NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Connoisseur Investments Pty Ltd v Sutherland Shire Council [2020] NSWLEC 1181 Hearing dates: 24-25 March 2020; brief submissions 28 May 2020 Date of orders: 17 June 2020 Decision date: 17 April 2020 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Horton C Decision: The Court orders that: (1) The Applicant is granted leave to rely upon amended plans at Exhibits E, F, G and H subject to costs thrown away pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the amount of $5,000.00. (2) The appeal is upheld. (3) Development consent is granted to Development Application DA18/1347 for the demolition of existing dwellings and construction of a multi-dwelling housing development of 6 townhouses comprising 4x3-storey, 3 bedroom townhouses and 2x2-storey, 3 bedroom townhouses, and basement parking consisting of double garage and laundry at 46-48 Elouera Road, Cronulla NSW, subject to those conditions at Annexure A. (4) All exhibits are returned, except for Exhibits D, E, F, G and H, L, M and 7, 8 and 9. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – R3 medium density residential zone – multi-dwelling housing – landscape setback – flood planning Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 Cases Cited: Chami v Lane Cove Council [2015] NSWLEC 1003 Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council (2018) 236 LGERA 256; [2018] NSWLEC 118 Wehbe v Pittwater Council (2007) 156 LGERA 446; [2007] NSWLEC 827 Texts Cited: Apartment Design Guide Building Code of Australia Land and Environment Court of NSW, 'COVID-19 Pandemic Arrangements Policy' (March 2020) Simon Leake and Elke Haege, 'Landscape Soils Handbook' (2017) Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan 2015 Sutherland Shire Section 7.12 Development Contributions Plan 2016 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Connoisseur Investments Pty Ltd (Applicant) Sutherland Shire Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: N Eastman (Applicant) J Amy (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