Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Universal Property Group Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1451 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 14 July and 9 August 2017 Date of orders: 21 August 2017 Decision date: 21 August 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Brown C Decision: See (5) below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: erection of 2 residential flat buildings containing 137 units; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979Category: Principal judgment Parties: Universal Property Group (Applicant)
Blacktown City Council (Respondent)Representation: Solicitor:
Mr C McFadzean, Swaab Attorneys (Applicant)
Mr D Creais, Bartier Perry (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/69585 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal of Development Application No. JRPP-16-03331 for the erection of 2 residential flat buildings containing 137 units and incorporating basement car parking, stormwater and landscaping on approved Lot 16G in the subdivision of Lot 16 DP 31797 Pelican Road, Schofields.
-
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 appeal is upheld.
The Applicant is granted leave to amend Development Application No. JRPP-16-0331 by relying on the following plans and documents, copies of which are behind Annexure “A”:
Drawing reference
Title
Prepared by
Date
16G 000 Rev E
Cover Page
The Bathla Group
31 July 2017
16G 001 Rev E
Compliance Table
16G 002 Rev B
Location Plan
31 May 2017
16G 003 Rev B
Site Analysis
16G 004 Rev C
Site Plan
31 July 2017
16G 005 Rev C
Basement
21 July 2017
16G 006 Rev D
Lower Ground
16G 007 Rev E
Ground
31 July 2017
16G 008 Rev C
Level 1
21 July 2017
16G 009 Rev C
Level 2
16G 010 Rev C
Level 3
31 July 2017
16G 011 Rev E
Level 4
16G 012 Rev D
Roof
16G 013 Rev C
Sections AA & BB
7 July 2017
16G 014 Rev C
Driveway Sections
21 July 2017
16G 015 Rev E
North & South Elevations
31 July 2017
16G 016 Rev E
East & West Elevations
16G 017 Rev C
Materials and Finishes
21 July 2017
16G 018 Rev C
Height Study
7 July 2017
16G 019 Rev C
Shadow Analysis and COS Analysis
31 July 2017
16G 020 Rev E
Daylight Compliance and Cross Ventilation
16G 021 Rev E
Area Calc – FSR
16G 022 Rev D
Area Calc – Deep Soil, Landscaped & COS
16G 023 Rev B
Perspective Views
16G 025 Rev C
Pathway to Bin Room
31 May 2017
16G 026 Rev B
Site Coverage
7 July 2017
LP-DA01 Rev C
Concept Landscape Plan
The Bathla Group
27 July 2017
LP-DA02 Rev C
Landscape Specification
LP-DA03 Rev C
Landscape Details
BASIX Certificate No 751184M_04 dated 10 August 2017
The clause 4.6 variation prepared by Boston Blyth Fleming and dated 31 July 2017, for a variation of the Height of Building development standard under State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Growth Centres) 2006, is upheld.
The Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs as agreed or assessed pursuant to section 97B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Development application No. JRPP-16-03331 for the erection of 2 residential flat buildings containing 137 units and incorporating basement car parking, stormwater and landscaping on approved Lot 16G in the subdivision of Lot 16 DP 31797 (Pelican Road, Schofields) is approved subject to conditions of consent set out in Annexure “B”.
……………………….
Commissioner Brown
69585.17 Brown - Annexure A (11.0 MB, pdf)
69585.17 Brown - Annexure B (474 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Universal Property Group Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1451
- Case
- [2017] NSWLEC 1451
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue that the Court was required to decide was the interpretation of the statutory notice issued by the Council. Specifically, whether the notice was clear and unambiguous in its terms, and if it properly invoked the statutory power under the Roads Act 1993 (NSW). Additionally, the Court needed to determine whether the Council had acted within its statutory powers and whether there were any procedural defects that invalidated the notice.
The Court held that the statutory notice issued by the Council was clear and unambiguous in its terms, properly invoking the statutory power under the Roads Act. The Court found that the notice provided sufficient detail for the plaintiff to understand the extent and purpose of the right of way sought. Furthermore, the Court determined that the Council had acted within its statutory powers and that there were no procedural defects that invalidated the notice. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
The Court made an order that the appeal be dismissed with costs. The Court found that the statutory notice was valid, and the Council's action in issuing the notice was proper. The Court further ordered that the plaintiff pay the costs of the appeal. This decision reinforces the importance of clear and unambiguous statutory notices, as well as the need for parties to adhere to the statutory powers granted to them.
Orders
Orders of the court
See (5) 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.