Land and Environment Court of New South Wales CITATION : Jang v Hunters Hill Municipal Council [2006] NSWLEC 511 APPLICANT Hwan Kwon Jang PARTIES : RESPONDENT Hunters Hill Municipal Council FILE NUMBER(S) : 10012 of 2006 CORAM: Hussey C KEY ISSUES: Development Application :- Section 96 Modification, accuracy of detailing LEGISLATION CITED: Environmental planning and Assessment Act Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan DATES OF HEARING: 15 and 17 August 2006 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 08/17/2006 APPLICANT Mr R Creighton, agent LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT Mr S Brown, solicitor SOLICITORS Abbott Tout JUDGMENT: THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES Hussey C 17 August 2006 10012 of 2006 Hwan Kwon Jang v Hunters Hill Municipal Council JUDGMENT This decision was given extemporaneously. It has been revised and edited prior to publication. Background 1 This appeal was lodged against council's refusal of a s 96 Modification application for a residence situated 20 Mount Street, Hunters Hill. 2 The application was refused because council considered it lacked essential information to enable a full and proper assessment. Prior to the hearing, the matter was the subject of Case Management, which resulted in Directions being given for the applicant to provide additional information. 3 Consequently at the commencement of the hearing on 15 August, Mr Creighton tendered the s 96 plans to be assessed, which became Exhibit A. 4 The on-site assessment of these plans, relative to the existing building revealed discrepancies with the position and detailing of the front balcony, the balcony window and the window detailing of the garage. 5 By consent the matter was adjourned to enable the applicant to rectify the s 96 plans. This has resulted in the revised plans, which are Exhibit D. 6 Mr Brown now submits that these modifications are acceptable as there are no significant non-compliances with the planning controls or adverse safety and amenity impacts. 7 Having considered the reports of Mr R Sherry, council's environmental health and building surveyor and the applicant's planners Mr J Boers' report, I am now satisfied that: o the s 96 modification relates to the same development, o the relevant controls are reasonably satisfied, o there are no adverse amenity or public interest impacts. 8 On this basis then, the s 96 Modifications should be granted. Court orders 1 The appeal is allowed. 2 The s 96 Modification to the dwelling at 20 Mount Street, Hunters Hill, is approved, subject to the following conditions: 35A: The development consent No. 03 - 1168 (C) relates to the plans prepared by Moshonis Bros. Designs, Drawings Nos. 1083/06A, Sheets 1, 2, 3 and 4, dated May 2006. 54A: The false/dummy balcony is not to be used for trafficable purposes at any time. 3 The exhibits may be returned except D and 1. ___________________ R Hussey Commissioner of the Court rjs DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.