NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Flaherty v Hawkesbury City Council [2020] NSWLEC 1449 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 23 June 2020, 1 July 2020, 3 July 2020, 29 July 2020, 20 August 2020 and 28 August 2020 Date of orders: 24 September 2020 Decision date: 24 September 2020 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Horton C Decision: The Court orders that: (1) Leave is granted to the applicant to rely on the amended plans and documents referred to in Condition 1 of the conditions annexed and marked "A". (2) The Applicant is ordered to pay the First Respondent's costs "thrown away" as a result of the amended development application pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the amount of $1,500.00. (3) The appeal is upheld. (4) Development Application No. 0498/18 for tree removal, demolition of existing structures, removal of three dams, bulk earthworks, construction and interpretation of two dams as permanent waterbodies, alterations to Grose Vale Road, construction of roads and drainage and a staged Torrens title subdivision to create 254 residential lots, four open space lots and a residue lot at Lot 548 DP 1233056, being 382 Grose Vale Road North Richmond, is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure 'A'. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – state heritage item – subdivision of land in urban release area – heritage conservation – agreement between the parties – conciliation conference – orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Hawkesbury Local Environmental Plan 2012 Heritage Act 1977 Rural Fires Act 1997 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 State Environmental Planning Policy No 55—Remediation of Land Water Management Act 2000 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Andrew Flaherty (Applicant) Hawkesbury City Council (First Respondent) Heritage Council of New South Wales (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: L Cone (Solicitor) (Applicant) J Corradini-Bird (Solicitor) (First Respondent) J Reid (Second Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate