Farrugia v City of Parramatta Council [2018] NSWLEC 1690

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Farrugia v City of Parramatta Council [2018] NSWLEC 1690 Hearing dates: 13 December 2018 Date of orders: 24 December 2018 Decision date: 24 December 2018 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: O'Neill C Decision: See [6] below Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: conciliation conference; agreement between the parties. Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: David Anthony Farrugia (Applicant) City of Parramatta Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: P Clay SC (Applicant)

Solicitors: Macquarie Lawyers (Applicant) A Gough, Storey & Gough Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 2018/176520 Publication restriction: No

Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to the provisions of s 8.7(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) against the refusal by the City of Parramatta Council (the Council) of Development Application No. 919/2017 for the construction of a two-storey dwelling with a detached double garage (the proposal) at 6A Lansdowne Street, Parramatta. 2. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34AA(2)(a) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which has been held on 13 December 2018. I presided over the conciliation conference. 3. At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties, based on amendments made to the proposal. 4. Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' decision, if the parties' decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The parties' decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.16 of the EPA Act to grant consent to the Development Application. 5. I am satisfied that the parties' decision is one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. I have considered the effect of the proposal on the heritage significance of the heritage conservation area pursuant to cl 5.10(4) of the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 and I am satisfied that the amendments made to the form of the roof results in a proposal that successfully respects the established scale of the heritage conservation area. As the parties' decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, I am required under s 34(3) of the LEC Act to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' decision.