NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Ecostay Pty Ltd v Penrith City Council [2024] NSWLEC 1842 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 20 December 2024 Date of orders: 30 December 2024 Decision date: 30 December 2024 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Horton C Decision: The Court orders that: (1) Leave is granted to the Applicant to amend Development Application No. DA23/0946 (PAN-384803) and rely upon the amended plans and documents in Annexure A. (2) The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs throw away by reason of the amendment of development application No DA23/0946 (PAN-384803) pursuant to section 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in the agreed sum of $15,000 to be paid within 28 days of these orders. (3) The appeal is upheld. (4) Development consent is granted to development application No. DA23/0946 (PAN-384803) for construction of a three-storey co-living development with a total of 19 rooms at 29-31 Castlereagh Street, Penrith (Lot 2 in Deposited Plan 1190616), subject to conditions of consent in Annexure B. Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: co-living development in R4 high density residential zone – conciliation conference – agreement between parties - orders Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, ss 4.16, 8.7, 8.15 Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 34 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021, s 38 Penrith local Environmental Plan 2010, cll 4.3, 5.10, 5.21, 7.1, 7.4, 7.6, 7.7, 7.30 State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, ss 2.6, 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 6.9, Pt 6.2 State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021, s 4.6 State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021, ss 67, 68, 69 Texts Cited: Penrith Development Control Plan 2014 Penrith Community Engagement Policy, Strategy and Participation Plan Apartment Design Guide Penrith Development Control Plan 2014 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ecostay Pty Ltd (Applicant) Penrith City Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: M Jaku (Solicitor) (Applicant) D Le Breton (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