{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Papaioannou v Marrickville Council
Download as PDF
Download as Word
Highlights
My Notes
Collections
Create a New Collection
Overview
Full Text
{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Details
Case
Agency Issuance Number
Published Date
Papaioannou v Marrickville Council
[2015] NSWLEC 1407
Tags
No tags available
Case
Papaioannou v Marrickville Council
[2015] NSWLEC 1407
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Case Name: Papaioannou v Marrickville Council Medium Neutral Citation: [2015] NSWLEC 1407 Hearing Date(s): 1 September 2015 Date of Orders: 9 October 2015 Decision Date: 9 October 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dixon C Decision: (1) The appeal is dismissed. (2) Development consent to relocate a modified train carriage on the property at 884 Princes Highway, Tempe and to use the carriage as a diner for the preparation and sale of food in accordance with DA 20140073 is refused. (3) The exhibits are returned. Catchwords: APPEAL - Development application - Modified train carriage to be used as a diner - Amenity impacts for nearby residents - Increased traffic - Parking Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011 Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 Category: Principal judgment Parties: George Papaioannou (Applicant) Marrickville Council (Respondent) Representation: George Papaioannou (in person) (Applicant) Joe Strati (Solicitor) (Respondent) Solicitors: Marrickville Council (Respondent) File Number(s): 10946 of 2014 JUDGMENTIntroductionThe applicant, George Papaioannou, is self-represented. He appeals Marrickville Council’s refusal of his development application for the location of a modified train carriage on land at 884 Princes Highway, Tempe (the site) for use as a diner.His appeal is made pursuant to section 97 (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act).The proposalThe proposal is detailed in the applicant’s amended plans (exhibit A) and his statement of environmental effects dated 18 November 2014. As it currently stands...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Papaioannou v Marrickville Council
[2015] NSWLEC 1407
•
Land and Environment Court New South Wales Case Name: Papaioannou v Marrickville Council Medium Neutral Citation: [2015] NSWLEC 1407 Hearing Date(s): 1 September 2015 Date of Orders: 9 October 2015 Decision Date: 9 October 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Dixon C Decision: (1) The appeal is dismissed. (2) Development consent to relocate a modified train carriage on the property at 884 Princes Highway, Tempe and to use the carriage as a diner for the preparation and sale of food in accordance with DA 20140073 is refused. (3) The exhibits are returned. Catchwords: APPEAL - Development application - Modified train carriage to be used as a diner - Amenity impacts for nearby residents - Increased traffic - Parking Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Marrickville Local Environmental Plan 2011 Marrickville Development Control Plan 2011 Category: Principal judgment Parties: George Papaioannou (Applicant) Marrickville Council (Respondent) Representation: George Papaioannou (in person) (Applicant) Joe Strati (Solicitor) (Respondent) Solicitors: Marrickville Council (Respondent) File Number(s): 10946 of 2014 JUDGMENTIntroductionThe applicant, George Papaioannou, is self-represented. He appeals Marrickville Council’s refusal of his development application for the location of a modified train carriage on land at 884 Princes Highway, Tempe (the site) for use as a diner.His appeal is made pursuant to section 97 (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EPA Act).The proposalThe proposal is detailed in the applicant’s amended plans (exhibit A) and his statement of environmental effects dated 18 November 2014. As it currently stands...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>