Raiti v Leichhardt Council (2)

[2005] NSWLEC 410

Land and Environment Court

of New South Wales

CITATION:

Raiti v Leichhardt Council (2) [2005] NSWLEC 410

PARTIES:

APPLICANT
Raiti

RESPONDENT
Leichhardt Council

FILE NUMBER(S):

11302 of 2004

CORAM:

Tuor C.

KEY ISSUES:

Development Application :- Alterations and additions to an existing single storey house
Amended plans address issues of streetscape setback bulk and scale privacy and overshadowing.

LEGISLATION CITED:

Leichhardt Local Environmental Plan 2000

DATES OF HEARING:

21/07/2005

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE:

07/21/2005

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:

APPLICANT
Mr Howard, barrister

RESPONDENT
Ms Rankin, solicitor
Pike Pike & Fenwick

JUDGMENT:

THE LAND AND
ENVIRONMENT COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES

Tuor C

21 July 2005

11302 of 2004 Raiti v Leichhardt Municipal Council (2)

JUDGMENT

1 On 28 April 2005, I delivered a preliminary judgment on this appeal. The appeal is against the refusal by Leichhardt Municipal Council of a development application for alterations and additions to an existing single storey house at 59 Louisa Road, Birchgrove, to provide a two storey dwelling and off street parking for two cars.

2 The judgment addressed a number of issues with the proposal including its streetscape impact as a result of the front setback and two car parking spaces, rear setback and resultant impact on bulk and scale, privacy and overshadowing of adjoining properties. I found that in its current form the application does not warrant approval but that amended plans could address the issues of concern. The parties agreed to this course of action and the applicant prepared amended plans. Council renotified the amended plans and no submissions received. The parties then sought consent orders from the court.

3 The amended plans delete one car parking space, reduce the front setback, increase the rear setback of the upper level and change the rear roof form. I am satisfied that the amended plans address the issues raised in the preliminary judgment and that the proposal is acceptable.

The Orders of the Court, by consent, are:

1 The appeal be upheld.

2 Development consent be granted to development application D/2004/475 for part demolition and alterations and additions to an existing single storey dwelling and associated works at premises known as 59 Louisa Road Birchgrove, subject to the conditions annexed and marked with the letter “A”.

3 The exhibits, except exhibits 9 and D, be returned.

4 No order as to costs.

________________________

Commissioner of the Court