NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Randall v Ashfield Council [2012] NSWLEC 1287 Hearing dates: 30-31 August 2012Conditions filed 14 September 2012 Decision date: 17 October 2012 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Tuor C Decision: See paragraph 44 and 45 Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION, residential units. Height, streetscape and solar access. Legislation Cited: Ashfield Local Environmental Plan 1985 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 - Design Quality of Residential Flat Development State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Development Standards. Cases Cited: Project Venture Developments v Pittwater Council [2005] NSWLEC 191 Category: Principal judgment Parties: David Randall (Applicant)
Ashfield Council (Respondent) Representation: Ms S Duggan, barrister (Respondent)
Mr G McKee, solicitor (Applicant) Solicitors McKees Legal Solutions (Applicant)
Wilshire Webb Staunton Beattie (Respondent) File Number(s): 10530 of 2012
Judgment 1This is an appeal against the refusal by Ashfield Council (council) of a development application (DA10.2012.051) under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act) for the demolition of existing industrial buildings, alterations and additions to the existing heritage item, construction of 27 dwellings within 4 new residential buildings and a new underground car park for 43 cars at 67-75 Smith Street, Summer Hill (site). 2The contentions that remain in dispute are whether the height of the terrace houses on Smith Street is acceptable and whether their two storey form is consistent with the streetscape and whether the dwellings within the development achieve an adequate level of solar access.
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