Navigating the planning and development process can be complex, especially when a development application faces objections or a deemed refusal from a local council. A recent case from the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales highlights how strategic negotiation and expert advice can lead to a successful outcome, even for a project in a sensitive environmental and heritage area.
Here is a summary of the case Vakili v Willoughby City Council and the key factors that led to the Court granting development consent.
The Project and the Dispute
Our client sought to redevelop a property at 9 The Bastion Road, Castlecrag, by demolishing the existing structures and constructing a new dwelling, pool, carport, and landscaping.
The original development application was not approved by Willoughby City Council, leading to an appeal to the Land and Environment Court.
The Path to Success: Conciliation and Agreement
Instead of proceeding to a lengthy and costly contested hearing, the parties engaged in a court-ordered conciliation conference. This is a structured negotiation process presided over by a Commissioner of the Court.
During this conference, our team worked collaboratively with the Council to address concerns and amend the plans. The result was an agreement that satisfied both parties, which the Court was then asked to formally approve.
Why the Court Approved the Development
For the Court to grant consent based on the parties’ agreement, it must be satisfied that the proposal meets all legal and planning requirements. In this case, the Commissioner was satisfied, based on the amended plans and expert reports, for several key reasons:
Addressing Community Concerns: The original application received 16 objections from neighbours. The approved plans were amended to respond to these concerns, demonstrating that community feedback was seriously considered.
Environmental Protections: The site is in a sensitive C4 Environmental Living Zone and within the Sydney Harbour Catchment. The approved proposal included:
A comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan to improve water quality leaving the site.
An Arboricultural Impact Assessment to manage trees and provide for new landscaping.
Evidence showing the development would not adversely impact aquatic ecology, flooding, or public access to waterways.
Heritage Considerations: The property is located within the Griffin Heritage Conservation Area. The Court relied on a joint expert heritage report which concluded that the amended design was acceptable and preserved the area’s character.
Compliance with Planning Rules: The amended application was shown to comply with critical development standards for building height and floor space, as well as specific rules for earthworks, acid sulfate soils, and urban heat.
The Outcome
The Court upheld the appeal and granted development consent for the project, subject to the agreed conditions. This outcome allowed our client to proceed with their vision for the property while ensuring all environmental, heritage, and planning obligations were met.
Key Takeaway for Property Owners
This case demonstrates that a refused or stalled development application is not necessarily the end of the road. The conciliation process in the Land and Environment Court provides a powerful forum to resolve disputes constructively.
Success hinges on:
Proactive Engagement: Willingness to negotiate and amend plans.
Expert Evidence: Using qualified specialists (e.g., heritage consultants, arborists, engineers) to provide robust reports that address the Council’s concerns.
Strategic Legal Guidance: Navigating the complex web of environmental planning policies and court procedures.
If you are facing challenges with a development application, our team can help you achieve a positive outcome through negotiation and the appeal processes in the Land and Environment Court.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. You should seek independent legal advice for your specific situation.
