An artist's impression of the "deep green" apartment building, dubbed Nightingale 2.0. VCAT senior member Russell Byard, in overturning the approval for the Brunswick apartments, ruled there was nothing as convenient as owning a car. "No such arrangements … are as convenient as private car ownership", Mr Byard wrote at the time. The 20-apartment Brunswick project – revised with three parking spots –​ is about to start construction. Now, the $7 million, car-parking-free Fairfield project is headed down the same route at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

A map of the site in Fairfield earmarked for a green development known as Nightingale 2.0. Credit:nearmap The challenge to the planned 20-apartment block comes from 17 Fairfield residents and the local traders' association. They are concerned the five-level building will block northern sunlight for neighbouring businesses. Another view of the five-storey Nightingale 2.0 block in Fairfield. Credit:Six Degrees Architects And they argue the project is an over-development of the 520-square-metre site, bought last year for $1.87 million.

The opponents argue that the planned building "detracts from the heritage place by completely blocking views from the south and dwarfing the heritage buildings from the north". Demand for the first Nightingale project was so strong that a ballot was started for buyers. But the lack of parking is the key concern among objectors. Five were contacted this week, but all declined to comment on the record. One trader, who did not want to give their name, asked where residents in the apartments would park. "Where are their visitors going to park?" the trader asked.

"It's only going to put pressure on the very limited parking available on our street." As well as shared rooftop washing machines and no individual laundries, no second bathrooms, no air conditioning and using rainwater for toilet flushing, there is no car parking in the project. There is also a 20-year caveat on each apartment's title dictating the amount they can be sold for. Owners can only resell their property for the purchase price plus the average price growth for the suburb. The same condition exists for the Brunswick project.

A five-storey office block was already approved on the site, but the developer in that case had intended to provide 14 car parking spaces. The developer behind the Fairfield project is a group of 24 investors, who together have put together $2.4 million as part of a "social business model". Each investor has a capped profit of 15 per cent, and anything over that amount is put back into the building to minimise costs. The Nightingale project is designed by Six Degrees Architects, who have worked on tiny residential projects up to a $60 million apartment development in Docklands. Last week they won the Architects Institute award for best sustainable architecture.

The lead architect on the project, James Legge, said he had been "slightly surprised" by the VCAT challenge. "It seems to be easier to get rubbish through than it is to get a good project approved," he said. Mr Legge said the reaction to a car-free development that tried to do something about housing affordability by limiting profiteering was often extreme, depending on people's viewpoint. "A lot of people are very enthusiastic," he said. "Then there is a large amount of cynicism: people who aren't in favour either think we are a bunch of crazy hippies, or that we're wolves in sheep's clothing."

A message sent last week to prospective purchasers and investors said the VCAT appeal would delay the project by up to nine months. The hold-up, the message said, would create "significant legal and [land] holding costs of between $50,000-$75,000, which will ultimately result in more expensive apartments". A third Nightingale project is under consideration on Sydney Road, Brunswick, while a fourth is also possible south of the river – although the higher land costs there has made finding a site more difficult.