Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorEdgar, Andrew
dc.date.accessioned2024-11-27T05:51:56Z
dc.date.available2024-11-27T05:51:56Z
dc.date.issued2002en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2123/33334
dc.description.abstractFlexibility is brought into the New South Wales environmental planning system by a State department policy called State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 – Development Standards. It provides a mechanism whereby applicants for development can submit an objection to compliance with a development standard that would apply to the particular development. This may sound simple enough but it has become very complex and problematic – and has consequently led to much confusion. This article addresses the way that the courts have handled the question of identifying a development standard as the precondition to the discretion to relax compliance. The article firstly notes that the problem of identification is due to insufficient legislative guidance. Next, the different approaches to the matter that have been developed in the New South Wales Court of Appeal are set out. It is then noted that these different approaches have led to more difficulties in the Land and Environment Court. An alternative approach is then offered.en_AU
dc.language.isoenen_AU
dc.publisherThomson Reutersen_AU
dc.relation.ispartofEnvironmental and Planning Law Journalen_AU
dc.rightsCopyright All Rights Reserveden_AU
dc.subjectNew South Wales environmental planning systemen_AU
dc.subjectState Environmental Planning Policy No 1 – Development Standardsen_AU
dc.subjectLand and Environment Courten_AU
dc.subjectcomplexityen_AU
dc.subjecttask before the courten_AU
dc.subjectalternative approachen_AU
dc.titleStandard deviation? The problematic pre-condition to SEPP 1en_AU
dc.typeArticleen_AU
dc.type.pubtypePublisher's versionen_AU
dc.rights.otherThis article was published by Thomson Reuters and should be cited as Edgar, A. (2002). Standard deviation? The problematic pre-condition to SEPP 1. Environmental and Planning Law Journal, 19(3), 226–239. For all subscription inquiries please phone, from Australia: 1300 304 195, from Overseas: +61 2 8587 7980 or online at legal.thomsonreuters.com.au/search. The official PDF version of this article can also be purchased separately from Thomson Reuters at http://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/journals/subscribe-or-purchase. This publication is copyright. Other than for the purposes of and subject to the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited. PO Box 3502, Rozelle NSW 2039. legal.thomsonreuters.com.auen_AU
usyd.facultySeS faculties schools::The University of Sydney Law Schoolen_AU
usyd.citation.volume9en_AU
usyd.citation.issue3en_AU
usyd.citation.spage226en_AU
usyd.citation.epage239en_AU
workflow.metadata.onlyNoen_AU


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.