NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Chehine-Nehmetallah v Bankstown City Council [2013] NSWLEC 1085 Hearing dates: 9 and 10 May 2013 Decision date: 20 May 2013 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Hussey C Decision: (1)The appeal is allowed. (2)Development consent is granted to DA - 495/2012 for the demolition of existing structures on the land and construction of an affordable housing development comprising 10 units over basement parking at No 18 and 22 Catherine Street, Punchbowl subject to the conditions in Annexure A. (3)The exhibits may be returned except 1, 5, 6 A, B, C and H. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - Affordable rental housing development - weight to be given to SEPP ARH and LEP, site density - character of the area - private open space and privacy amenity Legislation Cited: State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 Bankstown Local Environmental Plan 2001 Bankstown Development Control Plan 2005 Cases Cited: Project Venture Developments v Pittwater Council [200] NSWLEC 191 Succar v Bankstown City Council [2012] NSWLEC 1255 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Charlie Chehine-Nehmetallah (Applicant)
Bankstown City Council (Respondent) Representation: Mr A Pickles (Applicant)
Mr M Bonanno (Respondent) Planning Law Solutions (Applicant)
Lindsay Taylor Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 10036 of 2013
Judgment
Background 1This appeal was lodged against council's refusal of a development application for the demolition of two existing dwellings and the construction of an in-fill affordable rental housing development comprising ten dwellings with basement parking for twenty-two vehicles. The subject property is located at the adjoining lots Nos 18 and 22 Catherine Street, Punchbowl. 2A number of contentions were identified for the appeal and this resulted in responsive amendments being undertaken. The amended plans were admitted into the proceedings. Consequently the remaining contentions concern: * Site density of the proposal and relative weight to current controls * Compatibility with the character of the area * Privacy impacts on neighbouring properties * Public interest.
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