NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Samia v Bayside Council [2020] NSWLEC 1526 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 26 October 2020 Date of orders: 04 November 2020 Decision date: 04 November 2020 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Smithson AC Decision: The Court orders that: (1) Pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 the Applicant is to pay the costs of the Respondent that were thrown away as a result of amending the development application in the amount of $23,000 within 60 days of the date of these orders. (2) The Applicant's written request pursuant to cl 4.6 of the Botany Bay Local Environmental Plan 2013 seeking variation of the development standard relating to the height of buildings contained in clause 4.3 is upheld. (3) The appeal is upheld. (4) Development Application DA-2018/368 for the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a four storey mixed use development comprising 9 residential units, 1 commercial office space, associated landscaping and site works over 2 levels of basement car parking for 21 cars on the land at 1449 Botany Road, Botany, is approved subject to the conditions at Annexure 'A'. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – mixed use development – heritage conservation area – height breach – clause 4.6 written request – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders Legislation Cited: Botany Local Environmental Plan 2013 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 State Environmental Planning Policy No 55—Remediation of Land State Environmental Planning Policy No 65—Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development Water Management Act 2000 Cases Cited: Apartment Design Guide Botany Development Control Plan 2013 Texts Cited: Apartment Design Guide Botany Development Control Plan 2013 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Joseph Samia (Applicant) Bayside Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: C Rose (Solicitor) (Applicant) J Cole (Solicitor) (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