A provision of an environmental planning instrument that completely prohibits a type of development is not a development standard amenable to SEPP No 1; anything less than complete prohibition, where the development is otherwise permissible and a relevant aspect of the development can be identified, will be a development standard. The fact that a provision falls within paragraphs (a)-(n) of the definition does not automatically make it a development standard; the general requirements of the definition must also be satisfied. The prohibition/regulation dichotomy provides useful conceptual guidance but does not replace the statutory definition.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 64 later cases that cite this judgment.
7 of the 64 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.