APPEAL — development application — digital advertising sign — conciliation conference — agreement between the parties — orders
Quick Take
1Under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), the Court must dispose of proceedings in accordance with the parties' agreed decision if it is one the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. That requires the presiding Commissioner to be satisfied that the jurisdictional prerequisites are met, but involves no merit assessment of the issues originally in dispute.
2Consent to an advertising sign under Ch 3 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Industry and Employment) 2021 requires satisfaction that the signage is consistent with the chapter's objectives and the Sch 5 criteria (s 3.6), consideration of the Pt 3.3 Div 2 and Div 3 matters, and a time-limited consent under s 3.12, here a condition that the consent ceases after 15 years.
3On the facts, the s 4.6 contamination requirement of State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 was adequately addressed for a sign in an established commercial setting with no known contaminating uses. The acid sulfate soils provision (cl 7.14 of Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012) was satisfied because the works would disturb less than 1 tonne of soil and were not likely to lower the water table.
