house model held by man and woman
No Comments

NSW Housing Pattern Book: fast-track pathway now live for low-rise

What’s new

On 16 July 2025, the NSW Government launched the Housing Pattern Book (Pattern Book) and a new Pattern Book Development Code in the State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 (Codes SEPP 2008). The initiative provides a ten-day approval pathway for eligible sites, using selected residential housing designs.

Designs available now

The Pattern Book provides eight (8) selected designs for:

  • semi-detached or dual occupancy homes
  • terraces
  • manor homes
  • row homes
    (mid-rise apartment buildings up to 6 storeys will be in a separate pattern book due late 2025)

(Pattern Book Designs)

Each Pattern Book Design normally costs $1,000, but is subsidised to $1 during the six-month launch period of the Pattern Book, currently listed as subsidised until 31 January 2026 on the official shop. [...]  READ MORE →

opt-out-opt-in-signs-800w
No Comments

Integrated development – “opt-in” or a matter of fact?

Key points

  • In a recent Land and Environment Court (LEC) decision, the LEC treated a development application (DA) as integrated development even though the applicant did not elect it to be processed as such.
  • For years, practitioners have treated the integrated development scheme in Div 4.8 of Pt 4 of the EP&A Act as a device that allows applicants to invoke to coordinate approvals. On that view, an applicant might “opt in” or proceed as a standard DA.
  • In Artmade Architectural Pty Ltd v Central Coast Council [2025] NSWLEC 1249 (Artmade), the Court re-centred the analysis on the text of s 4.46: development is “integrated” if, in order to carry it out, the proponent requires both development consent and a listed approval. On that basis, the DA was integrated development, irrespective of the applicant’s election on the DA form submitted to Council.
  • The Court held the classification turns on the criteria in ss 1.4 and 4.46 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EP&A Act), not on whether the election was made on the DA form.
  • The LEC held that because the work required an aquifer interference approval under s 91 of the Water Management Act 2000, the DA attracted the 60-day deemed-refusal period for integrated development (rather than 40 days). As such the appeal lodged at day 41 was premature and jurisdiction had not yet arisen.
  • Although a judge’s decision in Maule v Liporoni [2002] NSWLEC 25 (Maule) has long been understood as supporting an “opt-in” approach, the Commissioner in Artmade did not follow that view. This creates complexity until a binding appellate clarification occurs.

Artmade in brief

Facts: The DA was for a childcare centre including a basement. The geotechnical report indicated that excavation for the basement was likely to intercept groundwater, so dewatering would be required during excavation and construction of the basement. Because that dewatering would interfere with an aquifer, the works required an aquifer interference approval under the Water Management Act 2000 (WM Act). The applicant did not nominate the DA as integrated development and, instead, filed a Class 1 appeal on day 41 after lodgement, relying on the 40-day deemed-refusal period that applies to standard DAs. [...]  READ MORE →

Dont forget written on notepad
No Comments

Mandatory Planning Considerations: Don’t forget the DCP!

In the recent Land and Environment Court (LEC) decision of Ross v Randwick City Council [2025] NSWLEC 89, Justice Pritchard confirmed that a development control plan (DCP) is a mandatory consideration when determining modification applications under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EP&A Act).

The Council’s approval was held invalid, because the assessment failed to engage with the applicable DCP.

Background

On 28 July 2022, ADS Building Designers (ADS) obtained development consent from Randwick City Council (Council) for demolition works and construction of a new two-storey duplex. [...]  READ MORE →

noise-pollution-sign-800w
No Comments

Noise Prevention Notices – evidentiary requirements

A recent decision of the Land and Environment Court in Doon v Snowy Valleys Council [2025] NSWLEC 1514, confirms that the ‘reasonable suspicion’ required to issue a Prevention Notice under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1993 (POEO Act) is not arbitrary and must be based on objective evidence.

Background

These proceedings related to an appeal against a Noise Prevention Notice issued by Snowy Valleys Council (Council) to Mr Doon (Appellant) under s 96 of the POEO Act.

Council received 15 written complaints from three neighbours about noise emanating from the Appellant’s property. The complaints related to noise from:- vehicles; undertaking of vehicle repairs; use of power tools, use of ride-on lawnmower, use of dirt bikes and amplified noise. The Appellant’s property is approximately 1.5ha, located within a low density residential zone and adjoins the Tumut golf course on one side. [...]  READ MORE →

House between green check mark and red cross
No Comments

Development Control Orders: Validity Matters More Than Ever

A recent decision by the NSW Land and Environment Court in Kingfisher Properties Pty Ltd v Northern Beaches Council [2025] NSWLEC 39 (Kingfisher Case) is a timely reminder that development control orders (DCO) must adhere to statutory requirements.

In this case, the Court reduced a $100,000 penalty to just $9,000 after finding that the DCO issued went beyond the powers permitted under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) (EP&A Act).

Background

Kingfisher Properties Pty Ltd (Kingfisher) was a company that built a carport without obtaining the necessary development consent for the construction. Northern Beaches Council (Council) issued a DCO requiring Kingfisher to remove the carport. Initially, this was done via a Compliance Order under item 11, part 1 of Schedule 5 of the EP&A Act. However, a Compliance Order can only be used when a planning approval exists but has not been complied with. Given there was no planning approval in this instance this was not the appropriate order to issue. [...]  READ MORE →

House and dollar cycle on chalk board
No Comments

New Proposed ‘Housing and Productivity Contribution Scheme Works-in-Kind Guideline’

On 1 October 2023, the NSW Government introduced the Housing and Productivity Contribution Scheme (HPCS), which enables the NSW Government to collect housing and productivity contributions from residential, commercial, and industrial developments to fund state and regional infrastructure within the following regions:

  • Central Coast
  • Greater Sydney
  • Illawarra-Shoalhaven
  • Lower Hunter

Under Part 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment (Housing and Productivity Contributions) Order 2024 (HPC Order), housing and productivity contributions are ordinarily made as monetary contributions. However, clause 18(2) permits developers, by agreement with the Minister, to dedicate land or carry out capital works (or both) for regional infrastructure (Works-in-Kind), in whole or in part, as an alternative to meeting their monetary contributions. [...]  READ MORE →

luxury-apartments-800w
No Comments

Low and Mid Rise Housing Policy Reforms – Phase 2 Begins

The next stage of housing reform is officially underway. Phase 2 of the Low and Mid Rise Housing Reform commenced on 28 February 2025, introducing significant changes that will affect residential development across the region. In this article, we outline the key updates, their implications, and how to navigate the evolving planning landscape.

 What is Low and Mid-Rise Housing Policy Reforms?

The first stage of the Low and Mid-Rise Housing Policy (Policy), which took effect on 1 July 2024, introduced key amendments to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021 (Housing SEPP). These initial changes permitted dual occupancies and semi-detached dwellings within the R2 Low Density Residential zone across all of New South Wales. [...]  READ MORE →

Drawing plans and color palette
No Comments

A concept development application, what is it?

What is a Concept Development Application (‘Concept DA’)?

A Concept DA is a type of development application that sets out a proposal at a conceptual level. The Concept DA outlines a proposal that will be the subject of one or more subsequent development applications and may relate to the entire site or just a part of it.

A Concept DA must include a description of the proposed future development. It may also include  more detailed plans for the first stage of the development. If the Concept DA is approved, it permits certain development works to commence without the need for further consent. This is in accordance with s 4.22(1) and (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (‘EPA Act’). The developer can then commence work on the initial stage, while submitting a more detailed development application for the remaining stages, consistent with the approved Concept DA. [...]  READ MORE →

Approval road sign on sky background
No Comments

New Approval Pathway for Major Residential Housing Projects: The Housing Development Authority

In a push to boost housing supply and affordability in accordance with the National Housing Accord, the NSW Government has introduced the Environmental Planning and Assessment (Housing Delivery Authority) Order 2024 (‘HDA Order’). The HDA Order has established the Housing Development Authority (‘HDA’) which will lead a streamlined State Significant Development (‘SSD’) approval pathway for major residential development projects, allowing new homes to be delivered more quickly to the community. [...]  READ MORE →

Airplane signpost
No Comments

Court of Appeal overturns LEC decision and provides clarity as to “public purpose” in compulsory acquisitions

The recent NSW Court of Appeal Judgment of Goldmate Property Luddenham No 1 Pty Ltd v Transport for New South Wales [2024] NSWCA 292 has overturned the decision of the Land and Environment Court (“LEC”), providing clarity as to the principles of ‘public purpose’ under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW) (“Just Terms Act”) relating to the valuation of land in compulsory acquisitions by government authorities.

Background Summary

  1. On 19 March 2021, Transport for NSW (“TfNSW”) issued a proposed acquisition notice to acquire a part of 31.79 hectares of land located at 777-819 Luddenham Road, Luddenham (“the Land”) that Goldmate had purchased in November 2020 for $33,056,500. The purpose of the acquisition was to facilitate in the construction of the M12, being a part of the Western Sydney Infrastructure Plan (“WSIP”) and linked to the construct the Western Sydney Airport (“WSA”). Relevant areas around the WSA were rezoned from RU2 to EUT pursuant to the State Environmental Planning Policy (Western Sydney Aerotropolis) 2020 (“Aerotropolis SEPP”), including the Land.
  1. On 30 June 2021, TfNSW acquired 14.66 hectares of the Land (“Acquired Land”) under the Roads Act 1993 (NSW) (Roads Act) to facilitate the construction of the M12 motorway.
  1. The primary issue in dispute was whether the public purpose had caused the change in zoning from RU2 to ENT and a subsequent increase in market value.
  1. The market valuation of the parties and Valuer General was as follows:
Valuer General’s determinationGoldmateTfNSW
Market Value$0$55,437,200$4,000,200
Disturbance$160,116.58$199,527.59$167,979.78
Total$160,111.58$55,636,727.59$4,168,179.78

 

Land and Environment Court Proceedings [...]  READ MORE →

Aerial view chart
No Comments

Case Review: Sydney Metro v G & J Drivas Pty Ltd [2024] 113 NSWCA 5

Understanding the Impact of Compulsory Acquisition on Market Value

The recent decision in Sydney Metro v G & J Drivas Pty Ltd [2024] 113 NSWCA 5 (Drivas) provides critical clarity on how compulsory acquisition affects the market valuation of land under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW) (Just Terms Act). This case focuses on whether the market value of land should include the value of a hypothetical development that was halted due to the prospect of acquisition. The ruling of the Court of Appeal, now upheld after the High Court declined special leave to appeal, reaffirms the principle of just compensation and sets clear limits for claims related to hypothetical development costs. [...]  READ MORE →

Signpost Accountability
No Comments

Achieving Accountability: Special Executive Liability Provisions Extended to Council Executives

The recent case of Environment Protection Authority v McMurray [2024] NSWCCA 160 (McMurray) highlights how council executives and those involved in council management can be held accountable under laws attracting special executive liability.

The central issue in the case was the legal status of a council and whether its executives, such as the General Manager, could be prosecuted under section s 169(1) of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW) (POEO Act). Section 169(1) of the POEO Act holds individuals involved in the management of a corporation liable if the corporation is found to have contravened certain provisions of the Act. [...]  READ MORE →