Tawdrous v Bankstown City Council [2007] NSWLEC 622

Land and Environment Court of New South Wales

CITATION : Tawdrous v Bankstown City Council [2007] NSWLEC 622

APPLICANT Safwat Tawdrous PARTIES : RESPONDENT Bankstown City Council

FILE NUMBER(S) : 10569 of 2007

CORAM: Tuor C

KEY ISSUES: Section 96 Application :- increase number of children in a child-care centre from 29 to 38

LEGISLATION CITED: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Bankstown Local Environmental Plan 2001

DATES OF HEARING: 24/09/2007

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 24 September 2007

APPLICANT Mr S. Tawdrous, litigant in person

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT Mr A. Seton, solicitor of Marsdens Law Group

JUDGMENT: THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES

Tuor C

24 September 2007

10569 of 2007 Safwat Tawdrous v Bankstown City Council

JUDGMENT 1 This is an appeal against the refusal by Bankstown City Council (the council) of an application under s 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act) to amend a development consent (555/92) for a pre school/long day care centre at 45 Fuller Street, Chester Hill. 2 The s 96 application seeks approval to increase the number of children from 29 to 38. 3 The parties are seeking consent orders from the Court. There are no objectors to the proposal. 4 The site, it context, the history of the application and the planning controls are in the Statement of Facts and Contentions. 5 The main contention between the parties related to the adequacy of parking to be provided on the site. Mr C. Hazell, the Court appointed traffic expert, has examined the proposal and recommended amendments in conditions of approval, to which the applicant has agreed. The proposed number of spaces complies with the requirements of Part D8 of Bankstown Development Control Plan 2005 (DCP 2005), the site width is sufficient to provide separate egress and ingress, there is adequate on street parking spaces and Fuller Street is of sufficient carriage width. Mr Hazell is satisfied that, with the amendments, the proposal does not have any unacceptable traffic or parking implications for Fuller Street. 6 The issues between the parties have been resolved and I am satisfied that the consent orders may be granted. Orders 7 The Court orders by consent that: 1. The appeal is upheld. 2. The application 555/1992/2 to modify Development Consent No. 555/92 for a pre-school/long day care centre on the land at 45 Fuller Street, Chester Hill to increase the number of children accommodated from 29 to 38 is approved and the said consent is amended in accordance with Annexure A to these orders. 3. The exhibits, except exhibit A, may be returned.