Cracknell & Lonergan Architects v Marrickville Council [2014] NSWLEC 1000

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Cracknell & Lonergan Architects v Marrickville Council [2014] NSWLEC 1000 Hearing dates: 21 November 2013 Decision date: 07 January 2014 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Tuor C Decision: 1. The appeal is dismissed. 2. The development application for alterations and additions to an existing building for use as a boarding house with ground floor commercial at 19 Mary Street, Newtown, is refused. 3. The exhibits, except Exhibit 3, are returned. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: boarding house with ground floor retail. Compatibility with local area. Whether floor space ratio compliant and results in excessive bulk and scale. Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011 State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 Cases Cited: White v Parramatta City Council [2011] NSWLEC 1059. Category: Principal judgment Parties: Cracknell & Lonergan Architects (Applicants)

Marrickville Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel Mr M Seymour (Respondent) Solicitors Mr G Green of Pikes & Verekers (Applicant) Mr J Strati, Principal solicitor Marrickville Council (Respondent) File Number(s): 10569 of 2013

Judgment 1This is an appeal under s 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) against the refusal by Marrickville Council (council) of Development Application No. 201300142 for alterations and additions to an existing building for use as a boarding house with ground floor commercial at 19 Mary Street, Newtown (site). 2The contentions pressed by council in the Amended Statement of Facts and Contentions are whether the proposed development: i. is of excessive bulk and scale; ii. has unacceptable negative effects on the heritage significance of the heritage conservation area (HCA) and heritage items in the vicinity; iii. unacceptably overshadows 17 Mary Street; iv. is incompatible with the character of the local area; v. will result in unacceptable amenity impacts on 17 Mary Street and safety and amenity impacts on the occupants of the boarding house.