Goa v Hurstville City Council [2015] NSWLEC 1162

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Goa v Hurstville City Council [2015] NSWLEC 1162 Hearing dates: 4,5 May 2015, conditions 18 May 2015 Decision date: 19 May 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Brown C Decision: 1. The appeal is upheld. 2. DA2014/0125 for the demolition of an existing dwelling and the construction of a purpose-built child care centre at 22 Cambridge Street Penshurst is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure A. 3. The exhibits are returned with the exception of exhibits 1, G and K. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: demolition of an existing dwelling and the construction of a child care centre – insufficient evidence on overshadowing – resident objections Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Sarah Gao (Applicant) Hurstville City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr G McKee, solicitor (Applicant) Ms V McGrath, solicitor (Respondent) Solicitors: McKees Legal Solutions (Applicant) Norton Rose Fullbright Australia (Respondent) File Number(s): 11042 of 2014 Publication restriction: No

Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: This appeal relates to the refusal by Hurstville City Council of DA2014/0125 for the demolition of an existing dwelling and the construction of a child care centre for 60 children and 9 staff at 22 Cambridge Street Penshurst (the site). The child care centre is to operate between 7am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday. 2. The council's Statement of Facts and Contentions maintained that the application should be refused because the proposed development: * will have an adverse impact on the streetscape, particularly given the absence of details of building materials, * provides insufficient information on solar access to adjoining properties, acoustic fencing, landscaping, a plan of management and basement excavation, and * provides insufficient information on toilet facilities. 1. A number of residents provided evidence on the site inspection and agreed with the concerns of council, as well as the following additional concerns: * excessive number of children, * unacceptable increase in traffic in the area and impact on existing road network, * noise from children and supervising staff, * sufficient existing child care centres in the area, and * stormwater disposal and potential for flooding.