Charalambous v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2016] NSWLEC 1576

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Charalambous v Canterbury-Bankstown Council [2016] NSWLEC 1576 Hearing dates: 24 October 2016 Date of orders: 02 December 2016 Decision date: 02 December 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Smithson C Decision: 1. The appeal is upheld. 2. Development application 452/2014 for a boarding house at 1 Fifth Avenue, Campsie is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure "A". 3. The exhibits, other than Exhibits A, B, C, D and 1, are returned. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: boarding house; isolated site; street address; character; setbacks Legislation Cited: Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 2012 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 Cases Cited: Project Venture Developments v Pittwater Council [2005] NSWLEC 191 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Costa Charalambous (Applicant) Canterbury-Bankstown Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr M Staunton (Applicant)

Solicitors: Mr V Conomos, Conomos Legal (Applicant) Ms R McCulloch, Pikes & Verekers Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 151682 of 2016 Publication restriction: No

Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: This appeal, pursuant to the provisions of s 97 (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, is against the refusal of then Canterbury City Council now Canterbury-Bankstown City Council (the Council) of Development Application 452/2014 (the application) for the development of a boarding house at 1 Fifth Avenue, Campsie (the site). 2. The application was lodged in September 2014. It proposed a 7 storey development with 18 rooms and was refused by the Council in October 2015. 3. The application was amended following conciliation to reduce both the height and density. It now proposes the development of a 6 storey boarding house with 15 boarding rooms and communal laundry, living room/kitchen and outdoor open space. The development has a two level basement containing 3 cars, 4 motor cycles and 5 bicycles accessed via a basement and driveway on the adjoining development to the south. 4. The amended application was advertised and two submissions were lodged in response raising concerns with the overdevelopment of the site and the adequacy of the parking. 5. The amended proposal addressed a number of Council contentions which had been grounds for refusal. Remaining contentions related to the bulk, character and setback of the development in terms of the impact on the streetscape and on neighbours.