Stark v ACT Planning and Land Authority (Administrative Review)

In the case of Stark v ACT Planning and Land Authority, the applicant sought merits review of a decision by the respondent to grant retrospective approval for the conversion of a non-habitable garage into a secondary dwelling without prior approval. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether the converted structure complied with the Residential Zones Development Code (RZDC) and the requirements of the Australian Standard AS 4299 for adaptable housing. The Tribunal found that the secondary residence did not meet the criteria for adaptable housing as it could not provide a continuous accessible path of travel, nor could it be easily adapted to suit the needs of persons with disabilities.

The Tribunal conducted a detailed examination of the plans and evidence provided, determining that the proposed secondary residence did not comply with R13/C13 of the RZDC. The analysis focused on the inability to establish a continuous accessible path of travel from the street frontage to the entry of the secondary residence and the infeasibility of the proposed pathway. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the proposed adaptations for post-adaptation did not meet the standard of being "easily adaptable" as required by AS 4299, particularly in relation to the provision of necessary circulation spaces and the relocation of essential fixtures and services.

The Tribunal concluded that the development did not comply with the requirements of the RZDC and that the correct decision was to set aside the approval and refuse the development application. The Tribunal did not find it necessary to address other issues raised during the hearing as the primary consideration of non-compliance with the adaptable housing requirements was determinative. Consequently, the Tribunal ordered that the decision to grant approval to the development application be set aside and substituted by a decision to refuse approval.