STARGAZE ASSETS PTY LTD and CITY OF SWAN
Case
•
[2016] WASAT 106
•6 SEPTEMBER 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
STARGAZE ASSETS PTY LTD and CITY OF SWAN [2016] WASAT 106
[2016] WASAT 106
6 SEPTEMBER 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
STARGAZE ASSETS PTY LTD applied for an amendment to an existing development approval, which allowed the crushing and screening of construction and demolition waste for use as fill on the same site. The proposed amendment sought to allow the crushed and screened material to be used as fill at other sites. The City of Swan opposed the application, arguing that the proposed use would constitute 'industry' and would not be suitable for the landscape zone. The matter was brought before the court to determine whether the proposed amended development was capable of approval and whether the land use would be classified as 'industry'.
The court considered the existing approval and the proposed amendment, and whether the proposed development was consistent with the objectives of the town planning scheme. The court examined the nature of the proposed use and whether it would be consistent with the landscape zone. The court also considered whether the proposed use would constitute 'industry' and whether it would be appropriate for the site.
The court found that the proposed amended development was not capable of approval. The court held that the proposed use of the site for the crushing and screening of construction and demolition waste, and the transportation of that waste to other sites for use as fill, would constitute 'industry' and would not be suitable for the landscape zone. The court noted that the existing approval was limited to the use of the crushed and screened material on the same site, and that the proposed amendment would expand the use of the site beyond the scope of the existing approval. The court concluded that the proposed development was not consistent with the objectives of the town planning scheme and was not capable of approval.
The court dismissed the application, and no orders were made. The existing development approval remained in place, and the proposed amended development was not approved.
The court considered the existing approval and the proposed amendment, and whether the proposed development was consistent with the objectives of the town planning scheme. The court examined the nature of the proposed use and whether it would be consistent with the landscape zone. The court also considered whether the proposed use would constitute 'industry' and whether it would be appropriate for the site.
The court found that the proposed amended development was not capable of approval. The court held that the proposed use of the site for the crushing and screening of construction and demolition waste, and the transportation of that waste to other sites for use as fill, would constitute 'industry' and would not be suitable for the landscape zone. The court noted that the existing approval was limited to the use of the crushed and screened material on the same site, and that the proposed amendment would expand the use of the site beyond the scope of the existing approval. The court concluded that the proposed development was not consistent with the objectives of the town planning scheme and was not capable of approval.
The court dismissed the application, and no orders were made. The existing development approval remained in place, and the proposed amended development was not approved.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Planning & Development Law
Legal Concepts
-
Adverse Possession
-
Easements & Covenants
-
Judicial Review
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
G & G Corp Asset Management Pty Ltd and Presiding Member of the Metropolitan East Joint Development Assessment Panel [2018] WASAT 9
Cases Citing This Decision
6
G & G Corp Asset Management Pty Ltd and Presiding Member of the Metropolitan East Joint Development Assessment Panel
[2018] WASAT 9
STARGAZE ASSET PTY LTD and CITY OF SWAN
[2017] WASAT 117
DI TRENTO and SHIRE OF NORTHAM
[2017] WASAT 121
Cases Cited
2
Statutory Material Cited
3
TERRA SPEI PTY LTD and SHIRE OF KALAMUNDA
[2015] WASAT 134
GMF Contractors Pty Ltd and Shire Of Serpentine-Jarrahdale
[2006] WASAT 353
TERRA SPEI PTY LTD and SHIRE OF KALAMUNDA
[2015] WASAT 134