Glass v ACT Planning And Land Authority & Anor (Administrative Review)
Case
•
[2016] ACAT 147
•21 October 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Glass v ACT Planning And Land Authority & Anor (Administrative Review) [2016] ACAT 147
[2016] ACAT 147
21 October 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In Glass v ACT Planning and Land Authority & Anor, the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (ACAT) considered an application for review of a decision by the ACT Planning and Land Authority (Planning Authority) to approve the redevelopment of a nursing and aged care accommodation facility on Block 10 Section 7 Farrer. The Tribunal was required to determine whether the amended plans for buildings B, D, and E complied with the Community Facilities Zone Development Code (CFZ Code) and whether public notification of those amendments was required. The key legal issues were whether the amendments to the development application were permissible under section 144 of the Planning and Development Act 2007 and whether the amendments should be publicly notified under section 146 of the same Act.
The Tribunal concluded that the amendments to the development application were permissible as the development would be substantially the same as that originally applied for, and the assessment track had not changed. The Tribunal also determined that public notification of the amended plans could be waived as the amendments would not adversely affect anyone other than the party joined, and the environmental impact would minimally increase. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the redesigned buildings B, D, and E complied with criterion 7a of the CFZ Code, which requires consistency with the desired character in terms of siting, building bulk and scale, and the resulting streetscape. The Tribunal ordered that the development application be amended in accordance with the amended plans, and the decision under review be varied accordingly. The applicant's application for costs was dismissed.
The Tribunal concluded that the amendments to the development application were permissible as the development would be substantially the same as that originally applied for, and the assessment track had not changed. The Tribunal also determined that public notification of the amended plans could be waived as the amendments would not adversely affect anyone other than the party joined, and the environmental impact would minimally increase. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the redesigned buildings B, D, and E complied with criterion 7a of the CFZ Code, which requires consistency with the desired character in terms of siting, building bulk and scale, and the resulting streetscape. The Tribunal ordered that the development application be amended in accordance with the amended plans, and the decision under review be varied accordingly. The applicant's application for costs was dismissed.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Standing
-
Compensatory Damages
-
Specific Performance
-
Public Notification
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Hobbs v ACT Planning And Land Authority & Anor (Administrative Review) [2022] ACAT 76
Cases Citing This Decision
6
Hamilton v ACT Planning and Land Authority
[2018] ACAT 121
Glass v ACTPLA
[2019] ACTSC 201
Cases Cited
7
Statutory Material Cited
1
Prisoners Review Board v Freeman
[2010] WASCA 166
Prisoners Review Board v Freeman
[2010] WASCA 166
Glass v ACT Planning and Land Authority & Anor
[2016] ACAT 21