15 October 2025, 9.30am
NSW Land and Environment Court (NSWLEC) will convene on-site and will hear from residents: LEC convening on-site
22 September 2025, 4.30pm
There is an on-site mediation between the owner and the Council by the Land and Environment Court. Everybody who put in a submission is welcomed.
However, Council’s lawyer have an information session for those residents too: Community consultation meeting. We have never seen this done by a council before, so wonder why now?
19 August 2025
So many HRG members have asked for an update about this property, so here is what we have gleaned from Council.
New DA
The Strathfield Local Planning Panel has refused the new DA at 40 Abbotsford Road to build an entirely unsympathetic duplex. Members who made submissions would have received Council’s letter directly informing them of this result. However, the DA matter is far from over: the applicant had preemptively filed a “class 1” against the Council at the NSW Land and Environment Court. A “class 1” case asks the court to review the merits of the LPP decision, effectively remaking the decision. This may well involve a site visit by the court to hear neighbours’ concerns, or a mediation by which Council and applicant can agree a compromise plan. Stay tuned!
Illegal Demolition of Original House
The status of Council’s work in relation to the illegal demolition 40 Abbotsford Road is a separate matter to the new DA.
The Mayor was able to provide some helpful updates to HRG. In plain English, and paraphrasing, Council has advised:
1. Status of the investigation: investigations are currently underway to determine the circumstances surrounding the destruction and Council does not believe it has “missed the boat” on any potential litigation.
2. External legal advice: Council has engaged external solicitors, which are same that are engaged to act on Council’s behalf in the Class 1 proceedings.
3. Interaction between a prosecution for demolition and the new DA: the new DA can still be considered and determined independently of the offence currently under investigation, but ultimately, Council is required to assess the DA on its merits, including consideration as to what form of development would be suitable for the site in view of its current state. To assist in this process, Council engaged external heritage and urban design experts to consider this for the purposes of determining the DA. The existence of a DA does not interfere with Council’s ongoing enforcement efforts. Investigations will proceed irrespective of any proposed or determined development on the site.
4. Ensuring the owner does not escape the restrictions by selling the property: Council is not aware of there being any caveat on the property. From Council’s position, there is no legal standing to lodge a caveat on the property as unauthorised works do not confer a caveatable interest. However, the owner/any new owner cannot simply proceed with works. The stop works order issued by Council runs with the land and is in force regardless of any change in ownership. In addition to this, and in circumstances where the property is sold, enforcement proceedings against the wrongdoing individuals remain valid regardless of property ownership.
Many HRG members, including those who are lawyers, are still surprised that Council is still in fact-finding mode. Stay tuned.
10 July 2025
The DA applicant didn’t get an answer from the Council within 40 days, so has appealed the deemed refusal of the DA to the Land and Environment Court. We don’t know when the first hearing will be, or what the grounds of appeal will be.
We understand that the Council intends to determine the DA a the Local Planning Panel meeting in August. Generally, those people who made submissions get notified so they can apply to speak at the meeting.
13 May 2025
28 submissions were received by Council about the new DA. Most were against the DA, and many blasted the Council for the lack of prosecutions of the owner, applicant of the original DA and the builder.
This will now do to Local Planning Panel rather than be approved by a Council Officer.
================
40 Abbotsford Road Homebush was originally called Kiloyth and it has been featured by the local historical society.
What happened? See this excellent article.
A DA was submitted for minor works, and approved. The house was concealed by high fences, and then knocked down completely and a new house construction started. Despite many warnings the Council only shutdown the site after that occured.
Now the owner, who hasn’t yet been prosecuted for the unauthorised demolition, wants to profit from the site by building an ugly dual occupancy: see this flyer.
Ten (10) seperate submissions before May 13 will mean a single council officer will not be able to determine the matter. See page 2 of the flyer to find out how to help.
One member has written to us:
While dual occupancy is allowed in the area, in the heritage conservation area the existing dwelling is supposed to be preserved and it is supposed to respond to the character of the area, see here:
https://www.strathfield.nsw.gov.au/Develop/Low-and-Mid-Rise-Housing-Policy
They can build a dual occupancy, sure, but it should sit behind a substantially restored frontage.
A number of residents have not only written to Council, but also copied the Mayor, every single Councillor individually and the Member for Strathfield….and the HRG.
13 May 2025 submission by HRG is here.