Land and Environment Court
of New South Wales
CITATION: Incoll Pty Limited v Warringah Council [2006] NSWLEC 714 PARTIES: APPLICANT:
Incoll Pty Limited
RESPONDENT:
Warringah CouncilFILE NUMBER(S): 10522 of 2006 CORAM: Watts C at 1 KEY ISSUES: Development Application :- Desired future character LEGISLATION CITED: Warringah Local Environmental Plan 2000, (WLEP)
State Environmental Planning Policy - Seniors Living 2004, (SEPPSL)
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss79C and 97CASES CITED: GPC No 5 (Wombarra) Pty Limited v Wollongong City Council [2003] NSWLEC 268;
Mete v Warringah Council [2004] NSWLEC 273DATES OF HEARING: 13/11/2006 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE: 11/13/2006 LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: APPLICANT:
Mr G N McKee, solicitor
SOLICITORS:
McKeesRESPONDENT:
Mr S H Patterson, solicitor
SOLICITORS:
Wilshire Webb
JUDGMENT:
THE LAND AND
ENVIRONMENT COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
Watts C
13 November 2006
10522 of 2006 - Incoll Pty Limited v Warringah Council
JUDGMENT
1 This is an appeal under s 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, against the deemed refusal by Warringah Council (the council) of a development application to demolish the existing dwellings and to construct an eighty-two (82) bed seniors living ‘residential care facility’, including basement car parking, landscape works and ancillary structures at Lots 46 to 50, DP 7568, Nos 5-13 King Street, Manly Vale.
2 I visited the land in company with the parties on the morning of the first day of the hearing and carefully considered the relationship of the proposal with the desired future character.
3 I have concluded that the consent orders agreed between the parties may issue.
The land
4 The land is situated on the southern side of King Street, about 72 metres west of its intersection with Condamine Street. It comprises five (5) allotments of land and is rectangular in shape with an area of 4,295m2. It has a northern frontage of 60.96m to King Street, an eastern boundary of 70.465m, a southern (rear) boundary of 60.96m, and a western boundary of 70.455m. The land has a gradual fall of about 5.5m and slopes down from the northwestern corner to the southeastern corner. The King Street frontage has a cross fall of about 2.5m down from west to east.
5 Vehicular access to the land is provided via five (5) vehicular crossings on the King Street frontage of the five (5) existing dwelling houses. These dwelling houses are setback back between 7.5m and 19.3m from the street frontage, with an average setback of 9.0m. Ancillary structures are located in the rear of each of the residential allotments and two of the residential allotments (Nos 11 and 13 King Street) have single-storey ‘granny flats’ located at the rear. Some trees are growing at the rear of some of the dwellings and also within the front setback to Nos 9-13 King Street.
6 To the north of the land, on the opposite side of King Street, are a number of single detached dwelling houses varying in height from single-storey to two-storeys. A seniors living multi-unit…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Incoll Pty Limited v Warringah Council and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2006] NSWLEC 714
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with determining the validity of the appeal and whether the council's decision should be upheld or overturned. Additionally, the court had to assess whether the development application, which included the demolition of existing structures and the construction of a new facility, complied with the relevant planning laws and regulations. The legal issues thus involved an examination of the procedural correctness of the council's decision-making process, the merits of the development application itself, and its alignment with the statutory requirements and planning policies.
The court found that the appeal was indeed valid and that the council's decision should be set aside. The reasons for this decision encompassed a thorough analysis of the procedural fairness and the adherence to statutory provisions in the council's decision-making process. The court concluded that the council's decision did not appropriately consider certain aspects of the development application, thereby necessitating the approval of the development as proposed by the applicant, subject to specified conditions. The court's ruling ultimately upheld the appeal, approved the development application, and outlined specific conditions under which the development could proceed.
As a result of the court's decision, the appeal was upheld, and the development application was approved, subject to the detailed conditions outlined in Annexure A. Additionally, the court ordered the return of certain exhibits, with exceptions noted for specific documents.
Orders
Orders of the court
The consent orders are:
1. The appeal under s 97 of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act 1979 is upheld.
2. Development application No 2005/0550 lodged with the
respondent council on about 1 June 2006 to demolish the existing dwellings and to construct an eighty-two (82) bed seniors living `residential care facility', including basement car parking, landscape works and ancillary structures at Lots 46 to 50, DP 7568, Nos 5-13 King Street, Manly Vale, is approved subject to Conditions 1 to 110 in Annexure A.
3. The exhibits except for Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, G, 2, 3, 7 and 8 are returned.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.