Planning principles

Adaptive re-use

Adaptive re-use and public interest

Michael Hesse v Parramatta City Council [2003] NSWLEC 313 at 14-18; revised - 24/11/2003

Aesthetics

Weight to be given to expert opinion on architectural design

Architects Marshall v Lake Macquarie City Council [2005] NSWLEC 78 at 38-42

Brothels

Location of brothels

In Yao v Liverpool City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1167, handed down on 31 March 2017, Brown C set out at [24-25] that the Commissioners had decided that the planning principle in Martyn v Hornsby Shire Council [2004] NSWLEC 614 at 18-21 should be replaced with objective based considerations for the location of brothels. 

Yao v Liverpool City Council [2017] NSWLEC 1167 at [24-25]

Building envelope

Tensions between a prescribed floor space ratio and a prescribed building envelope

PDE Investments No 8 Pty Ltd v Manly Council [2004] NSWLEC 355 at 48

Compliance

Responsibility for monitoring compliance with a condition

Dayho v Rockdale City Council [2004] NSWLEC 184 at 7-8

DCPs and Council policies

Weight to be given to Development Control Plans and to policies which had been adopted by councils although not embodied in DCPs

Stockland Development Pty Ltd v Manly Council [2004] NSWLEC 472 at 86-88 and 89-93; revised - 01/10/2004

Demolition

The extent of demolition - alterations and additions or a new building

Coorey v Municipality of Hunters Hill [2013] NSWLEC 1187

ESD and the precautionary principle

Explication of the precautionary principle and framework for its implementation

Telstra Corporation Limited v Hornsby Shire Council [2006] NSWLEC 133 at 107-183

ESD principles

What regard should a consent authority give to the principles of ecologically sustainable development

BGP Properties Pty Limited v Lake Macquarie City Council [2004] NSWLEC 399 at 82-114; revised - 05/05/2005

FSR

FSR - Compatibility in a suburban context

Salanitro-Chafei v Ashfield Council[2005] NSWLEC 366 at 23-28

General impact

Impact on neighbouring properties - revised principle

Davies v Penrith City Council [2013] NSWLEC 1141 at [116] to [121]

Height, bulk and scale

Assessment of height, bulk and scale

Veloshin v Randwick Council [2007] NSWLEC 428 at 32-33

Heritage

Demolition of contributory item in conservation area

Helou v Strathfield Municipal Council[2006] NSWLEC 66 at 43-46 

Licensed premises

Extension of trading hours increase in permitted patron numbers or additional attractions

Vinson v Randwick Council [2005] NSWLEC 142 at 84-85

Master plans

Proposal permissible but inconsistent with Master Plan

Aldi Foods Pty Limited v Holroyd City Council [2004] NSWLEC 253 at 40-43

Noise

Attenuation measures

Stockland Developments v Wollongong Council and others [2004] NSWLEC 470 at 6

Non-statutory regional planning policies

Assessing the role of non-statutory regional planning policies vis-a-vis statutory local plans

Direct Factory Outlets Homebush v Strathfield Municipal Council [2006] NSWLEC 318 at 25-26

Open Space

Location of communal open space

Seaside Property v Wyong Shire Council [2004] NSWLEC 600 at 30 

Plan of management

Adequacy or appropriateness of a plan of management to the particular use and situation

In Amazonia Hotels Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Sydney [2014] NSWLEC 1247, Pearson C set out at (72) that the Commissioners had decided that the planning principle in Renaldo Plus 3 Pty Ltd v Hurstville City Council [2005] NSWLEC 315 should be retained but revised to require that, where a Plan of Management is appropriate, it should be incorporated in the conditions of consent. As a consequence, the sixth question in Renaldo is re-worded to read:

Is the Management Plan incorporated in the conditions of consent, and to be enforced as a condition of consent?

Renaldo Plus 3 Pty Limited v Hurstville City Council [2005] NSWLEC 315 at 53-55

Privacy

General principles

Meriton v Sydney City Council [2004] NSWLEC 313 at 45-46

Privacy

Use of landscaping to protect privacy

Super Studio v Waverley Council[2004] NSWLEC 91 at 5-7

Redevelopment

Isolation of site by redevelopment of adjacent site(s) - role of Court in assessing consolidation negotiations

Karavellas v Sutherland Shire Council[2004] NSWLEC 251 at 17-19

Redevelopment

Existing use rights and merit assessment

The principles to be considered when undertaking a merits assessment of a proposed redevelopment of a site with existing use rights were dealt with by Roseth SC in Fodor Investments v Hornsby Shire Council [2005] NSWLEC 71.

In Stromness Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2006] NSWLEC 587 the planning principles in Fodor were considered and confirmed by Pain J at pars 83-89.

Principle 2 was specifically supported in paragraph 87 and principles 1,3 and 4 were specifically supported in paragraph 89.

Her Honour states, in para 89, that care must be exercised in the application of the principles to ensure that there is not a de facto application of standards in environmental planning instruments as that is prohibited by s 108(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

Stromness Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2006] NSWLEC 587 at 83-84

Fodor Investments v Hornsby Shire Council [2005] NSWLEC 71 at 17

Seniors living

Seniors living in low density zone

GPC No 5 (Wombarra) Pty Ltd v Wollongong City Council [2003] NSWLEC 268 at 14-18

Setbacks

Building to the side boundary in residential areas

Galea v Marrickville Council [2005] NSWLEC 113 at 17

Site dimensions

Small or narrow sites

CSA Architects v Randwick City Council[2004] NSWLEC 179 at 15-17

Staged development

How much information should be provided at Stage 1

Anglican Church Property Trust v Sydney City Council [2003] NSWLEC 353 at 58-59

Subdivision

When a residential subdivision application should impose constraints on future development

Parrott v Kiama Council [2004] NSWLEC 77 revised - 16/03/2004 at 17

Subdivision

Solar access for allotments in residential sudivisions

Wallis & Moore Pty Limited v Sutherland Shire Council [2006] NSWLEC 713 at 74

Sunlight

Access to sunlight

The Benevolent Society v Waverley Council [2010] NSWLEC 1082 at 133-144

Surrounding development

Compatibility of proposal with surrounding development

Project Venture Developments Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council [2005] NSWLEC 191 at 22-31

Unusual contemporary design

Basis for assessment

Totem Queens Park Pty Ltd v Waverley Council [2004] NSWLEC 712 at 41-44

Use

Impact of intensification

Randall Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Council[2004] NSWLEC 277 at 25-26

Views

Views - general principles

Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council [2004] NSWLEC 140 at 25-29

Impact on public domain views

Zones

Weight to be given to the zoning

BGP Properties Pty Limited v Lake Macquarie City Council [2004] NSWLEC 399 revised - 05/05/2005 at 115-119

Zones

Development at zone interface

Seaside Property Developments Pty Ltd v Wyong Shire Council [2004] NSWLEC 117 at 25