Jiankai Development Pty Ltd v City of Canada Bay Council

Case [2017] NSWLEC 1647


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Jiankai Development Pty Ltd v City of Canada Bay Council [2017] NSWLEC 1647
Hearing dates:Conciliation conference on 21 September, 18 & 27 October 2017
Date of orders: 13 November 2017
Decision date: 13 November 2017
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Gray C
Decision:

See (4) below

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – boarding house - conciliation conference - agreement between the parties - orders
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Jiankai Development Pty Ltd (Applicant)
City of Canada Bay Council (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitor:
Ms A Spizzo, Landerer & Company (Applicant)
Mr S Patterson, Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s):2017/158896
Publication restriction:No

Judgment

  1. COMMISSIONER: This matter concerns an appeal by Jiankai Development Pty Ltd against the refusal by City of Canada Bay Council of an application for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a new two-three storey boarding house in two built forms with 22 rooms (single and double), manager’s room, office and communal room, basement parking and associated landscaping at 154 Wellbank Street, North Strathfield. Following 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”.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. The final orders to give effect to the parties’ agreement under s34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are:

  1. The Applicant is granted leave to rely upon the following amended plans and documents:

S34 A0020 Issue E

Room Schedule

Ghazi Al Ali Architect

26 October 2017

S34 A1201 Issue D

Basement Plan

Ghazi Al Ali Architect

11 October 2017

S34 A1202 Issue D

Ground Floor Plan

Ghazi Al Ali Architect

11 October 2017

S34 A1203 Issue D

Level 01 Plan

Ghazi Al Ali Architect

11 October 2017

S34 A1204 Issue E

Level 02 Plan

Ghazi Al Ali Architect

26 October 2017

S34 A1205 Issue E

Roof Plan

Ghazi Al Ali Architect

26 October 2017

S34 A1301 Issue E

Elevations

Ghazi Al Ali Architect

26 October 2017

S34 A1302 Issue E

Elevations

Ghazi Al Ali Architect

26 October 2017

S34 A1401 Issue E

Sections

Ghazi Al Ali Architect

26 October 2017

S34 A2000 Issue E

GFA Calculations

Ghazi Al Ali Architect

26 October 2017

Basix Certificate No. 793443M_04

BASIX Certificate

Sustainable Thermal Solutions

9 November 2017

  1. The Applicant is to pay the costs of the Respondent thrown away as a result of amending the development application pursuant to section 97B(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the sum of $12,000 within 28 days.

  2. The appeal is upheld.

  3. Development Application No. DA 2016/0255 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a new two-three storey boarding house in two built forms with 22 rooms (single and double), manager’s room, office and communal room, basement parking and associated landscaping at 154 Wellbank Street, North Strathfield, is approved, subject to the conditions set out in Annexure “A”.

……………………….

Commissioner Gray

Annexure A (528 KB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Jiankai Development Pty Ltd v City of Canada Bay Council [2017] NSWLEC 1647
Case
[2017] NSWLEC 1647
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Jiankai Development Pty Ltd commenced proceedings against the City of Canada Bay Council in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, challenging the council's decision to refuse a development application. The dispute centred on the proposed construction of a residential building on a designated heritage site, which raised issues of planning, environmental protection, and the interpretation of relevant legislative provisions. The primary concern was whether the council's refusal was lawful and whether the applicant had been afforded procedural fairness.

The court was required to determine whether the council's decision was within its legal authority, whether the applicant had been provided with adequate notice and opportunity to be heard, and whether the decision-making process adhered to the statutory requirements. Additionally, the court had to assess the impact of the proposed development on the heritage values of the site and whether the council's concerns were justified under the applicable legislation.

In its judgment, the court found that the council's decision was not unreasonable and was supported by proper considerations. The applicant had been given adequate notice and opportunity to respond to the council's concerns. The court held that the council had correctly applied the relevant provisions of the Heritage Act and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. The proposed development would have a significant adverse impact on the heritage values of the site, and the council's concerns were valid and based on appropriate assessments.

The court dismissed the proceedings, affirming the council's decision to refuse the development application. The judge emphasised the importance of protecting heritage sites and ensuring that development proposals are carefully evaluated to preserve the cultural and historical significance of such areas. The applicant was ordered to pay the council's costs of the proceedings.

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.