Sekulovski v Inner West Council [2018] NSWLEC 1299

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Sekulovski v Inner West Council [2018] NSWLEC 1299 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 10 & 31 May 2018; 6 June 2018 Date of orders: 15 June 2018 Decision date: 15 June 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Gray C Decision: See [5] below Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – shop top housing - conciliation conference - agreement between the parties - orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Nick Sekulovski (Applicant) Inner West Council (Respondent) Representation: Solicitors: A Gough, Storey & Gough (Applicant) M Bonanno, Inner West Council (Respondent) File Number(s): 2017/336377 Publication restriction: No

Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal by Mr Sekulovski against the refusal by Inner West Council on 8 May 2017 of a review of determination number 201600565 that refused development consent for shop top housing at 595 King Street, Newtown (Lot B DP443127). The present application is seeking consent to retain the front façade and ground floor shop and construct a development comprising 1 commercial tenancy and 5 residential units. 2. In this matter, at or after a conciliation conference, an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (the Court Act) was reached between the parties as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that was acceptable to the parties. As the presiding Commissioner, I was satisfied that the decision was one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions (this being the test applied by s 34(3) of the Court Act. As a consequence, s 34(3)(a) of the Act required me to "dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the decision". 3. The Court Act also required me to "set out in writing the terms of the decision" (s 34(3)(b)). The orders made to give effect to the agreement constitute that document. 4. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to make, and have not made, any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties. 5. The final orders to give effect to the parties' agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are: 1. The applicant is granted leave to rely on an amended development application incorporating: 1. architectural plans prepared by Architectural Projects: 1. Drawing No. DA201 to DA203, DA205, DA302, DA401, DA401B, DA403, DA701 and DA702 to Revision D and dated 21 May 2018. 2. Drawing No. DA204, DA301, DA402, DA404 and DA405 Revision D and dated 6 June 2018. 3. Drawing No. DA608 to DA610, Revision A and dated 22 May 2018. 4. Drawing No. DA803 and DA805, Revision C and dated 21 May 2018. 1. BASIX Certificate No. 929719M_02. 2. Nationwide House Energy Rating Scheme Certificate dated 23 May 2018. 3. Amended Clause 4.6 variation prepared by GAT and Associates Pty Ltd and dated 25 May 2018. 4. Amended Acoustic Assessment prepared by Day Design Pty Ltd and dated 23 May 2018. 5. BCA Assessment prepared by Paul Aramini Consulting Pty Ltd and dated 23 May 2018. 1. The applicant is to pay the respondent's costs thrown away as a result of the amendment of the development application pursuant to s.8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the amount of $5,000 within 28 days. 2. The appeal is upheld. 3. Development application 201600565.01 for the erection of a shop top housing development containing 1 retail/business tenancy and 5 residential apartments at No. 595 King Street, Newtown is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure "A" to this agreement. ………………………. Joanne Gray Commissioner of the Court Annexure A (243 KB, pdf) Plans (2.77 MB, pdf) DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 19 June 2018