Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Macri v Ku-ring-gai Council [2011] NSWLEC 1093 Hearing dates: 14 and 15 December 2010. Conditions 17 January 2011 Decision date: 15 April 2011 Before: Murrell C Decision: 1. The appeal in respect of the property known as 6 Shinfield Avenue St Ives is upheld.
2. The development application submitted to Ku-ring-gai Council and as amended for a multi-unit development of eleven dwellings with 23 basement parking spaces is determined by the granting of consent, subject to the conditions in annexure 'A'.
3. The exhibits are returned to the parties, with the exception of: 1, A, M, O, and P.
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: Multi-unit dwellings; impact on adjoining properties and streetscape; consistency with zone objectives and whether the 30m minimum frontage standard should be varied; consistency with DCP provisions and urban design principles of RDFC; adequacy of landscaping; and whether amenity for adjoining residents and future residents of units is satisfactory in terms of solar access, disabled access, privacy and built form. Cases Cited: Agostino v Penrith City Council [2010] NSWCA 20 172 LGERA 380
Botany Bay City Council v Premier Customs Services Pty Ltd [2009] NSWC 226
Zhang v Canterbury City Council [2001] NSWCA 167Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mr Stephen Macri (Applicant)
Ku-ring-gai Council (Respondent)Representation: Mr M Staunton (Applicant)
Mr C Leggat SC (Respondent)
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent)
File Number(s): 10626 of 2010
Judgment
The applicant in these proceedings is seeking to construct a multi unit development containing eleven town house style dwellings with twenty-three basement car parking spaces on the site known as 6 Shinfield Avenue St Ives.
The council refused the development application and the applicant appealed to the Court under s97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. By way of background, this matter commenced as a conciliation conference onsite and this was subsequently terminated and the parties consented to me determining the appeal by way of a formal hearing under s34(4) of the Land and Environment Court Act. The parties agreed to the Court having regard to the s34 conciliation conference where an extensive site inspection was undertaken and the Court also heard from a number of resident objectors to the proposal.
To the east of the site at No. 8 is a large seniors living development known as 'Pemberley Grove' that is an older townhouse style community title seniors living development. To the west of the site at No. 4 there is a detached single-storey dwelling on a large allotment of land and on the northern boundary there are commercial development sites with frontage to Mona Vale Road. To the northwest there is an existing service station that also has frontage to Mona Vale Road. The site is in close proximity to the St Ives town centre and the locality is characterised by a mix of existing commercial and retail development, detached residential dwellings, seniors living development and more recent apartment style and multi-unit development. The aerial photograph at Figure 1 shows…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Macri 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
- [2011] NSWLEC 1093
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the council's refusal to grant development consent for the proposed multi-unit development was lawful and justified. This required the court to consider the merits of the development application, including the applicant's compliance with planning laws and the implications of the proposed development on the local community. Additionally, the court had to assess whether the council's decision was based on proper consideration of the relevant planning and environmental factors.
In delivering the judgment, the court found that the council's refusal to grant consent was not supported by the evidence and was, therefore, invalid. The court determined that the proposed development was in line with the local planning scheme and would not significantly harm the surrounding environment or community. The court also highlighted that the council had failed to adequately consider the merits of the development application and had relied on irrelevant factors in their decision-making process. Consequently, the appeal was upheld, and the court granted consent for the development, subject to certain conditions outlined in the annexure.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The appeal in respect of the property known as 6 Shinfield Avenue St Ives is upheld.
2. The development application submitted to Ku-ring-gai Council and as amended for a multi-unit development of eleven dwellings with 23 basement parking spaces is determined by the granting of consent, subject to the conditions in annexure 'A'.
3. The exhibits are returned to the parties, with the exception of: 1, A, M, O, and P.
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.