NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: ROI Properties Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Sydney [2011] NSWLEC 1023 Hearing dates: 24, 25, 27, 28 January 2011 Decision date: 11 February 2011 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Morris C Decision: 1.The appeal is dismissed; 2. Development Application D/2010/1350 which proposed the alterations and additions to three adjoining warehouse units at Nos. 2-10 Fountain Street, Alexandria to accommodate a supermarket including fresh food, specialty shop and offices is refused. 3. The exhibits are returned. Catchwords: Development application; alterations and additions to an existing building to provide for a supermarket; inconsistent with planning strategies for the area; weight to be given to council policy and draft LEP; retail hierarchy. Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; South Sydney Local Environmental Plan 1998; Draft Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2011; Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Order 2006. Cases Cited: ROI Properties Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Sydney [2010] NSWLEC 1096; Segal & Anor v Waverley Council [2005] NSWCA 310; Schaffer Corporation Limited v Council of the City of Hawkesbury [1992] 77 LGRA 21; Stockland Development Pty Ltd v Manly Council [2004] NSWLEC 472; Renaldo Plus 3 Pty Limited v Hurstville City Council [2005] NSWLEC 315 Blackmore Design Group Pty Ltd v North Sydney Council [2001] NSWLEC 279; Terrace Tower Holdings Pty Limited v Sutherland Shire Council [No. 2] [2002] NSWLEC 150. Texts Cited: Strategy for a Sustainable City of South Sydney; South Sydney Development Control Plan 1997: Urban Design; South Sydney City Council Development Control Plan No. 11 - Transport Guidelines for Development 1996; Sustainable Sydney 2030 The Vision; Green Square and Southern Areas Retail Study. Category: Principal judgment Parties: ROI Properties Pty Ltd (Applicant) Sydney City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr G Green Solicitor (Applicant) Mr P Tomasetti SC (Respondent) Solicitors: Pikes Lawyers (Applicant) Maddocks Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 10815 of 2010
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