20 Trentino Pty Limited v Ku-ring-gai Council

Case

[2022] NSWLEC 1283

09 June 2022

No judgment structure available for this case.

Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: 20 Trentino Pty Limited v Ku-ring-gai Council [2022] NSWLEC 1283
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 25 and 26 May 2022
Date of orders: 09 June 2022
Decision date: 09 June 2022
Jurisdiction:Class 1
Before: Espinosa C
Decision:

The Court orders that:

(1) the appeal is upheld.

(2) development application DA0555/21 for the demolition of existing dwelling, Torrens title subdivision into 2 lots and construction of a dwelling house on each lot – Integrated Development – Water Management Act, 2000 at 20 Trentino Road, Turramurra, NSW 2074 (legally described as Lot 25B in DP370846) is determined by the grant of consent subject to the conditions set out in Annexure 'A' to this agreement.

Catchwords:

DEVELOPMENT APPEAL – subdivision – construction of dwelling house - conciliation conference – agreement between the parties - orders

Legislation Cited:

Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016, s 7.4 and 7.7

Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2017, cl 7.1

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 2.22, 4.16, 4.46, 8.7

Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015, cl 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5

Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 34

State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6

Water Management Act 2000, ss 89, 90 and 91

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: 20 Trentino Pty Limited (Applicant)
Ku-ring-gai Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
J Lazarus SC (Applicant)
C Rose (Solicitor) (Respondent)

Solicitors:
Addisons (Applicant)
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2022/33018
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. COMMISSIONER: The nature of proceedings: This is a Class 1 Development Appeal pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act) being an appeal against the refusal of Development Application No. 0555/21 seeking development consent for the demolition of existing buildings, Torrens title subdivision into 2 lots, and construction of a dwelling house on each lot (the Proposed Development) at 20 Trentino Road, Turramurra legally described as Lot 25B in DP 370846 (the Site).

  2. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which has been held on 25 and 26 May 2022. I have 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. This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal and granting development consent to the development application subject to conditions.

  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. There are jurisdictional prerequisites that must be satisfied before this function can be exercised. The parties identified the jurisdictional prerequisites of relevance in these proceedings and the parties explained how the jurisdictional prerequisites have been satisfied in an agreed joint jurisdictional statement which I summarise as relevant below.

  6. The development application was notified between 22 February 2022 and 22 March 2022, in accordance with the community participation requirements of s 2.22 and Sch 1 of the EPA Act. Any submissions made have been considered by the parties, and the parties agree the matters raised have been addressed in the Applicant’s amended application.

  7. The Proposed Development complies with the following relevant development standards:

  1. Minimum subdivision lot size of 930m2 per lot (cl 4.1 of the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (KLEP));

  2. Maximum height of buildings of 9.5 m (cl 4.3 of the KLEP);

  3. Floor space ratio control of 0.3:1 (cl 4.4 of the KLEP)

  1. The Site is identified as being partially in a flood planning area on the “Hydrology Map”. The parties agree that the proposed development satisfied the considerations within clause 5.21 of the KLEP and that the Site is suitable for the development proposed.

  2. The Site is identified on the KLEP Maps as being affected by class 5 acid sulfate soils. The parties agree that the proposed development satisfies the considerations within cl 6.1 of the KLEP, and the Site is suitable for the Proposed Development.

  3. The Applicant has provided a “Proposed Residential Redevelopment Geotechnical Investigation Report” prepared by Cardno dated 21 April 2022 in order to satisfy cl 6.2 of the KLEP. The parties agree that the proposed development satisfies the considerations within cl 6.2 and that the Site is suitable for the development proposed.

  4. The Site is partially identified as an “Area of Biodiversity Significance” on the Terrestrial Biodiversity Map. The Applicant has provided a “Biodiversity Development Assessment Report” prepared by Fraser Ecology dated 16 May 2022 and a “Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report” prepared by Malcolm Bruce dated 5 May 2022 in order to satisfy the considerations within cl 6.3 of the KLEP. The parties agree that the proposed development satisfies the considerations within cl 6.3 and that the Site is suitable for the Proposed Development.

  5. The Site is identified as being partially affected by Category 3 Riparian Lands on the Riparian Lands and Watercourses Map. The Applicant provided a Flora and Fauna Report, prepared by Narla Environmental, dated August 2021 in order to satisfy the considerations within cl 6.4 of the KLEP. The parties agree that the proposed development satisfied the considerations within clause 6.4 and that the Site is suitable for the Proposed Development.

  6. The Applicant has provided stormwater management plans prepared by Quantum Engineers dated 13 May 2022. The parties agree that the proposed development satisfies the considerations within cl 6.5 of the KLEP and that the Site is suitable for the Proposed Development.

  7. In relation to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 (SEPP Resilience and Hazards), the Proposed Development is on land which has historically been used for residential purposes and is unlikely to contain any contamination. The parties agree that Clause 4.6 of the SEPP Resilience and Hazards is satisfied, and that the Site is suitable for the development proposed. The parties also rely on the Council’s Assessment Report, pages 88-89 (addressing contamination) and 91-92 (addressing clause 5.21 of the LEP) contained at Tab 14 of the Respondent’s bundle filed with the Court on 23 May 2022:

  8. The proposed development is BASIX affected development as prescribed by the State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 (SEPP BASIX). The Applicant has provided the following documents to satisfy the requirements of SEPP BASIX:

Updated BASIX Stamped Plans

05 May 2022

Updated BASIX Certificate for Lot A

23 May 2022

Updated BASIX Certificate for Lot B

23 May 2022

  1. Sections 7.4 and 7.7 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act) apply to the Proposed Development on the Site. Clause 7.1(3) of the Biodiversity Conservation Regulation 2017 (BC Regulation) applies to the Site. The Applicant has provided a “Biodiversity Development Assessment Report” prepared by Fraser Ecology dated 16 May 2022 to satisfy clause 7.1(3) of the BC Regulation. The Parties agree that clause 7.1(3) of the BC Regulation has been satisfied.

  2. The proposed development is “Integrated Development” as defined by section 4.46 of the EPA Act as it may require an approval under ss 89, 90 and 91 of the Water Management Act 2000 (WM Act). The Parties agree that the development application was referred to Water NSW and no terms of approval from Water NSW are required for the development.

  3. I am satisfied that the parties’ decision is one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, as required by s 34(3) of the LEC Act. I adopt the reasons given by the parties as summarised above in this judgment.

  4. 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.

Notations

  1. The Court notes that:

  1. Ku-ring-gai Council as the relevant consent authority has, pursuant to clause 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 consented to the following amendments to development application DA 0555/21:

Title of document

Dated

Updated Architectural Plans for Lot A

Drawing no.

Name

Rev

Dated

A1.00B

Site Analysis Plan

B

19 April 2022

A1.01C

Proposed Site and Roof Plan

C

19 April 2022

A1.02C

Proposed Plans

C

19 April 2022

A1.03C

Proposed Elevations

C

19 April 2022

A1.04C

Proposed Sections

C

19 April 2022

A1.06B

Plan of Detail Subdivision

B

19 April 2022

A1.08B

Shadow Diagrams Winter

B

19 April 2022

A1.09B

Compliance Calculations

B

19 April 2022

A1.10B

Environmental Site Management Plan

B

19 April 2022

A1.11C

Subdivision Plan – Scope of Works

C

26 May 2022

A3.01

Lot A – Material Sample Board

23 May 2022

Updated Architectural Plans for Lot B

Drawing no.

Name

Rev

Dated

DA01

Site Analysis Plan

B

20 April 2022

DA02

Lot B – Proposed Roof/Site Plan

D

20 April 2022

DA03

Lot B – Proposed Ground Floor Plan

F

20 May 2022

DA04

Lot B – Proposed First Floor Plan

E

20 April 2022

DA05

Lot B – Proposed Basement

E

20 May 2022

DA06

Lot B – Proposed Elevations 01 & Section

E

20 May 2022

DA07

Lot B – Proposed Elevations 02 & Section

E

20 May 2022

DA08

Sections

B

20 May 2022

DA09

Lot B – Area Calculations

D

20 May 2022

DA10

Lot B – Proposed Shadow Diagrams

B

12 October 2021

Updated Landscape Plans

Drawing no.

Name

Rev

Dated

Lot A – L01

Landscape Concept Plan, Plant Images and Schedule

C

21 May 2022

LOT A – L02

Details, Images and Notes.

C

21 May 2022

LOTB – L01

Landscape Concept Plan

C

21 May 2022

LOT B-L02

Plant Schedule, Details, Images and Notes.

C

21 May 2022

Updated Stormwater Plans

13 May 2022

Updated Subdivision and Civil Works Plans

13 May 2022

Proposed Residential Redevelopment Geotechnical Investigation Report

21 April 2022

Updated Arboricultural Impact Assessment of a Tree Located on or Near 20 Trentino Road, Turramurra

05 May 2022

Drivecon Permeable Concrete Performance Specifications

Updated Waste Management Plan

28 April 2022

Updated Biodiversity Development Assessment Report

16 May 2022

Updated BASIX Stamped Plans

05 May 2022

Updated BASIX Certificate for Lot A

23 May 2022

Updated BASIX Certificate for Lot B

23 May 2022

Updated National House Energy Rating Scheme for Lot A

05 May 2022

Updated National House Energy Rating Scheme for Lot B

05 May 2022

  1. the Applicant uploaded the amended application on the NSW planning portal on 25 May 2022 and 26 May 2022.

  2. the above documents which comprise the amended application were filed with Court on 26 May 2022.

Orders

  1. The Court orders that:

  1. the appeal is upheld.

  2. development application DA0555/21 for the demolition of existing dwelling, Torrens title subdivision into 2 lots and construction of a dwelling house on each lot – Integrated Development – Water Management Act, 2000 at 20 Trentino Road, Turramurra, NSW 2074 (legally described as Lot 25B in DP370846) is determined by the grant of consent subject to the conditions set out in Annexure 'A' to this agreement.

……………………….

E Espinosa

Commissioner of the Court

(Annexure A) (387395, pdf)

**********

Decision last updated: 09 June 2022

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

8