Achi Constructions Pty Limited v Hurstville City Council

PDF
Word
Highlights
Notes
Overview Full Text
Details
Case Agency Issuance Number Published Date

Achi Constructions Pty Limited v Hurstville City Council

[2014] NSWLEC 1216

Tags

No tags available

Case

Achi Constructions Pty Limited v Hurstville City Council

[2014] NSWLEC 1216

Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Achi Constructions Pty Limited v Hurstville City Council [2014] NSWLEC 1216 Hearing dates:23 October 2014Decision date: 23 October 2014 Jurisdiction:Class 1Before: Brown C Decision: 1.The appeal is upheld.2. Development Application DA2013/0408 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a three storey residential flat building comprising 21 units and basement car parking and strata subdivision at 71-75 Lawrence Street, Peakhurst, is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure A.3. The exhibits, other than exhibits 1, 6, A and B are returned. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: demolition of existing structures and construction of a three storey residential flat building comprising 21 residential units with basement car parking and strata subdivision - amended plans address council contentions Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 Category:Principal judgmentParties: Achi Constructions Pty Limited (Applicant) Hurstville City Council (Respondent) Representation: Mr M Staunton, barrister (Applicant) Mr P Rigg, barrister (Respondent) Gadens Lawyers (Applicant) Hurstville City Council (Respondent) File Number(s):10432 of 2014 JudgmentCOMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal by Hurstville City Council of DA2013/0408 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a three storey residential flat building comprising 21 residential units with basement car parking and strata subdivision at 71-75 Lawrence Street, Peakhurst (the site).The contentions identified in the Council's Statement of Facts and Contentions were insufficient information (Contention 1), inconsistency with State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 - Design Quality...

Continue reading the full case

Case content preview

Tags

No tags available

Case

Achi Constructions Pty Limited v Hurstville City Council

[2014] NSWLEC 1216

Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Achi Constructions Pty Limited v Hurstville City Council [2014] NSWLEC 1216 Hearing dates:23 October 2014Decision date: 23 October 2014 Jurisdiction:Class 1Before: Brown C Decision: 1.The appeal is upheld.2. Development Application DA2013/0408 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a three storey residential flat building comprising 21 units and basement car parking and strata subdivision at 71-75 Lawrence Street, Peakhurst, is approved subject to the conditions in Annexure A.3. The exhibits, other than exhibits 1, 6, A and B are returned. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: demolition of existing structures and construction of a three storey residential flat building comprising 21 residential units with basement car parking and strata subdivision - amended plans address council contentions Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 Category:Principal judgmentParties: Achi Constructions Pty Limited (Applicant) Hurstville City Council (Respondent) Representation: Mr M Staunton, barrister (Applicant) Mr P Rigg, barrister (Respondent) Gadens Lawyers (Applicant) Hurstville City Council (Respondent) File Number(s):10432 of 2014 JudgmentCOMMISSIONER: This is an appeal against the refusal by Hurstville City Council of DA2013/0408 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a three storey residential flat building comprising 21 residential units with basement car parking and strata subdivision at 71-75 Lawrence Street, Peakhurst (the site).The contentions identified in the Council's Statement of Facts and Contentions were insufficient information (Contention 1), inconsistency with State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 - Design Quality...