1. The concerns raised by residents were addressed by the town planning experts and it was agreed that there were no outstanding matters;
2. Waverley Council “employees” advised representatives of FREE to include the very “Security Design Maters” that were included within the DA Application;
3. [Yet] It was Council’s advocates which pursued the security issues in Court;
4. The L&E Courts [I think: Cowardly & Negative] decision was based directly upon the unhelpful and misleading arguments as presented by Waverly Councils representatives [the Council was obviously seeking such a decision];
5. The decision makes it clear the synagogue (and associated development) was rejected ONLY because of the question of security arising because it might be the target of terrorism;
6. No other project in Waverley has been rejected because it might be attacked by terrorists [I’m not aware of any]
7. Places of public worship [Synagogues] are a land use that is appropriately and generally located in residential areas.

Nonetheless; [“in moving forward….”] It’s GOOD to hear that Waverley Council has indicated that it would favorably consider a [DA] re-application in a timely manner.

Once the Council provides an approval to the [properly drafted] re-application; What will happen to the Court Order? Who will cause the Order to be Overturned; as it is begging to be?

P.S.
I haven’t seen any “…outrageous Anti-Semitic comments….”
Only comments that were supportive of FREE’s development and critical of the OUTRAGEOUS “Cowardly” Order by the Court.