Background
Saied Hasham appealed the Canterbury-Bankstown Council’s refusal of development application DA-132/2025 seeking consent to subdivide land at 55 Homer Street, Earlwood NSW 2206 (Lot X in DP 386920) into two lots. The property is zoned R2 Low Density Residential. Public notification of the application resulted in seven objecting submissions. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under the Land and Environment Court Act 1979, held on 28–29 May 2026.
During the conciliation conference, the Council reviewed amended plans and documentation submitted by the applicant. On the second day, the Council confirmed that the amended application resolved all of its legislative and merit concerns. The parties thereafter reached agreement on granting consent subject to conditions.
The Court’s Holding
The Court upheld the appeal and granted consent for the subdivision. The amended application proposes creation of two lots: Proposed Lot 101 (611.7 m²) and Proposed Lot 102 (571.5 m²), both exceeding the minimum lot size of 460 m² required under Canterbury-Bankstown Local Environmental Plan 2023. The Court was satisfied that essential services (water, electricity, and sewerage) are available, and vehicular access is feasible via frontage to Homer Street and Riverview Road.
Although the rear of the site is mapped as a “coastal environment area” and “coastal use area” under State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, the Court found no adverse environmental impact because the subdivision proposes no physical works. A Flora and Fauna Assessment concluded the site is not Biodiversity Values Land and will not significantly impact threatened species. The development complies with the Canterbury-Bankstown Development Control Plan 2023. Consent was granted subject to conditions including creation of easements for inter-allotment drainage.
Key Takeaways
- Courts may dispose of development appeals by agreement between parties during conciliation conferences, provided both conditions of section 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are met.
- Amending development applications can resolve consent authority concerns and facilitate agreement without merits assessment.
- Torrens title subdivisions proposing no works may not trigger environmental approval requirements even within mapped coastal zones.
- Compliance with minimum lot sizes, service availability, and development control plans is essential for subdivision consent.
Why It Matters
This decision demonstrates the effectiveness of conciliation procedures in resolving land and environment disputes without contested hearings. It clarifies that subdivision applications, when amended to address consent authority concerns, can proceed efficiently. The ruling is significant for property owners in NSW residential areas seeking to subdivide land, particularly in coastal zones, by showing that no-works subdivisions face minimal environmental assessment hurdles if basic statutory requirements are satisfied.
The case also illustrates the Court’s role in formalizing agreements reached by parties through structured dialogue. The decision signals that amendments and conditions can often bridge gaps between applicants and councils, potentially reducing litigation costs and timeframes for subdivision approvals.