Multiplan Constructions Pty Ltd v Campbelltown City Council [2016] NSWLEC 1208
The appeal was upheld because the council's contentions had been resolved, the expert evidence established that the proposal was compatible with the existing and desired future character of the area and would not cause unreasonable impacts on adjoining dwellings, and the objectors' concerns did not warrant refusal. Although removal of all trees was a negative feature, the evidence before the Court was that the trees were not significant enough to require retention and that the replacement landscaping would be compatible with the area's character. The disputed condition concerning Unit 7 was not required, while the geotechnical condition was imposed with an exclusion for footing excavation...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 31 May 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Class 1 Appeal Under S 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of a Development Application / Principal Judgment After Hearing; Conciliation Conference Under S34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Terminated Without Agreement
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to conditions in Annexure A; exhibits returned except Exhibits A, D and E.
- Legal Topics
- ['development Application' 'multi Dwelling Housing' 'affordable Rental Housing' 'compatibility With Local Character' 'residential Amenity' 'tree Removal and Landscaping' 'objector Submissions' 'development Consent Conditions']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of a Development Application / Principal Judgment After Hearing; Conciliation Conference Under S34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Terminated Without Agreement
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the proposed demolition, construction of nine two storey dwellings and strata subdivision should be approved despite the council's refusal." 'Whether the design of the development was compatible with the character of the local area under cl 16A of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.' "Whether objectors' concerns about height, bulk, density, overlooking, noise, traffic, parking and removal of canopy trees warranted refusal." 'Whether the removal of all existing trees on the site was a sufficient reason to refuse consent.' 'Whether disputed conditions 30 and 57 should be imposed or amended.']
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was upheld because the council's contentions had been resolved, the expert evidence established that the proposal was compatible with the existing and desired future character of the area and would not cause unreasonable impacts on adjoining dwellings, and the objectors' concerns did not warrant refusal. Although removal of all trees was a negative feature, the evidence before the Court was that the trees were not significant enough to require retention and that the replacement landscaping would be compatible with the area's character. The disputed condition concerning Unit 7 was not required, while the geotechnical condition was imposed with an exclusion for footing excavation...
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld; development application approved subject to conditions in Annexure A; exhibits returned except Exhibits A, D and E.
Orders
- ['The appeal is upheld.' 'The development application (DA2775/2014 DA-MAH) for demolition of an existing dwelling and construction of multi-dwelling housing comprising nine two storey dwellings and strata subdivision at 17 Lyndia Street, Ingleburn, is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure A.' 'The exhibits,...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment