Suh v Liverpool City Council and Casula Community Group for Responsible Planning Inc No. 2 [2016] NSWLEC 1596

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Suh v Liverpool City Council and Casula Community Group for Responsible Planning Inc No. 2 [2016] NSWLEC 1596 Hearing dates: 16 May, 15 September and 14 November 2016 Date of orders: 14 December 2016 Decision date: 14 December 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: O'Neill C Decision: 1. The appeal is dismissed. 2. Development Application No. 1060/2015 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of a single storey hotel and associated at grade car parking at 467 Hume Highway, Casula, is refused. 3. The exhibits, other than exhibits 1 and 101, are returned. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: demolition of existing motel and construction of a hotel; social impact. Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Cases Cited: Suh v Liverpool City Council [2016] NSWLEC 25 Mina Suh v Liverpool City Council and Casula Community Group for Responsible Planning Inc [2016] NSWLEC 1177 Waugh Hotel Management Pty Ltd v Marrickville Council (2009) 171 LGERA 112 Hoxton Park Residents Action Group Inc v Liverpool City Council (2011) 184 LGERA 104 BGP Properties Pty Limited v Lake Macquarie City Council [2004] NSWLEC 399 Motto Farm Pty Ltd v Port Stephens Council [2011] NSWLEC 1293 Martin Morris & Jones Pty Ltd v Shoalhaven City Council [2012] NSWLEC 1280 Cardno Pty Ltd v Campbelltown City Council [2013] NSWLEC 1056 Redcape Hotel Group Pty Ltd v City of Ryde Council [2016] NSWLEC 1497 New Century Developments Pty Ltd v Baulkham Hills Shire Council (2003) 127 LGERA 303 Telstra Corporation Ltd v Hornsby Shire Council (2006) 146 LGERA 10 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mina Suh (Applicant) Liverpool City Council (First Respondent) Casula Community Group for Responsible Planning Inc (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr A. Galasso SC (Applicant) Mr M. Staunton barrister (Respondent) Mr M. Seymour barrister with Ms N. Hammond barrister (Second Respondent)