Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Vourtzoumis v Willoughby City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1465 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 14 August 2019 Date of orders: 04 October 2019 Decision date: 04 October 2019 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dixon SC Decision: The Court orders:
(1) Leave is granted to the Applicant to rely on the amended plans and documents referred to in condition 1 of the conditions at Annexure “A”.
(2) The Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs thrown away as a result of the amendment of the application pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as are agreed or assessed.
(3) The appeal is upheld.
(4) Development consent is granted to DA-2018/189 to demolish the existing buildings and erect a 16 room boarding house at 19 Hampden Road, Artarmon, subject to the conditions at Annexure “A”.Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Land and Environment Court Act 1979
State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009Category: Principal judgment Parties: Kon Vourtzoumis (Applicant)
Willoughby City Council (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
G Christmas (Solicitor) (Applicant)
D Le Breton (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Apex Planning and Environment Law (Applicant)
HWL Ebsworth (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2018/391545 Publication restriction: No
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER This is an appeal pursuant to the provisions of s 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) against the refusal of Development Application DA-2018/189 for demolition of an existing dual occupancy development and associated detached garage at 19 Hampden Road, Artarmon (site) and construction of a 18-room boarding house for a total of 36 lodgers over four levels with basement parking (the proposal) by Willoughby City Council.
-
The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 21 August 2019. I presided over the conciliation conference.
-
During the conciliation, the Court took a site view with the parties and at that time heard from the local objectors. In response to the concerns raised by the Council and the submitters, the architectural plans were revised to reduce the number of boarding rooms to 16 and to address the privacy and traffic impacts generated by the original proposal. After the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties.
-
Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision, if the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.16 of the EPA Act to grant consent to the development application.
-
I am satisfied that the proposal is permissible under the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and that the decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions.
-
As the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, I am required under s 34(3) of the LEC Act to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision.
-
The Court orders:
Leave is granted to the Applicant to rely on the amended plans and documents referred to in condition 1 of the conditions at Annexure “A”.
The Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs thrown away as a result of the amendment of the application pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as are agreed or assessed.
The appeal is upheld.
Development consent is granted to DA-2018/189 to demolish the existing buildings and erect a 16 room boarding house at 19 Hampden Road, Artarmon, subject to the conditions at Annexure “A”.
…………………………
S Dixon
Senior Commissioner of the Court
Annexure A (176 KB, pdf)
Architectural Plans (5.50 MB, pdf)
Stormwater Plans (1.16 MB, pdf)
**********
- AGLC
- Vourtzoumis v Willoughby City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1465
- Case
- [2019] NSWLEC 1465
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court held that the applicant was entitled to rely on the amended plans and documents, as the amendments did not substantively alter the nature of the proposal. The court considered the impact of the amendments on the Council and concluded that the costs incurred due to the amendments should be borne by the applicant. Furthermore, the court found that the proposed development met the requirements of the local environmental plan and did not contravene any zoning or development controls. Therefore, the appeal was upheld, and development consent was granted subject to specified conditions.
In granting development consent, the court emphasised the importance of adhering to the conditions set out in the order to ensure the development aligns with the planning and environmental objectives of the area. The applicant was also directed to pay the Council's costs associated with the amendment of the application. This decision underscores the need for applicants to carefully consider the implications of amendments to their development applications and the importance of compliance with statutory requirements.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Court orders:
(1) Leave is granted to the Applicant to rely on the amended plans and documents referred to in condition 1 of the conditions at Annexure “A”.
(2) The Applicant is to pay the Respondent’s costs thrown away as a result of the amendment of the application pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as are agreed or assessed.
(3) The appeal is upheld.
(4) Development consent is granted to DA-2018/189 to demolish the existing buildings and erect a 16 room boarding house at 19 Hampden Road, Artarmon, subject to the conditions 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.