The Court held that cl 1.17A(1)(d)(iii) of the Codes SEPP operates as a universal requirement for complying development under any environmental planning instrument, including the T&I SEPP, such that development on land identified as a heritage item cannot be complying development. The Court found no inconsistency between the two SEPPs, noting that the absence of 'heritage item' from the complying development standards in Part 2 of Schedule 4 of the T&I SEPP (contrasted with its presence in the exempt development standards in Part 1) reinforced that cl 1.17A(1)(d)(iii) was intended to apply. The Court also held that a telecommunications facility comprising antennas, GPS equipment, cabinets and cabling was not the 'same development' as an aerial, antenna or satellite dish under cl 2.3 of the Codes SEPP, meaning the conflict resolution provisions in cl 1.8 were not engaged.
The full text is available to signed-in members.