NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Bitsikas v Canterbury Council [2004] NSWLEC 601 APPLICANT Parry Bitsikas PARTIES : RESPONDENT Canterbury City Council FILE NUMBER(S) : 10574 of 2004 CORAM: Brown C Development Application :- categorisation of use streetscape KEY ISSUES: solar access overlooking view loss LEGISLATION CITED: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance CASES CITED: Segal & Anor v Waverley Council [2004] NSWLEC 363 DATES OF HEARING: 10/09/04, 19/10/04 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/03/2004
APPLICANT Dr S Berveling, barrister SOLICITORS Norman Waterhouse
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT Mr A Seton, solicitor SOLICITORS Marsdens
JUDGMENT: THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES
Commissioner G T Brown
3 November 2004
10574 of 2004 Parry Bitsikas v Canterbury City Council
JUDGMENT 1 COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal by Canterbury City Council (the council) of Development Application No 1175/03 for the demolition of an existing dwelling and the construction of three attached dwellings at 18, 18A and 18B Stone Street, Earlwood (the subject site). The subject site 2 The subject site consists of three separate lots being lots 19, 20 and 21 in Section 4 of DP 32036. Each lot is 6.095 m wide and 28.65 m long, giving an area of 174.6 sq m. The three lots have a total area of 523.8 sq m. The subject site slopes approximately 4 m from the south eastern corner of 18 Stone Street to the north western corner of the same property. A single storey brick cottage with a tiled roof and a detached brick fibro garage is constructed over the three lots.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate