Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Catania v Inner West Council [2018] NSWLEC 1325 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 7, 21 June 2018 Date of orders: 29 June 2018 Decision date: 29 June 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Chilcott C Decision: See [4] below Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Alexander Catania (Applicant) Inner West Council (Respondent) Representation: Solicitors: V Conomos, Conomos Legal (Applicant) G Christmas, Apex Law (Respondent) File Number(s): 2017/385887 Publication restriction: No Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: 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". 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. The final orders to give effect to the parties' agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 are: 1. Leave is granted to the Applicant to rely on the following amended architectural and landscape plans: Plan No and Revision Plan type Prepared by Date DA100 Revision G Basement 2 plan BKA Architecture 21/06/18 DA101 Revision G Basement 1 plan BKA Architecture 21/06/18 DA102 Revision I Ground floor plan BKA Architecture 21/06/18 DA103 Revision H Level 1 plan BKA Architecture 15/06/18 DA104 Revision H Level 2 plan BKA Architecture 15/06/18 DA105 Revision H Level 3 plan BKA Architecture 15/06/18 DA106 Revision H Level 4 plan BKA Architecture 15/06/18 DA107 Revision H Level 5 plan BKA Architecture 15/06/18 DA108 Revision G Roof plan BKA Architecture 15/06/18 DA200 Revision G Proposed Elevations BKA Architecture 15/06/18 DA201 Revision G Proposed Elevations BKA Architecture 15/06/18 DA202 Revision C Streetscape elevation BKA Architecture 15/06/18 DA300 Revision H Proposed section BKA Architecture 21/06/18 DA301 Revision B Section – front façade BKA Architecture 15/06/18 DA302 Revision A Section – rear façade BKA Architecture 15/06/18 DA700 Revision D Finishes Schedule BKA Architecture 15/06/18 LPDA18-52 Revision D Landscape plan page 1 Conzept Landscape Architects 14.06.18 LPDA18-52 Revision B Landscape Plan page 2 Conzept Landscape Architects 14.0618 LPDA18-52 Revision C Landscape Plan page 3 Conzept Landscape Architects 14.06.18 1. Pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs agreed at $1,800.00 upon execution of this Agreement. 2. The appeal is upheld. 3. Development consent is granted to DA201700552 for the demolition of the existing buildings; consolidation of 3 lots into 1 lot; and the construction of a 6 storey mixed use development comprising basement car parking for 26 vehicles, a ground floor commercial space, 4 x ground floor serviced apartments and 28 x residential apartments above on the land known as 108-112 Old Canterbury Road, Lewisham subject to the conditions at Annexure "A". ………………………. Michael Chilcott Commissioner of the Court Annexure A (173 KB, 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: 29 June 2018