Planning firms refuse to defend Perth council's sex club rejection
Three planning firms refused to defend the city's rejection. They said the decision appears indefensible under planning law.
The City of Perth asked three planning consultants to defend its rejection of a proposed LGBTQIA+ sex club. This was for a state tribunal hearing.
All three refused. The planning director told councillors the firms had questioned something.
Could the city's reasons for refusing the development be legally justified? Planning experts said no. They could not risk their professional reputations on a weak case.
If the council refuses the revised application again, it may face costs. The bill could be $30,000 to $50,000 in tribunal defence.
The city has already spent about $10,000. The applicant has revised the proposal to address concerns.
These include lower patron numbers and stricter safety rules.
- 129 Barrack Street, Perth
- Venue location
- $30,000 to $50,000
- Potential defence costs
- $10,000
- Spent to date
- 3
- Planning firms approached
Why it mattersThe city does not have solid legal grounds. It risks losing an expensive tribunal case. The city may be forced to approve the venue anyway.
AustraliaPerth ratepayers could face tens of thousands in defence costs if the council rejects the application again without defensible planning reasons.
✓ Claims checked against the source. checked 2 d ago
