Carrington Clarke Group Pty Ltd v Goulburn Mulwaree Council [2020] NSWLEC 1392

Carrington Clarke Group Pty Ltd v Goulburn Mulwaree Council [2020] NSWLEC 1392

The Court approved the agreed decision because the proposal was permissible with consent in the R5 Large Lot Residential zone, complied with the minimum lot size development standard, would have a neutral or beneficial effect on water quality through concurrence and conditions, would have essential public utility infrastructure made available by conditions before the subdivision certificate, and raised no remediation issues; therefore the Court could grant consent under s 4.16 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and dispose of the matter under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of a Development Application / Orders After S 34 Conciliation Conference; Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to conditions of consent.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'subdivision' 'conciliation Conference' 'voluntary Planning Agreement' 'sydney Drinking Water Catchment' 'remediation of Land']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'subdivision' 'conciliation Conference' 'voluntary Planning Agreement' 'sydney Drinking Water Catchment' 'remediation of Land']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of a Development Application / Orders After S 34 Conciliation Conference; Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreed decision was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether jurisdictional prerequisites to granting development consent were satisfied, including permissibility, minimum lot size, water quality, public utility infrastructure and contamination considerations.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court approved the agreed decision because the proposal was permissible with consent in the R5 Large Lot Residential zone, complied with the minimum lot size development standard, would have a neutral or beneficial effect on water quality through concurrence and conditions, would have essential public utility infrastructure made available by conditions before the subdivision certificate, and raised no remediation issues; therefore the Court could grant consent under s 4.16 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and dispose of the matter under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to conditions of consent.

Orders

  • ['The applicant is granted leave to rely upon the Letter of Offer to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement prepared by Michael Brown Planning Strategies and dated 17 August 2020, as amended on 21 August 2020.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development Application No. 0171/1819 for the subdivision of Lots 1 and 2 in...