Scope Design Holdings Pty Ltd t/a Scope Building Design v Randwick City Council

[2017] NSWLEC 1720

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Scope Design Holdings Pty Ltd t/a Scope Building Design v Randwick City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1720
Hearing dates:	Conciliation conference on 14 December 2017
Date of orders:	15 December 2017
Decision date:	15 December 2017
Jurisdiction:	Class 1
Before:	Gray C
Decision:	See (4) below
Catchwords:	APPEAL – modification of development consent - conciliation conference - agreement between the parties - orders
Legislation Cited:	Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Scope Design Holdings Pty Ltd t/a Scope Building Design (Applicant) Randwick City Council (Respondent)
Representation:	Solicitor: Mr V Conomos, Conomos Legal (Applicant) Ms A Bowen, Shaw Reynold Bowen & Gerathy (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2017/236016
Publication restriction:	No

Judgment

1. COMMISSIONER: This appeal concerns an application to modify a development consent. The modification seeks to change the location of the pool gate and fence from their location in the development consent, to increase the area of the landing where the pool gate is proposed (which reflects work already undertaken), to make some adjustments to the first-floor deck area (again, reflecting work already undertaken), and to install privacy screening. The matter was listed for a compulsory conciliation process pursuant to s 34AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (the Court Act). At or after the conciliation conference, an agreement under s 34(3) of 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 given leave to amend the modification application and rely upon the following plans:

1. Drawing 11503, Sheet 1 of 2, Revision G dated 13.12.2017

2. Drawing 11503, Sheet 2 of 2, Revision G dated 13.12.2017

2. The appeal is upheld.

3. Section 96 modification application DA/664/2015/B is approved, and the development consent DA/664/2015 for alterations and additions at 40 Pauling Avenue, Coogee NSW is now subject to the consolidated conditions of consent in Annexure A.

……………………….

Commissioner Gray

236016.17 Gray (C) (79.1 KB, pdf)

236016.17 Gray - Plans_01 (323 KB, pdf)

236016.17 Gray - Plans (171 KB, pdf)

Decision last updated: 15 December 2017