Wang & Anor v Sydney City Council [2012] NSWLEC 1031

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Wang & Anor v Sydney City Council [2012] NSWLEC 1031 Hearing dates: 18-19 January, 14 February 2012 Decision date: 21 February 2012 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Morris C Decision: Appeal upheld Catchwords: CONSENT ORDERS; bulk and scale, compliance with planning controls Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; Land and Environment Court Act 1979; Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2000 Texts Cited: City of Sydney Heritage Development Control Plan 2006; Leichhardt Development Control Plan 2000; Draft Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2011 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Xiaohong Wang Tantastic Nominees Pty Ltd (Applicants)

Sydney City Council (Respondent) Representation: Dr D Doyle David Doyle & Affiliates Consulting Solicitors (Applicant)

Mr A Singh Sydney City Council (Respondent) File Number(s): 11118 of 2011

Judgment 1Ms Wang, and a company owning a neighbouring strata allotment are applicants in these proceedings, which is an appeal against the refusal, by Sydney City Council, of Development Application No. D/2010/656. That application proposed the addition of two new dwellings above existing garages and parking spaces at the rear of Nos. 68-70 Glebe Point Road, Glebe. 2The matter commenced as a conciliation conference under the provisions of S34AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 however, despite the co-operation of both parties, agreement in that forum was not reached, the conference was terminated and the hearing under s 34AA(2)(b)(i) commenced forthwith despite submissions opposing this by Dr Doyle on behalf of the applicant. The Court held that it was appropriate to proceed with the hearing forthwith in accordance with those provisions. 3Further discussions in relation to the application were conducted overnight and the parties resolved the issues in contention and arranged for the preparation of amended plans. The applicant was granted leave to rely on those plans. As the plans addressed the council's contentions, the parties are now seeking consent orders from the Court.