Australian Village No. 12 – Gladstone St Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2021] NSWLEC 1080

Australian Village No. 12 – Gladstone St Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2021] NSWLEC 1080

Clause 6.13(3)(c) of Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011 is a development standard, not a prohibition. However, the applicant's clause 4.6 objection does not adequately demonstrate that compliance with the 60% non-residential requirement is unreasonable or unnecessary, nor that the development is consistent with the objectives of the standard or the zone. Therefore, the Court has no power to grant consent and must refuse the application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Development Application Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'clause 4.6 Objection' 'floor Space Requirement' 'affordable Housing' 'development Standards' 'local Environmental Plan' 'state Environmental Planning Policy']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Development Application Appeal / Final Judgment

  1. 1 ['Proper characterisation of the development application' 'Whether clause 6.13(3)(c) of Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011 is a development standard or a prohibition' "Whether the applicant's clause 4.6 objection demonstrates that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary" 'Whether there are sufficient environmental planning grounds for varying the standard' 'Whether the development is consistent with the objectives of the zone and the standard']

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 6.13(3)(c) of Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011 is a development standard, not a prohibition. However, the applicant's clause 4.6 objection does not adequately demonstrate that compliance with the 60% non-residential requirement is unreasonable or unnecessary, nor that the development is consistent with the objectives of the standard or the zone. Therefore, the Court has no power to grant consent and must refuse the application.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'Development application DA/2020/0366 for change of use of level 1 and minor alterations to the development approved by consent granted on 8 April 2020 at 2-2A Gladstone Street, Newtown is refused.' 'Exhibits, other than Exhibits A and 1, to be returned.']