Wiltford Pty Ltd v Logan City Council

[2010] QPEC 83

[2010] QPEC 83

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT

JUDGE ROBIN QC

P & E Appeal No 2360 of 2010

WILTFORD PTY LTD	Appellant
and
LOGAN CITY COUNCIL	Respondent

BRISBANE

..DATE 02/09/2010

ORDER

CATCHWORDS

Sustainable Planning Act 2009, s 367

Development approval constituted by court order changed to defer developer's obligation to pay infrastructure changes to a time later than that stipulated in the approval - Council agreeable - whether this application was necessary

HIS HONOUR: The court makes an order in terms of the initialled draft. It is made under section 367 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA) in respect of a “permissible change.”

The approval which the respondent Council is happy to see changed as requested is constituted by an order of this court of 30 June 2008 in Appeal 2325 of 2007.  The order was made by consent of the parties.

From some points of view, one wonders whether this application was necessary at all.  The point of the changes is to delay the time at which infrastructure charges become payable by the applicant developer to the respondent council.

As the court's order stands, typically those payments were required to be made prior to the issue of a building permit.  That arrangement has been changed to require payment to be made at the time of application for the compliance certificate for any part of the development under the Plumbing and Draining Act 2002 or prior to the commencement of the use, whichever occurs first.  Those charges are subject to indexation to be applied at the time of payment.

For purposes of section 367 SPA, it is patent that the development is exactly the same one. There is no question of what occurs today requiring impact assessment - which has already occurred in relation to the development, attracting no submissions.

As I have indicated, it seems to me it may well have been in order for the Council to waive payment at the earlier stages contemplated in the court's existing order.  One can understand the developer and, indeed, the Council too preferring to be cautious.

Order as per initialled draft.

‑‑‑‑‑