Morgan v Lane Cove Council (No 1) [2017] NSWLEC 1687

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Morgan v Lane Cove Council (No 1) [2017] NSWLEC 1687 Hearing dates: 19 September 2017 Date of orders: 01 December 2017 Decision date: 01 December 2017 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dixon C Decision: See at [64] Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – subdivision of land – construction of dwelling house – adequacy of rear setback form E2 conservation land on the site and adjoining foreshore reserve – weight to be given to planning proposal for acquisition of E2 land for a walkway Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 State Environmental Planning Policy No 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas Cases Cited: Morgan v Lane Cove Council (No 2) [2018] NSWLEC 1472 Texts Cited: Lane Cove Development Control Plan 2009 Category: Principal judgment Parties: June Morgan (Applicant) Lane Cove Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: M Fraser (Applicant) Dr J Smith (Respondent)

Solicitors: JT Law Pty Ltd (Applicant) Marsdens Law Group (Respondent) File Number(s): 2017/63578 and 2017/211667 Publication restriction: No

Judgment

Introduction 1. The applicant, June Morgan, lodged two development applications with the Lane Cove Council in respect of her property at 7 Dettmann Avenue, Longueville ('the site'): * Development application number (DA 170/2016) sought consent for the subdivision of the site into two (2) Torrens title allotments. Lot 1 fronts Dettmann Avenue and is 654m2. Lot 2 adjoins the foreshore to Tambourine Bay and is 917m² including a 3m wide access handle off Dettmann Avenue; and * Development application number (DA 213/20166) sought consent for the construction of a three storey dwelling and access driveway on Lot 2. 1. The Council has refused development consent to the applications and the applicant has now exercised, in each case, her right of appeal to the Court under s 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 ('EPA Act'). The proceedings were heard together pursuant to s 34AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 ('the Court Act'). The parties have asked, in my consideration of the evidence, that I have regard to the matters discussed and observed during the onsite s 34 conciliation conference which preceded the hearing. This includes my observations of the site and its environs and the oral evidence from the three local objectors who addressed the Court at that time. While their evidence was responsive to an earlier proposal, their submissions, to a large extent, remain relevant. I have also considered the further submissions received after notification of the current applications.