//
[2025] NSWLEC 1651
General information, not legal advice.
Land and Environment Court (NSW)
2025-09-09
Washington C
Original judgment source is linked above.
Zoe will write a short plain-English summary of this judgment and email it to you for free: what it was about, what the court decided and why. It can take up to a minute.
General information, not legal advice.
Or create a free account to save it and ask Zoe follow-up questions.
Source: NSW Caselaw (www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au). Converted to plain text by ZoeLaw. Not the official version.
Medium Neutral Citation: Lin v Ku-ring-gai Council [2025] NSWLEC 1651
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 1 September 2025
Date of orders: 09 September 2025
Decision date: 09 September 2025
Jurisdiction: Class 1
Before: Washington C
Decision: The Court orders:
(1) The appeal is upheld.
(2) Development application eDA0008/24 for the for the construction of a new dwelling with basement parking, swimming pool, cabana, tennis court and associated work at 15 Larchmont Ave, East Killara NSW (legally described as Lot 20 DP 24293) is determined by the grant of consent, subject to the conditions set out in Annexure A.
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – construction of dwelling house – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders
Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 4.16, 8.7
Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), ss 34, 34AA
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2021 (NSW), s 38
Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015, cll 4.3, 4.4, 6.2, 6.5
State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, Pt 6.5, Ch 6, ss 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 6.9, 6.10, 6.11
State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6
State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2022, s 2.1
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Qiang Lin (First Applicant)
LQ Building Services Pty Ltd (Second Applicant)
Ku-ring-gai Council (Respondent)
Representation: Counsel:
N Eastman SC (Applicant)
C Morton (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Mills Oakley (Applicant)
Sparke Helmore (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2025/95646
Publication restriction: Nil
COMMISSIONER: These Class 1 proceedings arise as a result of the actual refusal, by Ku-ring-gai Council, of development application eDA0008/24. This application seeks consent for the construction of a new 2-3 storey dwelling with basement parking, swimming pool, cabana, tennis court and associated works at 15 Larchmont Avenue, East Killara, Lot 20 in DP 24293.
These proceedings have been brought to the Court pursuant to s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EPA Act) and are being heard concurrently with matter number 2025/95647 for the neighbouring lot.
The Court arranged a conciliation conference and hearing under s 34AA of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) (LEC Act) between the parties, over which I presided on 1 September 2025.
At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to acceptable terms of a decision in the proceedings. This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal and granting development consent to the development application subject to conditions. Subsequently, the matter concluded in conciliation and did not proceed to a hearing.
As part of this agreement, pursuant to s 38 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021 (NSW) (EPA Regulation), the Council agreed to the applicants amending the development application to reflect the outcomes of the joint expert reports, and to adequately resolve the Council’s contentions.
Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision if that decision is one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 4.16 of the EPA Act to grant consent to the development application. There are jurisdictional prerequisites that must be satisfied before this function can be exercised, which the parties identified and explained, and from this I note the following points.
The development applications were made with the written consent of the owner of the land.
The application was adequately notified from 4 to 18 March 2024. No submissions were received.
The subject site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential under the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 (KLEP), within which development for the purposes of a dwelling house is permissible with consent. The proposed development is consistent with the objectives of this zone.
Pursuant to KLEP cl 4.3, a maximum building height of 9.5m applies to the subject site, with which the proposed development complies.
KLEP cl 4.4 establishes a maximum floor space ratio (FSR) for the site of 0.3:1. The proposed development again complies with this development standard.
Based on the Engineering Report by Martens dated 11 August 2025 and the parties’ submission, I accept that the earthworks-related matters listed in KLEP cl 6.2(3) have been considered, and the proposed earthworks are acceptable pursuant to this clause.
From the stormwater drainage plans by MBC Engineering Pty Ltd in the amended application and the parties’ submission, I accept that the stormwater and water sensitive urban design of the proposed development meets the requirements of KLEP cl 6.5.
The site is located within the Sydney Harbour Catchment and therefore Pt 6.5 of Ch 6 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021 (SEPP B&C) applies. From the parties’ submission and the information in the amended application, I accept that the requirements of Ch 6 of SEPP B&C relating to water quality and quantity (s 6.6) and aquatic ecology (s 6.7) are met with the proposed development. I further accept that the proposed development is not flood liable land (s 6.8) does not affect public access to and from natural waterbodies (s 6.9), is not likely to have any adverse environmental impact on any adjacent local government areas (s 6.10), and is not located within 100 m of a natural waterbody (s 6.11).
Section 4.6 of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021 requires the consent authority to consider whether the site is contaminated, and if so, whether it is or will be made suitable for the intended use. From the parties’ submission and the Statement of Environmental Effects, I accept that the subject site has historically been used for residential purposes and there is no record of any contamination, or contaminating activity on site. Accordingly, I accept that in terms of contamination, the site is suitable for the intended, continued residential use.
A BASIX certificate has been provided that relates to the development as amended, and quantifies the embodied emissions attributable to the development pursuant to the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2022 s 2.1.
For these reasons, I am satisfied that the parties’ decision is one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions and subsequently, I am required under s 34(3) of the LEC Act to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision.
The Court notes that the respondent, as the relevant consent authority has agreed, under s 38(1) and (4) of the EPA Regulations, to the applicants amending the development application eDA0008/24 in Annexure B.
The Court orders:
The appeal is upheld.
Development application eDA0008/24 for the for the construction of a new dwelling with basement parking, swimming pool, cabana, tennis court and associated work at 15 Larchmont Ave, East Killara NSW (legally described as Lot 20 DP 24293) is determined by the grant of consent, subject to the conditions set out in Annexure A.
**********
Lin
Ku-ring-gai Council [2025] NSWLEC 1651