Gazzard v Inner West Council [2020] NSWLEC 1244

Gazzard v Inner West Council [2020] NSWLEC 1244

The amended development was permissible with consent in the R1 General Residential zone, the clause 4.6 requests for variations to the site coverage and floor space ratio standards were accepted, relevant heritage, flooding, stormwater, contamination and BASIX matters had been considered and addressed, and the parties' s 34 agreement was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions; the proceedings therefore had to be disposed of in accordance with that agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Development Application No D/2018/585 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference Agreement
Outcome
Appeal upheld and development consent granted subject to conditions in Annexure A.
Legal Topics
['development Application' 'multi Dwelling Housing' 'conciliation Conference' 'development Standards Variation' 'floor Space Ratio' 'site Coverage' 'heritage Conservation Area' 'basix' 'remediation of Land']
['planning and Environment Law'] ['development Application' 'multi Dwelling Housing' 'conciliation Conference' 'development Standards Variation' 'floor Space Ratio' 'site Coverage' 'heritage Conservation Area' 'basix' 'remediation of Land']

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

Class 1 Appeal Under S 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Against Refusal of Development Application No D/2018/585 / Orders Following S 34 Conciliation Conference Agreement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the parties' agreement was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979." 'Whether jurisdictional prerequisites for granting development consent to the amended development application were satisfied.' 'Whether written requests under clause 4.6 of the Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013 for variations to floor space ratio and site coverage development standards should be upheld.']

Ratio Decidendi

The amended development was permissible with consent in the R1 General Residential zone, the clause 4.6 requests for variations to the site coverage and floor space ratio standards were accepted, relevant heritage, flooding, stormwater, contamination and BASIX matters had been considered and addressed, and the parties' s 34 agreement was a decision the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions; the proceedings therefore had to be disposed of in accordance with that agreement.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld and development consent granted subject to conditions in Annexure A.

Orders

  • ['Leave is granted to the applicant to amend the development application and rely on the amended plans listed in condition 4 of Annexure A.' "Pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs thrown away as a result of the amendment of...