Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Walton v Blacktown City Council [2012] NSWLEC 1047 Hearing dates: 14 February 2012 Decision date: 15 February 2012 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Pearson C Decision: Directions made:
1.By close of business 17 February 2012 the respondent is to notify the applicant as to a range of colours which the respondent considers will match the building in compliance with condition 6.1, and to advise the applicant of the proposed modified terms of the order including a provision that the applicant have 21 days to carry out the work required.
2.The parties are to provide to the Court by close of business on 22 February 2012 the agreed terms of a modified order, and orders will be made in chambers.
3.Liberty to restore the matter on 48 hours notice.
Catchwords: Section 121B Order - Compliance with conditions of consent Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Cases Cited: J & J O'Brien Pty Limited v South Sydney Council [2002] NSWLEC 259
Lederer v Sydney City Council [2001] NSWLEC 272
Van Haasteren v South Sydney Council [2000] NSWLEC 168
Walton v Blacktown City Council [2011] NSWLEC 1008Category: Principal judgment Parties: Lance Walton (Applicant)
Blacktown City Council (Respondent)Representation: Mr C Adamson (Applicant)
Mr D Loether (Respondent)
File Number(s): 10828 of 2011
EX TEMPORE Judgment
This is an appeal under s 121ZK of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act) against an order issued under s121B of the Act (Order No.1) by Blacktown City Council on 9 September 2011 in relation to premises at 16 Nicholas Street, Blacktown owned by the applicant and his wife.
Development consent was granted on 21 January 2011 by the Court for use of the premises as a group home: Walton v Blacktown City Council [2011] NSWLEC 1008. The conditions of consent included condition 6.1 and 6.2:
6 PRIOR TO OCCUPATION
6.1 Privacy screening is to be erected along the street-fronting external staircase leading to the upper level of the dwelling and the installation of fixed privacy louvres to the windows of the first floor bedrooms and lounge/foyer areas which overlook to adjoining properties.
6.2 Any dilapidated fencing is to be replaced with new 1.8 metre high colorbond/lapped and capped timber fencing or 300 mm lattice is to be added on top of an existing 1.5 metre high fence that is in good condition, at full cost to the applicant.
On 17 March 2011 the applicant applied to the Council under s 96(1)(a) of the Act to modify the development consent. On 16 June 2011 the Council notified the applicant that the consent had been modified including relevantly the following modification of condition 6.1:
Condition 6.1 is amended to read:
Privacy screening is to be erected along the street-fronting the external staircase leading to the upper level of the dwelling in the form of an opaque screen or framed lattice painted to match the building, to a height of 1.2m above stair level measured…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Walton v Blacktown City Council and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2012] NSWLEC 1047
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the evidence and submissions presented by both parties. It found that the council's decision to reject the applicant's proposed colour was unreasonable. The court considered that the council had failed to adequately consider the applicant's submission and the evidence provided by the applicant. The court also found that the applicant's proposal could be modified to comply with the approval, and directed the parties to reach an agreement on the modified terms of the order. The court emphasised the importance of the council's consideration of the applicant's submission and evidence in making its decision.
As a result of the court's findings, it directed the council to notify the applicant of a range of colours that it considered would match the building in compliance with the approval. The court also directed the parties to provide the agreed terms of a modified order to the court. The court further directed that the matter could be restored to the list on 48 hours notice. The final orders included the directions made by the court, which were to be implemented by the parties within the specified timeframes.
Orders
Orders of the court
Directions made:
1.By close of business 17 February 2012 the respondent is to notify the applicant as to a range of colours which the respondent considers will match the building in compliance with condition 6.1, and to advise the applicant of the proposed modified terms of the order including a provision that the applicant have 21 days to carry out the work required.
2.The parties are to provide to the Court by close of business on 22 February 2012 the agreed terms of a modified order, and orders will be made in chambers.
3.Liberty to restore the matter on 48 hours notice.
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.