Yokine: SAT finds in favour of Meat Lovers’ Paradise over City of Stirling

A long-running dispute involving a Yokine business has come to an apparent end, with the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) finding for the owners of Meat Lovers’ Paradise against the City of Stirling.

The owners of Meat Lovers Paradise on Wannero Road, D’Orazio Enterprises, had for years sought to reconfigure its operations on the site but were thwarted by the City of Stirling.

In 2013 the D’Orazios unsuccessfully attempted to the get SAT to overturn the City of Stirling’s refusal of planning permission.

One of the reasons given by the City for refusal related to access to the site from Wanneroo Road, as Main Roads opposed the Wanneroo Road access proposal.

The company put forward new versions of its proposals that were all rejected by the City, the last of which came before the SAT earlier this year – a version supported by Main Roads.

The SAT held that the expert planning, traffic, and noise impact evidence favoured the position of D’Orazio Enterprises, and rejected the City’s position that Main Roads’ experts were unduly influenced by Main Roads’ transport policies and their preferences for State roads.

Last month, the SAT found Main Roads was “best placed to inform them of any traffic considerations and best practice when making a judgment on access from a State road”.

The SAT was critical of the City’s decision to not to call an expert noise witness of its own and cross-examining the applicant’s noise expert “at length about one, possibly marginal, factor”.

The SAT “fully accepted” the evidence of the D’Orazio’s noise expert, and suggested Stirling may be ordered to pay costs after failing to pursue “informed dialogue between experts who had previously jointly conferred, with relevant cross-examination to follow”.

A spokesperson for the City of Stirling said it was not appropriate to comment on SAT decisions.

The City’s grounds for opposition were set out in the 17 May council meeting.

Council unanimously found the proposed development did not “to ensure safe and convenient access to facilities, in an environment which is conducive to pedestrian movement, as the proposed truck manoeuvring from Wanneroo Road will create a significant hazard for pedestrians”.

The City also argued the proposal was “contrary to the requirements of orderly and proper planning” as it did not adequately address noise and waste disposal issues; it did not ensure safe and efficient access for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists; and did not comply with Clause 67 of the City’s Planning and Development Regulations as the means of access and exit were “inadequate”.

Council also held that “insufficient provision was made for the loading, unloading, manoeuvring and parking of vehicles”.

The SAT rejected these claims and granted conditional approval for the proposal.