UPG 194 Pty Ltd v Liverpool City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1238

UPG 194 Pty Ltd v Liverpool City Council [2023] NSWLEC 1238

The Court was satisfied that the amended development application addressed Council's contentions, that the cl 4.6 request adequately justified variation of the minimum dwelling density standard because the standard would be met by subsequent approvals and stages and the proposal was consistent with the relevant objectives, and that the required statutory preconditions and planning considerations were met. The agreed decision was therefore one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, requiring disposal of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Refusal of Development Application No. DA 188/2022 Under S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Final Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties
Outcome
Appeal upheld; clause 4.6 written request upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions in Annexure A.
Legal Topics
['development Application Refusal Appeal' 'subdivision' 'clause 4.6 Variation Request' 'minimum Dwelling Density' 'conciliation Conference' 'contamination and Remediation' 'water Catchments Considerations']
['planning and Environment' 'development Consent' 'land Use and Zoning'] ['development Application Refusal Appeal' 'subdivision' 'clause 4.6 Variation Request' 'minimum Dwelling Density' 'conciliation Conference' 'contamination and Remediation' 'water Catchments Considerations']

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 Against Refusal of Development Application No. DA 188/2022 Under S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 / Final Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference and Agreement Between the Parties

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreed decision was one 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 the applicant's cl 4.6 written request to vary cl 4.1B of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Precincts – Western Parkland City) 2021 – Appendix 4 should be upheld." 'Whether development consent should be granted for the amended development application for subdivision into two superlots, demolition, road construction, drainage works and associated site works.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the amended development application addressed Council's contentions, that the cl 4.6 request adequately justified variation of the minimum dwelling density standard because the standard would be met by subsequent approvals and stages and the proposal was consistent with the relevant objectives, and that the required statutory preconditions and planning considerations were met. The agreed decision was therefore one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, requiring disposal of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; clause 4.6 written request upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions in Annexure A.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's clause 4.6 written request dated 14 April 2023 to vary clause 4.1B of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Precincts – Western Parkland City) 2021 – Appendix 4 is upheld." 'The appeal is upheld.' 'Development consent is granted to development application No. DA-188/2022, as amended, for the...