Thoo v The Hills Shire Council [2022] NSWLEC 1219

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Thoo v The Hills Shire Council [2022] NSWLEC 1219 Hearing dates: 21 April 2022 Date of orders: 2 May 2022 Decision date: 02 May 2022 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Morris AC Decision: The Court Orders: (1) The appeal is upheld. (2) Development Application No 468/2021/ZA for a three lot subdivision of Lot 317 DP 746500, No 18 Flora Court, Baulkham Hills is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure A. (3) The exhibits are returned, other than exhibits A and 1 which are retained. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – subdivision- conditions of consent Legislation Cited: The Hills Local Environmental Plan 2019, cll 2.6, 4.1, 7.2 Cases Cited: Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council (2004) 134 LGERA 23; [2004] NSWLEC 140 Texts Cited: The Hills Development Control Plan 2012 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ricky Thoo (Applicant) The Hills Shire Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: G McKee (Solicitor) (Applicant) C Rose (Solicitor) (Respondent)

Solicitors: McKees Legal Solutions (Applicant) Wilshire Webb Staunton & Beattie (Respondent) File Number(s): 2021/224561 Publication restriction: No

Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: Development Application 468/2021/ZA was lodged with The Hills Shire Council on 9 October 2022 and sought consent for the subdivision of land at 18 Flora Court Baulkham Hills into four lots. The Council had not determined the application within the prescribed period and the applicant is appealing its deemed refusal. 2. Following a conciliation conference in this Court and dialogue between the parties, the applicant amended the application by lodgement of additional plans and details on the NSW Planning Portal on 12 April 2022, following an Order made in this Court that granted leave to the applicant to rely on those amended plans. 3. As a result of the amendments, the Council is satisfied that the proposed subdivision is appropriate however, there is no agreement between the parties in relation to one of the proposed consent conditions. 4. The focus of the appeal is now that particular condition.