In the media – New South Wales
Waste industry fined $52,500 for dust related
offences
Over November and December 2015, the Environment
Protection Authority inspected 21 Sydney waste facilities.
Following this, four licenced waste facilities have been issued a
total of $52,500 in fines for poor dust management practices.
The EPA says the waste industry can expect more inspections (19
February 2016). More...
NSW Government investigates legacy of PFC use across the
state
The Environment Protection Authority is undertaking an
investigation program to assess the historical legacy of
perfluorinated compound (PFC) use across
NSW. The investigation will focus on sites where, in the
past, the chemicals may have been used in large quantities,
including airports, firefighting training facilities and some
industrial sites, and where it is determined there are exposure
pathways that may increase people's contact with the chemicals,
such as bore water usage, surface water usage or fishing sites (19
February 2016). More...
Community input sought into revised guidelines for
Community Consultative Committees
The Department of Planning and Environment is inviting the
public to have its say on proposed changes to Community
Consultative Committee Guidelines, which would see them be able to
be used for any State Significant project in NSW, if needed.
The community can make submissions on the draft guidelines until 31
March (18 February 2016).
More...
Greater Sydney Commission Appointments
Planning Minister Rob Stokes has announced four district
commissioners who will represent local communities on the Greater
Sydney Commission, being Deborah Dearing (North District
Commissioner), Edward Blakely (West Central District Commissioner),
Maria Atkinson (Central District Commissioner) and Sean O'Toole
(West District Commissioner). South and South West districts
are yet to finalise their appointments (13 February 2016).
More...
In the media – Queensland
A $100 million new Brisbane Cruise Ship Terminal another
step closer
Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk has announced the planned
Brisbane Cruise Ship Terminal for the mouth of the Brisbane River
has entered the detailed assessment phase. The Market Led
Proposal was submitted by the Port of Brisbane Authority and is
supported by the major cruise ship operators (12 February
2016).
More...
Gold
Coast hotel tower plan – more rooms for more flights and more
jobs
The Palaszczuk Government has welcomed The Star
Entertainment Group's proposal for a 700-room hotel and
apartment tower at its Jupiters Integrated Resort on the Gold
Coast. Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk said the proposal, in
addition to the $345 million refurbishment of Jupiters, vindicated
the Government's commitment to Gold Coast Light Rail, the 2018
Commonwealth Games and attracting more direct international flights
to the Gold Coast (12 February 2016).
More...
Heritage value of Highgate Hill homes to be
considered
Stop work notices at three residential buildings at
Highgate Hill, Brisbane have been replaced by compliance officers
after they were removed overnight. Minister for Environment
and Heritage Protection Dr Steven Miles was joined by the Deputy
Premier and Member for South Brisbane Jackie Trad at the site in
Highgate Hill. Minister Miles said the future of the
buildings was now in the hands of the Queensland Heritage Council,
which would be considering the matter at its meeting on 6 May 2016
(11 February 2016).
More...
Stop
work order issued for Highgate Hill homes
The Queensland Government has issued a stop work order on
three residential buildings at Highgate Hill, Brisbane.
Minister for Planning and Member for South Brisbane, Jackie Trad
said the Brisbane City Council didn't identify the properties
at Jones and Colton Street for demolition protection in their new
City Plan which was adopted by Council on 30 June 2014 (11 February
2016).
More...
Legislation – Queensland
Planning reforms
The planning bills are under review by the Parliamentary Committee. The Government's Bills are available on the following links:
- Planning Bill 2015 – Explanatory Notes
- Planning and Environment Court Bill 2015 – Explanatory Notes
- Planning (Consequential) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 – Explanatory Notes
The Private Member's Bills
The Private Member's Bills are available on the following links:
- Planning and Development (Planning for Prosperity) Bill 2015 – Explanatory Notes
- Planning and Development (Planning Court) Bill 2015 – Explanatory Notes
- Planning and Development (Planning for Prosperity—Consequential Amendments) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 – Explanatory Notes
Submissions closed on 18 January 2016. A public hearing is to be held in Brisbane on Friday 26 February 2016 at the Parliamentary Annexe from 9:00am-2:30pm. The Committee is due to provide a report on Monday 21 March 2016. More...
Cases – Victoria
Frontlink Pty Ltd v Commissioner of State
Revenue [2016] VSC 25 Croft J
ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING – GAIC - operation of the
excluded subdivision provisions of the Growth Areas Infrastructure
Contribution provisions under the Planning and Environment Act
1987 (Part 9B) – Supreme Court overturned the Victorian
Civil and Administrative Tribunal's decision with respect to a
road widening subdivision whereby the Tribunal had found that a
road widening subdivision was not an excluded subdivision under
section 201RF of the Planning and Environment Act 1987
– interpretation of section 201RF of the Planning and
Environment Act 1987 - 'the purpose of the subdivision is
solely to provide land for transport infrastructure or any other
purpose' - Frontlink Pty Ltd had prepared plans of subdivision
which it submitted to the Council for certification. One of the
plans did nothing other than seek to provide 0.7782 ha of land for
a road widening. Frontlink Pty Ltd prepared a separate plan of
subdivision for its residential subdivision, which it submitted
after the road widening plan - Commissioner for State revenue
issued a GAIC assessment in relation to the road widening
subdivision plan on the basis that the subdivision triggered a
liability to pay GAIC. Frontlink Pty Ltd objected, and ultimately
sought review at the Tribunal, which upheld the Commissioner's
assessment. Frontlink Pty Ltd appealed to Supreme Court -
Frontlink Pty Ltd contended that all that was relevant was what the
road widening subdivision plan did, which was to create land for a
road. Justice Croft accepted that argument - as a result of this
decision, landholders in growth areas that need to create land for
roads or certain other types of public infrastructure, should have
confidence that if they create that land on a plan of subdivision
that precedes a separate plan for the residential subdivision, the
first plan of subdivision should not trigger a GAIC
liability. The GAIC payable on the subdivision for
residential purposes will be reduced because it will only be
payable upon the area of land that excludes the public land. It is
very important that landholders subdivide the land sequentially so
as to gain the benefit of the exemption. More...
Cases – New South Wales
Ocean Shores Community Association Inc v Byron Shire
Council (No 5) [2016] NSWLEC 8
COSTS – whether unsuccessful community association in
judicial review proceedings should pay costs of Respondent –
consideration of public interest costs rule in Land and Environment
Court Rules.
More...
Upper Mooki Landcare Inc v Shenhua Watermark Coal
Pty Ltd and Minister for Planning [2016] NSWLEC
6
JUDICIAL REVIEW – development consent for open cut coal mine
– likely significant effect on threatened species of the
koala – development application contained indication of
likely significant effect – whether misdirection in giving or
considering indication – consideration of impact on koala
population including by koala translocation – whether failure
to consider what was local population of koalas – condition
of consent requiring koala plans of management – whether
condition deferred consideration of impacts on koalas –
whether failure to consider precautionary principle or principle of
conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity
– application dismissed.
More...
Randwick City Council v Micaul Holdings Pty Ltd
[2016] NSWLEC 7
APPEAL – appeal against Commissioner's decision
on questions of law – grant of consent to development that
contravenes development standards – written request
justifying contravention – Commissioner's satisfaction of
required matters to justify contravention – whether
development consistent with objectives of development standards and
zone – whether Commissioner so satisfied – whether
adequate reasons given for being so satisfied – whether
compliance with development standards was unreasonable or
unnecessary – whether Commissioner gave adequate reasons for
being so satisfied – non-compliance with control in
development control plan – whether principal contested issue
requiring resolution and reasons.
More...
Cases – Queensland
Carrigan v Goondiwindi Regional
Council [2016] QPEC 008 (15/2346) Jones
DCJ 17/02/2016
HEARING OF AN APPLICATION – APPLICATION FOR
DETERMINATION OF PRELIMINARY ISSUES – Whether shed unlawfully
constructed on the subject land constituted a material change of
use for the purposes of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009
– and, if so, whether the use fell within the definition of
"detached house" or "storage facility" or is
otherwise undefined under the relevant planning scheme.
FINDINGS OF FACT – Where court invited to make findings
adverse to the applicant based on circumstantial evidence –
whether such findings open on the evidence. MATERIAL CHANGE
OF USE – whether construction of large shed on large rural
residential allotment amounted to a material change of use because
– it introduced a new use to the premises – it
constituted a re-establishment of an abandoned use – it was a
material increase in the scale and/or intensity of the use of the
premises. More...
Fraser Coast Regional Council v Walter Elliott
Holdings Pty Ltd [2016] QCA 019 (15/4042)
Margaret McMurdo P and Morrison JA and Atkinson J 12/02/2016
ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING – ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
– DEVELOPMENT CONTROL – CONSENTS, APPROVALS, PERMITS
AND AGREEMENTS – INTERPRETATION AND CONSTRUCTION –
EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE – where the applicant gave the respondent
an infrastructure charges notice for 3 bedrooms – where the
primary judge declared that the approved development was for 2
bedroom relocatable dwellings – where the applicant sought
leave to appeal on the ground that the primary judge had made an
error of law – where the primary judge construed the
development approval with reference to extrinsic evidence –
where the respondent failed to exercise a right of appeal under s
478(2) of the Sustainable Planning Act 2000 (Qld) –
where the primary judge considered the merits of a development
proposal – where the primary judge granted declaratory relief
– where the primary judge failed to give adequate reasons for
exercising the discretion to grant declaratory relief –
whether the primary judge erred in law in using declaratory powers
under s 456 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2000
(Qld). More...
Birkdale Flowers Pty Ltd v Redlands City Council
& Anor [2016] QPEC 004 (14/4802) Jones DCJ
11/02/2016
APPLICATION – where respondent council approved a
reconfiguration of land for a residential development at Birkdale
– where respondent council granted the first respondent a
development permit for operational works - whether respondent
council failed to assess the applications against the Excavation
and Fill Code – whether approvals in conflict with the
Excavation and Fill Code – whether respondent council failed
to properly assess the applications. WEDNESBURY PRINCIPLE
–– whether a decision by the respondent council to
grant approval to the first respondent was so unreasonable as to be
fundamentally defective. JONES V DUNKEL –
where second respondent failed to call evidence from a council
officer – whether the failure to call evidence allows an
adverse inference to be drawn against the respondent council.
DISCRETIONARY GROUNDS – where declarations were sought
pursuant to section 456 Sustainable Planning Act 2009
– whether proposed remedial works are proportional –
whether proposed remedial works will result in a materially better
outcome – where there was no bad faith on the part of any of
the parties.
More...
This publication does not deal with every important topic or change in law and is not intended to be relied upon as a substitute for legal or other advice that may be relevant to the reader's specific circumstances. If you have found this publication of interest and would like to know more or wish to obtain legal advice relevant to your circumstances please contact one of the named individuals listed.