Wallace v Central Coast Council

Case [2022] NSWLEC 1312


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Wallace v Central Coast Council [2022] NSWLEC 1312
Hearing dates: 09 June 2022
Date of orders: 09 June 2022
Decision date: 15 June 2022
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Chilcott C
Decision:

Orders – see [7]

Catchwords:

NOTICE OF MOTION – application to rely on documents

Legislation Cited:

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, s 8.15(3)

Environmental Planning Assessment Regulation 2000, cl 55

Rural Fires Act 1997, s100B

Category:Procedural rulings
Parties: Colin Wallace (Applicant)
Central Coast Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
J Doyle (Applicant)
H Irish (Respondent)

Solicitors:
Fox Legal Australia Pty Ltd (Applicant)
MBM Legal + Conveyancing (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2021/51735
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. COMMISSIONER: By notice of motion, the Applicant seeks leave to rely on further documents and reports, prepared in response to matters that had arisen during the course of the appeal.

  2. The appeal concerns the Respondent’s refusal of the Applicant’s development application for the subdivision of land, demolition and associated works, at Warnervale.

  3. An affidavit accompanying the notice of motion from Mr Colin Wallace, dated 31 May 2022, which the Applicant reads in the proceedings, confirms that the Applicant’s further documents and reports have sought to be responsive to matters that have arisen in the proceedings including bushfire and biodiversity related contentions between the Parties.

  4. The Applicant’s further documents make the following changes to the Applicant’s development application to address certain of the remaining contentions within the Respondent’s further amended statement of facts and contentions filed on 28 March 2022:

  1. increase the road reserve on proposed lot 25 tp 105m in width and dedicate it as a public road;

  2. provide a central median island to prevent right hand movements out of the road reserve on proposed lot 25;

  3. increase perimeter road 1 so that it would have a width of 8m carriage way kerb to kerb;

  4. provide a wider turning bay to adopt requirements of a certificate issue by the NSW Rural Fire Service on 25 May 2022 pursuant to s 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997;

  1. The Applicant also seeks to rely on certain consequential changes made to its landscape plan and its Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR).

  2. More specifically, the Applicant seeks leave to reply upon:

  1. the following amended plans and other documents in the proceedings:

  1. concept subdivision plan revision M, Job code SUB02;

  2. concept landscape plan issue F, dated 30 May 2022, prepared by Conus Landscaping and Architecture;

  1. the following further documents:

  1. updated BDAR, dated 24 May 2022, prepared by Cumberland Ecology; and

  2. bushfire report, dated April 2022, prepared by Clarke and Dowdle;

  1. The Respondent confirmed that it has accepted late service of the notice of motion and submits that:

  1. it does not oppose the grant of leave for the Applicant to rely on the documents and reports identified above (at [6]) in the proceedings; and

  2. the Applicant should pay its costs thrown away in relation to dealing with the Applicant’s amended plans, pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the EP&A Act.

  1. The Applicant has confirmed that it would not oppose the making of an order as sought by the Respondent in relation to its payment of costs thrown away.

  2. The Court notes that:

  1. Central Coast Council, as the relevant consent authority, agrees under cl 55(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 to the Applicant amending the application for development consent to rely on the plans and documents identified above (at [6]).

  2. the Applicant has filed the plans and documents identified above (at [6]) with the Court on 31 May 2022.

  1. The Court orders:

  1. the Court grants the Applicant’s request for leave to rely upon the plans and documents identified above (at [6]) in the proceedings;

  2. the Parties are to lodge the amendment of the development application on the NSW Planning Portal by 4pm, 16 June 2022 and notify the Court after it has been lodged;

  3. the Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs thrown away in dealing its amended plans and other documents, as agreed or assessed, pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1987.

……………………………..

M Chilcott

Commissioner of the Court

**********

Details
AGLC
Wallace v Central Coast Council [2022] NSWLEC 1312
Case
[2022] NSWLEC 1312
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Wallace v Central Coast Council, the dispute arose from a development application for a marina on the Central Coast of New South Wales. The applicant, Mr Wallace, sought to construct a marina, which was opposed by the council and several residents. The case was heard in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the council's refusal to grant development consent for the marina was lawful. This involved examining whether the decision was within the council’s statutory powers, whether it adhered to the relevant planning policies and principles, and whether it was reasonable and justifiable. Additionally, the court had to consider the evidence and submissions regarding the potential environmental impacts of the marina.

The court examined the evidence presented by both parties, including expert reports on environmental impacts, submissions from local residents, and the council’s planning policies. The court concluded that the council’s decision was not unreasonable and was justified based on the evidence and planning policies. The court found that the potential environmental impacts, including effects on marine habitats and water quality, were significant and not adequately mitigated by the proposed development. The council's decision was deemed to be in accordance with the statutory requirements and planning policies.

In light of the findings, the court dismissed Mr Wallace's appeal against the council's decision. The orders of the court included that the appeal be dismissed, and the development consent for the marina was not granted.

Orders

Orders of the court

Orders – see [7]

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.