Lippmann Partnership Pty Ltd v Canterbury – Bankstown Council [2017] NSWLEC 1601

Lippmann Partnership Pty Ltd v Canterbury – Bankstown Council [2017] NSWLEC 1601

The amended plans resolved the planning contentions and the experts' agreement was accepted, but the Preliminary Contamination report did not provide sufficient certainty about the historic service station use, the location of contamination, or the extent of remaining contamination to satisfy cl 7 of SEPP 55 before...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Development Consent for a Mixed Use Development / Principal Judgment With Addendum; Final Orders Made Granting Consent
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Appeal' 'mixed Use Development' 'state Environmental Planning Policy 55 Remediation of Land' 'site Contamination' 'detailed Site Investigation' 'remediation Action Plan' 'deferred Commencement Conditions']
['planning and Environment' 'development Consent' 'contaminated Land'] ['development Appeal' 'mixed Use Development' 'state Environmental Planning Policy 55 Remediation of Land' 'site Contamination' 'detailed Site Investigation' 'remediation Action Plan' 'deferred Commencement Conditions']

Source-derived case record

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 Development Appeal Against Deemed Refusal of Development Consent for a Mixed Use Development / Principal Judgment With Addendum; Final Orders Made Granting Consent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the agreement of the experts in relation to the merit of the amended proposal was well founded.' 'Whether the applicant had provided sufficient information to enable the Court to reach the state of satisfaction required by clause 7(1)(c) of State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land.' 'Whether further contamination assessment was required before determination, rather than by deferred commencement or operational condition.' 'After the Stage 2 Detailed Site Investigation and Remediation Action Plan were filed, whether the site could be rendered suitable for the proposed use through remediation.']

Ratio Decidendi

The amended plans resolved the planning contentions and the experts' agreement was accepted, but the Preliminary Contamination report did not provide sufficient certainty about the historic service station use, the location of contamination, or the extent of remaining contamination to satisfy cl 7 of SEPP 55 before determination. The Court therefore required a Stage 2 Detailed Site Investigation before final determination. After the applicant filed the Detailed Site Investigation and Remediation Action Plan, the Court was satisfied that the site could be rendered suitable for the proposed development through remediation, and consent was granted subject to conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The applicant is granted leave to rely on amended plans at Annexure A.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Consent is granted to Development Application No. DA/452-2016 for demolition and construction of a mixed use development comprising three retail spaces, a commercial space on ground floor, sixty seven residential...