Land and Environment Court
of New South Wales
CITATION: Leonard v Ku-ring-gai Council [2004] NSWLEC 330 PARTIES: APPLICANT
RESPONDENT
Mr B Leonard and Carnegie Credit Management Services Pty Ltd
Ku-ring-gai CouncilFILE NUMBER(S): 10116 of 2004; 10117 of 2004 CORAM: Cowdroy J KEY ISSUES: Appeal :- development incompatible with surrounding development LEGISLATION CITED: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, s 88B, s 91
Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance
Rivers and Foreshores Improvement Act 1948, s22B
State Environmental Planning Policy No 53 - Metropolitan Residential DevelopmentCASES CITED: DATES OF HEARING: 01/06/2004; 03/06/2004 EX TEMPORE
JUDGMENT DATE :06/03/2004 LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:
APPLICANT
Mr S. Kondilios (Solicitor)SOLICITORS
Maddocks LawyersRESPONDENT
SOLICITORS
Mr P. Rigg (Solicitor)
Deacons
JUDGMENT:
IN THE LAND AND
ENVIRONMENT COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
10116 of 2004;
10117 of 2004
3 June 2004Cowdroy J
- Applicant
- Respondent
Introduction
1 This is an appeal against the refusal by Ku-ring-gai Council (“the council”) of a development application (No 1652/03) to construct two detached dual occupancy developments on lot D in DP 324517, known as 20 Warwick Street, Killara (Appeal No 10117 of 2004). I record that in this appeal I have been assisted by Commissioner Tuor of the Court.
2 A development application (No 1653/03) to demolish the existing house and subdivide the site into two allotments was approved by council but the applicant is appealing against a condition of development consent (“Condition 55”) which requires the boundary between the allotments to be straightened (Appeal No 10116 of 2004). The applicant stated that this appeal would be discontinued if the appeal against the refusal of the dual occupancy developments was not upheld.
The site and its context
3 The site is located on the western side of Warwick Street, Killara. It has an area of 2928 square metres with the frontage to Warwick Street of 41.7 metres and a depth of about 70 metres. The site is located on the low side of Warwick Street and slopes approximately 13 metres towards the rear of the property. A watercourse follows the northern boundary of the site. A number of large trees, mainly Sydney Blue Gum are growing beside the creek. Other trees are scattered throughout the site, which is currently developed with a part one, part two-storey house located towards the centre of the site.
4 The surrounding area is characterised by single dwellings on large allotments in landscape settings. The allotments include a number of battle axe blocks and the houses are predominantly one and two-storey with some three-storey houses. There are a range of style and sizes, predominantly dating from the 1950’s and 60’s. Although there are some earlier houses, generally smaller cottages as well as more recent, larger houses. The gardens and streets in the area have large canopy trees that contribute to the character of the area.
Background
5 The applications were lodged on the 16 December 2003. They were notified to nearby residents…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Leonard v Ku-ring-gai 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
- [2004] NSWLEC 330
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court heard from experts and residents, considering the impact of the development on the site's trees, stormwater, adjoining neighbours, and parking. The court found that the proposed development did not align with the area's key characteristics of large allotment sizes, generous landscaped areas, and diverse building designs. The four houses being almost identical in design, materials, and form, with limited separation between them, resulted in a development that did not contribute to an attractive residential environment with clear character and identity, as required by SEPP 53.
The court dismissed the appeal against the refusal of the dual occupancy developments and ordered that the development application be refused. The court also found that the issue of the impact of the development on the site's trees, as well as the requirement for a Species Impact Statement, needed to be adequately addressed in any future application.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.