Ghazi Al Ali Architect Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council
[2017] NSWLEC 1543
•28 September 2017
Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Ghazi Al Ali Architect Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Council [2017] NSWLEC 1543 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 7 September 2017 Date of orders: 28 September 2017 Decision date: 28 September 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Chilcott C Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ghazi Al Ali Architect Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Ku-ring-gai Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Mr V Conomos, Conomos Legal (Applicant)
Mr A Hudson, Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/135551 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 make, 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 given leave to amend the development application and rely upon the following plans in the proceedings:
Drawing A0000 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1150 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1201 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1202 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1203 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1204 Revision B dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1205 Revision B dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1206 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1210 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1301 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1302 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1303 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1304 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1401 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A1402 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A2030 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A2201 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing A2202 Revision C dated 13/9/2017
Drawing SW01 Revision A dated 9/3/2017
Drawing SW02 Revision A dated 9/3/2017
Drawing SW03 Revision A dated 9/3/2017
Drawing SW04 Revision A dated 9/3/2017
Drawing SW05 Revision A dated 9/3/2017
Drawing SW06 Revision A dated 9/3/2017
Drawing SW07 Revision A dated 9/3/2017
Drawing SW08 Revision A dated 9/3/2017
The appeal is upheld.
Development application DA0095/17 lodged on 22 March 2017 seeking approval for the demolition existing structures and construction of a mixed use development comprising 17 units (4 of which are nominated affordable rental housing), 1 commercial premises, 1 shop, basement parking, and associated landscaping is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure A.
……………………….
Commissioner Chilcott
Annexure A (C) (323 KB, pdf)
Decision last updated: 28 September 2017
0
0
1