Land and Environment Court of New South Wales CITATION : Baladi v Botany Bay City Council [2007] NSWLEC 18 Applicant: George Baladi PARTIES : Respondent: Botany Bay City Council FILE NUMBER(S) : 10203 of 2006 CORAM: Roseth SC KEY ISSUES: Development Application :- consent orders DATES OF HEARING: 15/01/2007 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 15 January 2007 Applicant: LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: Ms S Levy, solicitor of KQ Lawyers Respondent: Mr T O'Connor, solicitor of Houston Dearn O'Connor JUDGMENT: THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES Roseth SC 15 January 2007 10203 of 2006 George Baladi v Botany Bay City Council JUDGMENT 1 Senior Commissioner: This is an appeal against the refusal by Botany Bay City Council (the council) of a development application to demolish the existing buildings and construct a new factory on lot B DP 414617 and lot 3 DP 29697, known as 4 Chalmers Crescent, Mascot. 2 The applicant lodged the original application in September 2004. The council refused it in September 2005. The applicant prepared several amendments and requested the council, on two occasions, to re-consider the matter under s82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. On the second occasion, in November 2006, the council resolved to seek consent orders from the Court. There are no objectors to the latest set of plans. Following perusal of the plans and conditions, the Court agrees to the request for consent orders. Orders 1. The appeal is allowed by consent. 2. Development application to demolish the existing buildings and construct a new factory on lot B DP 414617 and lot 3 DP 29697, known as 4 Chalmers Crescent, Mascot is determined by the grant of consent subject to the conditions in Annexure A. 3. Exhibits 1 and A are retained on the Court's files. _________________ Dr John Roseth Senior Commissioner DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.