Crownland Camden Valley Way Pty Ltd v Liverpool City Council

[2019] NSWLEC 1514

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Crownland Camden Valley Way Pty Ltd v Liverpool City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1514
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 6 September 2019
Date of orders:	29 October 2019
Decision date:	29 October 2019
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Gray C
Decision:	See [9] below
Catchwords:	DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – residential subdivision - conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders
Legislation Cited:	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Roads Act 1993 Water Management Act 2000
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Crownland Camden Valley Way Pty Ltd (Applicant) Liverpool City Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: A Knox (Solicitor) (Applicant) M Knight (Solicitor) (Respondent) Solicitors: Pikes and Verekers Lawyers (Applicant) Liverpool City Council (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2018/340718
Publication restriction:	No

Judgment

1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal concerning a development application lodged with Liverpool Council for the staged Torrens title subdivision of 1342 Camden Valley Way, Leppington, and related works. The appeal is lodged pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (“EPA Act”). In exercising the functions of the consent authority on the appeal, the Court has the power to determine the development application pursuant to ss 4.15 and 4.16 of the EPA Act. The final orders in this appeal, outlined in [9] below, are made as a result of an agreement between the parties that was reached at a conciliation conference.

2. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (“LEC Act”) between the parties, which was held on 6 September 2019. I presided over the conciliation conference.

3. Following the conciliation conference, an agreement under s 34(3) of the LEC Act was reached between the parties as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that was acceptable to the parties. The decision agreed upon is for leave to be granted to amend the development application, and for the grant of development consent subject to conditions of consent pursuant to s 4.16(1) of the EPA Act. The amended development application seeks a staged Torrens title subdivision to create a total of 69 residential lots in 4 stages.

4. As the presiding Commissioner, I am satisfied that the decision to grant development consent to the amended application subject to conditions of consent is a decision that the Court can make in the proper exercise of its functions (this being the test applied by s 34(3) of the LEC Act). I formed this state of satisfaction as each of the jurisdictional preconditions identified by the parties is met, for the following reasons:

• The development is permissible with consent pursuant to the Liverpool Growth Centres Precinct Plan 2013 in Appendix 8 to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006, the land being zoned part R2 and part R3 and located in the Liverpool Growth Centre Precinct.

• The proposed development does not breach any of the applicable development standards pursuant to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006.

• Pursuant to s 7(1) of SEPP 55, I am satisfied that the site will be remediated in accordance with the requirements of separate development approval DA 316/2017. Those remediation works must be completed prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate pursuant to condition 125.

5. The proposal is integrated development pursuant to s 90 of the Water Management Act 2000. The Department of Industry has provided general terms of approval under s 90 of the Water Management Act 2000, and those terms of approval are incorporated into the conditions, at condition 8.

6. The concurrence of the Roads and Maritime Services (“RMS”) is also required pursuant to s 138 of the Roads Act 1993. The RMS has provided recommended conditions which have been incorporated at conditions 10-18. Although the RMS has not granted concurrence, the Court nevertheless has the power to determine the appeal pursuant to s 39(6)(a) of the LEC Act.

7. Having reached the state of satisfaction that the decision is one that the Court could make in the exercise of its functions, s 34(3)(a) of the LEC Act requires me to “dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the decision”. The LEC Act also requires me to “set out in writing the terms of the decision” (s 34(3)(b)).

8. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to make, and have not made, any assessment of the merits of the development application against the discretionary matters that arise pursuant to an assessment under s 4.15 of the EPA Act.

9. The Court orders that:

1. The applicant is granted-leave to rely upon the amended plans and documentation referred to in condition 1 on the conditions at Annexure "A".

2. The appeal is upheld.

3. Development Application DA-533/2017 for the staged torrens title subdivision of 1342 Camden Valley Way and related works is approved subject to the conditions at Annexure "A". The subdivision is to be staged as follows:

Stage	Development works
1	Subdivision info 26 Residential lots (numbered 101 to 126], 5 residue lots (numbered 127 to 131), earthworks, roads and infrastructure.
2	Subdivision of residue lots 128 to 131 into 35 residential lots (numbered 201 to 229 and 231 to 236) and 1 residue lot (numbered 230) and dedication of 1 drainage reserve lot (numbered 237).
3	Decommissioning of the On-site Detention Basin and Subdivision of residue lot 230 into 4 residential lots (numbered 301 to 304).
4	Decommissioning of the Flood compensation work and subdivision of Lot 127 into 4 residential lots (numbered 401 to 404), earthworks, roads and infrastructure.

…………………………

J Gray

Commissioner of the Court

Annexure A (1.57 MB)

**********

Decision last updated: 29 October 2019