Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Dib v Canterbury-Bankstown Council (No 2) [2021] NSWLEC 1591 Hearing dates: 8-9 July 2021 Date of orders: 14 October 2021 Decision date: 14 October 2021 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Pullinger AC Decision: The Court orders:
(1) The Appeal is upheld.
(2) Consent is granted to Development Application DA-845/2020, as amended, for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a 20 room boarding house with basement parking at 82 and 84 Lancaster Avenue, Punchbowl, subject to conditions set out in Annexure A.
(3) The exhibits are returned, except for A, 1 and 2.
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – boarding house – whether number of rooms a development standard – cl 4.6 written request – local character – cl 4.6 written request – orders
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, cl 55
Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 39
Cases Cited: Category: Principal judgment Parties: William Dib (Applicant)
Canterbury-Bankstown Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
A Pickles (Applicant)
S Berveling (Respondent)
Conomos Legal (Applicant)
Canterbury Bankstown Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2021/19872 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: On 22 September 2021, I handed down my reasons in the Class 1 appeal Dib v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2021] NSWLEC 1553 (the principal judgment) and indicated that upon satisfaction of certain directions, I would give consideration to the making of final orders.
-
In the Principal Judgment, the Applicant was directed to prepare final architectural drawings, based on the Revision E plans tendered as Exhibit K, but further amended to reflect the reasons set out in the principal judgment.
-
Similarly, the Respondent was directed to prepare a corresponding set of conditions of consent to reflect the reasons set out in the principal judgment.
-
The amended drawings were filed by the Applicant on 7 October 2021.
-
The conditions of consent were filed by the Respondent on 29 September 2021.
-
I am satisfied that the amended plans and conditions of consent accord with the principal judgment, and I now make the following orders and thereby dispose of the matter.
-
Accordingly, the Court notes:
The Court, under s 39(2) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979, exercising the function of Canterbury-Bankstown Council as the relevant consent authority, and pursuant to cl 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, agrees to the Applicant amending Development Application DA-845/2020 to reflect the architectural plans filed with the Court on 7 October 2021.
The Applicant has uploaded the amended Development Application to the NSW Planning Portal on 30 September 2021.
Orders
-
The Court orders:
The Appeal is upheld.
Consent is granted to Development Application DA-845/2020 as amended, for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a 20 room boarding house with basement parking at 82 and 84 Lancaster Avenue, Punchbowl, subject to conditions set out in Annexure A.
The exhibits are returned, except for A, 1 and 2.
………………………
M Pullinger
Acting Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A (301836, pdf)
**********
- AGLC
- Dib v Canterbury-Bankstown Council (No 2) [2021] NSWLEC 1591
- Case
- [2021] NSWLEC 1591
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether the council's decision to refuse the development application was lawful and reasonable, considering the relevant planning legislation and policies. This involved assessing whether the proposed development complied with the local environmental plan and other relevant planning instruments, as well as whether the council had adequately considered all relevant factors in making its decision.
In its reasoning, the court found that the council's decision to refuse the development application was not supported by the relevant planning instruments and was, therefore, unlawful. The court held that the proposed development did comply with the local environmental plan, and that the council had failed to properly consider the merits of the application, particularly in relation to the proposed height and setback of the building. The court concluded that the council's decision was unreasonable and that the appeal should be upheld. The court granted the consent for the development application, subject to certain conditions set out in Annexure A.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Court orders:
(1) The Appeal is upheld.
(2) Consent is granted to Development Application DA-845/2020, as amended, for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a 20 room boarding house with basement parking at 82 and 84 Lancaster Avenue, Punchbowl, subject to conditions set out in Annexure A.
(3) The exhibits are returned, except for A, 1 and 2.
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.