Owner of controversial 200m Colorbond fence in Cockburn will enter legal battle with council to keep it
The fate of the controversial 200-metre Colorbond steel fence that split Cockburn council in April and left the city facing a potential $30,000 legal bill will be decided by the State Administrative Tribunal.
City of Cockburn councilors have voted to reject owner Sean Naidoo’s request for retrospective approval for a 200 meter metal fence, saying it did not meet rural fencing expectations.
Mr Naidoo is now taking further steps to protect his $100,000 hedge by applying for a full SAT hearing to resolve the issue. The hearing is estimated to cost the council approximately $30,000 in legal fees.
Mr Naidoo told PerthNow he had worked with town planning officers and participated in mediation to achieve a fair outcome and was disappointed with the outcome so far.
“While the fence was being erected, a city planning official advised me to make certain changes, including shortening the height of the fence. From this recommendation, I understood that if these changes were made, the fence would be acceptable,” he said.
“I followed their advice. At no point during this process was I informed that the fence was not appropriate in the council’s opinion. However, after the fence was completed and we had spent more than $100,000, the council informed me that retroactive approval was required.”
The property in question is zoned rural and the infrastructure must have an “open and informal character” to allow native wildlife to pass through it.
Mr Naidoo failed to obtain the necessary approvals under local fencing laws before building began in 2023 and first applied for retrospective approval last year.
After that was rejected, he worked with the city and SAT to develop four alternative fencing options as a compromise.
“I have engaged extensively and in good faith with the city to explore ways to preserve the front hedges, as well as to identify measures that could enhance rather than detract from the beauty of the area,” Mr Naidoo said.
“I have also made a number of alternative suggestions, including changes to fencing design such as permeable overhead hedges along parts of the frontage and adjustments to driveway cutting areas.
“The initial rejection of my application was due to concerns about wildlife movement. However, independent evidence contained in the planning report confirms that a State-owned cyclone fence with close mesh spacing already exists approximately 23 meters from my boundary,” he said.
“As a result, under no circumstances can wildlife cross my property from Thomsons Lake Nature Reserve.”
Mr Naidoo built the fence after encountering snakes on the property and was concerned for his young grandson’s safety. He also wanted to make sure family pets wouldn’t wander off on the road.
It said it had identified more than 70 other properties in the area with similar accepted fencing and had referred the matter to the SAT for a “appropriate and considered determination”.
“It is now appropriate for the matter to be decided by an independent court,” he said.
