NSW United Turkish Islamic Centre v Liverpool City Council [2013] NSWLEC 1150

NSW United Turkish Islamic Centre v Liverpool City Council [2013] NSWLEC 1150

The appeal is dismissed and development consent refused because there are fundamental evidentiary deficiencies and unresolved conflicts within expert reports regarding landscaping, bushfire, fencing, road widening, and flood management. These cumulatively result in an inability to approve the application under an 'amber light' approach, and the proposal’s noncompliance with required boundary landscaping under the DCP is unacceptable. The scale and nature of the proposal also cannot provide adequate landscaping buffer consistent with bushfire provisions, resulting in unacceptable impact on neighbouring properties.

Parties
Applicant: NSW United Turkish Islamic Centre; Respondent: Liverpool City Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Development Appeal / Final Judgment/decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; development application refused
Legal Topics
Development Application, Cemetery Approval, Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008, Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008, Landscaping Requirements, Flooding and Drainage, Bushfire Management, Site Suitability, Amenity and Visual Impact
Planning and Environment Law Development Application Cemetery Approval Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008 Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 Landscaping Requirements Flooding and Drainage Bushfire Management +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NSW United Turkish Islamic Centre

Applicant

Liverpool City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Development Appeal / Final Judgment/decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed cemetery development complies with the Liverpool Development Control Plan 2008 and Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008 requirements, including minimum lot size, flooding, bushfire, landscaping and access.
  2. 2 Whether evidentiary deficiencies and unresolved expert conflicts affect the capacity for development consent.
  3. 3 Whether the application should be refused for failure to provide adequate landscaping and landscaping amenity.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed and development consent refused because there are fundamental evidentiary deficiencies and unresolved conflicts within expert reports regarding landscaping, bushfire, fencing, road widening, and flood management. These cumulatively result in an inability to approve the application under an 'amber light' approach, and the proposal’s noncompliance with required boundary landscaping under the DCP is unacceptable. The scale and nature of the proposal also cannot provide adequate landscaping buffer consistent with bushfire provisions, resulting in unacceptable impact on neighbouring properties.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; development application refused

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • Development Application 957/2010 for a cemetery at 31 Greendale Road Bringelly is determined by the refusal of development consent.