Newtech Ventures Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2012] NSWLEC 1088

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Newtech Ventures Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Municipal Council [2012] NSWLEC 1088 Hearing dates: 28 March 2012 Decision date: 28 March 2012 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Pearson C Decision: Appeal upheld Catchwords: Consent orders - development application - retail liquor store - hours of operation - deliveries - CCTV recording Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2000 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Newtech Ventures Pty Ltd (Applicant)

Leichhardt Municipal Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel Mr P Clay (Applicant) Solicitors Ms A Spizzo, Lander & Rogers Lawyers (Applicant)

Ms R McCulloch, Pikes Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 11209 of 2011

EX TEMPORE Judgment 1COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal under s 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act) from the refusal by the respondent Council of consent to Development Application D/2011/162 for the change of use and fit out to create a retail liquor store at 243 Darling Street, Balmain (the site). 2The site is zoned Business under the Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2000 (the LEP) and is in the centre of the Darling Street commercial and retail precinct. The site is close to a number of restaurants and there are other licensed premises in the vicinity. The site was previously occupied by a newsagency on the ground floor, and has residential development on the first floor. 3In January 2011 the Council approved alterations and additions to the building containing the site, which included extending the commercial floor space, adding associated car parking and a new first floor dwelling. The application before the Court concerns only the commercial floor space, and the residential unit is not associated with the present application. 4The Council initially refused consent on 14 June 2011. The applicant sought a review under s 82A of the Act on 8 October 2011, and the application reduced the proposed hours of operation, provided a social impact assessment, provided a delivery management plan dealing with parking and traffic movement, and made provision for CCTV to limit opportunistic crime including secondary sales to minors. The s 82A review application was refused on 13 March 2012, on the basis of inadequate loading facilities, parking and traffic impacts, unacceptable delivery arrangements and social impact. 5The Council is now satisfied that it is appropriate to grant consent to the application, and the parties are seeking consent orders from the Court. In considering whether it is both lawful and appropriate that I make consent orders as sought by the parties, I must consider the planning controls as they apply to this development; the objections that were made to the original proposal and the s 82A review proposal; and the broad assessment of social impact, and traffic and parking, which formed the basis of the initial refusal by the Council.