KOGON and CITY OF VINCENT
Case
•
[2019] WASAT 75
•2 OCTOBER 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
KOGON and CITY OF VINCENT [2019] WASAT 75
[2019] WASAT 75
2 OCTOBER 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case between Kogon and the City of Vincent involved a dispute over a development application submitted by Kogon to change the use of a property for short-term accommodation, specifically for Airbnb rentals. The City of Vincent initially rejected the application, but Kogon appealed to the Western Australian State Administrative Tribunal (SAT). The central legal issues in the case revolved around the interpretation of the planning scheme, the classification of the land use, and the compatibility of the proposed use with its context. The tribunal needed to consider various factors, including the policy considerations, heritage issues, and the amenity impacts of the proposed use.
The tribunal reviewed the planning reports submitted by the City of Vincent's officers, which recommended approval of the proposal. However, the tribunal found that these reports did not adequately address the amenity impacts of the proposed use, particularly in relation to noise. The tribunal also considered the principle established in Dalla Riva, which suggested that while the officer's report to the planning authority should not be given weight in the exercise of discretion by the tribunal, the reasoning applied in the professional report could be considered as an expression of how the planner would exercise the discretion. Ultimately, the tribunal found that the City officers' planning reports were superseded by the evidence provided to the tribunal by Mr Hockley. The tribunal retained its discretion in making the final decision despite considering the various planning considerations.
In its decision, the tribunal emphasised that the term 'due regard' required only that proper, genuine, and realistic consideration be given to the various planning considerations set out in clause 67 of the deemed provisions. The tribunal concluded that regardless of its findings on each of these matters, it retained a discretion in relation to the ultimate decision it was required to make. The tribunal found in favour of Kogon, allowing the development application and permitting the change of use for short-term accommodation.
The tribunal reviewed the planning reports submitted by the City of Vincent's officers, which recommended approval of the proposal. However, the tribunal found that these reports did not adequately address the amenity impacts of the proposed use, particularly in relation to noise. The tribunal also considered the principle established in Dalla Riva, which suggested that while the officer's report to the planning authority should not be given weight in the exercise of discretion by the tribunal, the reasoning applied in the professional report could be considered as an expression of how the planner would exercise the discretion. Ultimately, the tribunal found that the City officers' planning reports were superseded by the evidence provided to the tribunal by Mr Hockley. The tribunal retained its discretion in making the final decision despite considering the various planning considerations.
In its decision, the tribunal emphasised that the term 'due regard' required only that proper, genuine, and realistic consideration be given to the various planning considerations set out in clause 67 of the deemed provisions. The tribunal concluded that regardless of its findings on each of these matters, it retained a discretion in relation to the ultimate decision it was required to make. The tribunal found in favour of Kogon, allowing the development application and permitting the change of use for short-term accommodation.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Planning & Development Law
Legal Concepts
-
Development Application
-
Land Use Classification
-
Innominate Use
-
Consideration of Policy
-
Amenity Impacts
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
MACIEJEWSKI and CITY OF BELMONT [2025] WASAT 47
Cases Citing This Decision
12
MACIEJEWSKI and CITY OF BELMONT
[2025] WASAT 47
LAWRENCE and CITY OF ROCKINGHAM
[2022] WASAT 36
JOSEPH and CITY OF NEDLANDS
[2022] WASAT 13
Cases Cited
17
Statutory Material Cited
9
RANDO and CITY OF GOSNELLS
[2019] WASAT 6
Re Shire of Mundaring; Ex parte Solomon
[2007] WASCA 132
Western Australian Planning Commission v Narcom Holdings Pty Ltd
[2011] WASC 259