LKM Volume 8, 2010

Planning Government Infrastructure and Environment group Colin Biggers & Paisley's Planning Government Infrastructure and Environment group is the trusted partner of public and private sector entities, for whom we are the legal and policy designers of strategic and tactical solutions to exceptionally challenging problems, in our chosen fields of planning, government, infrastructure and environment. We have more than 50 years' experience of planning, designing and executing legal and policy solutions for large development and infrastructure projects in Australia, including new cities, towns and communities. We are passionate about planning, government, infrastructure and environment issues, and we pride ourselves on acting for both the private and public sectors, including private development corporations, listed development corporations, other non-public sector entities and a wide range of State and local government entities. The solutions we design extend beyond legal and policy advice, and represent sensible, commercially focused outcomes which accommodate private interests in the context of established public interests. Reputation Our Planning Government Infrastructure and Environment group has built long and trusted relationships through continuous and exceptional performance. We understand that exceptional performance is the foundation of success, and we apply our philosophy of critical thinking and our process of strategy to ensure an unparalleled level of planning, design and manoeuvre to achieve that success. Our group practices as an East Coast Team of Teams, known for its Trusted Partners, Strategic Thinkers, Legal and Policy Designers and Tacticians. Credo Our credo is to Lead, Simplify and Win with Integrity. Our credo means we partner by integrity, lead by planning, simplify by design and win by manoeuvre. Lead, Simplify and Win with Integrity Specialist expertise and experience Our Planning Government Infrastructure and Environment group is recognised for our specialist expertise and experience: Planning – Strategic and tactical planning of development issues and processes for projects, in particular major residential communities, commercial and industrial developments. Government – In-depth understanding of government legislation, policy and processes. Infrastructure – Specialist expertise and experience in infrastructure planning, funding and delivery. Environment – Legal excellence in all areas of environmental law and policy. Contents INDEX .................................................................................................................................. iii TABLE OF LEGISLATION ................................................................................................... vi TABLE OF CASES ............................................................................................................. vii Determining the scope for protection of native vegetation 1 Application to remove statutory stay 3 Whether conditions imposed on a development application are relevant or reasonable 4 It's not "made" unless it's "properly made" 6 Partial approval of application 8 Stepping up koala conservation in South East Queensland at the expense of property holders 10 Injurious affection: Effect of a new planning scheme on market values of land 15 Building and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2009 19 Misdescription not fatal to development application 21 Application to remove statutory stay 23 Requirements in serving a notice of appeal 24 Court exercises discretion to return development application to public notification 25 Fibre deployment for new developments 26 Can the currency period of a lapsed development approval be extended? 27 Where renovations affect traditional pre-1946 building character 29 Minor change – substantially different development 30 Owner's consent not required with benefit of easement 31 Protecting land for public recreation. The introduction of the draft Queensland Greenspace Strategy 32 British Election: Are there any lessons for Australia? 34 Proposed subordinate legislation to give effect to fibre deployment 37 Building and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2010 39 Queensland government's growth management agenda 41 Excusal of non-compliance with mandatory parts and determining "minor changes" 43 Serving 888 principal submitters 44 Costs arising from a failure to comply with court procedure 45 Was the development permit valid and sufficient? 47 Relief for non-compliance with mandatory requirements 49 Exercise of relief to remedy a development application made under section 3.1.6 of IPA 50 Declaration about what is permitted under development approval 52 Payment of council headworks 53 Submitter appeal dismissed 55 Deficiencies in the public notice process 56 Demolition of a house under Brisbane City Plan 2000 58 Once again, the court if not the planning authority 60 Articulating Weightman 63 Exercising the court's discretion: A question of fact 64 LEGAL KNOWLEDGE MATTERS VOL. 8, 2010 | i Contents (cont'd) Conflict with planning scheme – No error of law 65 Mineral or not: A question of its use 68 Council has no say in the use of fee simple land – how absurd? 70 Can Prince Charming awaken Sleeping Beauty? 72 When is a change permissible? 74 Dismissing appeal for breach of court orders 75 Relief from failure to provide plan for reconfiguration in time 76 Expiry of local laws 78 Development approvals confer ownership in the sense of the right to take advantage of a development approval on the owner of the land for the time being 80 No excusal for non–compliance with IPA 82 No jurisdiction means no application 83 The cumulative effect of the modern state-of-the-art Roma saleyard 85 Application to re–enliven lapsed development approval 86 Failure to register title no impediment to ownership of land 87 Frivolous or vexatious claim 89 Single event to constitute material change of use 91 Conflict with scheme: Residential use on preferred rural use land 93 Garden Cities of Tomorrow or a Brave New World 94 Planners have become a lightning rod for people's sense of frustration 100 State resource entitlement required for preliminary approval 103 Court exercises discretion to revive development application 105 Furthering our understanding of "substantially different development" 106 A question of jurisdiction: A standard building regulation certificate of classification 107 "The Summerhouse" at New Farm Park 108 Constitutional challenge to operate an aircraft 110 Approval in part not qualified 112 Court of Appeal confirms decision of Planning and Environment Court 114 Costly consequence of failure to comply with environmental protection orders 115 Exercise of discretion to grant enforcement orders 117 ii | PLANNING GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT GROUP Index Acceptable solutions .............................................................................................................................................. 29 Acknowledgment notice ......................................................................................................................................... 57 Airstrip ................................................................................................................................................................. 110 Amenity ............................................................................................................................................ 4, 34, 39, 40, 52 Apartment building ................................................................................................................................................. 65 Approval despite conflict ........................................................................................................................................ 60 Assessable development ............................................................................................................. 1, 3, 13, 21, 22, 47 Ban the banners .................................................................................................................................. 19, 20, 39, 40 Body corporate by-laws ............................................................................................................................. 19, 20, 39 Boundary realignment ............................................................................................................................................ 70 Brave New World ................................................................................................................................................... 94 Brisbane City Plan 2000 .............................................................................................................. 4, 29, 58, 108, 112 British parliamentary system .................................................................................................................................. 34 British planning system .......................................................................................................................................... 34 Building and Development Tribunal ....................................................................................................................... 87 Building character .................................................................................................................................................. 29 Building covenants..........................................................................................................................................

Load more