Planning and Environmental Law ( Urban Design and Planning) - Essay Example

Student Name: Instructor’s Name: Title: Planning and Environmental Law (urban design and planning) Course: Institution: Planning and Environmental Law (urban design and planning) Question 1 The developer appealed to the Land and Environment Court and as a result the Court became the consent authority. The developer lodged the appeal within six months on the objection. The developer was allowed to appeal from commissioner’s modification of condition of consent. The proceedings were referred to the commissioner for determination in regard to the decision of requiring the developer to have underground placement of power cables. The reason for this decision was because the developer was not satisfied with the condition and hence he appealed (Brigden 2012). Question 2 This was not permissible under the planning law. This is because the planning permission process is an official administrative process that involves providing legally binding permit for a waterway project. The planning permit process considers the concerns of the private as well as the public who the project will affect and reaches a balance between conflicting interests. In the process of the planning permit process, the authority has a responsibility of the entire process and also consults other associated authorities. Basically, all authorities whose remit will be impacted by the project are involved. The authorities can then issue a statement regarding the project that has to be taken into consideration during the process. The key aim is to make sure that all public and private concerns have been considered in order to arrive at a satisfactorily balancing decision about the project (Brigden 2012). Likewise, an urban planning already in existence is also considered while considering the particular connection between sectoral planning and the urban land-use plan. Processes for waterways planning comprise purported restricted sectoral planning processes. Therefore, if a project has regional significance, it will be prioritized over municipal planning if the municipal planning is insufficiently validated. Prioritizing sectoral planning over municipal planning is justifiable if the regional sectoral planning being the larger unit bears more weight as compared to the lesser planning unit of the urban land-use plan (Brigden 2012).. Therefore, according to the explanation given above, this was not permissible under the planning law because expansion of the café did not have regional significance and hence could not be prioritized. In addition, the plans incorporated within 1993 consent indicated that the purpose of the building was for selling souvenirs and food whereas the proposed use included tourist entertainment, as well as a mini zoo. Question 3 Development consent to build a school was declared invalid in Hoxton Park Residents Action Group Inc v Liverpool City Council [2011] NSWCA 349 because the likely environmental effects of the construction were not considered and hence the consent was deemed invalid. Several factors were considered which led to its invalidity and they include: The projected impacts of the development: these are the impacts resulting from the development. This considers how remote likely effect is supposed to be for it to be excluded from section 79C (1) (b) and necessitates an evaluative ruling which involves any "bright-line-boundary". As remoteness from the development rises, effect has the likelihood of decreasing to a level that it does not have practical importance in terms of approving or declining to consent a development application. In addition, the probability of a certain effect might reduce with remoteness (Barnet 2008). In this case, in establishing if there were “direct and indirect effects”, the Court of Appeal was guided by the analysis of Federal Court within the Nathan Dam case. Basically, the effect is not limited to the direct physical impacts if the action on the issue protected by the pertinent provision. The effect also comprises of the effects which are adequately close to the action to enable to be confirmed without limiting the language, that they are, or would be, the effect of the action on the protected subject. Accordingly, in this case, there was no basis for excluding environmental effects which would have been or are liable to be taken into consideration in regard to a separate development application need for that undertaking. The likely environmental effects of the construction were not considered and hence the consent was deemed invalid (Barnet 2008). Question 4 Case number 1 did not include the theme “planning ought to take care of the environment”. The Part 5, clause 228 of planning regulation obligates that one of the aspects that should be considered when examining the probable effects of an activity on the environment is "any cumulative environmental impacts with other existing or likely future activities". This is because the development involved demolition of a building which is likely to result to negative environmental impacts (Gurran, N, 2007). Case number 2 included the theme “planning should promote greater social equity, by providing housing for mixed communities within new and changing areas”. This is because the development was to be expanded in order to accommodate activities that would incorporate an aboriginal cultural exhibit, a live koala exhibit as well as a vivarium. Still, the development included the theme “planning helps to provide public goods that might otherwise be underprovided by the free market, through the sustainability paradigm”. This is because the construction was supposed to be used by public and would provide a place for the public to buy food as well as get entertainment. The theme “Planning ‘helps to establish the conditions needed to protect and create attractive and efficient urban environments” was also considered since the expansion of the building was aimed to sell souvenirs and food and provide entertainment in addition to mini zoo. These services would eventually create an attractive and efficient urban environment. However, the development did not consider the theme “Planning should pursue ecologically sustainable development (integrating short and long term environmental, equity and economy considerations), not economic growth alone”. This is because the sole aim of expanding the building was a retail premises whose key goal was economic growth (Gurran, N, 2007). Case number 3 did not consider the requirement that planning should protect the environment. The Part 5, clause 228 of planning regulation obligates that one of the aspects that should be considered when examining the probable effects of an activity on the environment is "any cumulative environmental impacts with other existing or likely future activities" (clause 228(2)(o)). The impact of the construction should be considered. In this case, an environmental effect that was a likely outcome of the development should be taken into consideration under s 79C, even if its outcomes from an activity that is not itself the subject of the pertinent development application. In this regard, likely implies a real probability and not more likely or not. Basically, the environmental effect of a development reduces with the increase of remoteness from the development to a point that there is no practical value in regard to approval or refusal of the application. However, in this case, the development was likely to be constructed and hence the potential effects were not remote since the consent would have locked in the construction of the bridge resulting to being impossible to access or occupy the school unless the bridge was constructed. Consequently, the consent was provided and this breached Section 79C (Gurran, N, 2007). However, the planning in this case fulfilled the theme that planning should help in providing public goods that might otherwise be undersupplied by the free market through the sustainability paradigm. This is because the planning was about development of a school which had a probability of providing public goods. The planning also fulfilled the theme a planning should promote larger social equity through offering housing for diverse community members in the new and changing areas: this is because the school would be attended by different communities, and hence promote greater equity (Gurran, N, 2007). Question 5 An application should be made to the consent authority. Form 1 of the EPA Regulations will be utilized and the information needed under Form 1 should accompany it as well as the obligatory payment as well as consent under the Wilderness Act. The application should be accompanied by a remedial environmental impact statement or a remedial Natural impact statement. The environmental impact evaluation ought to carry out to determine the environmental impact of the quarry. Under section 79C (1) of the Planning Act issues relevant to the development should be considered whenever a development application is made. One of these issues that should be considered is the probable effects of the development and this includes environmental effects on the natural and built environments as well as the social and economic effects within the region (Brigden 2012). The application will be accompanied by: (a) an EIS (b) a species impact statement (SIS) (c) [2008 Act] a Statement of Environmental Effects (d) Disclosure of reportable political donations (Brigden 2012). Public availability An extract of the pertinent of the development application which is allied to the construction of the building should be availed to interested individuals. Development contributions Development contributions that have been made under s 94, 94A of EPA Act will be required by the consent authority (Brigden 2012). Advertising of development application It will be necessary to avail comprehensive provisions allied to the advertisement of development applications and this includes provisions allied to notifying the neighbors regarding the planned development in the area. In this case, the development application is supposed to be on display for at least thirty days. The advertising development will consist of: Development Development established within an EPI or DCP as advertised development The main function of giving a notice regarding development application will be to allow any individual to make submission regarding the development. As a result, if an individual makes a submission through objecting the designated development, it is possible to submit an appeal to the Land and Environmental Court and challenge the award of a development consent regarding the designated land application (Brigden 2012). Since there is a quarry, an approval will be required to change or construct improvement on the land or in subdividing the land. An environment protection license will also be required to allow the planned development work to be carried out. In addition, the environmental protection license will be essential in order to control carting out non-listed undertakings to regulate pollution of water likely to result from the development activity. After fulfilling all these requirements, it will possible to have successful application consent for the development. Bibliography Barnet, J., 2008, Environmental Management in the Extractive Industry, EPA, Sydney. Brigden, D., 2012, Obtaining Approvals to carry out Development in NSW, A Practical, Guide. Gurran, N, 2007, Australian Urban Land Use Planning, University Press, Sydney. Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Act 2008. Read More