Agenda of City Planning Committee Meeting

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 5

29/5/2017

City Planning Committee Meeting (Open Portion) held Monday, 29 May 2017 at 5.00 pm in the Lady Osborne Room, Town Hall.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Briscoe (Chairman)

Ruzicka

Burnet

Denison

ALDERMEN

Lord Mayor Hickey

Deputy Lord Mayor Christie

Zucco

Sexton

Cocker

Thomas

Reynolds

Harvey

Apologies: Nil.

Leave of Absence:

Alderman Burnet.

Alderman Denison.

1. Co-Option of a Committee Member in the event of a vacancy

2. Confirmation of Minutes

The minutes of the Open Portion of the City Planning Committee meeting held on Monday, 15 May 2017, are submitted for confirming as an accurate record.

3. Consideration of Supplementary Items

Ref: Part 2, Regulation 8(6) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

Recommendation

That the Committee resolve to deal with any supplementary items not appearing on the agenda, as reported by the General Manager.

4. Indications of Pecuniary and Conflicts of Interest

Ref: Part 2, Regulation 8(7) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

Aldermen are requested to indicate where they may have any pecuniary or conflict of interest in respect to any matter appearing on the agenda, or any supplementary item to the agenda, which the committee has resolved to deal with.

5. Transfer of Agenda Items

Regulation 15 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

A committee may close a part of a meeting to the public where a matter to be discussed falls within 15(2) of the above regulations.

In the event that the committee transfer an item to the closed portion, the reasons for doing so should be stated.

Are there any items which should be transferred from this agenda to the closed portion of the agenda, or from the closed to the open portion of the agenda?

6. Planning Authority Items - Consideration of Items With Deputations

In accordance with the requirements of Part 2 Regulation 8(3) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the General Manager is to arrange the agenda so that the planning authority items are sequential.

In accordance with Part 2 Regulation 8(4) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the Committee by simple majority may change the order of any of the items listed on the agenda, but in the case of planning items they must still be considered sequentially – in other words they still have to be dealt with as a single group on the agenda.

Where deputations are to be received in respect to planning items, past practice has been to move consideration of these items to the beginning of the meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

That in accordance with Regulation 8(4) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the Committee resolve to deal with any items which have deputations by members of the public regarding any planning matter listed on the agenda, to be taken out of sequence in order to deal with deputations at the beginning of the meeting.

Item No. 7.1.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 8

29/5/2017

7.1 Applications under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015

7.1.1 15 Marieville Esplanade, Sandy Bay - Adjacent area of River Derwent - Partial Demolition, Boat Ramp Pontoon, Refuelling Pontoon and Fuel Storage Tank and Dispensing Facility

PLN - 16-1184 - FILE REF: F17/51831

Address: 15 Marieville Esplanade, Sandy Bay Adjacent area of River Derwent

Proposal: Partial Demolition, Boat Ramp Pontoon, Refuelling Pontoon and Fuel Storage Tank and Dispensing Facility

Expiry Date: 28 June 2017

Extension of Time: Not applicable

Author: Elizabeth Wilson

REcommendation

Pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the Council approve the application for Partial Demolition, Boat Ramp Pontoon, Refuelling Pontoon and Fuel Storage Tank and Dispensing Facility at 15 Marieville Esplanade and Adjacent Area of River Derwent, Sandy Bay for the reasons outlined in the officer’s report and a permit containing the following conditions be issued:

GEN

The use and/or development must be substantially in accordance with the documents and drawings that comprise PLN161184 15 MARIEVILLE ESPLANADE SANDY BAY TAS 7005 except where modified below.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

ENG 12

A construction waste management plan must be implemented throughout construction.

A construction waste management plan must be submitted and approved, prior to commencement of work on the site. The construction waste management plan must include:

· Provisions for the handling, transport and disposal of demolition material, including any contaminated waste and recycling opportunities, to satisfy the above requirement.

All work required by this condition must be undertaken in accordance with the approved construction waste management plan.

Advice: Once the construction waste management plan has been approved, the Council will issue a condition endorsement (see general advice on how to obtain condition endorsement).

It is recommended that the developer liaise with the Council’s Cleansing and Solid Waste Unit regarding reducing, reusing and recycling materials associated with demolition on the site to minimise solid waste being directed to landfill. Further information can also be found on the Council’s website.

Reason for condition

To ensure that solid waste management from the site meets the Council’s requirements and standards.

ENG 1

The cost of repair of any damage to the Council infrastructure resulting from the implementation of this permit, must be met by the owners within 30 days of the completion of the development or as otherwise determined by the Council.

A photographic record of the Council infrastructure adjacent to the subject site must be provided to the Council prior to any commencement of works.

to provide to the Council a photographic record of the Council’s infrastructure, then any damage to the Council infrastructure found on completion of works will be deemed to be the responsibility of the owner.

Reason for condition

To ensure that any of the Council infrastructure and/or siterelated service connections affected by the proposal will be altered and/or reinstated at the owner’s full cost.

ENV 2

Demolition and construction environmental management measures, in accordance with an approved Demolition and Construction Environmental Management Plan (D&CEMP) must be implemented.

A D&CEMP must be submitted and approved, prior to the issue of any building consent or commencement of work (if no building consent is required). The D&CEMP must identify potential impacts upon natural values as a result of the development during demolition and construction works and include management measures where necessary to minimise potential impacts including:

· disturbance of the river bed during demolition of the existing jetty;

· sediment transfer into waterways from the construction of new fuel lines and fuel tank;

· disturbance of noise sensitive fauna during piling activities; and

· leaks and spills of fuels, wastes and other pollutants into waterways (including from construction equipment and machinery).

The D&CEMP must demonstrate compliance with any relevant recommendations of the Wetlands and Waterways Works Manual (DPIWE, 2003) and Tasmania Coastal Works Manual (DPIPWE, 2010).

All work required by this condition must be undertaken in accordance with the approved D&CEMP.

Advice: Once the D&CEMP has been approved, the Council will issue a condition endorsement (see general advice on how to obtain condition endorsement).

Reason for condition

To ensure the development meets the provisions of the Inundation Prone Areas Code of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

ENV s1

The development must be designed, installed and operated in accordance with Australian Standard AS1940: The storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids.

Reason for condition

To ensure the development complies with the Waterway and Coastal Protection Code of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

ENV s2

The development must be designed and used in accordance with The Royal Yacht Club of Tasmania Fuel Facilities Refueling Procedures and Guidelines (September, 2016) or an alternative document specifying refueling requirements and procedures approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason for condition

To ensure the development complies with the Waterway and Coastal Protection Code of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

ENVHE 1

Recommendations in the report 'Environmental Site Assessment, Royal Yacht Club of Tasmania, 15 Maryville Esplanade Sandy Bay, February 2017' and the associated 'Contamination Management Plan, Royal Yacht Club of Tasmania, Sandy Bay, February 2017' prepared by GeoEnvironmental Solutions P/L, 86 Queen St, Sandy Bay, must be implemented.

Reason for condition

To ensure that the risk to future occupants of the building remain low and acceptable.

ADVICE

The following advice is provided to you to assist in the implementation of the planning permit that has been issued subject to the conditions above. The advice is not exhaustive and you must inform yourself of any other legislation, bylaws, regulations, codes or standards that will apply to your development under which you may need to obtain an approval. Visit the Council's website for further information.

Prior to any commencement of work on the site or commencement of use the following additional permits/approval may be required from the Hobart City Council.

CONDITION ENDORSEMENT

As a condition endorsement is required by a planning condition above, you will need to submit the relevant documentation to satisfy the condition, via the Condition Endorsement Submission on Council's online eservice portal.

Once approved, the Council will respond to you via email that the condition(s) has been endorsed (satisfied). Detailed instructions can be found here.

BUILDING PERMIT

Building permit in accordance with the Building Act 2016. Click here for more information.

TEMPORARY PARKING PERMITS

Temporary parking permits for construction vehicles i.e. residential or meter parking/loading zones. Click here for more information.

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Please note that under section 32 of the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 a person responsible for the activity must notify the relevant council, as soon as reasonably practicable but not later than 24 hours, after becoming aware of the release of a pollutant occurring as the result of any incident in relation to that

activity, including an emergency, accident or malfunction, if this release causes or may cause an environmental nuisance.

NOISE REGULATIONS

Click here for information with respect to noise nuisances in residential areas.

WASTE DISPOSAL

Click here for information regarding waste disposal.

FEES AND CHARGES

Click here for information on the Council's fees and charges.

DIAL BEFORE YOU DIG

Click here for dial before you dig information.

Attachment a: PLN-16-1184 - 15 MARIEVILLE ESPLANADE SANDY BAY TAS 7005 - Planning Committee or Delegated Report ⇩

Attachment b: PLN-16-1184 - 15 MARIEVILLE ESPLANADE SANDY BAY TAS 7005 - CPC Agenda Documents ⇩

Item No. 7.1.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 209

29/5/2017

7.1.2 45 Hampden Road, Battery Point - Partial Demolition, Alterations and Extension to Eating Establishment Seating and Operating Hours

pln-17-183 - FILE REF: F17/52087

Address: 45 Hampden Raod, Battery Point

Proposal: Partial Demolition, Alterations and Extension to Eating Establishment Seating and Operating Hours

Expiry Date: 16 June 2017

Extension of Time: Not applicable

Author: Richard Bacon

REcommendation

Pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the Council approve the application for a partial demolition, alterations, and extension to eating establishment seating and operating hours at 45 Hampden Road, Battery Point for the reasons outlined in the officer’s report and a permit containing the following conditions be issued:

GEN

The use and/or development must be substantially in accordance with the documents and drawings that comprise PLN17183 45 HAMPDEN ROAD BATTERY POINT TAS 7004 Final Planning Documents except where modified below.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

The use and/or development must comply with the requirements of TasWater as detailed in the form Submission to Planning Authority Notice, Reference No. TWDA 2017/00376HCC dated 4/4/2017 as attached to the permit.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

THC

The use and/or development must comply with the requirements of the Tasmanian Heritage Council as detailed in the Notice of Heritage Decision, THC Application No. 5260 dated 11th May 2017, as attached to the permit.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

PLN 13

Waste storage areas must be located within an enclosed and roofed building in an area that is at least 3m from the northern boundary with 38 South Street.

A plan complying with this condition must be submitted and approved prior to the issue of any building consent or the commencement of work (if no building consent is required).

All work required by this condition must be undertaken in accordance with the approved plan.

Advice: Once the waste storage area plan has been approved, the Council will issue a condition endorsement (see general advice on how to obtain condition endorsement).

The area which was to be used for outdoor waste storage ('Ex. Bin Area') is not approved to be used for outdoor dining.

Reason for condition

To minimise the risk of environmental harm

PLN s1

The hours of operation of the open rear courtyard must not exceed the following:

· 7:00am to 9:00pm Mondays to Fridays.

· 8:00am to 6:00pm Saturdays.

· 9:00am to 5:00pm Sundays and public holidays.

Reason for condition

To ensure the hours of operation do not have an unreasonable impact upon the residential amenity through noise or other emissions that are unreasonable in their timing, duration or extent.

PLN s2

External lighting must comply with the following:

· Be turned off between 10:00 pm and 6:00 am, except for security lighting; and

· Security lighting must be baffled to ensure it does not cause emission of light into adjoining private land.

Reason for condition

To ensure external lighting must not adversely affect existing or future residential amenity in the vicinity.

ENG 1

A photographic record of the Council infrastructure adjacent to the subject site must be provided to the Council prior to any commencement of works.

A photographic record of the Council’s infrastructure (e.g. existing property service connection points, roads, buildings, stormwater, footpaths, driveway crossovers and nature strips, including if any, pre existing damage) will be relied upon to establish the extent of damage caused to the Council’s infrastructure during construction. In the event that the owner/developer fails to provide to the Council a photographic record of the Council’s infrastructure, then any damage to the Council infrastructure found on completion of works will be deemed to be the responsibility of the owner.

Reason for condition

To ensure that any of the Council infrastructure and/or siterelated service connections affected by the proposal will be altered and/or reinstated at the owner’s full cost.

ENV 1

Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to prevent sediment from leaving the site must be installed prior to any disturbance of the site. Sediment controls must be maintained until all areas of disturbance have been stabilized or revegetated.

Advice: For further guidance in preparing a Soil and Water Management Plan – in accordance with Fact sheet 3 Derwent Estuary Program click here.

Reason for condition

To avoid the sedimentation of roads, drains, natural watercourses, Council land that could be caused by erosion and runoff from the development, and to comply with relevant State legislation.

ENV s1

Music and recorded sound must not be played in the outdoor dining area prior to 7:30am.

Reason for condition

To minimise the risk of environmental harm

ENV s2

A solid wall with a minimum height of 2m must be constructed between the outdoor dining area and 38 South Street, from the lot boundary with South Street to the buildings on the site, prior to commencement of the use.

A plan complying with this condition and including the wall's materials must be submitted and approved prior to the issue of any building consent or the commencement of work (if no building consent is required).

All work required by this condition must be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans.

Advice: Once the design of the wall has been approved the Council will issue a condition endorsement (see general advice on how to obtain condition endorsement).

Reason for condition

To minimise the risk of environmental harm

ENV s3

Noise emissions from the site must not exceed 5dB(A) (LA90) above the background level immediately adjacent the western and southern boundaries after 6:00pm as measured in accordance with the Tasmanian Noise Measurement Procedures Manual (DEPHA, 2008).

Reason for condition

To minimise the risk of environmental harm

ENV s4

A noise report from a suitably qualified person, specifying the LA90 background noise level in dB(A) immediately adjacent the western and southern boundaries between the hours of 6:00pm and 9:00pm weekdays, must be submitted and approved prior to the issue of any building consent or the commencement of work (if no building consent is required). Measurement of noise levels must be in accordance with the methods in the Tasmanian Noise Measurement Procedures Manual (DEPHA, 2008).

Reason for condition

To ensure compliance with permit conditions can be enforced to minimise the risk of environmental harm.

ADVICE

Prior to any commencement of work on the site or commencement of use the following additional permits/approval may be required from the Hobart City Council.

CONDITION ENDORSEMENT

If a condition endorsement is required by a planning condition above, you will need to submit the relevant documentation to satisfy the condition, via the Condition Endorsement Submission on Council's online eservice portal.

Once approved, the Council will respond to you via email that the condition(s) has been endorsed (satisfied). Detailed instructions can be found here.

BUILDING PERMIT

Building permit in accordance with the Building Act 2016. Click here for more information.

PLUMBING PERMIT

Plumbing permit in accordance with the Building Act 2016, Building Regulations

2016 and the National Construction Code. Click here for more information.

PUBLIC HEALTH

Approved/endorsed plans for a food business fit out, in accordance with the National Construction Code Building Code of Australia including Tas Part H102 for food premises which must have regard to the FSANZ Food Safety Standards. Click here for more information.

FOOD BUSINESS REGISTRATION

Food business registration in accordance with the Food Act 2003. Click here for more information.

NOISE REGULATIONS

Click here for information with respect to noise nuisances in residential areas.

FEES AND CHARGES

Click here for information on the Council's fees and charges.

DIAL BEFORE YOU DIG

Click here for dial before you dig information.

Attachment a: PLN-17-183 - 45 HAMPDEN ROAD BATTERY POINT TAS 7004 - Planning Committee or Delegated Report ⇩

Attachment b: PLN-17-183 45 HAMPDEN ROAD BATTERY POINT TAS 7004 - CPC Agenda Documents ⇩

Attachment c: PLN-17-183 - 45 HAMPDEN ROAD BATTERY POINT TAS 7004 - Environmental Development Planner Referral Report ⇩

Attachment d: PLN-17-183 - 45 HAMPDEN ROAD BATTERY POINT TAS 7004 - Cultural Heritage Officer Referral Report ⇩

Item No. 7.1.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 267

29/5/2017

7.1.3 Elizabeth Street, Hobart - Signage

PLN-17-276 - FILE REF: F17/52520

Address: Elizabeth Street, Hobart

Proposal: Signage

Expiry Date: 6 June 2017

Extension of Time: Not applicable

Author: Tristan Widdowson

REcommendation

Pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the Council approve the application for signage at Elizabeth Street Mall, Hobart for the reasons outlined in the officer’s report and a permit containing the following conditions be issued:

GEN

The use and/or development must be substantially in accordance with the documents and drawings that comprise PLN17276 ELIZABETH MALL ELIZABETH STREET HOBART TAS 7000 Final Planning Documents except where modified below.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

ADVICE

Prior to any commencement of work on the site or commencement of use the following additional permits/approval may be required from the Hobart City Council.

BUILDING PERMIT

Building permit in accordance with the Building Act 2016. Click here for more information.

Attachment a: PLN-17-276 - ELIZABETH STREET (ELIZABETH MALL) HOBART TAS 7000 - Planning Committee or Delegated Report ⇩

Attachment b: PLN-17-276 ELIZABETH MALL ELIZABETH STREET HOBART TAS 7000 - CPC Agenda Documents ⇩

Item No. 7.1.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 283

29/5/2017

Memorandum: City Planning Committee

145-167 liverpool street and 104-110 murray street hobart – eta-17-21 request for EXTENSION OF TIME TO PERMIT pln-15-00414-01

Introduction

This memorandum relates to a request to extend the time period to substantially commence planning permit PLN-15-00414-01 for Partial Demolition, Alterations and Redevelopment for Offices, Shops, Restaurants, Take Away Food Shops and Carparking at 145-167 Liverpool Street and 104-110 Murray Street, Hobart.

Background

PLN-15-00414-01 is a multiple storey, mixed use redevelopment approved by Council dated 26 October 2015.

The application was assessed under the former City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.

The discretions invoked were heritage and basic plot ratio.

Two representations were received to the proposal, both raising concern at the proposed loss of the ‘Odeon’ theatre venue at 163-167 Liverpool Street, Hobart.

The applicant has requested an extension of time (until 26 October 2019) in which to substantially commence the proposal. The request is made under Section 53(5)(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (the Act).

A separate request has also been made to extend the time of a related permit under ETA-17-20. This was PLN-15-00415-01, which is an approval for the demolition and redevelopment for flats (student accommodation) and shops at 104-110 Murray Street Hobart. That application was approved by the Council (following a Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal consent decision) dated 3 September 2015. That application was likewise assessed under the former City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.

Evaluation

Under the current Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the heritage discretion would remain. Height would also require the exercise of discretion.

Plot ratio is not a consideration under Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

Under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, discretion would be required in terms of the following:

Clause 22.4.1 A1 (a): height; and

Clause 22.4.1 A4: heritage adjacency provisions with respect to height.

Assessment against the performance criterion would be required under 22.4.1 P1, which provides as follows.

Development:

(a) Contained within the amenity building envelope illustrated in figure 22.3 must demonstrate through siting, bulk and design that it does not significantly adversely impact on the streetscape and townscape values of the surrounding area;

(b) Outside the amenity building envelope illustrated in figure 22.3 must only be approved if:

(i) it provides significant benefits in terms of civic amenities such as public space, pedestrian links, public art or public toilets, unless an extension to an existing building that already exceeds the amenity building envelope; and

(ii) the siting, bulk and design does not significantly negatively impact on the streetscape and townscape of the surrounding area; and

(iii) the design demonstrates that it will minimise unacceptable wind conditions in adjacent streets; and

(iv) for city blocks with frontage to a solar penetration priority street in figure 22.2, the overshadowing of the public footpath on the opposite side of the solar penetration priority street does not unreasonably impact on pedestrian amenity.

In relation to (a) the proposal would not meet the amenity building envelope. Part (b) therefore applies.

In relation to (b)(i) and (ii) under the original planning report to the Council, an independent urban design review was submitted by P Curtis (22/6/2015) which stated in part as follows.

‘Impacts from excessive density must readily manifest themselves through the perceived bulk of the development and the impact that may have on the overall character, appearance and amenity of the city and its public spaces.’

The proponent has presented a case to justify the bonus plot ratio being sought. The elements of this justification include:

(i) Publicly accessible foyer and atrium spaces.

(ii) The conservation and maintenance of items of heritage significance.

(iii) Material selection and architectural detail of a high standard that will lift the overall urban quality of the precinct.

(iv) Environmentally sustainable development initiatives have been adopted including significant facilities for cyclists and the proponent has indicated that a 5 star green rating is also being sought through a range of measures including solar arrays. Under the provisions of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 and on the basis of the betterment being offered in exchange, it is my opinion justifiable for a bonus plot ratio benefit to be awarded’.

The proposal was approved by the Council with no restricting conditions relating to building bulk. The independent urban design review concluded that sufficient public benefit was provided to achieve reasonable acceptability.

In relation to (b)(iii) under the original proposal, a wind analysis report was submitted. The planning report to the Council concluded that the proposal was acceptable in terms of potential wind impact.

In relation to (b)(iv) under the planning report to the Council, submitted spring and autumn sunshade diagrams indicated a morning overshadowing of Watchorn Street, middle of the day overshadowing of Liverpool Street around the Watchorn Street corner, and afternoon overshadowing of the adjacent section of Liverpool Street for its whole width. The planning report to the Council recommended that likely impact in terms of overshadowing was not sufficient to justify refusal of the proposal.

Heritage Assessment

The Council’s Cultural Heritage Officer provides the following comment:

When dealing with an application for something previously determined by the Planning Authority, it is considered that the only determinants are whether the physical development has altered, the particular circumstances of the site have altered or whether the statutory planning documents have altered.

With regard to the above, it is noted that the site has remained entirely unaltered. The Statutory Planning Framework has however altered, with the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 in force at the time having subsequently been replaced by the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015. Notably, Nos. 159-161 and Nos.163-167 Liverpool Street, previously not identified as Heritage Listed, have formally been adopted as Heritage Places under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015. In addition, the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 has introduced specific height restrictions within the Central Business Zone when dealing with proposals within or adjacent to individual or multiple Heritage Listed Places. As such, it is therefore considered that the proposal should be the subject of reassessment through the submission of a new planning application.

With regard to the above, whilst the supporting documentation of the original application has sought to address some of the above, it is considered that they have not been addressed in specific detail to address the provisions of the new Scheme. Similarly, whilst the previous proposal was deemed to be acceptable partially on the basis that it met the perception of provision of 'public amenity', it is considered that whether it still meets those tests should be given further consideration on the basis of the additional requirements set by the new Scheme. However, based on the wording of the Scheme which seeks to retain Heritage Listed Places and limit the height of new development within and next to Heritage Listed Places far below that currently sought, it is considered that the proposal does not meet the requirements of the heritage provisions of the Scheme as it currently stands.

Should the applicant seek to submit a new proposal, it is recommended that it contain a Conservation Management Plan for the entire site, a Heritage Report dealing with the proposed demolition of the newly Heritage Listed Places and impact upon neighbouring Heritage Places, an Architectural Statement and Urban Design Statement dealing with site and townscape impact, Shadow Diagrams and a Statement of Archaeological Potential for the entire site.

Extension of time delegation

Usually, requests for extensions of time to a permit are dealt with at an officer level under delegation. However, that delegation can only be exercised at officer level when the ‘strategic intent of the relevant planning scheme has not significantly changed’.

As stated above, the proposal was considered under the relevant provisions of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982. The Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 came into force on 20 May 2015. If the provisions of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 represent a significant change in the strategic intent to the provisions of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 insofar as they are applicable to the proposal, delegation to determine the extension of time to the permit rests with the Council.

The Strategic Intent of the Planning Scheme

Originally the proposal was assessed under the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982. The property was within the Central Commercial and Administrative Zone. The proposal triggered discretions under Schedule C: Height and Schedule F: Heritage.

Under the now in force Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the site is within Central Business Zone. In terms of height provisions not relating to heritage, it is considered that the strategic intent of the zone provisions applicable to the site has not changed from the former City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 to the current Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

However, there is a significant change to the heritage status of the site between the two planning schemes.

Under the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 the part of the site that was listed was 145-147 Liverpool Street.

Notably, Nos. 159-161 and Nos.167-163 Liverpool Street (the ‘Odeon’), previously not identified as Heritage Listed, have formally been adopted as Heritage Places under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

In addition, the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 has introduced specific height restrictions within the Central Business Zone when dealing with proposals within or adjacent to individual or multiple Heritage Listed Places.

The changes to the heritage status of parts of the site and the inclusion of new height provisions within the Central Business Zone that relate to proposals adjacent to individual or multiple Heritage Listed Places are considered to be significant changes to the strategic intent of planning scheme provisions applicable to the site, and therefore delegation to determine the extension of time to the permit request rests with the Council.

Based on the assessment of the Council’s Cultural Heritage Officer, it is considered that the proposal should be the subject of reassessment through the submission of a new planning application.

Conclusion

The strategic intent of planning provisions applicable to the site has significantly changed from the former City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, on the basis that the heritage status of parts of the site has changed, and the site is now subject to heritage adjacency provisions with respect to height.

The Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the proposal and advised that the original conditions imposed are consistent with the requirements of Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 and no amendment to or additional conditions are required.

If the Council grants the extension of time request, the applicant will have until 26 October 2019 to substantially commence the proposal.

If the Council refuses to grant the extension of time request, the applicant may lodge a new development application which will be assessed under the planning scheme prevailing at the time of submission, which is currently the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

There is no provision under the Act to appeal an extension of time refusal.

Based on the assessment of the Council’s Cultural Heritage Officer, it is considered that the proposal should be the subject of reassessment through the submission of a new planning application. It is therefore recommended that the Council refuse the extension of time request lodged under Section 53(5)(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (under ETA-17-21) in respect of PLN-15-00414-01.

REcommendation

That:

1. That the information be received and noted.

2. It is recommended that the Council refuse the extension of time request lodged under Section 53(5)(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (under ETA-17-21) in respect of PLN-15-00414-01.

As signatory to this report, I certify that, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, I hold no interest, as referred to in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 1993, in matters contained in this report.

Rohan Probert

Manager Development Appraisal

Date: 24 May 2017

File Reference: F17/51602

Attachment a: ETA-17-21 - 145-147 LIVERPOOL STREET HOBART TAS 7000 - Attachment B - Approved Drawings ⇩

Item No. 7.1.5

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 317

29/5/2017

Memorandum: City Planning Committee

104-110 MURRAY STREET HOBART ETA-17-20 - REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO PERMIT PLN-15-00415-01

Introduction

This memorandum relates to a request to extend the time period to substantially commence planning permit PLN-15-00415-01 for Demolition and Redevelopment for Flats (Student Accommodation) and Shops at 104-110 Murray Street, Hobart.

Background

PLN-15-00415-01 is a multiple storey redevelopment which was approved by Council (following a Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal consent decision) dated 3 September 2015.

The proposal was assessed under the former City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.

Discretions were heritage, plot ratio, height and signage.

No representations were received to the proposal.

The applicant has requested an extension of time (until 3 September 2019) in which to substantially commence the proposal. The request is made under Section 53(5)(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (the Act).

A separate request has also been made to extend the time of a related planning application under ETA-17-21. This was PLN-15-00414-01, which is an approval for the partial demolition, alterations and development for offices, shops, restaurants, take away food shops and carparking at 145-7 Liverpool Street and 104-110 Murray Street, Hobart. That application was approved by Council dated 26 October 2015. That application was likewise assessed under the former City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.

Evaluation

Under the current Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the sole discretion would be height.

Assessment is required to ascertain whether or not the matters considered by Council and the Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal under the previous planning scheme, would satisfy considerations under the current planning scheme.

Under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, height discretion would be required under clause 22.4.1 A1(a).

The performance criteria under 22.4.1 P1 states as follows.

Development:

(b) Outside the amenity building envelope illustrated in figure 22.3 must only be approved if:

(ii) the siting, bulk and design does not significantly negatively impact on the streetscape and townscape of the surrounding area; and

(iii) the design demonstrates that it will minimise unacceptable wind conditions in adjacent streets; and

In relation to (a) the proposal would not meet the amenity building envelope. Part (b) therefore applies.

The original planning report to Council under PLN-15-00415 provides an assessment under the (then draft) Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 as follows.

In terms of the ‘figure 22.3 amenity building envelope’ as referred to under clause p1 (a) of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the concern would be as to whether the proposal could be considered to maintain acceptability under clause p1 (b)(i) to (iv). In terms of clause p1 (b)(iii), the submitted wind analysis indicates no excessive likely impact. In terms of clause p1(b)(iv), it is noted on figure 22.2 that the Murray Street frontage to the northeastern side of the site is listed as a ‘solar penetration priority street’. The submitted sunshade diagrams indicate late summer afternoon overshadowing of part of the frontage toward the Liverpool Street intersection (3pm on 21st December).

In terms of principle 11 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, an independent urban design review has been submitted (P Curtis, 22 may 2015). the review concludes as follows (the full comment is attached to this report):

“‘The development site and proposed development is consistent with the pattern of development prevailing in the immediate vicinity, within the central area more generally and with the statements of desired future character for the precinct as prescribed in the CHPS1982.

The proposed development is consistent with the height limits prevailing in and prescribed for the precinct.

Adverse or unacceptable impacts on pedestrian amenity are not evident.it is therefore my opinion that, notwithstanding the significant bonus plot ratio benefit being sought, the proposed development is acceptable from an urban design perspective.”’.

On balance, the proposal is considered acceptable in terms of height, siting, townscape, amenity and environment provisions under the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.

It is noted that the draft Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 existing at the time of the original application included under clause 22.4.1 P1 (b)(i) that development must only be approved if 'it provides overriding benefits in terms of economic activity'. That statement is not included in the current Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

On balance, the proposal was considered acceptable under the original application which, while under the previous planning scheme, nevertheless took into account the (then draft) provisions of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

The proposal is considered acceptable in terms of height under the provisions of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

Heritage Assessment

The Council’s Cultural Heritage Officer provides the following comment:

With regard to the above, it is noted that the site has remained entirely unaltered. The Statutory Planning Framework has however altered, with the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 in force at the time having subsequently been replaced by the Hobart interim Planning Scheme 2015. Notably, whilst the site in question is unlisted, it does stand immediately next to several Heritage Listed Places, most notably No.112 Murray Street and No.137 Liverpool Street. As such, the site is subject to new and descriptive height restrictions as set out within the Hobart interim Planning Scheme 2015 under Part D - 22.4.1 A5 not previously stipulated. As such, it is therefore considered that the proposal should be the subject of reassessment through the submission of a new planning application.

With regard to the above, it is noted that the proposal exceeds the height restrictions relating to a development adjacent to multiple Heritage Listed Places as set out in 22.4.1 Building Height A5 or indeed A1 and A2 based on the lack of civic amenity as set out in the provisions of the Scheme. As such, it is therefore considered that in the event of a new application based on an unaltered previous submission, the proposal would not meet the Heritage provisions of the Scheme.

In line with previous heritage reports for PLN-08-01036-01, PLN-11-00364-01 and PLN-15-00414-01, and the requirements of the Hobart interim Planning Scheme 2015, it is suggested that new applications be supported by a Statement of Archaeological Potential for the entire site.

Extension of time delegation

Usually, requests for extensions of time to a permit are dealt with at an officer level under delegation. However, that delegation can only be exercised at officer level when the ‘strategic intent of the relevant planning scheme has not significantly changed’.

As stated above, the proposal was considered under the relevant provisions of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982. The Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 came into force on 20 May 2015. If the provisions of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 represent a significant change in the strategic intent to the provisions of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 insofar as they are applicable to the proposal, delegation to grant the extension of time to the permit rests with the Council.

The Strategic Intent of the Planning Scheme

Originally the proposal was assessed under the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982. The property was within the Central Commercial and Administrative Zone. The proposal triggered discretions under Schedule F: heritage, Schedule B: plot ratio, Schedule C: height, and Schedule G: signage.

Under the now in force Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the site is within the Central Business Zone. In terms of height provisions not relating to heritage, it is considered that the strategic intent of the zone provisions applicable to the site has not changed from the former City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 to the current Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015. The plot ratio provision does not apply under the current planning scheme. The signage provision does not apply given the deletion of the subject sign under the Council approval (following the Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal decision) dated 3 September 2015.

Under the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 the site was adjacent to a heritage listed site. Under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 there are no general adjacency provisions, and the site is not itself listed or within any heritage precinct. There are however new and descriptive height provisions as set out under clause 22.4.1 A5 not previously stipulated that relate to sites adjacent to heritage listed sites. As stated, those adjacent heritage listed sites are Nos. 112 Murray Street and 137 Liverpool Street.

The inclusion of these provisions is considered to be a significant change to the strategic intent of planning scheme provisions applicable to the site. Delegation to determine the extension of time to the permit request therefore rests with the Council.

Based on the assessment of the Council’s Cultural Heritage Officer, it is considered that the proposal should be the subject of reassessment through the submission of a new planning application.

Conclusion

The strategic intent of planning provisions applicable to the site has significantly changed from the former City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, on the basis that the site is now subject to heritage adjacency provisions with respect to height.

Council’s Development Engineer has reviewed the proposal and advised that the original conditions imposed are consistent with the requirements of Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 and no amendment to or additional conditions are required.

If the Council grants the extension of time request, the applicant will have until 3 September 2019 to substantially commence the proposal.

There is no provision under the Act to appeal an extension of time refusal.

Based on the assessment of the Council’s Cultural Heritage Officer, it is considered that the proposal should be the subject of reassessment through the submission of a new planning application. It is therefore recommended that the Council refuse the extension of time request lodged under Section 53(5)(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (under ETA-17-20) in respect of PLN-15-00415-01.

REcommendation

That:

1. That the information be received and noted.

2. It is recommended that the Council refuse the extension of time request lodged under Section 53(5)(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (under ETA-17-20) in respect of PLN-15-00415-01.

Rohan Probert

Manager Development Appraisal

Date: 24 May 2017

File Reference: F17/50748

Attachment a: ETA-17-20 - 110 MURRAY STREET HOBART TAS 7000 - Attachment B - Approved Drawings ⇩

Item No. 8.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 342

29/5/2017

REPORT TITLE: Fees and Charges Review - 2017-2018 - City Planning

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Director City Planning

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. The purpose of this report is to seek Council endorsement of the proposed 2017-2018 schedule of fees and charges relevant to the City Planning Division.

2. Report Summary

2.1. Pursuant to section 205 of the Local Government Act 1993, Council may impose fees and charges for various services.

2.2. The attached schedules detail the proposed fees and charges for the following activities for the 2017-2018 financial year:

2.2.1. Environmental Health;

2.2.2. Development Compliance – (City Inspector, Building and Plumbing and Animal Management);

2.2.3. Development Appraisal;

2.2.4. Planning Policy and Heritage (Scheme Amendments and City Planning Publications);

2.2.5. City Design.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The report be received and noted.

2. The City Planning fees and charges contained within the attached schedule are adopted for the 2017-2018 financial year.

4. Background

4.1. The fees and charges for the City Planning Division are reviewed each year as part of the City of Hobart’s annual budget process.

4.2. Where possible fees and charges are to be paid up-front and additional costs are charged on a cost recovery basis.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. It is proposed that the attached schedule of fees and charges be endorsed for the 2017-2018 financial year.

Fees and charges for 2017-2018 will become effective as at 1 July 2017.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. The annual review of the City’s fees and charges contributes to the Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025 - Goal 5 – “Governance, Leadership provides for informed decision-making for our capital city”.

7. Financial Implications

7.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1. Not applicable.

7.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1. The review of the fees and charges has been undertaken and expected increase/decreases for the 2017-2018 financial year for each function area is expected as follows:

Development Appraisal

7.2.1.1. The anticipated increase for Development Appraisal is based upon a predication of continued relatively strong planning application numbers, as well as recommended incremental increases in some fees to better reflect the cost of the service.

Planning Policy and Heritage

7.2.1.2. The reduction in income for Planning Policy and Heritage Unit is due to a more realistic prediction of book sales for the unit. 2016-2017 was abnormally high and it is anticipated that 2017-2018 will be back to normal levels.

Development Compliance

7.2.1.3. The only substantial change is the reduction in temporary occupancy revenue ($7250 last year, $0 this year). The reason for this is that the Building Act 2016 commenced on 1 January 2017 and the City of Hobart is no longer responsible for the issue of temporary occupancy permits. There will also be a modest increase in the occupation license fees given the revaluations for these areas particularly in the Salamanca Place and Morrison Street. This modest increase will be offset by reduction in building permit revenue due to the changes in the Building Act 2016 reducing the amount of building activity requiring a formal building application.

Environmental Health

7.2.1.4. Minor increase in Environmental Health revenue due to increased number of applications for food business plans assessment and food business occupancy reports.

Function Area	2016/2017 Budget	2017/2018 Budget	Increase/ (Decrease)
Environmental Health	281,550	295,650	14,100	5.01%
Development Compliance - City Inspector, Building and Plumbing and Animal Management	1,196,520	1,214,000	17,480	1.46%
Development Appraisal	630,000	812,600	182,600	28.98%
City Design	500	500	0	0.00%
Planning Policy and Heritage – Scheme Amendments and City Planning Publications	53,600	24,916	(28,684)	(53.51%)

8. Delegation

8.1. This matter is delegated to the Council.

Neil Noye Signature

Neil Noye

Director City Planning

Date: 24 May 2017

File Reference: F17/49574

Attachment a: 2017-2018 City Planning Schedule of Fees and Charges ⇩

Item No. 8.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 382

29/5/2017

REPORT TITLE: State Planning Provisions - Heritage Issues

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Senior Cultural Heritage Officer

Director City Planning

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. This report highlights concerns with regard to the proposed Local Historic Heritage Code as part of the new state planning provisions.

1.2. The report recommends that the Lord Mayor write to the Minister for Planning and Local Government, providing examples of inadequate Tasmanian Heritage Council consideration of local heritage values, as evidenced in two recent decisions by the Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal.

2. Report Summary

2.1. The City of Hobart has previously made submissions in relation to the state planning provisions.

2.2. One concern, previously raised, was in relation to the Local Historic Heritage Code, and the proposed exclusion of state-listed places (places on the Tasmanian Heritage Register) from consideration against local provisions.

2.3. It is not appropriate to rely on the Tasmanian Heritage Council (THC) to assess applications to take into consideration local heritage values, wider streetscape issues, historic patterns of development, bulk and height, particularly in significant areas such as Battery Point, as these issues have historically not been addressed.

2.4. Two recent tribunal decisions have highlighted the inadequacy of consideration of local heritage values by the Tasmanian Heritage Council.

2.5. In the case of 53 Runnymede Street, the Tribunal accepted that the Arthur Circus buildings were of national importance, and that such value would be eroded by the proposal which had received THC endorsement.

2.6. If places on the Tasmanian Heritage Register are removed from local government consideration, it is reasonable that the Tasmanian Heritage Council should be required to give consideration to the provisions of a heritage code within the planning scheme (essentially acting in place of a local council).

3. Recommendation

That the Lord Mayor write to the Minister for Planning and Local Government drawing attention to the inadequacy of Tasmanian Heritage Council consideration of local heritage values as evidenced in recent RMPAT decisions, and seek amendment to the Local Historic Heritage Code to ensure that there is ongoing consideration by local government of local heritage values of places listed on the Tasmanian Heritage Register or alternatively amend the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995 to require the Heritage Council to assess development against the standards in the Local Heritage Code.

4. Background

4.1. The Local Historic Heritage Code includes some significant changes compared to that in the current Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 (HIPS2015). These include removing the application of the code to places that are listed on the Tasmanian Heritage Register and removing any consideration of internal works. The Code as drafted does not reflect best practice in heritage and conservation management.

4.2. Under the provisions of C6.2.1 the listing of a place on the Tasmanian Heritage Register removes the opportunity for the City of Hobart to make these important assessments in order to retain 'local' heritage values and consider streetscape, historical patterns of development, the height and bulk of buildings and make a thorough and holistic planning assessment as required under the Act. It is inappropriate to filter 'local' values from 'state' values or vice versa for the City of Hobart.

4.3. In its submission on the State Planning Provisions, the City of Hobart has previously advised the Minister of the shortcomings of the proposed Local Historic Heritage Code.

4.4. It is not appropriate to rely on the Tasmanian Heritage Council (THC) to assess applications to take into consideration local heritage values, wider streetscape issues, historic patterns of development, bulk and height, particularly in significant areas such as Battery Point, as these issues have historically not been addressed.

4.5. Two recent decisions of the Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal highlight the inadequacy of THC consideration. In both cases, the THC had provided approval to new development, whereas the City of Hobart had refused the applications. These refusals were upheld by the Tribunal. Both places are listed on the Tasmanian Heritage Register. Under the proposed Local Historic Heritage Code, the heritage issues associated with these applications would NOT be considered by the City of Hobart. The two cases are:

4.5.1. Melrose, 141 Hampden Road, Hobart
S Visagie v Hobart City Council and Ors [2017] TASRMPAT 2
(Appeal 86/16P)

4.5.2. 53 Runnymede Street, Battery Point (Arthur Circus) –
S Solvyns v Hobart City Council & Ors [2017] TASRMPAT 8 (Appeal 119/16P).

4.6. These decisions are attached. In the case of 53 Runnymede Street, the Tribunal accepted that the Arthur Circus buildings were of national importance, and that such value would be eroded by the proposal which had received THC endorsement.

4.7. In its consideration of proposals under the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995, the Tasmanian Heritage Council is not required to consider any local planning scheme provisions. Section 39(2) of the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995 states:

The Heritage Council is to further consider the discretionary permit application and in so doing –

(a) is to have regard to the likely impact of the proposed heritage works on the historic cultural heritage significance of the relevant registered place or heritage area; and

(b) may have regard to any representations made in respect of the application; and

(c) is to have regard to any matters prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of this subsection; and

(d) is to have regard to any relevant works guidelines; and

(e) may liaise with the relevant planning authority.

4.8. If places on the Tasmanian Heritage Register are removed from local government consideration, it is reasonable that the Tasmanian Heritage Council should be required to give consideration to the provisions of a heritage code within the planning scheme (essentially acting in place of a local council).

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. It is proposed that the Lord Mayor write to the Minister drawing attention to the inadequacy of Tasmanian Heritage Council consideration of local heritage values, and seek amendment to the Local Historic Heritage Code to ensure that there is ongoing consideration by local government of local heritage values of places listed on the Tasmanian Heritage Register or alternatively require the Heritage Council to assess development against the standards in the Local Heritage Code.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. The Local Historic Heritage Code will make it more difficult to achieve some of the strategic objectives of the Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025 particularly in relation to Goal 2 Urban Management.

7. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

7.1. The implementation of the State Planning Provisions will be undertaken in accordance with the process set out under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993.

8. Delegation

8.1. The matter is reserved to the Council.

Brendan Lennard

Senior Cultural Heritage Officer

Neil Noye

Director City Planning

Date: 24 May 2017

File Reference: F17/50282; 32-13-7

Attachment a: 141 HAMPDEN ROAD HOBART TAS 7000 - Reasons for Decision - RMPAT - 23/02/2017 ⇩

Attachment b: 53 Runnymede Street - RMPAT decision ⇩

about people	We value people – our community, our customers and colleagues.
professional	We take pride in our work.
enterprising	We look for ways to create value.
responsive	We’re accessible and focused on service.
inclusive	We respect diversity in people and ideas.
making a difference	We recognise that everything we do shapes Hobart’s future.