Ryan and Anor v Ku-ring-gai Council [2015] NSWLEC 1168

Ryan and Anor v Ku-ring-gai Council [2015] NSWLEC 1168

On fine balance, consent should be granted to a revised proposal permitting limited piping up to the point of gradient change slightly downstream of the wooden bridge, subject to plans and revised conditions for engineered open channel, landscaping, weed removal, installation of a gross pollutant trap, and an ongoing management regime to be developed to the satisfaction of the Council.

Parties
First Applicant: Felicity Ryan; Second Applicant: Rodger Ryan; Respondent: Ku-ring-gai Council
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Development Appeal / Final Judgment With Directions
Outcome
Development consent may be granted on revised, limited terms if applicants submit plans and respondent files revised conditions; otherwise, appeal is dismissed.
Legal Topics
Development Application, Riparian Land, Waterway Enhancement, Residential Amenity, Policy Against Piping
Environmental Law Planning Law Development Application Riparian Land Waterway Enhancement Residential Amenity Policy Against Piping

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Felicity Ryan

First Applicant

Rodger Ryan

Second Applicant

Ku-ring-gai Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Development Appeal / Final Judgment With Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed piping of streamway is permissible under relevant planning controls and policies
  2. 2 Balancing environmental benefits against amenity improvements
  3. 3 Extent and conditions of development consent

Ratio Decidendi

On fine balance, consent should be granted to a revised proposal permitting limited piping up to the point of gradient change slightly downstream of the wooden bridge, subject to plans and revised conditions for engineered open channel, landscaping, weed removal, installation of a gross pollutant trap, and an ongoing management regime to be developed to the satisfaction of the Council.

Court Disposition

Development consent may be granted on revised, limited terms if applicants submit plans and respondent files revised conditions; otherwise, appeal is dismissed.

Orders

  • Applicants to advise Court and respondent by close of business on 25 May if they wish to be granted development consent in limited approvable terms.
  • If applicants advise against or fail to notify, appeal dismissed without further hearing.