NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Raland Construction Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council [2022] NSWLEC 1376 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 30 May 2022 and 21 June 2022. Date of orders: 18 July 2022 Decision date: 18 July 2022 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Harding AC Decision: The Court Orders that: (1) In accordance with section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 the Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs thrown away, as a result of the amendment, in the sum of $3,000. (2) The Appeal is upheld. (3) Development Application No. DA21/0983, for the demolition of the existing dwellings and associated structures, lot consolidation and the construction and operation of a two (2) storey centre based child care facility for one-hundred and twenty (120) children including basement car parking spaces and associated landscaping, tree removal and drainage, on land legally described as Lot 14 in DP30684, Lot 15 in DP30684 and Lot 16 in DP30684 and known as 1-5 Gordon Street, St Marys, NSW, is determined by the grant of Development Consent subject to the conditions set out in Annexure "A". Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION – child care centre – amended plans – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 4.15, 8.7, 8.15 Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 34 Penrith Local Environmental Plan 2010, cl 7.7 State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021 State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards), cl 4.6 State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021, cll 2.118, 3.23 Texts Cited: Department of Planning & Environment NSW, 'Child Care Planning Guideline', August 2017 Penrith Development Control Plan 2014 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Raland Construction Pty Ltd (Applicant) Penrith City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: M Staunton (Applicant) C Campbell (Solicitor) (Respondent)
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