4.16 of the EP&A Act.

  3. The proposed dwelling breaches the height control set by the North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 (NSLEP), and the Applicant relies on a request to vary this height control, pursuant to cl 4.6 of the NSLEP. Amongst other contentions, the Respondent contends that the written cl 4.6 Variation Request (cl 4.6 written request) is inadequate.

  4. For the following reasons I have determined that the written cl 4.6 written request is inadequate and that the appeal should be dismissed.

Background to the appeal

  1. The appeal was listed for conciliation under s 34AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act), which commenced on site on 3 May 2021. At this site view I had the opportunity to view the…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Etherington v North Sydney Council and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2021] NSWLEC 1324
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Etherington v North Sydney Council is a case concerning a dispute over a development application for the demolition of an existing dwelling and garage, and the construction of a new dwelling and double garage, with associated tree removal and earthworks. The matter was heard in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales. The applicant, Etherington, sought approval for the proposed development from North Sydney Council. The Council refused the application, leading to Etherington's appeal against the decision.

The primary legal issue for the Court to decide was whether the development application complied with the relevant planning scheme and whether the Council's decision to refuse the application was lawful, reasonable, and justifiable. The Court also had to consider whether the proposed development would have an unacceptable impact on the character and appearance of the area, as well as whether the development would be contrary to the objectives of the planning scheme.

In its judgment, the Court found that the development application did not comply with the relevant planning scheme, as it did not meet the requirements for the height and scale of the proposed dwelling. The Court further found that the proposed development would have an unacceptable impact on the character and appearance of the area, and would be contrary to the objectives of the planning scheme. The Court also determined that the Council's decision to refuse the development application was lawful, reasonable, and justifiable. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the development application was refused.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Court orders:

(1) The appeal is dismissed.

(2) Development application DA56/20 for the demolition of an existing dwelling and garage and the construction of a new dwelling and double garage, with associated tree removal and earthworks on the land at 58 Cowdroy Avenue, Cammeray, is determined by way of refusal.

(3) The exhibits are returned, with the exception of Exhibits 1, A, B, D, E and F.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.