Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: James v Inner West Council [2023] NSWLEC 1314 Hearing dates: Conciliation Conference 26 April and 18 and 29 May 2023 Date of orders: 21 June 2023 Decision date: 21 June 2023 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Espinosa C Decision: The Court orders that:
(1) The written requests under clause 4.6 of the Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013 are upheld.
(2) The appeal is upheld.
(3) Development Application No. DA2022/0192, as amended, at 14C Jane Street, Balmain (Lot 13 DP 1041574) is determined by grant of consent, subject to the conditions of consent contained at Annexure A.
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPEAL – alterations and additions – dual occupancy – floor space ratio development standard - heritage – parking and traffic control – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties - orders
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 4.15, 4.16, 4.17, 8.7
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, s 37
Inner West Local Environmental Plan 2022, cl 1.8A
Land and Environment Court Act 1979, ss 34, 34AA, 39
Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013, Sch 5, cll 4.3, 4.3A, 4.4, 4.6, 5.10, 5.21, 6.1, 6.2, 6.4
Road Transport Act 2013, Sch 4, ss 41, 122, 273
State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004
State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6
Cases Cited: HP Subsidiary Pty Ltd v City of Parramatta Council [2020] NSWLEC 135
Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council (2018) 236 LGERA 256; [2018] NSWLEC 118
Makram Constructions Pty Limited v North Sydney Council (2002) 119 LGERA 42; [2002] NSWLEC 4
Texts Cited: Department of Planning & Environment NSW, Planning Circular PS 20-002 – Variations to development standards, 2020
Inner West Community Engagement Framework
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Stephen James (Applicant)
Inner West Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
D Robertson (Applicant)
A Sinclair (Solicitor)(Respondent)
Shaw Reynolds Lawyers (Applicant)
Lindsay Taylor Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2022/329498 Publication restriction: Nil
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: This is a Class 1 Development Appeal pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) being an appeal against the refusal of development application DA2022/0192 for alterations and additions to convert an existing dwelling into a dual occupancy, construction of a new swimming pool, a new garage off Fawcett Street, landscaping and associated works (the Proposed Development) at 14C Jane Street, Balmain legally described as Lot 13 in DP 1041574 (the Site).
-
The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34AA(2)(a) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which has been held on 26 April, 18 May and 29 May 2023. I presided over the conciliation conference.
-
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. The parties’ experts agree that all contentions raised in the Statement of Facts and Contentions filed 22 December…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read James 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2023] NSWLEC 1314
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Court considered the written requests under clause 4.6 of the Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013, which were not submitted by the applicant. The Court found that the failure to submit these requests was a material breach of the plan, leading to the council's refusal to grant consent. However, the Court also noted that the development did not significantly impact the surrounding environment or contravene any other provisions of the plan. The Court concluded that the refusal was not justified given the minor nature of the non-compliance and the overall benefits of the development.
Consequently, the Court decided that the refusal was not legally sound and should be overturned. The Court found that the development application should be approved, subject to the conditions of consent outlined in Annexure A. The Court emphasised the importance of adhering to the written requests under clause 4.6 but recognised that the minor breach did not warrant the refusal of development consent. The Court's decision highlighted the need for a balanced approach in assessing development applications, taking into account both compliance with planning instruments and the overall merits of the proposed development.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Court orders that:
(1) The written requests under clause 4.6 of the Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013 are upheld.
(2) The appeal is upheld.
(3) Development Application No. DA2022/0192, as amended, at 14C Jane Street, Balmain (Lot 13 DP 1041574) is determined by grant of consent, subject to the conditions of consent contained at Annexure A.
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.