NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Blueprint Planning & Development Pty Ltd v Greater Hume Shire Council and anor [2014] NSWLEC 1203 Hearing dates: 15, 18, 19, 20 August 2014 Decision date: 02 October 2014 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Brown C and Speers AC Decision: 1. The appeal is dismissed. 2. DA 42-12/13 for the construction and operation of a compost facility located at 92 Pattersons Road, Gerogery is refused. 3. The exhibits are returned with the exception of exhibits 2, 101, B and K. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: construction and operation of a compost facility - impact on local and regional road system - odour and amenity impacts - conflict with zone objectives and purposes - land use conflict and impact on rural character - loss of agricultural land - social and economic impact - inadequate information Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 Greater Hume Local Environmental Plan 2012 Hume Local Environmental Plan 2001 Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 Roads Act 1993 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 Cases Cited: BGP Properties Pty Limited v Lake Macquarie City Council [2004] NSWLEC 399 Chamwell Pty Limited v Strathfield Council (2007) 151 LGERA 114 Cooper Brookes (Wollongong) v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1981) 147 CLR 297 Mison and ors v Randwick Municipal Council and ors [1991] 191 NSWLR 734 Renaldo Plus 3 Pty Limited v Hurstville City Council [2005] NSWLEC 315 Schaffer Corporation v Hawkesbury City Council (1992) 77 LGRA 21 Weal v Bathurst City Council and or [2000] NSWCA 88 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Blueprint Planning & Development Pty Ltd (Applicant) Greater Hume Shire Council (First Respondent) Michael Scollard (Second Respondent) Representation: Mr A Galasso SC (Applicant) Mr A Seton, solicitor (First Respondent) Mr C McEwen SC with Ms A Hemmings, barrister (Second Respondent) Herbert Smith Freehills (Applicant) Marsdens Law Group (First Respondent) Baker & McKenzie (Second Respondent) File Number(s): 11015 of 2013
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate