Adaptive re-use
Adaptive re-use and public interest
Michael Hesse v Parramatta City Council[2003] NSWLEC 313at 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 78at 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 inMartyn v Hornsby Shire Council[2004] NSWLEC 614at 18-21 should be replaced with objective based considerations for the location of brothels.
Yao v Liverpool City Council[2017] NSWLEC 1167at [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 355at 48
Compliance
Responsibility for monitoring compliance with a condition
Dayho v Rockdale City Council[2004] NSWLEC 184at 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 472at 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 133at 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 399at 82-114; revised - 05/05/2005
FSR
FSR - Compatibility in a suburban context
Salanitro-Chafei v Ashfield Council[2005] NSWLEC 366at 23-28
General impact
Impact on neighbouring properties- revised principle
Davies v Penrith City Council[2013] NSWLEC 1141at [116] to [121]
Height, bulk and scale
Assessment of height, bulk and scale
Veloshin v Randwick Council[2007] NSWLEC 428at 32-33
Heritage
Demolition of contributory item in conservation area
Helou v Strathfield Municipal Council[2006] NSWLEC 66at 43-46
Licensed premises
Extension of trading hours increase in permitted patron numbers or additional attractions
Vinson v Randwick Council[2005] NSWLEC 142at 84-85
Master plans
Proposal permissible but inconsistent with Master Plan
Aldi Foods Pty Limited v Holroyd City Council[2004] NSWLEC 253at 40-43
Noise
Attenuation measures
Stockland Developments v Wollongong Council and others[2004] NSWLEC 470at 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 318at 25-26
Open Space
Location of communal open space
Seaside Property v Wyong Shire Council[2004] NSWLEC 600at 30
Plan of management
Adequacy or appropriateness of a plan of management to the particular use and situation
InAmazonia 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 inRenaldo 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 inRenaldois 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 315at 53-55
Privacy
General principles
Meriton v Sydney City Council[2004] NSWLEC 313at 45-46
Privacy
Use of landscaping to protect privacy
Super Studio v Waverley Council[2004] NSWLEC 91at 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 251at 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 587at 83-84
Fodor Investments v Hornsby Shire Council[2005] NSWLEC 71at 17
Seniors living
Seniors living in low density zone
GPC No 5 (Wombarra) Pty Ltd v Wollongong City Council[2003] NSWLEC 268at 14-18
Setbacks
Building to the side boundary in residential areas
Galea v Marrickville Council[2005] NSWLEC 113at 17
Site dimensions
Small or narrow sites
CSA Architects v Randwick City Council[2004] NSWLEC 179at 15-17
Staged development
How much information should be provided at Stage 1
Anglican Church Property Trust v Sydney City Council[2003] NSWLEC 353at 58-59
Subdivision
When a residential subdivision application should impose constraints on future development
Parrott v Kiama Council[2004] NSWLEC 77revised - 16/03/2004at 17
Subdivision
Solar access for allotments in residential sudivisions
Wallis & Moore Pty Limited v Sutherland Shire Council[2006] NSWLEC 713at 74
Sunlight
Access to sunlight
The Benevolent Society v Waverley Council[2010] NSWLEC 1082at 133-144
Surrounding development
Compatibility of proposal with surrounding development
Project Venture Developments Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council[2005] NSWLEC 191at 22-31
Unusual contemporary design
Basis for assessment
Totem Queens Park Pty Ltd v Waverley Council[2004] NSWLEC 712at 41-44
Use
Impact of intensification
Randall Pty Ltd v Leichhardt Council[2004] NSWLEC 277at 25-26
Views
Views- general principles
Tenacity Consulting v Warringah Council[2004] NSWLEC 140at 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 399revised - 05/05/2005at 115-119
Zones
Development at zone interface
Seaside Property Developments Pty Ltd v Wyong Shire Council[2004] NSWLEC 117at 25
