The core principles behind the development assessment forum’s (DAF) proposals for a uniform development assessment model is that politicians should, after consultation with the community professional officers and qualified consultants, set the policies to guide development in their local area.  The rules for implementing the policies should be written objectively and legibly or alternatively the policy objectives should be clearly stated and guidelines provided for their achievement.  The point of this approach is to garner community and political ‘buy in’ at the scheme making stage so as to avoid having to obtain it each time a development application is to be determined.  Thus, DAF leading practice 8 seeks professional assessment and decision making rather than political decision making for ‘most development applications’.

Planning law in Queensland has always recognised the primacy of the planning scheme in decision making on development applications.  The Judges of the Planning Court have repeatedly said over the last forty years that the Court will not usurp the functions of local governments by attempting to become involved in the making of planning schemes.  Politicians are no less accountable in respect of the administration and enforcement of the planning schemes which they have made.  Local Governments are not permitted to make decisions which conflict with the planning scheme without sufficient grounds.  The ‘sufficient grounds’ test applies equally to applications for preliminary approvals which seek to override planning schemes, and to applications for development permits.  The view that there is a lower threshold for preliminary approvals which override planning schemes is misconceived.  Conflict is only accommodated in respect of levels of assessment and applicable codes if a decision is made that conflicting development should be approved.

David Nicholls, Partner

Click on the PDF link to download a full copy of this document.