Applicant Brendan McHugh took Bathurst Regional Council to court after his plans for the Dunkeld Pet Hotel on Marys Lane were twice rejected by councillors, despite recommendations from senior planning staff that it be approved subject to a raft of conditions.

And when the court handed down its decision on Friday, it was a comprehensive victory for Mr McHugh.

The court upheld Mr McHugh’s appeal against the council decision and also accepted his offer to install signs to to let motorists travelling along the Mitchell Highway know that they are approaching Marys Lane as the only condition.

A relieved Mr McHugh spoke to the Western Advocate yesterday and said taking council to court was a matter of principle.

Mr McHugh said he was not surprised he had won at court.

“The council experts, the planning department and environmental services had already said it was a fully compliant development,” he said.

“This should not have gone to court.

“We’re happy, we’re going to progress the development, the whole family are happy. We’ve got lots of supporters who’ve written emails.”

Just three councillors – mayor Gary Rush, Michael Coote and Warren Aubin – voted to approve the DA when it last came before council last December.

Cr Coote told the Western Advocate in February that Mr McHugh would win his court appeal and at the time he slammed his colleagues for rejecting the DA.

Still clearly frustrated after Mr McHugh’s appeal was upheld on Friday, Cr Coote said he would use Wednesday night’s policy committee meeting to ask his colleagues how much the case had cost.

“It’s a decision that some councillors based on their hearts, not their heads,” Cr Coote said.

Council cited four issues with the proposed pet kennel – road safety; that it was not in the public interest; noise concerns; and environmental concerns.

However, two of these – environmental concerns and not in public interest – were dropped before the case even went to court.

“I’m frustrated, there’s not point getting angry, they basically have to stand by their decision ... I knew they’d lose it at court,” Cr Coote said. “It’s not a good way to spend ratepayers’ money at all.”

Council employed additional noise and environmental experts in the lead-up to court, along with a barrister to represent them – a move that would have cost ratepayers thousands of dollars.

The first DA was put before council in February 2014 and after 17 months Mr McHugh will now commence construction design of the kennel.

The Dunkeld Pet Hotel DA was for a 24-dog kennel along with a cattery for 20 animals and shelter for up to 20 other small animals.

“It was 100 per cent worth it,” Mr McHugh said of the court action.

“We hold no grudges, let’s move on.”