NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Hy-Tec Industries Pty Limited v Parramatta City Council [2015] NSWLEC 1047 Hearing dates: 16 & 17 February 2015 Date of orders: 20 February 2015 Decision date: 20 February 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Morris C Decision: Appeal Upheld Catchwords: Designated Development: Concrete Batching Plant; visual impact Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011; State Environmental Planning Policy No 33 – Hazardous and Offensive Development; State Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005; State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land; State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 Cases Cited: Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827 Texts Cited: Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Hy-Tec Industries Pty Limited (Applicant) Parramatta City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr A Galasso SC (Applicant) Mr S Nash (Respondent)
Solicitors: Mr A Beatty, Beatty Legal Pty Limited Mr P Couch, Sparke Helmore Lawyers File Number(s): 11069 of 2014
Judgment 1. Hy-Tec Industries Pty Limited lodged Development Application DA/203/2014 with Parramatta City Council on 15 April 2014 seeking consent for tree removal, construction and operation of a concrete batching plant with a capacity of 150,000cubic metres of concrete annually and for a temporary mobile concrete batching plant on the northern part of the site at Lot 1 DP 870814, Nos 4-6 Shirley Street, Rosehill. The council had not determined the application in the prescribed period and Hy-Tec appealed its deemed refusal. The council has subsequently refused consent. 2. The primary issues in the case were resolved during the hearing however the council had not issued instructions to enter into consent orders and did not wish to be heard on the second day of the hearing. The outstanding contention related to the submissions that had been received in relation to the application.
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