Khouri v City of Parramatta Council

Texts Cited: City of Parramatta Council, Community Engagement Strategy 2024-2028

Category: Principal judgment

Parties: Peter Khouri (Applicant)
City of Parramatta Council (Respondent)

Representation: Counsel:
M Sahade (Applicant)
P Hudson (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Oliveri Lawyers (Applicant)
Marsdens Law Group (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2025/229736

Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

1. COMMISSIONER: Pursuant to s 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EPA Act), the Applicant appeals the actual refusal of Development Application DA/649/2024 (DA) by the City of Parramatta Council (Council).

2. The DA seeks consent for use of an existing dog washing facility (including associated signage) as ancillary to the approved car wash on Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 509643 known as 86 Victoria Road, North Parramatta (Site).

3. The proceedings fall within Class 1 of the Court’s jurisdiction pursuant to s 17(d) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) (LEC Act).

4. The statutory power or function to be exercised in determining the proceedings are s 4.16(1) of the EPA Act and s 34(3) of the LEC Act.

5. The Site is an irregular corner block allotment bounded by Ross Street, Buller Street and Victoria Road. Below is an aerial photograph of the Site:

*Figure 1: Aerial photograph of the Site copied from Council’s Statement of Facts and Contentions filed 17 July 2025 (*Source: Sixmaps 2025)

6. The Site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential (Zone R3) under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2023 (NSW) (PLEP 2023).

7. The use of land in Zone R3 for the purposes of commercial premises is prohibited. The DA relies on the existing use of the Site for the purposes of a carwash (commercial (business) premises) which operates under Development Consent DA/59/2019. The proposed use of the dog wash facility (as constructed) is ancillary to the existing use for the purposes of a car wash facility.

8. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the LEC Act between the parties, which was held on 24 October 2025, (12 December 2025 – in Chambers), 27 and 30 January 2026. I presided over the conciliation conference.

9. At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal and granting development consent to the development application subject to conditions.

10. Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision if the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.16(1) of the EPA Act and s 34(3) of the LEC to uphold the appeal and grant consent to the DA subject to conditions of consent. There are jurisdictional prerequisites that must be satisfied before this function can be exercised. The parties identified the jurisdictional prerequisites of relevance in these proceedings, and explained how they have been satisfied, as set out below.

11. In accordance with s 4.12 of the EPA, the DA was lodged with Council on 6 December 2025. Owner’s consent was given to the DA.

12. Council is the relevant consent authority under s 4.5(d) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) to process the DA.

13. In accordance with Council’s Community Engagement Strategy 2024 the DA was notified between 17 December 2024 and 29 January 2025. One resident lodged submissions with Council during the notification period. I attended on Site on 24 October 2025 and heard oral submissions from the objector together with inspecting the Site and the exterior of the objector’s fences.

14. On 17 March 2025 Council determined the DA by way of refusal.

15. On 16 June 2025 the Applicant filed its appeal pursuant to s 8.7(1) of the EPA Act, and in accordance with the time provisions in s 8.10 of the EPA Act.

16. The parties agree that all of the matters contained in s 4.15 of the EPA Act that are of relevance to the DA have been taken into consideration, and the DA as amended during the conciliation conference is acceptable, subject to the proposed conditions of consent in Annexure A.

17. The parties have considered s 4.6 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 (R & H SEPP). Given the minor nature of the proposed use and works (the works being limited to acoustic treatment of a fence adjacent to the car washing facility and the use limited to existing minor structures which comprise the car wash facility with no contamination concerns), the parties agree that the requirements of s 4.6 of the R & H SEPP have been met.

18. Chapter 6 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021 (BC SEPP) has been considered, as the Site is within Sydney Harbour Catchment, which is a “regulated catchment”. The conditions of consent in Annexure A include the provision of stormwater treatment devices, backflow prevention and the treatment of any liquid and solid waste to ensure that the matters for consideration in Div 2 of the BC SEPP have been addressed.

19. Signage has been constructed as part of the existing dog wash structure. The proposed use of the facility includes the use of the existing signage (part of which assists in the required acoustic treatment). It is noted that the construction of the signage is not being approved. The existing signage constitutes a business identification sign, and s 3.6 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Industry and Employment) 2021(I & E SEPP) applies:

3.6 Granting of consent to signage

A consent authority must not grant development consent to an application to display signage unless the consent authority is satisfied—

(a) that the signage is consistent with the objectives of this Chapter as set out in section 3.1(1)(a), and

(b) that the signage the subject of the application satisfies the assessment criteria specified in Schedule 5.

20. The parties are satisfied that the use of the signage should be approved having considered ss 3.1 (objectives), 3.6 and Sch 5 of the I & E SEPP.

21. Whilst the DA relies on the existing use of the Site, it is noted that the DA satisfied the following provisions of PLEP 2023:

22. Clause 6.1 – Acid sulfate soils (no excavation proposed);

23. Clause 6.5 – Stormwater Management: This has been considered and relevant conditions of consent in Annexure A are imposed to control the ongoing proposed use.

24. Clause 6.7 – Essential services: all relevant services have been supplied to the Site.

25. The parties agree that the conditions of consent in Annexure A are appropriate.

26. The parties consider that the granting of consent to the DA does not result in any contravention of the EPA Act, any environmental planning instrument or the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW).

27. As set out above, I am satisfied that the parties’ decision is one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, as required by s 34(3) of the LEC Act. I shall uphold the appeal and grant the DA pursuant to s 4.16(1) of the EPA Act.

28. As the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, I am required under s 34(3) of the LEC Act to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision.

29. I am not required to consider the merit issues of the DA, and I have not done so.

30. The Court notes:

31. The City of Parramatta Council as the relevant consent authority under s 4.5(d) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), has approved under s 38(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW), the Applicant amending Development Application DA/649/2024 in accordance with the following documents:

| Document | Author | Date | | Site Plan, A1.00, Rev J | I D Projects | 27 November 2025 | | Acoustic Compliance Test | The Acoustic Group ABN 73 082 704 701 | 24 November 2025 | | Advice by M V Sahade Barrister | Trust Chambers | 7 November 2025 |

28. The Court orders:

29. The appeal is upheld.

30. Pursuant to s 4.16(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) consent is granted to Development Application DA/649/2024 for the use of an existing dog washing facility (including associated signage) as ancillary to the approved car wash facility, and the construction of acoustic treatments and fencing on Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 509643 known as 86 Victoria Road North Parramatta, subject to Annexure A.

M Peatman

Acting Commissioner of the Court

**********

Annexure A (202 KB, pdf)