Formzen Pty Limited v Inner West Council

Link copied
Case Copied 31 min read

Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Formzen Pty Limited v Inner West Council [2018] NSWLEC 1645
Hearing dates: 19 November 2018
Date of orders: 14 December 2018
Decision date: 14 December 2018
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Smithson C
Decision:

(1)   The appeal is upheld;
(2)   Development Application 10.2017.039.1 for demolition of existing buildings and construction of an infill affordable housing development at 24-24A Cecil Street, Ashfield is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure “A”;
(3)   The exhibits are returned other than Exhibits A, B, F, 1 and 6.

Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: affordable housing; overdevelopment; bulk and scale; built form; infill development; compatibility with the character of the local area; urban design considerations; aural and visual privacy impacts; landscaping and open space; amenity for future occupants; disputed conditions; public interest
Legislation Cited: Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 2013
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979
State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development
Cases Cited: Davies v Penrith City Council [2013] NSWLEC 1141
Project Venture Developments v Pittwater Council [2005] NSWLEC 191
Texts Cited: Apartment Design Guide
Australian Standard AS4299 (Adaptable Housing) 1995
Inner West Council Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2016
Urban Tree Canopy Guide (Draft) 2018 (NSW Government Architect)
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Formzen Pty Limited (Applicant)
Inner West Council (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
G McKee, McKees Legal Solutions (Applicant)
S Turner, Inner West Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/346911
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. COMMISSIONER: This appeal, lodged pursuant to the provisions of former s 97(1)(a), now s 8.7(1), of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act1979 (the Act), is against the refusal by Inner West Council (the Council) of Development Application 10.2017.039.1 (the application). The application is for the demolition of existing buildings and construction of a 4 storey affordable housing development at 24-24A Cecil Street, Ashfield (the site).

  2. The site comprises two allotments which are legally described as Lots 151 and 152 in DP 531353. It is situated on the northern side of Cecil Street, has an area of 929m², a frontage of 15.24m and a depth of 60.96m. The site currently contains a semi-detached dwelling house and outbuildings.

  3. The site is adjoined on its eastern and western (side) boundaries, as well as opposite, by 3 storey residential flat buildings (RFBs). The area otherwise is characterised by low to medium density dwellings.

  4. The application lodged with the Council in March 2017 proposed to demolish the existing structures and erect ‘in-fill affordable housing’ as that use is referenced in Division 1 of Part 2 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (the SEPP-ARH). The development contained 20 dwellings above a basement car park.

  5. The application was notified and 8 objections were received. Concerns raised included the 4 storey height, inadequate rear setback, lack of street parking, noise, attraction of an undesirable and transient population, decreased property values, the number of affordable dwellings and boarding houses…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Formzen Pty Limited v Inner West Council and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2018] NSWLEC 1645
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal was brought by Formzen Pty Limited against the Inner West Council concerning a development application for the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of an infill affordable housing development at 24-24A Cecil Street, Ashfield. The primary issue before the court was whether the council's refusal to approve the development application was lawful and whether the conditions attached to the approval were appropriate.

The legal issues that the court had to resolve included the interpretation and application of the relevant planning laws and policies, the consideration of the merits of the development application, and the appropriateness of the council's decision to refuse approval. The court had to determine whether the council's decision was based on valid reasons and whether the conditions attached to the approval were reasonable and consistent with the planning laws and policies.

In its decision, the court found that the council's refusal to approve the development application was not supported by valid reasons and that the conditions attached to the approval were not appropriate. The court held that the development application was consistent with the relevant planning laws and policies and that the proposed development would result in significant benefits for the community, including the provision of affordable housing. The court also found that the council had failed to properly consider the merits of the development application and that its decision was based on irrelevant or erroneous considerations. As a result, the court upheld the appeal and approved the development application subject to certain conditions.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) The appeal is upheld;

(2) Development Application 10.2017.039.1 for demolition of existing buildings and construction of an infill affordable housing development at 24-24A Cecil Street, Ashfield is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure “A”;

(3) The exhibits are returned other than Exhibits A, B, F, 1 and 6.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.