Sladen v Tweed Shire Council [2014] NSWLEC 1184

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Sladen v Tweed Shire Council [2014] NSWLEC 1184 Hearing dates: 28 August 2014 Decision date: 29 August 2014 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Hussey C Decision: (1)The appeal is upheld. (2)Development consent is granted to DA 13/0678 for the erection of an outbuilding with shower and toilet at Lot 2 SP 38780, No 2/1 Beatrice Court, Pottsville subject to the conditions in Annexure A. (3)The exhibits may be returned except for 1, 2, A, B and C. Catchwords: Development Application: Outbuilding, compliance with zone objectives, excessive height, compatibility with neighbourhood in terms of streetscape, acoustic impacts on adjoining property Legislation Cited: Tweed Local Environmental Plan 2014 Tweed Local Environmental Plan 2000 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Janice Sladen (Applicant)

Tweed Shire Council (Respondent) Representation: Mr P Sladen (Agent for the Applicant)

Ms M Hawley (Respondent) Lindsay Taylor Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 10357 of 2014

Judgment

Background 1This appeal was lodged against council's refusal of a development application for an outbuilding on a corner lot located at 1 Beatrice Court, Pottsville. 2A number of contentions were identified for the appeal which can be summarised as follows: * Non-compliance with the primary zone objectives in terms of amenity impacts, particularly visual and acoustic impacts on the neighbouring property and streetscape. * Excessive height and incompatibility of the structure with the character of the area. 3The appeal was undertaken by way of a s 34 Conference, which commenced with the hearing of objectors and then an initial conciliation conference. 4During the conciliation conference the parties discussed various aspects of the outbuilding and associated impacts. Mr Lonergan initially agreed that a suitable outbuilding was permissible in the proposed location providing the amenity impacts were acceptable. 5After discussion of various options there was no agreement and the conciliation conference was terminated. The matter then proceeded to the determination phase in the s 34 AA proceedings.