Australia, Aug. 2 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on July 2:

1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) against the deemed refusal of Development Application DA2024.44 for the demolition of the existing structure and construction of a four storey co-living development with basement parking level at land legally identified as Lot 5 in DP31394, known as 15 Homebush Road, Strathfield, NSW, 2135 (the site).

2. The DA was lodged with the Respondent on 7 May 2024. The Applicant filed a Class 1 Application with the Court on 23 August 2024. The Respondent filed its Statement of Facts and Contentions (the SOFAC) with the Court on 18 September 2024.

3. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34 of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 20 February 2025. I presided over the conciliation conference, which began with an on-site view. Nine submissions were made against the proposal, however no submitters attended the on-site view.

4. The s 34 conciliation conference was adjourned to 20 March and 25 March 2025 to allow time for amended plans to be prepared by the Applicant and assessed by the Respondent.

5. At the initial conciliation conference the parties indicated that they considered that they could reach an agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal and granting development consent to the amended DA subject to conditions.

6. A signed s 34 agreement with Annexure A and amended plans (the amended DA) as agreed between the parties was filed with the Court on 25 March 2025. The s 34 agreement is supported by an agreed statement of jurisdictional prerequisites.

7. The DA, as amended, seeks consent for the demolition of the existing structure and construction of four storey co-living development with basement parking level. There are a number of changes to the built form of the proposed development incorporated into the design arising from the s 34 conciliation conference and included in the amended DA.

8. 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. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to, and have not, made any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.

9. The parties' decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.16 of the EPA Act to grant consent to the DA.

10. There are jurisdictional prerequisites that must be satisfied before this function can be exercised. The parties have identified and explained how the jurisdictional prerequisites of relevance have been satisfied in a written submission accompanying the s 34 agreement, and those requirements have been satisfied as follows below.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/197c37eac26a97e2c56a4c35)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.