Gelder Architects v Ku-ring-gai Council
[2016] NSWLEC 1571
•30 November 2016
Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Gelder Architects v Ku-ring-gai Council [2016] NSWLEC 1571 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 25 August 2016 Date of orders: 30 November 2016 Decision date: 30 November 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dickson C Decision: See [5] below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPEAL under s97(1)(b) against deemed refusal; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979Category: Principal judgment Parties: Gelder Architects (Applicant)
Ku-ring-gai Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Mr. Sattler, A, Sattler and Associates (Applicant)
Ms Lesley Finn, Hones Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2016/00157999 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal, under s97(1) (b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, against the deemed refusal by Ku-ring-gai Council of DA 0599/2015. The Development Application sought approval for demolition of existing structures and construction of a seniors living development at 404 Mona Vale Rd, St Ives.
-
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 are:
The appeal is upheld
The Applicant is granted leave to rely upon the amended architectural and landscape plans set out in operational Condition 1 in Annexure A;
The Applicant is to pay the Respondent costs thrown away as a result of amending the development application pursuant to s97B as may be agreed or assessed
Development Consent is granted to Development Application number DA 0599/2015, for demolition of existing structures and construction of a seniors living development consisting of 15 units, basement parking, landscaping and strata subdivision at 404 Mona Vale Rd, St Ives, subject to the conditions annexed hereto and marked in Annexure A
…………….
D M Dickson
Commissioner of the Court
157999.16 Dickson (C) (455 KB, pdf)
Decision last updated: 01 December 2016
0
0
2