Horton Coastal Engineering Pty Ltd v Central Coast Council

[2026] NSWLEC 1449

NSW Land and Environment Court

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

1. APPEAL — development application — coastal protection works — coastal seawall — whether adverse visual impact — whether impact acceptable — coastal management plan — impact on coastal foreshore and adjacent properties — the public interest — precedent

An adverse visual impact on the coastal environment under s 2.11 of SEPP (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 may be found acceptable where the form of development is anticipated by the applicable zoning, planning instruments and certified coastal management program, where no feasible alternative exists that would avoid the impact, and where the design minimises the impact — even if the development introduces built form in a location typically characterised by natural features.
The risk that approval of coastal protection works will set a precedent for similar development along the coast is not, of itself, a reason for refusal where the development is found to be acceptable on its merits; the acceptability of future works is assessed on their own development applications against the controls then in force.
Conditions requiring registration of positive covenants under s 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919 are not appropriate where the covenant merely replicates obligations already imposed by conditions of consent enforceable under the EPA Act and existing legislation such as the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015, consistent with MacDonald v Mosman Municipal Council.