Under a performance-based planning scheme, the acceptable solution is not necessarily irrelevant to the evaluative assessment under corresponding performance criteria. Where performance criteria require assessment of whether visual impact on residential amenity is 'unreasonable', the decision-maker may (but is not obliged to) consider what the scheme accepts as a permitted building — being one that complies with all relevant acceptable solutions — as context for assessing reasonableness. However, the acceptable solution for a single standard should not be considered in isolation; the relevant comparator is a building complying with all applicable acceptable solutions. The approach in Henry Design and Consulting v Clarence City Council [2017] TASRMPAT 11, which treated acceptable solutions as absolutely irrelevant to performance criteria assessment, is wrong in law.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.