//
[2025] NSWLEC 1158
General information, not legal advice.
Land and Environment Court (NSW)
2025-03-18
Kullen AC
Original judgment source is linked above.
Zoe will write a short plain-English summary of this judgment and email it to you for free: what it was about, what the court decided and why. It can take up to a minute.
General information, not legal advice.
Or create a free account to save it and ask Zoe follow-up questions.
Source: NSW Caselaw (www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au). Converted to plain text by ZoeLaw. Not the official version.
Medium Neutral Citation: MHE Property Co Pty Ltd ATF MHE Land Trust 3 v Central Coast Council [2025] NSWLEC 1158
Hearing dates: Conciliation conferences on 24 June, 17 and 31 July, 17 September, 18 November, 3 and 11 December 2024
Date of orders: 18 March 2025
Decision date: 18 March 2025
Jurisdiction: Class 1
Before: Kullen AC
Decision: The Court orders that:
(1) Pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Applicant is to pay the costs of the Respondent that have been thrown away as a result of the amendment of the development application, in the agreed amount of $30,000, such amount is to be paid within 28 days of the date of this order.
(2) The appeal is upheld.
(3) Development consent is granted to development application No DA 885/2023 for Demolition, Manufactured Home Estate comprising 157 dwelling sites, Clubhouse, Fitness Centre, Pool, Community Workshop, Shed and Caravan Parking on the land comprising Lot 5 DP 1228880, known as 45 Mulloway Road, Chain Valley Bay, subject to the conditions at Annexure A.
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPEAL – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – biodiversity conservation order – manufactured homes - orders
Legislation Cited: Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016, ss 7.2, 7.3, 7.6, 8.2, 8.4, Pts 6,7, 8, Div 5
Coal Mine Subsidence Compensation Act 2017, s 22
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 4.15, 4.16, 4.17, 8.7, 8.15, Pt 7, Divs 4.8, 7.1, Sch 1, Div 2, s 7
Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 34
Local Government Act 1993, Ch 7, Pt 1
Rural Fires Act 1997, s 100B
Central Coast Local Environmental Plan 2022, cll 2.2, 2.3, 2.6, 4.1, 4.1G, 5.21, 5.22, 6.2, 7.1, 7.6
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, s 38
Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates) Transitional Regulation 1993, s 175
State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021, Ch 3, Pt 8, ss 122, 123, 125
State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, Ch 4, s 4.6
Texts Cited: Central Coast Development Control Plan 2022
Central Coast Community Engagement Plan (2023-24)
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: MHE Property Co Pty Ltd ATF MHE Land Trust 3 (Applicant)
Central Coast Council (Respondent)
Representation: Counsel:
J Palmer (Solicitor) (Applicant)
C Rose (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Pike & Verekers Lawyers (Applicant)
Central Coast Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2023/357808
Publication restriction: Nil
COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) against the deemed refusal of development application No DA 885/2023 (the DA) for the demolition of existing structures, clearing of vegetation, earthworks and staged construction of a manufactured home estate (the MHE) comprising 161 home sites, clubhouse, fitness centre, community workshop, maintenance shed, civil works and caravan parking facilities on the land legally described as Lot 5 DP 1228880, known as 45 Mulloway Road, Chain Valley Bay (the site).
There is a separate (concurrent) development application (DA 911/2023) for the same site, seeking consent to subdivide the site into two lots, which is also the subject of Class 1 proceedings (LEC case number 2023/00357817 refers). The MHE would occupy the proposed Lot 52 of this subdivision.
A conciliation conference under s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties was convened by the Court on 24 June 2024. This conciliation conference also included the LEC case matter 2023/00357808 as the matters were heard together. I presided over the s 34 conciliation conference. No submitters attended as there no submissions made on the DA.
The s 34 conciliation conference was adjourned to allow time for amended plans to be prepared by the Applicant and assessed by the Respondent, and subsequently further adjourned multiple times to allow the parties time to consider and review the revised plans and to finalise the s 34 agreement and conditions of consent based on an amended development application (the amended DA).
The parties advise that the agreed amendments to the proposal include a reduction in dwelling site numbers to 157, minor internal road layout and parking revisions to accommodate waste vehicles and waste storage, changes to dwelling site pad levels and retaining wall heights, changes to internal stormwater arrangements, changes to pedestrian access arrangements including works in the road reserve, fencing detail revisions, a reduction in clearing within the western boundary of the site and removal of additional trees within the road reserve to accommodate driveways and pedestrian pathways. As amended the proposed development now comprises:
(a) 157 dwelling sites. (b) Visitor car parking comprising 24 standard spaces and two accessible spaces. (c) 16 caravan parking spaces. (d) Clubhouse facility, including library, gym, lounge room, kitchen, indoor cinema, and other amenities for the use of residents. (e) Community facilities including a swimming pool, bowling green, pickleball court, BBQ area, golf putting green and communal open space. (f) Maintenance shed and community workshop. (g) Construction of main driveway access to proposed Lot 52, and associated vegetation removal, swale and drainage infrastructure within road reserve. (h) Demolition of four metal sheds, fibro dwelling and sheds, and metal carport located on Lot 52. (i) Earthworks to fill the existing dam located on-site (proposed Lot 52) and site benching. (j) Internal infrastructure comprising construction of bio-basin and detention basin. (k) Internal infrastructure comprising internal road network, retaining walls and fencing. (l) Clearing of remnant vegetation along northern, eastern and western boundaries. (m) Clearing of remnant vegetation as permitted by the endorsed BCAR. (n) Minor revegetation works along the corridor and protection of the corridor as identified in the endorsed BCAR. (o) Establishment of bushfire asset protection zones. (p) Decorative feature fronting the site, comprising a stone wall (1.5m high) with the logo of the MHE community. Aged timber hardwood posts and landscaping with rusted steel edging will adjoin the stone wall.
The amended plans were accompanied by additional reports addressing the revisions, notably in the view of the parties, a revised Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report (AIA) and a Biodiversity Assessment Report (BAR).
After the conciliation conferences, and the assessment by the Respondent of the amended plans, the parties reached an agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties.
A signed s 34 agreement with Annexure A was filed with the Court on 23 December 2024 with amended plans and additional material (the amended DA) as agreed between the parties. The s 34 agreement is supported by an agreed statement of jurisdictional prerequisites.
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. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to, and have not, made any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.
The parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.16 of the EPA Act. This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal and granting development consent to the DA subject to conditions.
There are jurisdictional prerequisites that must be satisfied before this function can be exercised. The parties have identified and explained how the jurisdictional prerequisites of relevance have been satisfied in a jurisdictional note accompanying the s 34 agreement, and those requirements have been satisfied as follows.
The parties advise that landowner’s consent for the DA has been provided.
Ancillary aspects of the proposed development, including installation and connection of services are proposed within the road reserve of Mulloway and Chain Valley Bay Roads, as well as within the site adjoining to the west at 25 Mulloway Road, Chain Valley Bay. The Respondent, as owner of the road reserve, consents to the making of the DA. In addition, the Class 1 Application is accompanied by the consent of the owner of the adjoining lot.
The site is identified as bushfire prone land (vegetation category 1 in the southern portion, with most of the remainder of the site vegetation buffer) and a bushfire safety authority under s 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1993 is required for subdivision of the site.
The parties advise that the DA was made as an integrated development application with respect to bushfire safety and General Terms of Approval (GTA’s) were issued by the Rural Fire Service on 19 June 2023 and are required to be complied with by condition 1.2 in the conditions of consent.
The parties advise that the site, other than the Avoided Land, is the subject of an order (the Order) conferring biodiversity certification made on 24 March 2023 pursuant to s 8.2 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (the BC Act); and
Pursuant to subss 8.4(2) and (3) of the BC Act, no assessment of the likely impact of the development on biodiversity on the land the subject of the Order (the Certified Land) is required for the purposes of Pt 4 of the EPA Act;
Pursuant to s 7.6 of the BC Act, Pt 7 of the BC Act dealing with biodiversity assessment, does not apply to the certified land; and
Part 7 of the BC Act continues to apply to the development to the extent that it is proposed to be carried out or may have indirect impacts beyond the boundaries of the Certified Land, including on the Avoided Lands and in the road reserve.
The DA proposes some minor vegetation clearing to facilitate driveway widening and the construction of pedestrian paths. The parties advise that this is considered in the Biodiversity Assessment Report (the BAR), which concludes that the clearing does not trigger the need for a Biodiversity Development Assessment Report under Pt 7 of the BC Act, nor does it trigger the need for any biodiversity offsets under Pt 6 of the BC Act as:
(a) there is no clearing on land mapped biodiversity values; (b) the area threshold is not met (0.05ha cleared, against a 0.25ha threshold); (c) the clearing is not likely to significantly affect threatened species or ecological communities or their habitats when assessed against the test in s 7.3 of the BC Act (undertaken in Appendix 3 of the BAR); and (d) the site (and road reserve) is not in a declared area of outstanding biodiversity values (refer to s 7.2 BC Act).
The parties submit that Indirect impacts on the Avoided Lands were considered in the BAR that informed the conferral of the Order and were considered to be acceptable subject to compliance with the requirements of the Order, and that specifically:
The BAR and Order refer to stormwater concept designs which regulate water flow into the Avoided Lands, but which are superseded by the detailed stormwater and other civil engineering plans included in the DA (as amended).
The designing engineers have provided a letter confirming that the detailed design plans are consistent with and ensure an equal or better outcome for the Avoided Lands than the concept designs in the Order and BAR (Northrop Water Quality Comparison Letter dated 9 July 2024);
This has been confirmed by Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water – Biodiversity Conservation and Science in correspondence dated 11 December 2024, which letter is referenced in the proposed conditions of consent; and
The refined stormwater plans do not result in any additional impacts on the Avoided Lands.
It is submitted by the parties that there are no other ecological or biodiversity impacts resulting from the proposed development.
The parties advise that the site is also the subject of a Biodiversity Certification Agreement (the BC Agreement), entered into in conjunction with the making of the Order under Div 5 of Pt 8 of the BC Act.
The conditions of consent have been drafted so as to ensure consistency between the consent, the Order and the BC Agreement.
The site is within a mine subsidence district for the purposes of the Coal Mine Subsidence Compensation Act 2017, and approval for subdivision of the site, or alteration or erection of improvements on the site is required pursuant to s 22 of that Act.
The parties advise that the DA was made as an integrated development application with respect to mine subsidence within the meaning of Div 4.8 of the EPA Act. Subsidence Advisory issued GTA’s on 7 June 2023, which are required to be complied with by proposed condition 1.2 in the conditions of consent.
Chapter 4 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 (the Resilience SEPP) deals with land contamination and s 4.6(1) provides that consent may not be granted unless the consent authority has considered whether the land is contaminated, if it is whether the land is suitable or can be made suitable by remediation for the proposed use, and if remediation is required, whether that remediation will be carried prior to the use commencing. Section 4.6(2) provides that the consent authority must consider a report specifying the findings of a preliminary site investigation (PSI) prior to the grant of consent and may require a detailed site investigation report (DSI) to be prepared if the PSI findings so warrant.
The parties advise that the DA is accompanied by DSI prepared by Compliance Health & Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd (CHEC), dated 22 November 2022, which sets out the findings of an earlier PSI conducted by Douglas Partners Pty Ltd in 2018, as well as the further investigations and results of CHEC. The DSI concludes that there is some minor asbestos contamination on site and makes recommendations for managing that risk. Condition 1.1 of the conditions of consent requires the DSI to be complied with.
The parties submit that the Court can be satisfied that the site will be made suitable for the MHE use prior to the use commencing and I agree with this conclusion.
Part 8 of Ch 3 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 (the Housing SEPP) deals with manufactured home estates.
Section 122, which provides that MHE’s are permissible with consent on any land on which caravan parks are permissible, makes the proposed development permissible on the site, as the part of the site on which the MHE is proposed to operate is zoned RE2 Private Recreation under Central Coast Local Environmental Plan 2022 and caravan parks are permissible in the zone.
Section 123(2) of the Housing SEPP requires a condition of consent to be imposed requiring an approval to operate be issued under Pt 1 of Ch 7 of the Local Government Act 1993 (LG Act). Proposed condition 1.7 in the conditions of consent deals with this matter.
Section 123(3) of the Housing SEPP confirms that no development consent is required for the placing of manufactured homes within an MHE, and no approval for installation of homes is sought here.
Section 125(1) requires the consent authority be satisfied:
that each site on which a home will be installed will be adequately provided with reticulated water, reticulated sewerage, drainage and electricity;
that the MHE will be adequately provided with transport services;
that sufficient community facilities and services will be available to residents;
that the development will not have an adverse effect on any conservation area, heritage item or waterway of land having special landscape, scenic or ecological qualities;
Under s 125(2) of the Housing SEPP the consent authority is to consider:
The cumulative impacts of the proposed development and other MHE’s in the locality;
Any relevant guidelines issue by the Director; and
the provisions of the Local Government (Manufactured Home Estates) Transitional Regulation 1993 (the Regulation).
The parties advise that:
There are a number of other MHEs in Chain Valley Bay, including Valhalla Village immediately to the west.
Cumulative impacts were considered in the planning proposal that led to the rezoning of the Land to permit the proposed development, and in the making of the Order. In addition, the parties have had regard to demands on infrastructure, external environmental and ecological impacts, and planning impacts, and are agreed that the proposed development is acceptable;
There are no relevant guidelines issued by the Director under s 125 of the Housing SEPP, however the parties have had regard to the Regulation, which makes detailed prescription for the design and operation of MHEs, in considering the application and reaching agreement;
The Regulation has been repealed and replaced by subsequent iterations of regulations dealing with the same subject matter, leading up the present Regulation. It is prudent to regard this as a reference to the Regulation (s 175 of the Regulation; also s 30A Interpretation Act 1987). The parties advise that they have carefully considered all relevant provisions of the Regulation and are agreed that the proposed development can and will comply.
The Central Coast Local Environmental Plan 2022 (the LEP) is the relevant local environmental planning instrument that applies to the site; and pursuant to cll 2.2 and 2.3 of the LEP:
Proposed Lot 51 is zoned R2 Low Density Residential pursuant to the LEP. Proposed Lot 52 is partly zoned RE2 Private Recreation, and partly zoned C2 Environmental Conservation pursuant to the LEP. The C2 zone generally corresponds with the southern vegetated portion of the site adjoining the creek. Subdivision works are permissible with consent pursuant to cl 2.6 of the LEP;
The parties advise that under the MHE DA 885/2023 (refer to [3] above), it is proposed to use the RE2 zoned portion of the site as a manufactured home estate (MHE), and to maintain in perpetuity the native vegetation on the C2 zone portion. The MHE use is permissible as caravan parks are permissible in the RE2 zone, and by the operation of s 122 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 (SEPP Housing). No change of use is proposed for the R2 zoned part of the site; and
I am satisfied that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the objectives for development within the zones in which the subdivision is proposed to be carried out;
Clause 4.1 of the LEP sets general minimum lot size controls for the subdivision of land by reference to a Lot Size Map. Pursuant to that map, the R2 zoned portion of the site has minimum lot size of 450sqm, the RE2 portion has a minimum lot size of 7ha, and the C2 portion has a minimum lot size of 40ha. Clause 4.1G of the LEP applies to lots identified as SZ on the Key Sites Map in the LEP and provides criteria for the granting of development consent for subdivision in various zones. The parties advise that the site is so identified; and
(a) The parties advise that cl 4.1G of the LEP was introduced after the DA was lodged, as were the specific lot sizes on the Lot Size Map in the LEP. No savings provision accompanied the introduction of the clause and maps, and so the clause and maps apply to the determination of the DA. In light of cl 4.1G and the amended mapping, no request under cl 4.6 of LEP is necessary; (b) Proposed Lot 51 satisfies cl 4.1G(3)(b), with an area of 1.2ha against a control of 450sqm; (c) Proposed Lot 52 satisfies cl 4.1G(3)(a), as the RE2 portion of the Land has an area of 7.05ha, satisfying cl 4.1G(3)(a)(i) of the LEP, and the C2 portion, with an area of 2.4ha is entirely contained within Lot 52, satisfying cl 4.1G(3)(a)(ii) of the LEP; (d) The subdivision enables the separation of the residential portion of the site, and the establishment of the MHE (on approval of the MHE DA – refer to [3] above); and (e) No residential development is proposed on the C2 land, nor can any development of that land, other than environmental conservation measures, be carried out on that land in the future, satisfying cl 4.1G(4)(b) of the LEP;
(a) The parties advise that there is Class 1 and Class 2 mapped land within 500m of the site, which may be below 5m AHD, however the parties agree that the proposed work is not likely to reduce the watertable on that land. Accordingly cl 7.1 of LEP does not apply;
Having considered the advice of the parties provided above at [12]-[36], I am satisfied that:
The applicants’ further amended DA can be approved, having regard to the matters in s 4.15(1)(b)–(e) of the EPA Act;
The jurisdictional prerequisites on which I must be satisfied before I can exercise the power under s 4.16 of the EPA Act have been satisfied; and
Approval of the proposed development is in the public interest.
Further, 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.
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.
In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to make, and have not made, any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.
The Court notes that:
Central Coast Council, as the relevant consent authority, pursuant to s 38(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, has approved the application for an amendment to development application No DA 885/2023 made on 20 December 2024 to rely on the plans and documents specified below:
(a) Architectural Plans by**:** Space Design Architecture, ref: 2021-164
| Drawing | Description | Issue | Date | | DD001 | Masterplan | Legend + Notes + Drawing List | 05 | 13/08/2024 | | DD100 | Masterplan | Site Analysis Plan | 03 | 13/08/2024 | | DD101a | Masterplan | Masterplan Alt Layout | 15 | 30/09/2024 | | DD102 | Masterplan | Site Demolition Plan | 02 | 13/08/2024 | | DD103 | Masterplan | Staging | 06 | 30/09/2024 | | DD104 | Masterplan | Road Layout + Parking | 08 | 30/09/2024 | | DD105 | Masterplan | Open Space + Landscaping | 11 | 10/10/2024 | | DD106 | Masterplan | Indicative Building Footprint Plan | 07 | 30/09/2024 | | DD107 | Masterplan | Fencing Plan | 08 | 30/09/2024 | | DD108 | Masterplan | Site Section – Sheet 1 | 06 | 10/10/2024 | | DD108a | Masterplan | Site Section – Sheet 2 | 03 | 13/08/2024 | | DD109 | Masterplan | Entry Feature Signage | 06 | 13/08/2024 | | DD113 | Masterplan | Lot Summary Page 1 | 05 | 13/08/2024 | | DD114 | Masterplan | Lot Summary Page 2 | 05 | 13/08/2024 | | DD115 | Masterplan | Lot Summary Page 3 | 05 | 13/08/2024 | | DD116 | Masterplan | Chain Valley Bay Road Elevation – 1 | 05 | 13/08/2024 | | DD117 | Masterplan | Chain Valley Bay Road | 03 | 13/08/2024 | | DD200 | Clubhouse + Facilities | Sheet 1 | 02 | 13/08/2024 | | DD201 | Clubhouse + Facilities | Sheet 2 | 04 | 13/08/2024 | | DD202 | Clubhouse + Facilities | Sheet 3 | 02 | 13/08/2024 |
(b) Landscape Plans by**:** Lindy Lean Landscape Architect
| Drawing | Description | Issue | Date | | L01 | Site Location | J | 25 Sep 2024 | | L02 | Landscape Concept Plan | J | 25 Sep 2024 | | L03 | Tree Removal Plan | J | 25 Sep 2024 | | L04 | Landscape Plan South | J | 25 Sep 2024 | | L05 | Landscape Plan North | J | 25 Sep 2024 | | L06 | Indicative Planting | J | 25 Sep 2024 | | L07 | Landscape section and details | J | 25 Sep 2024 |
(c) Civil Engineering Package: Northrop, ref: NL212903
| Drawing | Description | Issue | Date | | DA3-C01.01 | Cover Sheet, Drawing Schedule & Locality Plan | B | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C02.01 | General Arrangement Plan | F | 26.09.24 | | DA3-C02.11 | Retaining Wall Site Sections – Sheet 1 | B | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C02.12 | Retaining Wall Site Sections – Sheet 2 | B | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C02.13 | Retaining Wall Site Sections – Sheet 3 | B | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C02.14 | Retaining Wall Site Sections – Sheet 4 | B | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C02.15 | Retaining Wall Site Sections – Sheet 5 | B | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C03.01 | Erosion & Sediment Control Plan | C | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C04.01 | Bulk Earthworks Cut and Fill Plan | B | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C04.51 | Site Sections – Sheet 1 | C | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C04.52 | Site Sections – Sheet 2 | C | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C04.53 | Site Sections – Sheet 3 | C | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C05.01 | Stormwater Management Plan Sheet 1 | F | 26.09.24 | | DA3-C05.02 | Stormwater Management Plan Sheet 2 | F | 26.09.24 | | DA3-C05.51 | External Works Plan – Sheet 1 | F | 26.09.24 | | DA3-C05.52 | External Works Plan – Sheet 2 | F | 26.09.24 | | DA3-C05.53 | External Works Plan – Sheet 3 | F | 26.09.24 | | DA3-C06.01 | Road Longitudinal Sections Sheet 1 | B | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C06.02 | Road Longitudinal Sections Sheet 2 | B | 24.09.24 | | DA3-C07.01 | Typical Sections and Details | D | 24.09.24 | | EXT05.01 | Proposed External Works Civil Sketch | 3 | 26.09.24 |
(d) Reports and Documents
| Document Title | Reference | Version No. | Prepared by | Dated | | Arboriculture Impact Assessment Report | VIV05.5AIA | | Travers Bushfire & Ecology | 30 September 2024 | | Concept Stormwater & Preliminary Servicing Summary | NL212903 | | Northrop | 09.07.2024 | | Biodiversity Assessment Report | VIV05.6 | | Travers Bushfire and Ecology | 24 September 2024 | | Operational Waste Management Plan | 5694 | D | Elephants Foot | 24/07/2024 | | Swept Path Assessment | 22402 | B | TTPP Transport Planning | 30/09/24 | | Water Quality Comparison Letter | NL212903 | | Northrop | 09.07.2024 | | DSI Groundwater Assessment | CH1375_D240176 | | Compliance Health & Environmental Consulting | | | Construction Management Plan | | 3 | Avid Project Management | 4 July 2024 | | Plan of Management | | B | Vivacity | 9 July 2024 |
(e) Government concurrence/General Terms of Approval
| Government Agency | Description | Ref No | Date | | Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water – Biodiversity, Conservation and Science | Letter in response to Stormwater Documentation | DOC24/1017339 | 11 December 2024 |
The DA is related to DA 911/2023 (the Subdivision DA), which application seeks development consent subdivide the site into two lots. The MHE would occupy proposed Lot 52 should the Subdivision DA be approved. The Subdivision DA is the subject of proceedings 2023/357817 in the LEC between the same parties as these proceedings.
The Court orders that:
Pursuant to s 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Applicant is to pay the costs of the Respondent that have been thrown away as a result of the amendment of the development application, in the agreed amount of $30,000, such amount is to be paid within 28 days of the date of this order.
The appeal is upheld.
Development consent is granted to development application No DA 885/2023 for Demolition, Manufactured Home Estate comprising 157 dwelling sites, Clubhouse, Fitness Centre, Pool, Community Workshop, Shed and Caravan Parking on the land comprising Lot 5 DP 1228880, known as 45 Mulloway Road, Chain Valley Bay, subject to the conditions at Annexure A.
Annexure A
**********
MHE Property Co Pty Ltd ATF MHE Land Trust 3
Central Coast Council [2025] NSWLEC 1158