So Nash Pty Limited v Inner West Council [2018] NSWLEC 1327

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: So Nash Pty Limited v Inner West Council [2018] NSWLEC 1327 Hearing dates: 26 – 27 June 2018 Date of orders: 03 July 2018 Decision date: 03 July 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: O'Neill C Decision: Directions, refer to [37]-[40] Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT CONSENT: appeal against the imposition of a number of conditions on development consent for the adaptive reuse of a local heritage item, including a condition requiring the deletion of one off-street car parking space and a condition notifying the future occupants of the development that they are not eligible to participate in the Council's Resident Parking Scheme. Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Cases Cited: Stockland Development Pty Ltd v Manly Council (2004) 136 LGERA 254 Rogers v Inner West Council [2018] NSWLEC 1305 Category: Principal judgment Parties: So Nash Pty Limited (Applicant) Inner West Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: M Fraser (Applicant)

Solicitors: DG Briggs & Associates (Applicant) M Bonanno, Inner West Council (Respondent) File Number(s): 2017/244906 Publication restriction: No

Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to the provisions of s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) against a number of conditions, including deferred commencement conditions, imposed on Development Consent No. D/2016/366 for the adaptive reuse of a local heritage item as a mixed use development (the proposal) at 236 Darling Street, Balmain (the site), granted by the Inner West Council (the Council). 2. The appeal was subject to mandatory conciliation on 12 January 2018, in accordance with the provisions of s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act). As agreement was not reached during the conciliation phase, the conciliation conference was terminated on 24 January 2018, pursuant to s 34(4) of the LEC Act. 3. The appeal was against 28 conditions of consent. Through the conciliation process, the majority of the appealed conditions were agreed by the parties, either by an agreed amendment to the wording of those conditions or by the condition not being pressed by the Council. By the end of the hearing, the parties had reduced the dispute to two conditions of consent. 4. The parties agreed on the deletion of condition 6(b), the deletion of the contribution for commercial car parking in condition 8, amendments to conditions 9(f) and (l), an amendment to condition 10, the deletion of condition 21, an amendment to condition 30(a), an amendment to condition 33, an amendment to condition 42 and the deletion of condition 79. These changes were included in exhibit 1 and exhibit A ff 100-138 and the agreed terms of conditions 10 and 33 were filed with the Court on 28 June 2018 as the conditions of consent.