The 'existing or approved development' for the purposes of the cl 35 designated development comparison is identified by reference to the subject of the development application, not the broader operations of which the proposed development forms part. An applicant seeking to rely on cl 35 bears the onus of demonstrating its elements, including the identification of an existing or approved development. The presumption of regularity may be invoked to infer original development consent from the grant of subsequent development consents by the same consent authority, and is not rebutted merely by the absence of a formal record or a reference to 'existing use' in council records.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 26 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 26 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.