Universal Property Group Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1300

Universal Property Group Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1300

The agreed decision could be made in the proper exercise of the Court's functions because the land was zoned R2 Low Density Residential under the Growth Centres SEPP, the proposed development was permissible with consent, it did not breach applicable development standards in Appendix 5, essential public utility infrastructure was available or adequately arranged, a BASIX certificate had been lodged, submissions following notification had been considered, and no jurisdictional impediment was identified. The Court therefore disposed of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement by upholding the appeal and granting consent subject to conditions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Pursuant to S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of a Development Application / Final Orders Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'subdivision of Land' 'construction of Dwellings' 'conciliation Conference' 'development Consent' 'conditions of Consent']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'subdivision of Land' 'construction of Dwellings' 'conciliation Conference' 'development Consent' 'conditions of Consent']

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 Pursuant to S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of a Development Application / Final Orders Following Conciliation Conference and Agreement Under S 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreed decision to uphold the appeal and grant development consent subject to conditions was one the Court could make in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether the proposed development was permissible with consent and complied with applicable planning controls identified in the judgment.']

Ratio Decidendi

The agreed decision could be made in the proper exercise of the Court's functions because the land was zoned R2 Low Density Residential under the Growth Centres SEPP, the proposed development was permissible with consent, it did not breach applicable development standards in Appendix 5, essential public utility infrastructure was available or adequately arranged, a BASIX certificate had been lodged, submissions following notification had been considered, and no jurisdictional impediment was identified. The Court therefore disposed of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement by upholding the appeal and granting consent subject to conditions.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The Applicant is granted leave to amend its development application to include land known as 350 Quakers Road, Quakers Hill (legally described as Lot 12 DP4455) and to rely upon the listed plans and material.' "The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs as agreed or assessed under s 8.15(3) of the...