IPM Holdings Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2019] NSWLEC 1182

IPM Holdings Pty Ltd v Inner West Council [2019] NSWLEC 1182

The proposed development was compatible with the desired future character of the area because its dominant lower three storeys were accepted as appropriate, the fourth storey was recessive and harmonious from Darling Street and Cambridge Street, and its heritage, overlooking and overshadowing impacts were acceptable or addressed by amended plans and conditions. The development therefore satisfied cl 4.4A(3) of Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013, the applicable floor space ratio was 1.5:1, the proposed 1.48:1 floor space ratio complied, and consent should be granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Development Application Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Development Application, Heard After S 34 Conciliation Conference Was Terminated
Outcome
Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['shop Top Housing Development' 'desired Future Character' 'floor Space Ratio' 'clause 4.4 a of Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013' 'heritage Impacts' 'overlooking' 'overshadowing' 'traffic and Parking']
['planning and Environment' 'development Consent' 'heritage Conservation'] ['shop Top Housing Development' 'desired Future Character' 'floor Space Ratio' 'clause 4.4 a of Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013' 'heritage Impacts' 'overlooking' 'overshadowing' 'traffic and Parking']

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 Development Application Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Development Application, Heard After S 34 Conciliation Conference Was Terminated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed four storey shop top housing development, including its fourth storey, was compatible with the desired future character of the area.' 'Whether cl 4.4A of Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013 applied so that the applicable floor space ratio was 1.5:1 rather than 1:1.' 'Whether the potential heritage impacts of the proposed development were acceptable under cl 5.10 of Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013.' 'Whether potential overlooking impacts to adjoining properties were acceptable.' 'Whether potential overshadowing impacts to adjoining properties were acceptable.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed development was compatible with the desired future character of the area because its dominant lower three storeys were accepted as appropriate, the fourth storey was recessive and harmonious from Darling Street and Cambridge Street, and its heritage, overlooking and overshadowing impacts were acceptable or addressed by amended plans and conditions. The development therefore satisfied cl 4.4A(3) of Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2013, the applicable floor space ratio was 1.5:1, the proposed 1.48:1 floor space ratio complied, and consent should be granted.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; development consent granted subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ['The Applicant is granted leave to rely on amended plans, including amended landscape plans.' "The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs that are thrown away as a result of amending the development application, as agreed or assessed under s 8.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979." 'The...