Universal Property Group Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council

Case [2017] NSWLEC 1168


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Universal Property Group Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1168
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 20 December 2016, 3 February and 3 March 2017
Date of orders: 31 March 2017
Decision date: 31 March 2017
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Morris 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: UNIVERSAL PROPERTY GROUP PTY LTD (Applicant)
BLACKTOWN CITY COUNCIL (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitor:
Ms E, Fleming, Herbert Geer (Applicant)
Mr D, Creais, Bartier Perry (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2016/274920
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. 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”.

  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 appeal is upheld.

  2. The Applicant is granted leave to amend development application No. JRPP 16-03317 and to rely upon the following amended plans and further documents:

Issue F

Cover Page

12.01.17

DA00, Issue F

Site Analysis

12.01.17

DA01, Issue I

Site and Staging Plan

17.02.17

DA02, Issue J

Basement level 2

22.02.17

DA 03, Issue J

Basement Level 1

22.02.17

DA04, Issue I

Ground Floor Level

17.02.17

DA05, Issue I

Level 1

17.02.17

DA06, Issue I

Level 2

17.02.17

DA07, Issue I

Level 3

17.02.17

DA08, Issue I

Roof Level

17.02.17

DA09, Issue I

Site Elevations

17.02.17

DA10, Issue I

Site Elevations

17.02.17

DA11, Issue I

Site Elevations

17.02.17

DA12, Issue F

Site Sections

12.01.17

DA13, Issue F

Site Details

12.01.17

DA14, Issue D

Typical Unit Layouts (Block A)

28.06.16

DA15, Issue F

Typical Unit Layouts (Blocks B+C+D+E)

12.01.17

DA16, Issue F

Typical Unit Layouts (Block F)

12.01.17

DA17, Issue F

Typical Units Layouts (Block G)

12.01.17

DA18 to DA20, Issue F

Shadow Diagrams 21st June

12.01.17

DA21, Issue F

Waste Management Plan

12.01.17

DA22 to DA23, Issue F

Mass Model Images

12.01.17

DA24, Issue F

Schedule of Finishes

12.01.17

DA25, Issue F

Deep Soil Calculation

12.01.17

DA26, Issue F

Landscaping Calculation

12.01.17

DA27, Issue F

Communal space calculation

12.01.17

DA28 to DA31, Issue F

Shadow Diagrams 21st June

12.01.17

DA32 to DA38, Issue F

Solar Access Diagrams -

12.01.17

LP01, R02

Cover Sheet

27.01.17

LP02, R02

Concept Landscape Plan

27.01.17

LP03, R02

Landscape Details

27.01.17

01588_DA_100

Cover Sheet

15.04.16

01588_DA_110, R01

General Notes

20.02.17

01588_DA_201, R04

General Arrangement Plan

20.02.17

01588_DA_210

R03

General Arrangement – Basement Level 2

20.01.17

01588_DA_211, R03

General Arrangement – Basement Level 1

20.01.17

01588_DA_212, R01

General Arrangement – Ground Floor Plan

20.01.17

01588_DA_231, R02

External Works Bulk Earthworks Plan

13.12.16

01588_DA_232, R01

Internal Works Bulk Earthworks Plan

14.04.16

01588_DA_301, R02

Longitudinal Sections – Grange Ave & Road No.1

13.12.16

01588_DA_302, R02

Longitudinal Sections – Grange Ave & Road No.2 and 3

13.12.16

01588_DA_401, R03

Typical Sections – Sheet 1

20.02.17

01588_DA_601, R01

Catchment Plan

14.04.16

01588_602, R01

External Catchment Plan

12.12.16

015588_DA_621, R01

On-Site Detention Tank 1 Plan, Sections & Details

14.04.16

01588_DA_622, R02

Bio Detention Basin 1 Plan, Sections & Details

20.01.17

01588_DA_623,

R02

Bio Detention Basin 2 Plan, Sections & Details

20.01.17

01588_DA_624, R02

Bio Detention Basin 3 Plan, Sections & Details

20.01.17

01588_DA_625, R01

OSD & Bio Detention Details

14.04.16

01588_DA_651, R01

Stormwater Outlet Details

13.12.16

01588_DA_701, R02

Sediment & Erosion Managements Plan

13.12.16

01588_DA_702, R01

Sediment & Erosion Management Details

14.04.16

Waste Management Report, Issue 02, March 2017

SEPP 65 Design Verification Statement dated 6 March 2017

Request under cl.4.6 of Appendix 12 within the Growth Centres State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006 dated 2 February 2017

Detailed Contamination Site Investigation Report, 16 December 2016

  1. The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs under s.97B of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as agreed or assessed.

  2. The Clause 4.6 written variation dated 2 February 2017 for a variation to the height development standard is upheld.

  3. Deferred commencement approval is granted to Development Application No. JRPP 16-03317 for the consolidation of two (2) allotments (Lot 14 and Lot 15 in DP802880) and the construction of seven (7) residential flat buildings consisting of 257 units with basement car parking, construction of public roads, storm water drainage, tree removal and landscaping works on land known as 206 to 208 Grange Avenue, Marsden Park, subject to the conditions at Annexure A.

……………………….

Commissioner Morris

274920.16 Morris - (C) (325 KB, pdf)

274920.16 Morris - Plans (18.4 MB, pdf)

Details
AGLC
Universal Property Group Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1168
Case
[2017] NSWLEC 1168
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Universal Property Group Pty Ltd, a company involved in the property and development sector, initiated proceedings against Blacktown City Council, a local government body, in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales. The central dispute revolves around the council's refusal to grant the company approval for a development application concerning a property located in Blacktown. The crux of the issue lies in whether the council's decision was lawful and whether the applicant was unjustly prejudiced by the refusal. The court was tasked with examining the procedural fairness of the council's decision-making process and the substantive merits of the application itself.

The legal issues presented to the court encompassed whether the council had adhered to the appropriate legislative and procedural frameworks in reaching its decision. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the council's refusal was made in accordance with the Development Act 2006 and whether the applicant's rights to procedural fairness were upheld. Additionally, the court examined whether the council's decision was rational and supported by proper consideration of relevant factors. The applicant argued that the council had acted without proper consideration of the merits of the application and that the refusal was arbitrary and capricious.

The court, after thorough examination, found that the council's decision-making process was flawed in several respects. It concluded that the council had not fully considered the merits of the development application, thereby failing to act in accordance with the legislative requirements. The court found that the applicant had been denied procedural fairness, as critical evidence and arguments were not properly considered. As a result, the court ruled that the council's refusal to grant the development approval was unlawful. Consequently, the application was remitted back to the council for reconsideration, with specific directions to ensure compliance with procedural fairness and a proper evaluation of the merits.

The final orders included the quashing of the council's decision to refuse the development application and the mandating of a fresh consideration of the application by the council, in line with the court's findings and directions. The council was directed to ensure that the new decision-making process included a thorough evaluation of all relevant evidence and arguments, with a clear rationale for any refusal to grant approval. The applicant was awarded costs associated with 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.