Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: JRNN Pty Limited v Inner West Council [2019] NSWLEC 1039 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 14 January 2019 Date of orders: 01 February 2019 Decision date: 01 February 2019 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Morris AC Decision: See [8] below Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: affordable housing, impact on trees and amenity of adjoining properties Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: JRNN Pty Limited (Applicant) Inner West Council (Respondent) Representation: Solicitors: S Kondilios, Hall & Wilcox (Applicant) M Bonanno, Inner West Council (Respondent) File Number(s): 2018/223475 Publication restriction: No Judgment 1. JRNN Pty Limited lodged Development Application No. D/2018/293 with Inner West Council (Council) seeking consent for demolition of existing structure, tree removal and construction of a new five storey mixed use development comprising 12 residential apartments including affordable housing units with associated parking and landscaping. The Council did not determine the application within the prescribed period and the applicant is appealing its deemed refusal under ss 8.7 and 8.11 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act). 2. The issues in the case are whether the impact of the proposal on existing trees on the site and the amenity of adjoining residents are acceptable. 3. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 14 January 2019. I have presided over the conciliation conference. 4. 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. The decision agreed upon is to uphold the appeal and grant consent to the application. The agreement was based on amended plans and additional information. Those plans and details were agreed by the experts to address the contentions in the case. 5. As the presiding Commissioner, I am satisfied that the decision is one that the Court can make in the proper exercise of its functions, as required by s 34(3) of the LEC Act. 6. I have formed this state of satisfaction because the details now before the Court allow proper assessment of the proposal and, based on the advice of the Council's experts, the issues raised in the contentions in the case have been resolved. That is achieved through the amended landscape and architectural plans that address amenity impacts. 7. 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. 8. The Court orders: 1. Leave is granted for the Applicant to rely on the amended plans and material listed in paragraph 1 of the conditions set out in Annexure A. 2. The appeal is upheld and Development Application DA/2018/293, for the demolition of existing structures, construction of a new 5 storey residential flat building comprising 12 residential apartments, provision of a ground floor space to suit a future café or takeaway food premises, storage and rooftop garden communal open space area, new driveway and pedestrian access from Lilyfield Road; 9 car parking spaces and 18 bicycle storage racks; and landscaping works at 101-103 Lilyfield Road, Lilyfield 2040 is approved, subject to the conditions set out in Annexure A. 3. The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) in the amount of $8,000 within 28 days of the date of the Judgment of the Court. _____________________________ Sue Morris Acting Commissioner of the Court Annexure A (391 KB, pdf) Plans (15.0 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: 05 February 2019