NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: PRJM Pty Ltd v Hawkesbury City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1339 Hearing dates: 8,9,10 February 2017, 1 May 2017 Date of orders: 30 June 2017 Decision date: 30 June 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Brown C Decision: See orders at [88] Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: subdivision - inconsistent with some aims of the local environmental plan - inconsistent with some objectives of the zone - impact on existing vegetation - inappropriate method of disposal of sewage - inadequate arrangements for water supply, stormwater disposal, waste collection and road access – appropriate conditions of consent Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Hawkesbury Local Environmental Plan 2012 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No 20-Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No 2-1997) Category: Principal judgment Parties: PRJM Pty Ltd (Applicant) Hawkesbury City Council.(Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr P Tomasetti SC (Applicant) Ms R McCullough (Respondent)
Solicitors: Brock Partners (Applicant) Pikes & Verekers Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 2016/162961 Publication restriction: No
Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal of Development Application DA0830/15 that proposes a 37 lot community title subdivision, including the construction of a new private road, drainage system and installation of a water recycling facility to treat sewage. Two lots (Lots 1 and 21) would be used for these services and the remaining 35 lots would be used for residential development and range in size from 708 sqm to 1355 sqm. 1. The council maintains that the application should be refused because the proposal will: * be inappropriate for the site, * have an adverse impact on existing vegetation, * have an inappropriate method of disposal of sewage, and * have inadequate arrangements for water supply, stormwater disposal, waste collection and road access.
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