Penmore Properties No. 2 Pty Limited v Penrith City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1265

Penmore Properties No. 2 Pty Limited v Penrith City Council [2019] NSWLEC 1265

The modification application was approved because the Court was satisfied that it had been properly made, the modified development was substantially the same as the originally approved development, notification and consideration of submissions had been adequately addressed, the existing cl 4.6 request concerning height did not require amendment, all contentions were resolved or addressed by proposed conditions, and approval was in the public interest.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Class 1 Appeal Against Refusal of Modification Application / Consent Orders Hearing After Terminated S 34 Conciliation Conference
Outcome
By consent, the appeal was upheld and modification application No. 16/0589.03 was approved subject to conditions.
Legal Topics
['modification Application' 'consent Orders' 'residential Flat Building' 'waste Collection' 'amended Plans' 'resident Objector' 'height Development Standard']
['planning and Environment Law' 'development Consent Modification'] ['modification Application' 'consent Orders' 'residential Flat Building' 'waste Collection' 'amended Plans' 'resident Objector' 'height Development Standard']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 1 Appeal Against Refusal of Modification Application / Consent Orders Hearing After Terminated S 34 Conciliation Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted for the Applicant to rely on amended plans.' 'Whether the jurisdictional prerequisites in s 4.55(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 for modification of the development consent were satisfied.' 'Whether the proposed modified development was substantially the same development as originally approved.' 'Whether objectors were adequately notified and their concerns properly taken into account.' 'Whether approval of the modification application, subject to conditions, was lawful, appropriate and in the public interest.']

Ratio Decidendi

The modification application was approved because the Court was satisfied that it had been properly made, the modified development was substantially the same as the originally approved development, notification and consideration of submissions had been adequately addressed, the existing cl 4.6 request concerning height did not require amendment, all contentions were resolved or addressed by proposed conditions, and approval was in the public interest.

Court Disposition

By consent, the appeal was upheld and modification application No. 16/0589.03 was approved subject to conditions.

Orders

  • ["The Applicant is granted leave to amend the development application to rely upon the amended plans referred to in condition 1 of the conditions of consent annexed hereto at Annexure 'A'." "The Applicant is to pay the Respondent's costs thrown away as a result of the amended plans in the sum of $15,000 pursuant to...