23.03.2014 Views

27 February 2007 - Ordinary Meeting of Council (pdf. 14MB)

27 February 2007 - Ordinary Meeting of Council (pdf. 14MB)

27 February 2007 - Ordinary Meeting of Council (pdf. 14MB)

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Ordinary</strong> <strong>Meeting</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Council</strong> - <strong>27</strong> <strong>February</strong> <strong>2007</strong> 6 / 6<br />

Item 6<br />

S02466<br />

6 <strong>February</strong> <strong>2007</strong><br />

SUMMARY BY WARD<br />

A summary <strong>of</strong> Land & Environment Court costs by ward is shown in the following table:<br />

Land & Environment Court costs by Ward for the financial year 2006/<strong>2007</strong><br />

Comenarra $23,916 6.3%<br />

Gordon $11,730 3.1%<br />

Roseville $66,335 17.4%<br />

St Ives $172,822 45.2%<br />

Wahroonga $107,330 28.0%<br />

Total Costs $382,133 100.0%<br />

OUTCOMES<br />

At an early stage <strong>of</strong> each appeal, <strong>Council</strong> as respondent, is required to file with the Court a<br />

Statement <strong>of</strong> Issues outlining the grounds which <strong>Council</strong> asserts as warranting refusal <strong>of</strong> a<br />

development, or alternatively, that may be addressed by way <strong>of</strong> conditions <strong>of</strong> consent.<br />

In cases where issues raised by <strong>Council</strong> are capable <strong>of</strong> resolution by the provision by the applicant<br />

<strong>of</strong> additional information or amendment <strong>of</strong> the proposal, it is the Court’s expectation that this<br />

should occur. The Court’s current practice <strong>of</strong> appointing a Court-appointed expert witness, rather<br />

than allowing the parties to call their own expert evidence, strongly encourages this.<br />

In this context, any <strong>of</strong> three outcomes can be regarded as favorable, namely:<br />

1. If the appeal is in relation to a deemed refusal <strong>of</strong> an application which, upon assessment,<br />

is appropriate for approval: that the development is determined by <strong>Council</strong>, allowing the<br />

appeal to be discontinued by the applicant and avoiding as much as is practicable the<br />

incurring <strong>of</strong> unnecessary legal costs;<br />

2. If the issues raised by <strong>Council</strong> are capable <strong>of</strong> resolution by the applicant providing<br />

further information, or amending the proposal: that this occurs, so that development<br />

consent should be granted, either by <strong>Council</strong> or the Court;<br />

3. If the issues raised by <strong>Council</strong> are either not capable <strong>of</strong> resolution, or the applicant<br />

declines to take the steps that are necessary to resolve them: that the appeal is either<br />

discontinued by the applicant, or dismissed (refused) by the Court.<br />

Of the 31 appeals commenced in the half year ended December 2006, only 6 appeals were resolved<br />

in that period. Five <strong>of</strong> which were discontinued by the applicant.<br />

CONSULTATION<br />

Not applicable.<br />

N:\0702<strong>27</strong>-OMC-SR-03649-ANALYSIS OF LAND ENVIRON.doc/athaide /6

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!