Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: MNT Investments Pty Limited v Northern Beaches Council [2017] NSWLEC 1596 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 10 and 31 May, 15 June and 18 October 2017 Date of orders: 24 October 2017 Decision date: 24 October 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Martin SC 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: MNT Investments Pty Limited (Applicant)
Northern Beaches Council (Respondent)Representation: Mr A Sattler, Sattler & Associates Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Mr S Patterson, Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/26834 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 by substituting the following plans and documents as the plans and documents relied upon for the purposes of the development application:
Plan No. / Title
Issue/
Revision & Date
Prepared by
Plan No. / Title
DA03 Ground Floor Plan
Amd. E 7 August 2017
Simon Rosewell Pty Ltd
DA03 Ground Floor Plan
DA04 Elevations 01
Amd. D 7 August 2017
Simon Rosewell Pty Ltd
DA04 Elevations 01
DA05 Elevations 02
Amd. F 7 August 2017
Simon Rosewell Pty Ltd
DA05 Elevations 02
DA06 Section
Amd. G 15 June 2017
Simon Rosewell Pty Ltd
DA06 Section
DA09 Site Plan
Amd. E 7 August 2017
Simon Rosewell Pty Ltd
DA09 Site Plan
DA 11 First Floor & Mezzanine Plans
Amd. E 7 August 2017
Simon Rosewell Pty Ltd
DA 11 First Floor & Mezzanine Plans
SK01 Section Track System
Undated
Simon Rosewell Pty Ltd
SK01 Section Track System
DA03 Ground Floor Plan
Amd. E 7 August 2017
Simon Rosewell Pty Ltd
DA03 Ground Floor Plan
DA04 Elevations 01
Amd. D 7 August 2017
Simon Rosewell Pty Ltd
DA04 Elevations 01
Document
Date
Author
Received
Statement of Environmental Effects
29 March 2016
Colco Consulting Pty Ltd
30 March 2016
Plan of Management for the Operations of Donny’s Café, Bar & Restaurant
October 2017
(with a cover note “DONNY’s August 2017)
MNT Investments Pty Ltd
October 2017
Heritage Impact Statement
Simon Rosewell
30 March 2016
Social Impact Assessment
2016
MNT Investments Pty Ltd
30 March 2016
Acoustic Impact Assessment
25 September 2017
PKA Acoustic Consulting
September 2017
The appeal is upheld.
Development consent is granted to Development Application No. DA DA77/2016 for change of use and alterations and additions to an existing commercial building for the use of the site as a restaurant/café, consolidation of shops, addition of a new first floor, new mezzanine level, rooftop terrace, outdoor eating areas, and extension to the hours of operation, at 29 Sydney Road, Manly subject to the conditions annexed to this Agreement at “A” and the amended plans annexed to this Agreement at “B”.
The applicant is to pay the respondent's costs pursuant to s 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as agreed or assessed.
……………………….
Senior Commissioner Martin
Annexure A (C) (294 KB, pdf)
Annexure B (Plans) (443 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- MNT Investments Pty Limited v Northern Beaches Council [2017] NSWLEC 1596
- Case
- [2017] NSWLEC 1596
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were whether the proposal complied with the zoning and development controls as set out in the LEP, and whether the council's refusal was lawful and justified. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the proposed development met the criteria for approval under the LEP, and whether the council had valid reasons for refusing the application. The plaintiff argued that the proposal was consistent with the LEP and that the council's decision was arbitrary and irrational. The defendant maintained that the proposal did not align with the LEP and that the refusal was based on legitimate planning considerations.
The court considered the provisions of the LEP and the relevant principles of planning law, including the need to balance development with the protection of the local environment and community interests. The judge found that the proposed development did not comply with the zoning and development controls as outlined in the LEP. The court held that the council's decision to refuse the application was not arbitrary but was based on a proper consideration of the LEP and the broader planning objectives. The plaintiff's arguments regarding the interpretation of the LEP were not persuasive, and the council's decision was upheld.
The final orders of the court were that the appeal brought by MNT Investments Pty Limited was dismissed, and the decision of the Northern Beaches Council to refuse the development application was affirmed. The plaintiff 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.