Western Grammar School v Blacktown City Council [2014] NSWLEC 1191

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Western Grammar School v Blacktown City Council [2014] NSWLEC 1191 Hearing dates: 10 and 11 June 2014 Decision date: 12 September 2014 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dixon C Decision: See paragraph [39] Catchwords: MODIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT CONSENT: existing school -development of additional buildings and increase in student numbers- acoustic impacts on adjoining properties - traffic impacts in locality Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Blacktown Local Environmental Plan 1988 Draft Blacktown Local Environmental Plan 2014 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 Blacktown Development Control Plan 2006. Cases Cited: Best Western Services Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2011] NSWLEC 1380 Project Venture Developments v Pittwater Council [2005] NSWLEC 191 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Western Grammar School v Blacktown City Council Representation: A Pickles (Applicant) A Seton (Respondent) Mr Toyer of Denison Toyer (Applicant) Ms McCullan of Marsdens Law Group (Respondent) File Number(s): 10135 of 2014

Judgment

Introduction 1The Western Grammar School (the School) is an independent school located at 13-15 Cannery Road, Plumpton (the Site). The use of the site for that purpose commenced in 2012 following the grant of a development consent by the Court on 29 November 2011 in Best Western Services Pty Ltd v Blacktown City Council [2011] NSWLEC 1380. 2Initially, the School operated as a "single stream school "(i.e. 1 class per year) catering for primary school children from Kindergarten to year 4. However, in successive years the School has expanded and it now caters for 127 students from Kindergarten to year 8. 3On 5 November 2013 the School lodged a development application (DA -13-2106) with the Blacktown City Council (the Council) for approval to carry out the following development: (i)Demolition of a metal clad building on the land that currently houses the library and computer room and 1 classroom; (ii)Construction of a 2 storey building comprising 6 classrooms, library and computer room, toilets and staff facilities; (iii)The provision of five (5) additional car parking spaces; 4The overall objective of the development is to increase the student capacity from its current level of 125 students to 320 students (an increase of 195 students) and staff numbers from 12 part/full time staff to 15 full time staff. The reasons for the development are more fully explained in the statement by the School's principal Irfan Afzal, which is Exhibit F. 5The Council had not formally refused the School's development application when this appeal was lodged with the Court under s 97(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Despite that the contentions identified in Part B of the Council's Statement of Facts and Contentions (Exhibit 1) clearly identify the Council concerns with the proposal. In summary the Council contends that the proposed built form is inconsistent with the existing and desired future character of the area and, the proposed increase in student numbers will generate unacceptable traffic and noise impacts. 6In coming to that position the Council has considered the submissions received from adjoining and nearby landowners and occupiers in response to the notification of the application from 15 January 2014 to 29 January 29014. The submissions include two individual objections and a petition of 8 signatures. They raise the following concerns: * Impacts upon local road system by traffic and parking; * Difficulties in accessing driveways of residences; * Proximity of the proposed building to the boundary; * Visual impact of the building design; * Building height will dominate the skyline; * Supply of existing schools in the area; * Noise impacts from school activities; * Noise impacts from maintenance activities on weekends; * Noise impacts from construction activities; * Impacts upon Plumpton Park. 7Two objectors attended the commencement of the hearing to voice their individual concerns and the concerns of others who were unable to attend. Noise was a major issue for the residents of the town house complex exacerbated by the fact that the acoustic fence and vegetation conditioned on the first approval had never been carried out.